August 14, 2013 The Martin County Board of Commissioners met in Regular Session on Wednesday, August 14, 2013 at 7:00 p.m. in the Board Room, Martin County Governmental Center at 305 East Main Street, Williamston, North Carolina. ASSEMBLY Chairman Tommy W. Bowen, Vice Chairman Ronnie Smith, Commissioner Elmo Butch Lilley, Commissioner Bob Hyman, Commissioner Dempsey Bond, Jr., County Manager David Bone, County Attorney J. Melvin Bowen, and Clerk to the Board Marion B. Thompson. Chairman Bowen called the meeting to order around 7:00 p.m. Commissioner Bond led the pledge of allegiance. Vice Chairman Smith offered the invocation. Chairman Bowen welcomed everyone and stated it was good to see the citizens of the county. Elected officials were recognized as well. AGENDA APPROVAL Vice Chairman Smith made a MOTION to approve the agenda as presented, with a SECOND by Commissioner Hyman. The motion was unanimously APPROVED. PUBLIC COMMENTS None CONSENT AGENDA Commissioner Lilley made a MOTION to approve the Consent Agenda as presented, with a SECOND by Commissioner Bond. The motion was unanimously APPROVED. 1. Minutes for July 10, 2013 Regular Session; July 31, 2013 Special Session 2. Financial Report for June 2013 included for informational purposes. 3. Tax Refund Request Landfill fees In 2011, Mr. Jerry Coltrain was charged for two trash cans for two homes previously listed as being located on the same parcel. Unbeknown to the Tax Assessor office, one of the homes was removed from the parcel in 2012. Tax Assessor Hilton Edmondson visited the property and verified that there was only one home on the parcel at this time. Mr. Coltrain requested a refund of $324.00. 4. Tax Relief Orders for July 2013 in the amount of $2,898.50.
Year Levy Lname Fname Reason Value Total 2013 Manning Shelbert G Error in Value 4,780 34.42 2013 Wilson Garland Clerk Error 2,000 25.00 2011 Askew Dale, Jr Sold Vehicle 1,507 11.77 2012 Askew Dale, Jr Sold Vehicle 1,356 10.59 2013 Askew Dale, Jr. Sold Vehicle 1,220 10.20 2013 Beacham Thomas Archibald Error in Value 10,350 79.18 2013 Bell Rexford Darrell, Jr Sold Vehicle 365 2.92 2013 Buck Eddie Thomas Error in Landfill Fee 162.00 2011 Buck Eddie Thomas Sold Mobile Home 5,610 44.44 2012 Buck Eddie Thomas Sold Mobile Home 5,230 41.42 2013 Buck Eddie Thomas Sold Mobile Home 5,000 38.50 2013 Coltrain Jerry Wayne Error in Landfill Fee 162.00 2013 Coltrain Kevin Wade Sold Mobile Home 6,820 51.83 2013 Cornwell Jerry W. Error in Value 28,678 219.39 2013 Cornwell Jerry W. Error in Value 38,605 295.33 2013 Cornwell Jerry W. Error in Value 6,220 47.58 2013 Cross Eric Wayne Surrendered Tags 2,957 25.05 2013 Cruz Arvizu Oscar Ricardo Double list 4,780 39.96 2013 Jamesville Town of Error in Landfill Fee 162.00 2013 O Neal Catherine H Error in Landfill Fee 162.00 2013 Price Jo Beth Carraway Error in Landfill Fee 162.00 2013 Pritchett Tom Error in Landfill Fee 162.00 2013 Roberson J P Etals Error in Landfill Fee 162.00 2013 Rogers Alice Faye Corey Error in Landfill Fee 162.00 2013 Smith Robert L Sold Vehicle 5,552 42.19 2013 Smith Robert L Surrendered Tags 797 6.06 2012 Smith Robert L Surrendered Tags 886 6.29 2013 Tucker Cecil Sold Vehicle 900 6.93 2013 US Bank National Assoc. Clerk Error 5,747 59.49 2012 Warren Peggy Bryant Error in Listing 2,530 17.96 2013 Whitley William Jay Error in Landfill Fee 162.00 2013 Williams Michael H Error in Landfill Fee 162.00 2013 Williamston Town of Error in Landfill Fee 162.00 Total 2,898.50 4. Tax Collector s Report July 2013
July Real (20) $ 584,880.90 Personal (25) $ 259,236.09 Total $ 844,116.99 MV (30) $ 89,770.03 Total $ 89,770.03 All Total $ 933,887.02 6. Tax Collector s Request for Records Purge / Destruction Tax Collector Christine Blevins requested permission to shred the following records: Record to be Destroyed Recommended Retention Years on File Through June 2011 Years Requested To Be Destroyed Bankruptcy 3 Years 2010-2013 2010 Debt-Setoff Records 3 Years 2010-2013 2010 Motor Vehicle Scrolls 10 Years 2002-2013 2002 Motor Vehicle Tag Surrenders, Release, and Refunds Mobile Home Moving Permits 1 year after submission or 3 years after final settlement 2010-2013 2010 5 Year 2008-2013 2008 Deposits 3 Years 2010-2013 2010 Attachment/Garnishment Records Payment Proofs and Monthly Reports Town Monthly Reports For Checks Accounts Receivable Monthly Reports 3 Years 2010-2013 2010 1 Year 2012-2013 2012 1 Year 2012-2013 2012 3 Years 2010-2013 2010 Employer Record of Employees For Garnishment Destroy In Office When Administrative value ends (1Year) 2012-2013 2012
Drainage Assessment Receipts Beer & Wine Permit Copies Payment Plans Special Assessment Records- Destroy in office after 10 years or two revaluation Cycles, whichever occurs first 2002-2013 2002 Tax Receipts File- 2010-2013 2010 Destroy in office after 3 years Destroy in office 3 years 2010-2013 2010 after final settlement 1 Year 2012-2013 2012 Motor Vehicle Block Records Gross Receipts 3 Years 2010-2013 2010 Check Request and 3 Years 2010-2013 2010 Purchase Orders 7. Tax Collector Annual Settlement of Taxes State of North Carolina County of Martin Annual Settlement of Taxes for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2013 Taxes Receivable July 1, 2012 $2,184,980.88 Fees Added (Returned Check, Advertising, Garnishment) $15,352.07 Net Beginning Balance, July 1, 2012 $2,200,332.95 Tax Levy for 2012-2013 $16,067,426.20 Total Taxes Charged to Tax Collector, Including years 2002-2013 $18,267,759.15 Collection of Principal $15,819,448.70 Write-off of 2002 Delinquents to Conform to Audit Report -$32,420.51 General Write-offs 2002-2013 (Over/Under Payments) -$145.83 Releases -$61,137.73 Adjustments -$651.98 Refunds $87,189.88 Discounts -$1,287.86 Total Credits and Adjustments $15,827,902.73 Total Receivable as of June 30,2012 $2,439,856.42 Cash Collections Summary Principal amount of taxes $15,819,448.70 Interest $205,575.60 Over/Short Net Balance $6.00 Total Cash Deposit (Automated) $16,025,030.30
8. Road naming Correction Ann Ln to Ann Rd At the last meeting, when the agenda was approved it was stated that Mr. William Bud Swain requested that Felton Rogers TRL Park Rd be renamed ANN LN. However, in the memo for the Tax Assessor s Office, the request was for Felton Rogers TRL Park Rd to be renamed ANN RD instead of ANN LN. Approval of this item on the consent agenda will correct this inconsistency. 9. Approve Amendment to 2013 December / 2014 January Administration Leave Currently, the employee handbook establishes the following policy concerning Article V Holiday leave for Christmas: When Christmas Day Falls On: Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday The County Observes: Friday and Monday Monday and Tuesday Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday Wednesday, Thursday, Friday Thursday and Friday Friday and Monday The handbook also states, the County Board of Commissioners reserves the right to make administrative changes. This year, Christmas will be on Wednesday, and the county would observe Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday, as approved by the Board at its December 2012 meeting. County Manager Bone requested consideration of amending the approved Christmas Holiday leave time for this year. Staff considered many different options. After careful consideration of comments from the Board, staff and retirees, County Manager Bone recommended approving the following amendment to the December / January leave time, as presented: Monday, December 23, 2013 County offices open all day December 24 - December 27, 2013 Office Closed (Friday would be additional day of administrative leave) December 31, 2013 Office Closed at 11:30 am December 31, 2013 Office Closed 12 noon Employee Luncheon / Award Recognition (4 1/2 hours administrative leave) Office Closed January 1, 2013 New Years Day 10. Southern Albemarle Association Delegates 2013-2014 The following individuals have been chosen to serve as Martin County Southern Albemarle Delegates at the annual meeting October 17, 2013:
Ms. Charlotte Bowen Mrs. Lula Council Mr. Herman Daniels Mrs. Ann Britt Mrs. Barbara Cotton Ms. Tina P. Manning Ms. Libby Jenkins Mr. & Mrs. Gene Powell Mr. Tommy Roberson Mr. Junious J. Horton Mr. & Mrs. Jerry Harrell Mr. & Mrs. George Matthews Mr. Bob Hyman Mr. Thomas Chavis Mr. Butch & Becky Lilley Mr. & Mrs. James Batchelor Mr. Jeffrey Stanley Mr. & Mrs. Moses Matthews Ms. Beulah Bennett Ms. & Mr. Don Grady Mr. & Mrs. Dempsey Bond, Jr. Mr. & Mrs. Dan & Amy Gibbs Mr. Eric Pearson Mr. & Mrs. Henry Wilson Ms. Tonya C. Leggett Mr. Reid Thomas Mr. & Mrs. Steve Wolfe Mr. Tommy Bowen Mr. Derek Price Mr. Ronnie Smith Mr. Phillip Martin Mr. David Bone Mr. Ray Deans Mr. Milton Bennett, Jr. Mr. John H. Gurganus Mr. & Mrs. Brad Sommerer 11. Board Appointments / Reappointments a. ABC Board The Martin County ABC Board recommended the appointment of Mr. James E. Hill to replace Mr. Tim Roberson, whose term ended July 31, 2013 and has resigned from the ABC Board. This would be a three (3) year term, which would end July 31, 2016. b. Martin County Joint Community Advisory Committee In an email received from Ms. Tameka Riggsbee, Mid-East Commission Regional Long Term Care Ombudsman, she requested the reappointment of the following committee members to the Martin County Joint Community Advisory Committee for the adult care, family care, and nursing homes in Martin County: Ms. Jean Daniels, Ms. Olga Jones, and Mr. Willie Peele. Ms. Riggsbee made her request in accordance with NC G.S. 131E-128 (c), which states, any person reappointed to a second or subsequent term in the same county shall serve a three-year term. As a result, the above individual terms would expire September 30, 2016: 6. Clerk Report included each month for informational purposes.
INTRODUCTION OF NEW EMPLOYEE(S) There were no new full-time employees to be introduced at the meeting. OLD BUSINESS Consider Use of Excess Qualified School Construction Bond (QSCB) Funds for Pre-K Center / Memorandum of Understanding Concerning QSCB Bonds County Manager Bone summarized the ongoing discussion of the proposed use of the excess QSCB for a Pre-K Center in the following manner: At the joint meeting between the Board of Commissioners and Board of Education on July 31 st to discuss this request, Commissioners expressed their support for education and also discussed their concern about the federal sequestration and the future of the QSCB program in light of the federal budget / deficit. Also, the Board of commissioner questioned why a new middle school needed to be constructed, if the Board of Education now desires to renovate the former middle school property. The County Commissioners suggested the former middle school could have been constructed more cheaply than the new construction. It was suggested by the Board of Education that the former middle school building did not meet current building square footage / space needs for a modern middle school; rather, a renovated facility was more suited for a Pre-K center. There was also some discussion about whether or not consolidation would occur at a Williamston Pre-K Center. The Board of Commissioners also expressed a desire for a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to address how Martin County and the Board of Education would deal with continued sequestration and changes to the QSCB program, if the Board agreed to use the remaining QSCB funds for a Pre-K Center. A draft MOU was included in the agenda packets. A revised draft MOU was presented to the Board of Commissioners for their review on the night of the meeting. Additionally, an email from the county s bond attorney, Gundars Aperans, explained how the QSCB loan would be affected if the approximate $900,000 remaining in the QSCB program is not utilized. There would be no penalties for not using these funds. The principal payments would be $60,000 less each year than the current requirement of $1,000,000. Interest on the loan would also be decreased. It has been estimated that it will take seven to eight months to complete the Pre-K project. Due to the fact the QSCB funding must be used by May 16, 2014, the Martin County School Board was seeking a speedy decision from the Board of Commissioners. County Manager Bone and Dr. Melchiorre met earlier to discuss the what if the QSCB program was eliminated. In this scenario, both agreed adjusting the terms through refinancing
would be advisable. The County could extend the term past the current 15-year term in order to keep annual payments at a level consistent with the current $1 million debt service payment. So, the county could restructure the financing so that the payment would be made without creating a burden on the county s annual budget. (By statue, the school board cannot assume any of the county s debt.) Ms. Addie Leggett, on behalf of the Martin County Board of Education (MCBE), thanked the Board of Commissioner for the opportunity to speak and asked the Board for an affirmative vote on the use of the QSCB funding to relieve the over-crowded classrooms at Williamston Primary School. Ms. Leggett added with an affirmative vote, MCBE would be able to serve approximately 125 students who are on a waiting list to receive Pre-K services in the Williamston area. Ms. Addie Leggett further stated MCBE was requesting the release of the QSCB balance due to the fact MCBE was not reimbursed approximately $900,000 for the cost of the land and architectural fees which were paid up front with School Capital Funds before the construction of Riverside Middle school. The concerns previously stated by the Board of Commissioners had not diminished since the meeting on July 31 st. The answers to questions regarding those concerns from MCBE did little to alleviate the thoughts of the effect caused by sequestration, the possible elimination of the QSCB program, the use of funding to renovate a school once declared too costly to repair, the possible displacement of four year olds for their local community, the possibility of an additional tax increase in next year s budget, and using the funds for a Pre-K center rather than using it to aid in repaying the new Riverside Middle School loan, as stated by one Board member in an economy where people are already hurting financially. Looking at the issue from a different prospective, a member of the Board of Commissioners stated if Pre-K was centralized, all of the expertise would be in one location. Additionally, this would be a head start for more minorities who make up a large percentage of Pre-K enrollments. After a lengthy discussion, Commissioner Bond made a MOTION to go forward with the Pre-K Center and to let MCBE use the $900,000 in excess QSCB funding. As in the July 10 th meeting, the motion DIED for lack of a second. PRESENTATION Martin County Regional Water and Sewer Authority (MCRWASA) Water Treatment Plant Update Mr. Dan Boone and Charles Davis, of The Wooten Company, presented a project update of the MCRWASA Water Treatment Plant to the Board of Commissioners. Mr. Boone and Mr. Davis reiterated the need for the WTP from a historical perspective, Central Coastal Plain Capacity Use Area (CCPCUA)Report, water demands and supplies, project alternatives, MCRWASA project schedule (permits, design, easements, etc), project bidding / funding, project schedule, and water rates. The message highlights were as follows:
Due to CCPCUA report, the region faces a water supply deficit because of: -Increasing potential for salt water encroachment -Evidence of aquifer dewatering -Reports of extreme loss of well yield MCRWASA was formed to address this need on a regional basis. After the study of several alternatives, including multiple groundwater alternatives, a Roanoke River WTP was selected as the supply alterative. Contract 1 Water Treatment Plant ($19,725,00.00) & Contract 2 Water Transmission System (2,699,693.25) were both awarded to T. A. Loving Company. Project funding includes $2.8 million in USDA grant, $40,000 in Rural Center grant, $3.289 million in USDA grant (tap fee), $2.013 million DWSRF loan ($1.6 million principal forgiveness) and $0.709 million in supplement USDA funds (grant); Estimated total project cost $27,026,142. Interim project financing is to be provided through the sale of Bond Anticipation Notes (BAN) by the Local Government Commission. The proposed use of WTP acreage, which was purchased for future expansion, for a potential solar farm. The lease would be drafted for a stated period of time so future expansion would not be hindered. The solar farm construction could begin by January 2014. WTP Construction is scheduled to start September 30, 2013; WTP Project is scheduled to be completed by July 22, 2015. Monthly county water bills are projected to increase from about $48 to an average of about $60-$61 per month. PUBLIC HEARING Watershed Protection Ordinances Commissioner Hyman offered the MOTION to enter the Public Hearing, with a SECOND by Commissioner Bond. The motion was APPROVED unanimously. As part of the River Reclassification process for the Roanoke River that allows for the construction of the Martin County Regional Water and Sewer Authority (MCRWASA) water treatment plant, jurisdictions within the reclassified section of the river are required to establish a watershed protection ordinance for that particular section of the Roanoke River. In addition to Martin County, the Town of Williamston and Bertie County must also adopt similar ordinances. Williamston established its watershed protection ordinance in July.
Martin County already had a Watershed Protection Ordinance (enacted in 1993) to protect a watershed region west of Oak City. This small section of Martin County was protected as part of a watershed protection area for a City of Tarboro area on the Tar River. Currently, this watershed protection area is the only protected area in Martin County. On October 18, 2012, the Legislature s Rules Review Committee approved the rule concerning the reclassification of the Roanoke River, as suggested by the Environmental Management Commission (EMC). As aforementioned, this reclassification was required in order for the MCRWASA to build a water treatment plant. The reclassification of this section of the Roanoke River was finalized and took effect on January 1, 2013. Mr. Gavin Harrison, Martin County s Intern, explained since Martin County already has a water supply watershed protection provision for Water Supply IV (WS-IV) waters in a small area in the western part of the state, Martin County simply had to update its ordinance and map to include the new Protected Area and Critical Area. County Manager Bone assigned Mr. Harrison the task of changing the language of the current ordinance to reflect the most recent requirements set by the NC Division of Water Quality. Upon approval of the Board, the ordinance and watershed protection map will be replaced in their entirety. A watershed critical area is the land adjacent to a water supply intake where risk associated with pollution is greater than from remaining portions of the watershed. Critical area is defined as land within one-half mile upstream and draining to a river intake or within one-half mile and draining to the normal pool elevation of water supply reservoirs. Critical areas are more restrictive than areas outside this area. Protected areas are only located within WS-IV watersheds. A protected area is defined as land within five miles and draining to the normal pool elevation of water supplies/reservoirs or within ten miles upstream and draining to a river intake. Watershed protection regulations protect designated drinking water supply reservoirs and surface waters from activities that could degrade water quality. The WS-IV designation does NOT prohibit development in these areas; rather, it regulates new development. County Manager Bone stated only a small area of the Martin County Watershed Protection area involves a critical area. The majority of the critical area in watershed protection area for this section of the Roanoke River is in the jurisdiction of the Town of Williamston. County Manager Bone commented under the proposed, revised Watershed Protection Ordinance, the Chief Code Enforcement Officer (or his/her designee) will enforce the Watershed Protection Ordinance as the Watershed Administrator. Additionally, under the proposed, revised Watershed Protection Ordinance, appeals of determinations made by the Chief Code Enforcement Officer are heard by the Board of Commissioners serving as a Watershed Review Board.
No comments from the public were offered during the public hearing. Vice Chairman Smith made the MOTION to end the Public Hearing on the revised Watershed Ordinance, with a SECOND by Commissioner Hyman. The motion was unanimously APPROVED. County Manager Bone recommended the adoption of the revised watershed protection ordinance and map. Vice Chairman Smith made the MOTION to adopt the revised Watershed Protection Ordinance and map as presented, with a SECOND by Commissioner Lilley. The motion was unanimously APPROVED. Section 101. Authority and Enactment. MARTIN COUNTY WATERSHED PROTECTION ORDINANCE ARTICLE I: AUTHORITY AND GENERAL REGULATIONS The Legislature of the State of North Carolina has, in Chapter 153A, Article 6, Section 121, General Ordinance Authority; in Chapter 153A, Article 18, Planning and Regulation of Development; and in Chapter 143, Article 21, Watershed Protection Rules, delegated the responsibility or directed local governmental units to adopt regulations designed to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of its citizenry. The Martin County Board of Commissioners does hereby ordain and enact into law the following articles as the Watershed Protection Ordinance of Martin County. Section 102. Jurisdiction. The provisions of this ordinance shall apply within the areas designated as a Public Water Supply Watershed by the N.C. Environmental Management Commission and shall be defined and established on the map entitled, "Watershed Protection Map of Martin County, North Carolina" ("the Watershed Map"), which is adopted simultaneously herewith. The Watershed Map and all explanatory matter contained thereon accompanies and is hereby made a part of this ordinance. This ordinance shall be permanently kept on file in the office of the Martin County Clerk. Section 103. Exceptions to Applicability. (A) Nothing contained herein shall repeal, modify, or amend any Federal or State law or regulation, or any ordinance or regulation pertaining thereto except any ordinance which these regulations specifically replace; nor shall any provision of this ordinance amend, modify, or restrict any provisions of the Code of Ordinances of Martin County; however, the adoption of this ordinance shall and does amend any and all ordinances, resolutions, and regulations in effect in Martin County at the time of the adoption of this ordinance that may be construed to impair or reduce the effectiveness of this ordinance or to conflict with any of its provisions. (B) It is not intended that these regulations interfere with any easement, covenants or other agreements between parties. However, if the provisions of these regulations impose greater restrictions or higher standards for the use of a building or land, then the provisions of these regulations shall control. (C) Existing development, as defined in this ordinance, is not subject to the requirements of this ordinance. Expansions to structures classified as existing development must meet the requirements of this ordinance; however, the built-upon area of the existing development is not required to be included in the density calculations.
(D) If a nonconforming lot of record is not contiguous to any other lot owned by the same party, then that lot of record shall not be subject to the development restrictions of this ordinance if it is developed for single-family residential purposes. Any lot or parcel created as part of a family subdivision after the effective date of these rules shall be exempt from these rules if it is developed for one single-family detached residence and if it is exempt from local subdivision regulation. Any lot or parcel created as part of any other type of subdivision that is exempt from a local subdivision ordinance shall be subject to the land use requirements (including impervious surface requirements) of these rules, except that such a lot or parcel must meet the minimum buffer requirements to the maximum extent practicable. Section 104. Repeal of Existing Watershed Ordinance. This ordinance in part carries forward by re-enactment, some of the Watershed Ordinance of Martin County, North Carolina (adopted by the Board of Commissioners on December 23, 1993 ), and it is not the intention to repeal but rather to re-enact and continue in force such existing provisions so that all rights and liabilities that have accrued thereunder are preserved and may be enforced. All provisions of the Watershed Ordinance which are not re-enacted herein are hereby repealed. All suits at law or in equity and/or all prosecutions resulting from the violation of any ordinance provisions heretofore in effect, which are now pending in any court of this state or of the United States, shall not be abated or abandoned by reason of the adoption of this ordinance, but shall be prosecuted to their finality the same as if this ordinance had not been adopted; and any and all violations of the existing Watershed Protection Ordinance, prosecutions for which have not been instituted, may be hereafter filed and prosecuted; and nothing in this ordinance shall be so construed as to abandon, abate or dismiss any litigation or prosecution now pending and/or which may heretofore have been instituted or prosecuted. Section 105. Criminal Penalties. Any person violating any provisions of this ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, shall be punished in accordance with NCGS 14-4. The maximum fine for each offense shall not exceed $500.00. Each day that the violation continues shall constitute a separate offense. Section 106. Remedies. (A) If any subdivision, development and/or land use is found to be in violation of this ordinance, the Martin County Board of Commissioners may, in addition to all other remedies available either in law or in equity, institute a civil penalty in the amount of $50.00, action or proceedings to restrain, correct, or abate the violation; to prevent occupancy of the building, structure, or land; or to prevent any illegal act, conduct, business, or use in or about the premises. In addition, the N.C. Environmental Management Commission may assess civil penalties in accordance with G.S. 143-215.6(a). Each day that the violation continues shall constitute a separate offense. (B) If the Watershed Administrator, hereinafter referred to as Chief Code Enforcement Officer or his designee, finds that any of the provisions of this ordinance are being violated, he shall notify in writing the person responsible for such violation, indicating the nature of the violation, and ordering the action necessary to correct it. He shall order discontinuance of the illegal use of land, buildings or structures; removal of illegal buildings or structures, or of additions, alterations or structural changes thereto; discontinuance of any illegal work being done; or shall take any action authorized by this ordinance to ensure compliance with or to prevent violation of its provisions. If a ruling of the Chief Code Enforcement Officer is questioned, the aggrieved party or parties may appeal such ruling to the Board of Commissioners. Section 107. Severability. Should any section or provision of this ordinance be declared invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, the declaration shall not affect the validity of this ordinance as a whole or any part thereof that is not specifically declared to be invalid or unconstitutional. Section 108. Effective Date.
This ordinance shall take effect and be in force on September 1, 2013. ARTICLE II: SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS. Note: Provisions in this Article are derived in part from statutory authority Chapter 153A, Article 18, Part 2. Section 201. General Provisions. (A) No subdivision plat of land within the Public Water Supply Watershed shall be filed or recorded by the Register of Deeds until it has been approved in accordance with the provisions of this Article. Likewise, the Clerk of Superior Court shall not order or direct the recording of a plat if the recording of such plat would be in conflict with this Article. (B) The approval of a plat does not constitute or effect the acceptance by the county or the public of the dedication of any street or other ground, easement, right-of-way, public utility line, or other public facility shown on the plat and shall not be construed to do so. (C) All subdivisions shall conform with the mapping requirements contained in G.S.47-30. (D) All subdivisions of land within the Watershed Protection jurisdiction of Martin County after the effective date of this Ordinance shall require a plat to be prepared, approved, and recorded pursuant to this Ordinance. Section 202. Subdivision Application and Review Procedures. (A) All proposed subdivisions shall be reviewed prior to recording with the Register of Deeds by submitting a vicinity map to the Chief Code Enforcement Officer to determine whether or not the property is located within the designated Public Water Supply Watershed. Subdivisions that are not within the designated watershed area shall not be subject to the provisions of this Ordinance and may be recorded provided the Chief Code Enforcement Officer initials the vicinity map. In addition, subdivisions within a WS-IV watershed are subject to the provisions of this Ordinance only when an erosion and sedimentation plan is required under the provisions of State law, or approved local program. Subdivisions within the designated watershed area shall comply with the provisions of this Article and all other state and local requirements that may apply. (B) Subdivision applications shall be filed with the Chief Code Enforcement Officer. The application shall include a completed application form, two (2) copies of the plat and supporting documentation deemed necessary by the Chief Code Enforcement Officer or the Watershed Review Board; hereinafter referred to as the Board of Commissioners (see appendix A). (C) The Chief Code Enforcement Officer shall review the completed application and shall either approve, approve conditionally or disapprove each application. The Chief Code Enforcement Officer shall take final action within forty-five (45) days of submission of the application. The Chief Code Enforcement Officer may provide public agencies an opportunity to review and make recommendations. However, failure of the agencies to submit their comments and recommendations shall not delay action within the prescribed time limit. Said public agencies may include, but are not limited to, the following: (1) The district highway engineer with regard to proposed streets and highways. (2) The director of the Health Department with regard to proposed private water system or sewer systems normally approved by the Health Department. (3) The state Department of Environmental and Natural Resources with regard to proposed sewer systems normally approved by the Department, engineered storm water controls or storm water management in general.
(4) Any other agency or official designated by the Chief Code Enforcement Officer or Board of Commissioners. (D) If the Chief Code Enforcement Officer approves the application, such approval shall be indicated on both copies of the plat by the following certificate and signed by the Chief Code Enforcement Officer: Certificate of Approval for Recording I certify that the plat shown hereon complies with the Watershed Protection Ordinance and is approved by the Chief Code Enforcement Officer for recording in the Register of Deeds office. Date Chief Code Enforcement Officer NOTICE: This property is located within a Public Water Supply Watershed - development restrictions may apply. (E) If the Chief Code Enforcement Officer disapproves or approves conditionally the application, the reasons for such action shall be stated in writing for the applicant and entered into the written record. The subdivider may make changes and submit a revised plan which shall constitute a separate request for the purpose of review. Deeds. (F) All subdivision plats shall comply with the requirements for recording of the County Register of (G) The plat shall be recorded within thirty (30) days of approval. The Subdivider shall provide the Chief Code Enforcement Officer with evidence the plat has been recorded with the Register of Deeds within five (5) working days. Section 203. Subdivision Standards and Required Improvements. (A) All lots shall provide adequate building space in accordance with the development standards contained in Article III. Lots which are smaller than the minimum required for residential lots may be developed using built-upon area criteria in accordance with Article 300. (B) For the purpose of calculating built-upon area, total project area shall include total acreage in the tract on which the project is to be developed. When the total project area involves the development of public streets, the built-upon area in those new streets is included in the calculation of the built-upon area for the project. As a result, the allowable built-upon area for the remaining lot or lots shall be adjusted to account for the built-upon area of the street. Any final subdivision plat, zoning permit and conditional use permit for the project shall indicate the maximum permitted square feet of built-upon area for each parcel. (C) Storm Water Drainage Facilities. The application shall be accompanied by a description of the proposed method of providing storm water drainage. The subdivider shall provide a drainage system that diverts stormwater runoff away from surface waters and incorporates best management practices to minimize water quality impacts. (D) Erosion and Sedimentation Control. The application shall, where required, be accompanied by a written statement that a Sedimentation and Erosion Control Plan has been submitted to and approved by the local agency administering a Sedimentation and Erosion Control Ordinance approved by the N.C. Division of Energy, Mineral and Land Resources. (E) Roads constructed in critical areas and watershed buffer areas. Where possible, roads should be located outside of critical areas and watershed buffer areas. Roads constructed within these areas shall be designed
and constructed to minimize their impact on water quality. Section 204. Construction Procedures. (A) No construction or installation of improvements shall commence in a proposed subdivision in a Watershed Protection Area until a subdivision plat has been approved by the Chief Code Enforcement Officer. (B) No building or other permits shall be issued for erection of a structure on any lot not of record at the time of adoption of this ordinance until all requirements of this ordinance have been met. The subdivider, prior to commencing any work within the subdivision, shall make arrangements with the Chief Code Enforcement Officer to provide for adequate inspection. Section 205. Penalties for Transferring Lots in Unapproved Subdivisions. Any person who, being the owner or agent of the owner of any land located within the jurisdiction of Martin County, thereafter subdivides his land in violation of this ordinance or transfers or sells land by reference to, exhibition of, or any other use of a plat showing a subdivision of the land before the plat has been properly approved under this ordinance and recorded in the office of the register of deeds, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. The description by metes and bounds in the instrument of transfer or other document used in the process of selling or transferring land shall not exempt the transaction from this penalty. The county may bring an action for injunction of any illegal subdivision, transfer, conveyance, or sale of land, and the court shall, upon appropriate findings, issue an injunction and order requiring the offending party to comply with this ordinance. Section 301. Establishment of Watershed Areas. ARTICLE III: DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS The purpose of this Article is to list and describe the watershed areas herein adopted. For purposes of this ordinance the county is hereby divided into the following areas, as appropriate: WS-IV-CA WS-IV-PA (Critical Area) (Protected Area) Section 302. Watershed Areas Described (A) WS-IV Watershed Areas - Critical Area (WS-IV-CA). Only new development activities that require an erosion/sedimentation control plan under State law or approved local program are required to meet the provisions of this ordinance when located in a WS-IV watershed. In order to address a moderate to high land use intensity pattern, single family residential uses are allowed at a maximum of two (2) dwelling units per acre. All other residential and non-residential development shall be allowed at a maximum of twenty-four percent (24%) built-upon area. New residuals application sites and landfills are specifically prohibited. (1) Allowed Uses: (a) Agriculture subject to the provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985 and the Food, Agriculture, Conservation and Trade Act of 1990 and the rules and regulations of the Soil and Water Conservation Commission. (b) Silviculture, subject to the provisions of the Forest Practices Guidelines Related to Water Quality (15 NCAC 1I.0101-.0209). (c) Residential. (d) Non-residential development, excluding: 1) landfills and 2) sites for land application of
residuals or petroleum contaminated soils. (2) Density and Built-upon Limits: (a) Single Family Residential--development shall not exceed two dwelling units per acre on a project by project basis. No residential lot shall be less than one-half (1/2) acre (or 20,000 square feet excluding roadway right-of-way), except within an approved cluster development. (b) All Other Residential and Non-Residential--development shall not exceed twenty-four percent (24%) built-upon area on a project by project basis. For the purpose of calculating the built-upon area, total project area shall include total acreage in the tract on which the project is to be developed. (B) WS-IV Watershed Areas - Protected Area (WS-IV-PA). Only new development activities that require an erosion/sedimentation control plan under State law or approved local government program are required to meet the provisions of this ordinance when located in a WS-IV watershed. In order to accommodate moderate to high land use intensity, single family residential uses shall develop at a maximum of two (2) dwelling units per acre (2 du/ac). All other residential and non-residential development shall be allowed at a maximum of twenty-four percent (24%) built-upon area. A maximum of three (3) dwelling units per acre (3 du/ac) or thirty-six (36%) percent builtupon area is allowed for projects without a curb and gutter street system. (1) Uses Allowed: (a) Agriculture, subject to the provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985 and the Food, Agricultural, Conservation and Trade Act of 1990. (b) Silviculture, subject to the provisions of the Forest Practices Guidelines Related to Water Quality (15 NCAC 1I.0101-.0209). (c) Residential development. (d) Non-residential development, excluding the storage of toxic and hazardous materials unless a spill containment plan is implemented. (2) Density and Built-upon Limits: (a) Single Family Residential--development shall not exceed two (2) dwelling units per acre, as defined on a project by project basis. No residential lot shall be less than one-half (1/2) acre (or 20,000 square feet excluding roadway right-of-way), or one-third (1/3) acre for projects without a curb and gutter street system, except within an approved cluster development. (b) All Other Residential and Non-Residential--development shall not exceed twenty-four percent (24%) built-upon area on a project by project basis. For projects without a curb and gutter street system, development shall not exceed thirty-six percent (36%) built-upon area on a project by project basis. For the purpose of calculating built-upon area, total project area shall include acreage in the tract on which the project is to be developed. When the total project involves the development of public streets, the built-upon area in those new streets is included in the calculation of the built-upon area for the project. As a result, the allowable built upon area for the remaining lot or lots shall be adjusted to account for the built-upon area of the street. Any final subdivision plat, zoning permit and conditional use permit for the project shall indicate the maximum permitted square feet of built-upon area for each parcel. (c) In addition to the development allowed under paragraphs (a) and (b) above, new development and expansions to existing development may occupy up to ten percent (10%) of the protected area
with up to seventy percent (70%) built-upon area on a project by project basis, when approved as a special intensity allocation (SIA). The Chief Code Enforcement Officer is authorized to approve SIAs consistent with the provisions of this ordinance. Projects must, to the maximum extent practicable, minimize built-upon surface area, direct stormwater away from surface waters and incorporate Best Management Practices to minimize water quality impacts. For the purpose of calculating built-upon area, total project area shall include total acreage in the tract on which the project is to be developed. Section 303. Cluster Development. Cluster development is allowed in all Watershed Areas under the following conditions: (A) Minimum lot sizes are not applicable to single family cluster development projects; however, the total number of lots shall not exceed the number of lots allowed for single family detached developments in Section 302. Density or built-upon area for the project shall not exceed that allowed for the critical area, balance of watershed or protected area, whichever applies. (B) All built-upon area shall be designed and located to minimize stormwater runoff impact to the receiving waters and minimize concentrated stormwater flow, maximize the use of sheet flow through vegetated areas, and maximize the flow length through vegetated areas. (C) Areas of concentrated density development shall be located in upland area and away, to the maximum extent practicable, from surface waters and drainageways. (D) The remainder of the tract shall remain in a vegetated or natural state. The title to the open space area shall be conveyed to an incorporated homeowners association for management; to a local government for preservation as a park or open space; or to a conservation organization for preservation in a permanent easement. Where a property association is not incorporated, a maintenance agreement shall be filed with the property deeds. (E) Cluster developments that meet the applicable low i density requirements shall transport stormwater runoff by vegetated conveyances to the maximum extent practicable. Section 304. Buffer Areas Required. (A) A minimum one hundred (100) foot vegetative buffer is required for all new development activities that are approved for a Special Intensity Allocation (SIA); otherwise, a minimum thirty (30) foot vegetative buffer for development activities is required along all perennial waters indicated on the most recent versions of U.S.G.S. 1:24,000 (7.5 minute) scale topographic maps or as determined by local government studies. Desirable artificial streambank or shoreline stabilization is permitted. (B) No new development is allowed in the buffer except for water dependent structures, other structures such as flag poles, signs and security lights which result in only diminutive increases in impervious area and public projects such as road crossings and greenways where no practical alternative exists. These activities should minimize built-upon surface area, direct runoff away from the surface waters and maximize the utilization of stormwater Best Management Practices. Section 305. Rules Governing the Interpretation of Watershed Area Boundaries. Where uncertainty exists as to the boundaries of the watershed areas, as shown on the Watershed Map, the following rules shall apply: (A) Where area boundaries are indicated as approximately following either street, alley, railroad or highway lines or centerlines thereof, such lines shall be construed to be said boundaries.
(B) Where area boundaries are indicated as approximately following lot lines, such lot lines shall be construed to be said boundaries. However, a surveyed plat prepared by a registered land surveyor may be submitted to the county as evidence that one or more properties along these boundaries do not lie within the watershed area. (C) Where the watershed area boundaries lie at a scaled distance more than twenty-five (25) feet from any parallel lot line, the location of watershed area boundaries shall be determined by use of the scale appearing on the watershed map. (D) Where the watershed area boundaries lie at a scaled distance of twenty-five (25) feet or less from any parallel lot line, the location of watershed area boundaries shall be construed to be the lot line. (E) Boundaries of watershed districts indicated as approximately following the ridge lines shall be construed as the actual ridge line as determined by accepting surveying practices. The property owner shall bear the expense of any surveys. (F) Where other uncertainty exists, the Chief Code Enforcement Officer shall interpret the Watershed Map as to location of such boundaries. This decision may be appealed to the Board of Commissioners. Section 306. Application of Regulations. (A) No building or land shall hereafter be used and no development shall take place except in conformity with the regulations herein specified for the watershed area in which it is located. (B) No area required for the purpose of complying with the provisions of this ordinance shall be included in the area required for another building. (C) Every residential building hereafter erected, moved or structurally altered shall be located on a lot which conforms to the regulations herein specified, except as permitted in Section 307. (D) If a use or class of use is not specifically indicated as being allowed in a watershed area, such use or class of use is prohibited. Section 307. Existing Development. Existing development as defined in this ordinance may be continued and maintained subject to the provisions provided herein. Expansions to structures classified as existing development must meet the requirements of this ordinance, however, the built-upon area of the existing development is not required to be included in the built-upon area calculations. (A) Occupied Lots. This category consists of lots, occupied for residential purposes at the time of the adoption of this ordinance. These lots may continue to be used provided that whenever two or more adjoining lots of record, one of which is occupied, and such lots individually or together have less area than the minimum requirements for residential purposes for the watershed area in which they are located, such lots shall be combined to create lots which meet the minimum size requirements or which minimize the degree of nonconformity. (B) Uses of Land. This category consists of uses existing at the time of adoption of this ordinance where such use of the land is not permitted to be established hereafter in the watershed area in which it is located. Such uses may be continued except as follows: (1) When such use of land has been changed to an allowed use, it shall not thereafter revert to any prohibited use. (2) Such use of land shall be changed only to an allowed use.
(3) When such use ceases for a period of at least one year, it shall not be reestablished. (C) Reconstruction of Buildings or Built-upon Areas. Any existing building or built-upon area not in conformance with the restrictions of this ordinance that has been damaged or removed may be repaired and/or reconstructed, except that there are no restrictions on single family residential development, provided: (1) Repair or reconstruction is initiated within twelve (12) months and completed within two (2) years of such damage. (2) The total amount of space devoted to built-upon area may not be increased unless stormwater control that equals or exceeds the previous development is provided. Section 308. Watershed Protection Permit. (A) Except where a single family residence is constructed on a lot deeded prior to the effective date of this ordinance, no building or built-upon area shall be erected, moved, enlarged or structurally altered, nor shall any building permit be issued nor shall any change in the use of any building or land be made until a Watershed Protection Permit has been issued by the Chief Code Enforcement Officer. No Watershed Protection Permit shall be issued except in conformity with the provisions of this ordinance. (B) Watershed Protection Permit applications shall be filed with the Chief Code Enforcement Officer. The application shall include a completed application form (see Appendix A) and supporting documentation deemed necessary by the Chief Code Enforcement Officer. (C) Prior to issuance of a Watershed Protection Permit, the Chief Code Enforcement Officer may consult with qualified personnel for assistance to determine if the application meets the requirements of this ordinance. (D) A Watershed Protection Permit shall expire if a Building Permit or Watershed Occupancy Permit for such use is not obtained by the applicant within twelve (12) months from the date of issuance. Section 309. Building Permit Required. No Watershed Protection Permit is required for a single family residence constructed on a lot of record prior to the effective date of this ordinance. No permit required under the North Carolina State Building Code shall be issued for any activity for which a Watershed Protection Permit is required until that permit has been issued. Section 310. Watershed Protection Occupancy Permit. (A) The Chief Code Enforcement Officer shall issue a Watershed Protection Occupancy Permit certifying that all requirements of this ordinance have been met prior to the occupancy or use of a building hereafter erected, altered or moved and/or prior to the change of use of any building or land. (B) A Watershed Protection Occupancy Permit, either for the whole or part of a building, shall be applied for coincident with the application for a Watershed Protection Permit and shall be issued or denied within ten (10) days after the erection or structural alterations of the building. (C) When only a change in use of land or existing building occurs, the Chief Code Enforcement Officer shall issue a Watershed Protection Occupancy Permit certifying that all requirements of this ordinance have been met coincident with the Watershed Protection Permit. (D) If the Watershed Protection Occupancy Permit is denied, the Chief Code Enforcement Officer shall notify the applicant in writing stating the reasons for denial. (E) No building or structure which has been erected, moved, or structurally altered may be occupied until