ROCKINGHAM A KSESSAECEAHCKCKENCES CITY LOOKING FORWARD  CITY COUNCIL AGENDA March 10, 2015 7:30 p.m.  1. Opening of meeting by Mayor Steve Morris.  2. Invocation by Reverend Ernie Walters, Pastor of Roberdel Baptist Church.  3. 4.  Amendments and Changes to Agenda.  Consent Agenda:  A.  Disposition of Minutes of the February 10, 2015 Regular Meeting.  B. Tax Collector's Report. (See Pages 4-7)  Informational Items: 1.) Monthly Collection Report  2.) Uncollected Taxes as of February 28, 2015. 1.) Refunds per County Assessor's Office. 2.) Discovery bills added to Tax Scroll. 3.) Releases per County Assessor's Office.  Action Items:  5.  Business by Planning Board. A. Set Public Hearing.  1.) UDO Text Amendment: Set public hearing for an amendment to the City's Unified Development Ordinance to delete Article 12: Telecommunication Regulations in its entirety and replace with a revised Article 12: Telecommunication Regulations. (See Pages 8-10 & Article 12: Telecommunication Regulations included separately.)  514 Rockingham Road, Rockingham, NC 28379 Phone -1- '5 9088 Fax (910) 9976617. wwwgorectingham.con    City Council Agenda March 10, 2015 Page2  B. Hold Public Hearing.  1.) Rezoning Request: Hold public hearing for an ordinance to rezone approximately .63 acres located at 190 County Home Road and identified as Richmond County PIN # 7472-02-68-8866 from Residential Duplex (R- 8) to Neighborhood Business (B-1). (See pages 11-12 & Map Inserts)  C. Minutes from Various Boards (included separately)  6. Hold 2nd Public Hearing reference submission of CDBG application for 2015.  A. B. C.  Summary of purpose of 2nd Hearing (See Page 13) Adopt Resolution Authorizing Filing of Application (See Page 14) Certification by Recording Officer (See Page 15) D. Project Maps (Sub area A and B) (See Map Inserts)  7. Presentation of Rockingham Police Department's Annual Report for 2014 by  Chief Billy Kelly. 8. Business by' Visitors. 9. Business by City Clerk. 10. Business by City Manager. 11. Business by City Attorney. 13. Business by Mayor.  12. Items of discussion by City Council Members.  14. Closed Session in compliance with N.C.G.S 143-318.11 (a)6 to discuss a  personnel matter. 15. Adjournment.  -2-    Rockingham, NC  City Council Agenda  SUPPORT DOCUMENTS  -3-     a N &  R DE  -4-    UNCOLLECTED TAXES  YEAR 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004  AMOUNT 170,420.72 34,340.68 25,418.76 21,077.26 16,638.31 12,388.56 9,817.12 5,943.82 4,615.75 3,999.38 3,112.25  February 2015  170,420.72 137,351.89 307,772.61  Total Current Year Total Past Years Total All Years  5-    3  3    a E  8  3 8 0  6    Staff Report to Planning and Zoning Board  Agenda Item: IV.A March 3, 2015 Issue:  UDO Text Amendment: Consideration of an amendment to the City's Unified Development Ordinance to delete Article 12: Telecommunication Regulations in its entirety and replace with a revised Article 12:  Telecommunication Regulations.  Background:  The City's current telecommunication regulations set forth in Article 12 of the UDO were originally adopted in January of 2003. These regulations have not been amended since the original adoption. Changes in state and federal laws in combination with new technology have necessitated a City staff contracted with Cityscape Consultants, Inc. to provide assistance with revising and updating the regulations. Cityscape specializes in providing technical assistance to local governments on all eecommunaton-reitad issues. They are not associated or affiliated with any wireless providers or private tower owners. The proposed regulations are based on a model ordinance modified to meet Rockingham's specific needs and preferences. Cityscape has drafted similar ordinances for other cities  comprehensive revision oft the City's wireless telecommunication regulations.  and counties in North Carolina. Staff Comments:  1. A copy of the proposed regulations are included in the agenda packet for the Board's review. Identifying and discussing every minor change or adjustment will be nearly impossible; therefore, City staff will focus on identifying notable and significant changes. Although the proposed regulations are a complete and total rewrite, the net effect is not a major departure from the current regulations. The primary intent of the re-write is to bring the current regulations into compliance 2. In terms of permitting, the proposed regulations establish four permit levels to address the various types of regulated facilities. Levels I and II permits include those type facilities approved administratively. Levels III and IV permits include those type facilities approved by the Board of Adjustment. A notable change is that collocations of wireless facilities on existing towers/structures will be approved administratively under the proposed regulations. This change is made to comply with state and federal laws. (Sections 12.14 and 12.15 define the four permit levels.) 3. The order of preferred siting for telecommunication facilities in the proposed regulations will remain essentially the same as the current regulations. The proposed regulations continue to encourage collocations on existing towers and structures as the highest preferred siting option; and the construction of new non-concealed towers as the lowest preferred siting option. Only after an applicant adequately demonstrates no collocation options are available, can new tower construction be considered. (Sections 12.16, 12.17, and 12.18 set forth the preferred siting alternatives and 4. An notable change is that the proposed regulations distinguish between concealed and non-concealed towers; and allow concealed towers as a conditional use in all zones. The current regulations do not distinguish between concealed and non-concealed towers. Examples of concealed towers are church steeples, windmills, bell towers, clock towers, light standards, flagpoles and/or trees. City staff is  with changes in federal and state laws; and address new technology.  associated requirements.)  8-    recommending this change as part of the proposed regulations because these type structures containing a concealed personal wireless service facility (PWSF) may be appropriate in any zoning district depending upon the specific location and the specific design/appearance. The Board of Adjustment would make the final determination as to the suitability of a specific location and the design/appearance of the concealment during the conditional use permitting process. 5. Another notable change is that non-concealed towers will be allowed in the R-20 zone (as a conditional use). The current regulations allow new towers as a conditional use in the I-1, I-2, and B-3 zones. The proposed regulations will allow non-concealed towers as a conditional use in the I-1, I-2, B-3, and R-20 zones. City staff is recommending this change because there are a number of large undeveloped tracts zoned R-20 in the ETJ where a non-concealed tower could potentially be located with minimal impact on the surrounding community. (Section 12.19 sets forth which type 6. The proposed regulations address amateur radio towers, which are not addressed in the current regulations. Under the proposed regulations, amateur radio towers are permitted in all zoning districts; limited to 70 feet in height; must be setback from all property lines a distance at least equal to the height of the tower; and approved administratively. (Section 12.20 sets forth the 7. The proposed regulations address and allow for "mitigation", which is not addressed in the current regulations. Essentially, mitigation" allows for the replacement of an existing PWSF tower as a permitted use provided such mitigation does at least one of the following: reduces the number of PWSF: support structures or towers; or replaces a non-concealed tower with a PWSF concealed tower (or reduces the visual impact of a PWSF); or replaces an existing PWSF tower with a new PWSF tower to improve network functionality. (Section 12.26 sets forth the requirements for mitigation".) 8. The proposed regulations establish requirements for distributed antenna systems (DAS), which are not addressed in the current regulations. DAS is relatively new technology. (Section 12.27 sets 9. The maximum allowable tower height also increases in the proposed regulations. The maximum allowable height for a concealed PWSF tower is 150 feet. The maximum allowable height for a non- concealed PWSF tower is 199 feet. The current regulations limit the maximum allowable tower height to 140 feet. In 2006, the current 140-foot maximum height limit proved too restrictive for the only tower constructed under the current regulations. The Board of Adjustment granted a variance to allow a maximum height of 180 feet sO the tower could provide adequate service and collocation opportunities. (Section 12.28 (B) and Section 12.30 (B) set forth tower height 10. The proposed regulations address the use of "breakpoint" technology as it relates to tower design and setback requirements. Essentially, this technology insures that in the event of a structural failure of the monopole, the failure will occur at the breakpoint rather than at the base plate, anchor bolts, or any other point on the monopole. The use of this technology allows for a reduction in tower setback requirements since the risk of a collapse onto adjacent property is significantly reduced. The current regulations do not address "breakpoint" technology. (Section 12.28 (C) and Section 12.30 (C) set forth tower setbacks and the use of breakpoint technology.) 11. The requirement for all PWSF towers to be a "monopole" type construction is unchanged between the current and proposed regulations (as opposed to allowing lattice or guyed towers). 12. The proposed regulations include requirements for broadcast towers (radio and television towers), which are not addressed in the current regulations. In the proposed regulations, broadcast towers  facilities are allowed in each zoning district and the type of permit required.)  requirements for amateur radio towers.)  forth the requirements for DAS facilities.)  requirements.)  -9-    are allowed as a conditional use in the I-1, I-2, B-3, and R-20 zones the same as PWSF towers. The maximum height for a broadcast tower will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis with consideration given to the determination of height contained in an applicant's FCC construction permit. The minimum setback is equal to the tower height. (Section 12.32 sets forth the 13. The proposed regulations continue to allow for the retention of expert assistance in reviewing and evaluating any type facility. However, one notably change is that there is no longer a requirement for an escrow account to be set up by the applicant to cover the cost of the expert assistance. The cost of expert assistance will now be funded by requiring a one-time application fee in an amount adequate to cover the cost. City staff has entered into a contract with Cityscape to provide this expert assistance on an as-needed basis for a fixed fee depending on the type of facility. 14. As a part of this amendment, the Planning and Inspections Department Fee Schedule will need to be amended to reflect application costs for "substantial" collocations and new towers ($6,500); and "non-substantial" collocations, modifications, and upgrades ($1,000). The term "substantial"  requirements for broadcast towers.)  collocation is defined in NCGS 160A-400.51.  Staff Recommendation: Article 12 as proposed.  City staff recommends the Board review and discuss the proposed regulations. If the Board is satisfied with the proposed revisions, then City staff recommends the Board recommend the City Council amend  Planning Board Recommendation: Council amend Article 12 of the UDO as proposed.  The Planning Board reviewed the request on March 3, 2015 and recommended unanimously that the City  -10-    Staff Report to Planning and Zoning Board  Agenda Item: IV.A February 3, 2015 Issue:  Rezoning Request: Henry R. Seals has submitted a request to rezone approximately .63 acres located at 190 County Home Road and identified as Richmond County PIN # 7472-02-68-8866 from Residential  Duplex (R-8) to Neighborhood Business (B-1).  Background:  On January 20, 2015, Henry R. Seals submitted a request to rezone approximately .63 acres located at 190 County Home Road from Residential Duplex (R-8) to Neighborhood Business (B-1). An upholstery shop is operated by the applicant on the subject property, which is a nonconforming use in the R-8 zone. The applicant is concerned with the potential future limitations created by the legal nonconforming status of his business as currently zoned if the building were to be substantialy damaged and/or ceased As stated in Section 3.01 of the UDO, the R-8 zone is intended to provide for the orderly growth of single-family detached, semi-detached, and two-family development (excluding manufactured housing) with a moderately dense character in order to create quiet, livable neighborhoods. The B-1 zone is intended to accommodate and provide for the development of small, neghnborhood-onented commercial activities strategically located to offer goods and services to the surrounding residential areas that are typically considered non-offensive in nature and compatible with residential uses in close proximity.  operations for a period oft time in excess of 180 days.  Staff Comments:  1. A copy of a zoning map and aerial map illustrating the location of the subject property is included in 2. The subject property is currently zoned Residential Duplex (R-8). Upholstery shops and/or similar uses are not allowed in the R-8 zone. Thus, the upholstery shop is considered a legal nonconforming use and subject to regulations set forth in Article 6 of the UDO concerning nonconforming situations. Such regulations place limits on re-establishing nonconforming uses if damaged or destroyed; re-establishing the use if discontinued for 180 days; or using the existing 3. In addition to the upholstery shop, two single-wide manufactured homes are located on the subject property. Both manufactured homes are also legal nonconforming uses in the R-8 zone. The requested rezoning to B-1 will not affect their nonconforming status - both manufactured homes 4. The approval of the rezoning request will undoubtedly constitute spot zoning. As discussed in previous rezoning cases, spot zoning is not illegal if determined to be reasonable and in the public interest. Legal precedent has established the following factors for determining if a particular spot zoning is reasonable: the size of the tract; compatibility with an existing comprehensive plan; the impact of the zoning decision on the landowner, the immediate neighbors, and the surrounding community; and the relationship between the newly allowed uses in a spot rezoning and the 5. Shaping Our Future: 2023, the City's land use plan, mentions the importance of neighborhood- oriented commercial developments at key intersections for the purpose of providing goods and  the agenda packet for the Board's review.  building for a different commercial use.  would remain legal nonconforming uses under the B-1 zoning.  previously allowed uses.  -11-    services to the surrounding residential areas. While the subject property was not specifically identified and may not necessarily constitute a "key intersection", it is an existing commercial building in a residential area that could serve the same purpose. From this perspective, the request 5. The B-1 zone has been previously used in multiple instances around the City's jurisdiction to address as single commercial use located in a residential area. So, this particular rezoning request is not  isc consistent with the City's future land use plan.  without precedent. Staff Recommendation:  City staff recommends the Board review the request and recommend the City Council rezone the subject  property from R-8 to B-1 as requested by the applicant.  Planning Board Recommendation:  The Planning Board reviewed the request on February 3, 2015 and recommended unanimously the City Council rezone the subject property from Residential Duplex (R-8) to Neighborhood Business (B-1).  -12-    BIs SubjectF Property Proportyl Linos( (2014) AE( (Floodplain) SHADEDXFibodplain) AEFW (Floodway) StreetNames Address Data Cityl Limits Watershed rea Balance INCO  Seals Rezoning Request  Scale: 1"=150'  ROCKINGHAM A CITY  FORWARD  (R-8toB-1)  97    SubjectProperty PropantyLnes/2014) AE(Floodplain) SHADEDX( (Floodplain) AEFW (Floodway) StreetN Names Addross Data CilyLimits EETJ istorio District Watershed CriticalArea WatorshodE Balance TNCO B-1( (NeighborhoodE B-2 (Central  B-3(Highway! Business) (-ighti Industrial) 12Heavyl Industrial) 0-(Ofical Instlutional) Jo-s(Opans Space) R-20( (RuralR Residential) R-12(Low Density Residential) R-9(Moderale DensityF Residential) R-8 (Rosidontial Duplex) R-7(High DensityF Residential) R-7A(Residontialy Village)  Seals Rezoning Request  Scale: 1"=300'  ROCKINGHAM A LOOKING CITY  NAN FORWARD  B-1)  (R-8toB  0-I  R-20  ONTRE OM  B3    City of Rockingham- - 2nd CDBG Public Hearing Summary  Tuesday, March 10, 2015  The purpose of the public hearing will be to discuss the City'sintent to submit an application to the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR) for Community Development NCDENR expects to receive approximately $26 million in CDBG Infrastructure funds during this fiscal year, with approximately: $13 million available in this funding round. CDBG funds may provide for water and sewer infrastructure activities and Economic Development activities, of which 100% of the CDBG The City of Rockingham is very familiar with the CDBG program, as the City has received and implemented many CDBG grants over the past several years. All of the City'sCDBG projects have been successfully closed out and have provided much needed improvements to the City's low and moderate The City of Rockingham has selected a project area in East Rockingham, which is al large area that the City has created phased projects and continues to seek funding for this community. The application will request funding in the amount of$ 2,750,000. If funded, this project will provide public sewer improvements to approximately 80 low/moderate income families who currently experience failed or The City of Rockingham certifies they are in compliance with their Antt-Displacement and Relocation Policy for CDBG grant funding and also certifies that no one will be displaced or relocated as ar result of the proposed CDBG project. The application will be available for review at Rockingham City Hall Citizens wishing to submit a complaint or grievance may contact Monty Crump, Rockingham City Manager at 997-5546, or at 514 Rockingham Road, Rockingham, NC 28379. The City will provide a written timely response to the citizen within 151 business days when practicable. All citizens of the City of Rockingham are invited to attend and participate in this public hearing.  Biock Grant (CDBG) Infrastructure funding.  funds must be used to benefit low-to-moderate income people.  income communities.  failing onsite septic systemsi in thel East Rockingham community.  between 9:00 am and 5:00 pm, Monday - Friday.  At this time, allow) for public comment(s).  -13-    RESOLUTION BY THE CITY OF ROCKINGHAM CITY COUNCIL  WHEREAS, Titie loft the Federal Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, has  established the U.S. Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program, and has authorized the making of grants to aid eligible units of government in funding the cost of construction, replacement, or rehabilitation of water and wastewater infrastructure, and that the North Carolina Department of Environment & Natural Resources (NCDENR) Division of Water Infrastructure (DWI) was delegated the authority by the state legislature to administer the water and wastewater infrastructure portion of the state grant monies received from the U.S. HUD CDBG program by Session Law 2013-360, Section 15.15(a) as amended by Section! 5.3 of Session Law 2013-363, and system project described as the 2015 East Rockingham Sewer System Project; and  WHEREAS, The City of Rockingham has need for and intends to construct a wastewater collection WHEREAS, The City of Rockingham intends to request state grant assistance for the project in the NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROCKINGHAM;  amount of $2,750,000;  That the City of Rockingham, the Applicant, will adopt and place into effect on or before completion of the project a schedule of fees and charges and other availabie funds which will provide adequate funds for proper operation, maintenance, and administration of the That the Applicant will provide for efficient operation and maintenance of the project on That M. Steven Morris, Mayor and Monty Crump, City! Manager, the Authorized Officials, and successors so titled, is hereby authorized to execute and file an application on behalf of the Applicant with the State of North Carolina for a grant to aid in the construction of the That the Authorized Officials, and successors. so titled, is hereby authorized and directed to furnish such information as the appropriate State agency may request in connection with such application or the project; to make the assurances as contained above; and to execute such other documents as may be required in connection with the application. That the Applicant has substantially complied or will substantially comply with all Federal, State, and local laws, rules, regulations, and ordinances applicable to the project and to  system.  completion of construction thereof.  project described above.  Federal and State grants and loans pertaining thereto.  Adopted this the 10" day of March, 2015 at Rockingham, Richmond County, North Carolina.  M. Steven Morris Mayor  Gwendolyn F. Swinney City Clerk  (SEAL)  STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA COUNTY OF MOORE 10" day of March, 2015. NotaryP Public_ My commission expires_ 10-20-18  Sharon McDuffie, a Notary Public for said County and State, do hereby certify that M. Steven Morris and Gwendolyn F. Swinney appeared before me and acknowledged the due execution oft the foregoing instrument. Witness my hand and official seal this the  (Notary! Seal)  29 -14-    CATPCATONEYARECRONG OFFICER  The undersigned duly qualified and acting City Clerk of the City of Rockingham does hereby certify: That the above/attached resolution is a true and correct copy of the resolution authorizing the filing of an application with the State of North Carolina, as regularly adopted at a legally convened meeting of the Rockingham City Council duly held on the 10th day of March, 2015; and, further, that such resolution has  beenf fully recorded in the journal of proceedings and records in my office. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Ihave hereunto set my hand this 10th day of March, 2015.  Signature - Gwendolyn F. Swinney  Gwendolyn F. Swinney, City Clerk (Title of Recording Officer)  STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA COUNTYOFI MOORE 2015. Notary Public_  1,Sharon McDuffie, a Notary Public for said County and State, do hereby certify that Gwendolyn F. Swinney appeared before me and acknowledged the due execution of the foregoing instrument. Witness my hand and official seal this the 10" day of March,  My commission expires_ 10-20-18  (Notary Seal)  30 -15-    &    Iluih  & 8  4  30  86  de a    DEPARTMENTAL ACTIVITY REPORTS  for  COUNCIL'S INFORMATION  -16-    ROCKINGHAM A CITY LOOKING FORWARD  NRF  EGHEEA  To: From: Date: Subject:  Monty Crump, City Manager Dave Davis, Recreation Director March 3,2015 Activity Report  With spring right around the corner the following are. just at few activities involving our  department this month.  Spring Soccer- Registration has been completed and wel have another strong enrollment for this spring program. Over four hundred children have enrolled for the fourth consecutive year. Practices have been Youth Baseball/Softball - Registration is currently under way and should be completed within the week. Although still a popularactivity it is doubtfulit ifi it, or any program, will overtake the popularity generated Hinson Lake - As the spring and summer months approach activities and reservations for this facility increase substantially. Hinson Lake has, and will continue, to offer a nice diversification to our  scheduled and league play will begin Friday, March 6th.  by youth soccer.  recreational offerings.  March is always at transitional month for our department. Weather will remain a variable, but through the years, our maintenance staff has employed various maintenance strategies to make the  process as seamless as possible. We look forward to the months ahead.  514 Rockingham Road, Rockingham, NC 28379 - Phon -17- 5 9088 Fax (910) 997 6617 * w.goroctingham.com    FIRE CHIEF HAROLDI ISLER ADMIN.ASST. KRISTYPLAYER  ASST.CHIEF DAVIDMULLIS CAPTAIN VICI MCCASKILL  ( D FIRE DEPE. February-15  We are pleased to submit the monthly fire report on the activities undertaken by the Rockingham  Fire Department during the month of February 2015.  Total Alarms: Turn In Alarms: Wrecks: Smoke Scare: Power line down: 1 Illegal Burn: Electrical:  43 1 20 1 0 1  In Town: Silent Alarms: Alarm Malf: Vehicle fire: Bomb Threat: Co detector: Assist EMS:  43 42 Z 0 0 2 0  Out of Town: Structure: Good Intent: Trash: Gas Leak/Spill: Assist Police: Mutual Aid:  0 1 Z 3 0 0 0  Hours Spent on Calls: 21 hours 15 minutes Total Property Exposed to Fire: Total Property Damaged by Fire: Total Property Saved:  $235,000.00 $20,000.00 $215,000.00  During the month of February full time members of the fire department averaged 33 training hours  per person; part-paid members averaged 7 hours per person fort the month.  Public Life & Safety: Installed 1 car seats Inspections: 113  -Chief Isler and Assistant Chief Mullis attened the North Carolina Association of Fire Chief's Confernece in  Concord, NC February 5th-8th, 2015  Respectfully Submitted, sle Fire Chief Harold Isler  -18-  231 S. LAWRENCE ST. ROCKI. aaa NC 28379 I 910-997-4002    ROCKINGHAM ACIY LOOKING FORWARD  Rockingham Police Department  W.D. Kelly, Chiefof Police  To: Monty Crump éom: W. D. Kelly  Chief of Police Date: March 4, 2015 Ref: February Activity Report  On behalf of the Rockingham Police Department, I am pleased to submit this report for your consideration. The following activities have been undertaken by officers of the Rockingham Police Department.  Total Calls for the Month: Animai Control Calls: Alarm Calls Escorts: Unlock Vehicles: Charges Generating Arrest: Felonies: Misdemeanors: Drug Violations: Juvenile: Warrants Served: Citations:  991 49 130 65 114  37 67 13 3 95 236  Accidents eported/investyates: Property Damage only: Personal Injury: Officer Hours Spent in Court: Officer Training Hours Logged Items of Interest:  50 01 45 442  We had some inclement weather, but all in all it went well and we had no significant  problems.  311 E.. Franklin, Street, Rockingham, N.C. 28379. Phone 19- -2468 Fax (910) agmapian