HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-20-2024 Regular Meeting344
Dunn City Council
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, February 20, 2024
6:30 p.m., Dunn Municipal Building
Minutes
PRESENT: Mayor William P. Elmore Jr., Mayor Pro Tom 1. Wesley Sills, Council Members Raquel
McNeil, April Gaulden, Alan Hargis, and Dr. David L. Bradham. ABSENT: Council Member Billy N. Tart
• Also present: City Manager Steven Neuschafer, Assistant City Manager Billy R. Godwin, Finance Director Cary
McNallan, Chief of Police Cary Jackson, Planning Director George Adler, Parks and Recreation Director Brian
McNeill, Human Resources Director Connie Jernigan, Public Works Director Dwayne Williams, Collections and
Distribution Manager Billy Cottle, Water Plant Manager Ian Stroud, Wastewater Plant Manager Donne Dukes,
Administrative Support SpecialistAmber Groves, City Attorney Tilghman Pope, and City Clerk Tammy Williams.
CALL TO ORDER AND INVOCATION
Mayor Elmore opened the meeting at 6:30 p.m. and Council Member Gaulden gave the invocation.
Afterwards, Council Member Hargis led in the Pledge of Allegiance.
AGENDA ADJUSTMENT AND APPROVAL
Motion by Council Member Bradham and second by Council Member Gaulden to adopt the February 20, 2024
meeting agenda as presented with the following addition:
• Small Rural Tribal Body Worn Camera Grant
Motion unanimously approved.
CONSENTITEMS
• Minutes of the November 14, 2023 City Council Meeting.
• Minutes of the December 12, 2023 City Council Meeting.
• Minutes of the January 3, 2024 City Council Orientation Meeting.
• Temporary Blocking of Street/Use of City Property- B Healthy Club Anniversary
• Audit Contract Award to TPSA and authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the contract,
engagement letter, and related documents. A copy of the Resolution (R2024-05) is incorporated into these
minutes as Attachment #1.
• : Retirement Resolution - Terry Bethea. A copy of the Resolution (R2024-06) is incorporated into these
minutes as Attachment #2.
Budget Amendment - Various Accounts. A copy of Budget Amendment (RA2024-11) is incorporated into
these minutes as Attachment #3.
• Park to Park Trail Project Amendment A copy of the Capitol Project Ordinance (02024-01) and Budget
Amendment (BA2024-12) are incorporated into these minutes as Attachment #4.
• Capitol Projects Manager/Building Inspector Amendment A copy of Budget Amendment (BA2024-13) is
incorporated into these minutes as Attachment #S.
• Small Rural Tribal Body Worn Camera Grant
Motion by Mayor Pro Tern Sills and second by Council Member Gaulden to approve all consent items. Motion
unanimously approved.
PRESENTATIONS
Terry Bethea Retirement Presentation
Mayor Elmore recognized Terry Bethea on his retirement
CALEA Reaccreditation - Police
Chief Jackson presented to the Council and her staff the second CALEA Accreditation award to the City of
Dunn Police Department
Reading of Black History Month Proclamation
Mayor Elmore read the proclamation and recognized Council Members Gaulden and McNeil honoring their
leadership and service to the City of Dunn. A copy of the Proclamation (P2024-02) is incorporated into these
• minutes as Attachment#6.
School Bus Driver Appreciation Week
Mayor Pro Tern Sills read the Proclamation and presented a copy to the schools in attendance: Dunn
Elementary and Dunn Middle Schools. A copy of the Proclamation (P2024-03) is incorporated into these
minutes as Attachment #7.
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
The Public Comment Period was opened by Mayor Elmore at 6:51 p.m. The following spoke in favor of Chief
Jackson and the Dunn Police Department: Karren Lee, Michael Wood, and Michael Preddy. The following
spoke in favor of Pac-Man's retirement: Victoria Lee, Susan Thrailkill and Johnnie Jackson. Herb Smith spoke
about a vision for Dunn and encouraged engagement with residents and Michael Edwards spoke about the
fiber optics installed around the City. Having no additional comments, the Public Commemperiod was closed.
345
ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION AND/OR DECISION
Resolution and Order for Closing of Public Street - W Godwin Between 801 S King Ave and 707 S King
Ave
Mayor Elmore opened the Public Hearing at 7:19 p.m. City Manager Neuschafer presented for consideration
the closing of a section of public street between 801 S King Ave and 707 S King Ave from S King Ave to the
alley. A petition requesting the closure was received on December 1, 2023 and is included in this packet The
Resolution of Intent was adopted at the December Council meeting setting the date for the Public Hearing for
February 20, 2024. The public hearing was duly advertised and posted as required. Proper notice was
certified mailed to the property owners adjoining this property and posted in two places along the property
and all utilities were located. The City of Dunn has an outfall line that crosses the property and the owners
have had a survey map completed which identifies the easement in their property. With no further comments,
the Public Hearing was closed.
Motion by Council Member Gaulden and second by Mayor Pro Tem Sills to adopt the Resolution and Order to
Close the Public Street between 801 S King Ave and 707 S King Ave as presented. Motion unanimously
approved. A copy ofthe Resolution and Order (R2024-07) is incorporated into these minutes as Attachment #8.
SUP-01-24 (quasi-judicial) Dwelling - Multi -Family Conversion at 309 N Wilson
Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Sills and second by Council Member Bmdham to open a Public Hearing at 7:22 p.m.
to consider a request to convert a single-family home into a triplex in an R-7 zoning district Motion
unanimously approved.
And at this time, since the hearing is open, I'd like to turn it over to the City Attorney Tilghman Pope to
conduct this portion of the meeting. City Attorney Pope's comments in this matter are all in italics
Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This is a request to convert a single-family home into a triplex and an R7 zoning district
Specifically, the request is to allow for the development of a multifamily conversion as a special use of the
property zoned R7. As the Mayor indicated, this is a quasi-judicial proceeding and the matter is under case #SUP-
01-24, which is a request by David Berg and Chris Dolan, for a special use permit to allow for a multifamily
dwelling conversion on an existing .16-acre parcel being Pin #1516-78-0032-000 at 309 N Wilson Ave. The
property is zoned R7Single Family Dwelling District
The meeting on this matter is judicial in nature and will be conducted with special due process safeguards. At
this time, any person who wishes to give testimony in this hearing, ifyou will, please come to the podium to be
sworn.
George, is there a Bible there? If you'll place your left hand on the Bible and raise your right hand. Do you
solemnly swear that the testimony you're about to give to be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
truth, so help you God? All agreed. Thank you. You may be seated.
In this meeting we will first hearfrom the planning director, George Adler, and then from the applicant and their
witnesses, and then from opponents to the request Parties may cross examine witnesses after each witness
testifies when questions are called for if the person has standing. ifyou want City Council to see written evidence
such as reports, maps, exhibits, the witness who is most familiar with the evidence should ask that it be
introduced at the end or beginning ofyour testimony. We cannot accept reports from persons who are not here
to testify. I do not see any attorneys present for any parry, so we'll skip that part and now open this meeting on
Case #SUP-01-24 Special Use Permit application and recognize the Planning Director George Adler.
Planning Director Adler: Thank you. 1 would I'd like to include in the record all the materials that were
provided to council in their packets.
Those items are received in evidence.
Adler: This request is for a special use permit to allow for multifamily conversion as a special use of the
structure that's currently existing at 309 N Wilson. And that's specifically to convert a single-family home into
a triplex.
In the ODD section 506 table of permitted uses, a dwelling multifamily conversion is permitted in R7 as a
special use. Referring to ODD section 3.06 A 5B that describes the process, a quasi-judicial process. There are •
a few questions that are raised, and I'll address them, and it basically follows what was in the staff report On
the first question asks does the use materially endanger the public health or safety. 309 N Wilson is zoned R7
Single family zoning district Multifamily conversion is permitted as a special use in R7 according to the table
of permitted uses at 5.06. A triplex at this location would increase density slightly. just two blocks from the
center of downtown. Increasing residential density in the downtown area supports Imagine Dunn's vision for
more commercial and pedestrian activity downtown.
Will the use substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property? 309 N Wilson is in the Gateway
and Corridor Character area and to quote from the Future Land Use plan, many of these areas were identified
in the city Strategic Vision Plan as opportunities for improvement and or redevelopment Development
policies should focus on adaptive reuse of existing structures. That's on page 28 of the Future Land Use Plan.
Increasing the residential from one household to three in a revitalized residential structure built in 1925
adjacent to the downtown would not injure the value of surrounding properties. All Public Utilities are
available on the site. A multifamily conversion would not impede orderly development or have any negative
346
impact on surrounding properties. So, the question of is the requested use in conformity with the city's
adopted comprehensive plan? The future land use map identifies this address as being in the Gateway and
Corridor character area adjacent to the downtown character area. The conversion of a dilapidated single-
family structure to a vitalized triplex conforms to that character area of support of redevelopment A blend of
uses and a blend of different residential types. The existing 2000 square foot structure was built in 1925. To
convert and revitalize such a structure into a three -household residential building would conform with the
future land use plan and map.
1 would like to just explain one thing that might not be clear. What's requested is a multifamily conversion
• and that's defined in the DOD as a structure that was built as a single-family home, that's converted up to a
triplex. So, that means converting the existing single-family home at 309 N Wilson to a triplex. If for whatever
reason, the existing structure can't be redeveloped into a triplex. A new building with three units could not be
built without a special use permit and rezoning to RM mixed -use or Cl. If you have any questions, I'd be
happy to answer them.
At this time, this is the opportunityfor Council to ask any questions of Mr. Adler.
Council Member Bradham: Back to your last point So, if it's converted to a triplex. I don't want to put words
in your mouth, if it doesn't sell or doesn't work out or whatever, then at that point you're saying that it cannot
be converted to a... what was the last point that you made?
Adler: That what is being requested is converting the existing building to a triplex. Let's just say the existing
building could not be, and for whatever reason, it could be that it costs too much to get it to meet code. It
could be any number of reasons, whatever the reason is. If it had to be torn down. The owners could not just
build a triplex. That's a different definition in the UDO, that's multifamily. This is a single family. This is a
dwelling conversion from a single family to a triplex. So, if the building came down and you had approved this
special use permit for the multifamily conversion that would become a moot point
Council Member Hargis: So,you're saying that it would revert back to single family at that time is what you're
saying?
Adler: To do anything other than single family you would need to come back to council for a special use
permit and that would also include rezoning.
• Other questions of Mc Adlerfrom Council.
Hargis: I have a question about something, but I don't know if you would be the right one George to ask or not
or maybe one of the petitioners might be, but I as I was looking through this, there is a tremendous amount of
things that the county inspector has said that need to be done, sprinkler systems and all kinds of things that
are expensive. And I just wonder. Are you prepared to do that?
Applicants are coming next; you'll be able to ask them this question.
Unintelligible comments by David Berg.
Oh, oh, oh. You're not testifying yet, Sir. Any other questions for Mr. Adler? All right Thank you, Sir. We will now
hear from the applicant and other proponents. State your name before you testify, please.
Chris Dolan: My name is Chris Dolan I am one of the homeowners. I do have some items I'd like to put into
testimony.
If you will pass that around with Or Bradham, please.
Hargis: Yes, speak in I cannot hear you.
Dolan: I did not know how many copies to make, so I do apologize. I am short, so, I did have seven.
Hargis: We just passed around.
Dolan: So, I do apologize for that, but 1 did not know how many I needed.
• You may proceed.
I'm starting out I've actually numbered the items that you have in your packet there. So starting with the top
right, you'll see an item number one. This is just a listing of the home that we purchased last year in April. So,
we haven't even had it a year yet So, we purchased it in April of 2023. The listing agent had it listed as a
triplex Then after that So that's just kind of #1. So, if you look to page 2 on here, there's a whole series of my
county tax records for this property and also a letter from Harnett County. So, in looking at the tax records, so
again, they're marked as. You'll see a letter from Harnett County, such as, say, #2 on the top right You may
have to undo your paper clip, Sir.
It might be easier for you to undo the paper clip. Anyways, there's a letter from Harnett County here, and
basically understanding this is he's clarified to us that the MOD. The MOD is the model type, which is a single-
family resident as a model type, but the usage is 62, which is a duplex triplex. He pulled these records back
347
and he was able to go back for what their limitation was 2002. And since 2002 for their records, this home
has had the usage code as a triplex duplex with the measurements in there for each individual unit So,1 want
to I wanted to share that with you so you could see that, and this letter is from him, and he said if you had any
questions, but it does say that the use of this home is a triplex. So that is #2.
Number 3. We reviewed the zoning in your packet there, you'll see a little. Speaking of something like this
kind of enlarged, this is from 2006. In 2006 our home 2000 and actually up to 2021 and previous years, our
home was actually classified and zoned as 01. It was not changed to R7 until 2021 and that is evidence 3B. So,
this is 3A and you have 3B. So 3A is that this home was actually zoned as 01, which is office and institutional.
Number 4. The home and you can see in the very front picture of the packet that I gave you, the home has
three mailboxes. The home also has three electric meters. I emailed Mr. Adler here and asked him some
questions and that is on #4 packet There's an e-mail from Mr. Adler and myself in exchange and I asked him
how does somebody get 3 electric meters because I called Duke Energy myself and I said, hey, you know we
have 3 electric meters. Can you tell me how long that they have been there? Their records only go back to
1999 and they said we've had three meters there since at least 1999. Then I asked what is the process of Mr.
Adler and Duke Energy, both, asked both parties. Duke said that in order to have an electric meter, an
inspection needs to be completed and that is done by the city. In addition to that, it has to be approved to
allow the additional meters to be added. In the e-mail from Mr. Adler, he does confirm that that is indeed the
case, that typically somebody would apply through the city inspection department and ask for the additional
meters to be added and then they're either approved or not approved. And the Duke Energy has to have that
before they can add additional meters. The other part of that e-mail, as 1 asked him about the three mailboxes,
I said how does somebody get 3 mailboxes. Because I can't just call today the post office and say, hey, can I
please get another address for my house. There is a process put in place and that is that you need to go
through the city. In the e-mail George says what is his awareness? Because George has been here since I think
2019. So, he said in his history of being here, he could say that you have to go to the city to get the approval to
plan this. You have to get their approval because you have to have the 911 information added. You have to
have all kinds of different things to get approved prior to getting 3 mailboxes.
So as far as we know from Duke Energy, I asked him how long their policy was in place, having inspections for
additional meters. And they said at least 40 plus years that they're aware of that their records go back. If you
look at #5, I pulled, there's a packet in there where 1 pulled comparable sales and listings to our property. To
show how the county has listed them for usage codes and compare this to what the City of Dunn has both in
what they have on their map but also what they have as zoned previously and currently. So, I'm gonna go to
that for a second here.
All right, so first we have 604 S Fayetteville Ave. This is a duplex triplex. The usage code is the same as ours,
which is 62. And this is on the Duke or I'm sorry, on the Dunn City zoning map, it is R10. I pulled then 310 W
Broad St in Dunn. This is actually shows description as a use 57 as converted residents to commercial. This is
zoned as RM. This is actually a fourplex. This is a quad, 4 units in one.1 then pulled the 311 East Bay St This is
also used code 57. And it says converted resident commercial. This is also zoned RM and this, for me, shows it
apartments because it has apartments are five or more units. So, once you get past that 4 quad it becomes an
apartment according to how they've defined this here. Next, I pulled our neighbors down the street, so on the
same block as us on the opposite corner. So, if you look at the map of what George had up there on our exact
block, just the opposite comer is 303 Wilson and it actually has two mailboxes, 2 meters, it's 301 and 303 N
Wilson Ave.
They have that listed in the zoning map. So, on the 2022 and 2024 zoning map, the zoning maps here, it is
listed as R7. It is also classified use as 62 duplex triplex. Then 1 pulled a house that's actually currently for sale
just to kind of, you know, mix things up a little bit and this is 103 Winterlochen Drive. This is also use code as
62 duplex triplex. This I could not find in the ZODI map, and 1 don't know if it's because it's outside of city
limits or if I just, the city, the streets are just not listed there. But I couldn't actually find that one. But that just
kind of gives you an idea of how ours compares to the other multifamily homes that are out there and have
been sold recently.
Number six, I made a mistake. 1 thought parking was according to the LIDO that Harnett County has, which is
1.5, but George states. I couldn't find the city's UDO that George shared it with me today. So, the parking is 1.8.
parking spots off street per unit So, we have a very large backyard where our property is so we can
accommodate the 4.5 vehicles or the six vehicles almost that we would need. So, we have ample space in the
back. So that was something that came about
Next, 1'd like to kind of talk to you guys about the person that we spoke we bought the house from. His name
is BL Strickland, he's Belvin L Strickland Junior. We actually just talked to him today too, but we also met with
him when we were purchasing the home. So, we talked to him, and he told us that this home was actually
converted to a triplex in 1977.
Ma'am, you can'tgive testimony as to whatsomebody else said. How to close.
Dolan: OK, that's fine. That's OK, but we're just trying to say that this house has been triplex for a while, so
that's fine. And one of the things that came about the conversation is that he did go through the city. I don't
know how far back records go because it seems to me like even the county doesn't go past like the 80s. But
his father - he assured us that he went through the proper channels. His father actually was a City of Dunn
Inspector.
348
Ma'am I'm sorry you can't testify what somebody else said that's not here.
Dolan: It's there. I mean, he was. I gave you the. I'm just telling you that he was, his dad was an inspector.
That's all I'm saying right now.
Unintelligible comments.
OK? Siryou will get opportunity to testify in a minute.
isDolan: OK, that's fine. So, I'm putting into evidence that his father, the owner's father, was the city inspector
for City of Dunn for multiple years. So that's what I'm putting in that in for evidence. No other, no other
comment
Unintelligible comments by David Berg.
Yeah, well, you can see that he was, I'm sure somebody probably even know him, but he was. If you look at the
picture, you can see that he was here on the council for,1 think he was an inspector for around 20 years that is
there. So, I believe that he would have been able to instruct his son properly on how to do this. To convert it
to a triplex the right way. Oman. And 1 do have a copy of his deed if that's necessary. The other thing I wanted
to point out is, in having a conversation with Mr. Adler here, we have a conflict about dumpsters.
So right now, we actually have city water that we provide for the three units. They all get automatically when
you open up a water account through the City of Dunn. You automatically get a recycling bin, a yard waste
debris container, and a recycling container. So, you get in garbage. Sorry, you get 3 different bins
automatically if you want them. You don't have to take them, but you get them. So right now, we are providing
3 of everything to these people. So, one thing that George mentioned is that the future conversion, if this was
declared a new conversion versus an existing just requesting a special use permit, is that he felt that we
would need to have a dumpster. A reading from Article 5.13, it says, any residential development with more
than two units. I take that as a neighborhood or a community, not an existing property that's within the city
limits, that's just already there. So, there is a little conflict I have, I guess, with that, with that language. So, I
don't think a dumpster would be necessary because this house is probably six blocks from here. I mean, I
don't think it's necessary. And viewing the other properties that we disclosed to you, I didn't see any of them
having dumpsters either. So in in my conclusion and yes, I'm long winded and I will finally be done.
• So going back to kind of where I started here. So, we were surprised based on this, what we've told you about
the listing and about property having the meters and the mailboxes and what the county has showed us. We
were surprised when Mr. Adler told us that we, that first of all, he couldn't find any documents showing that
this was ever converted. But that our house is considered single family, single family, and that we would have
to apply for a special permit So, we were surprised bemuse we were like, OK, this is already a triplex. And it's
better for and we've as far as we know it's been at least about 50 years that it's been that way. So, we were
surprised. We were and confused based on all these findings. That's why I'm sharing those findings with you.
And it's been taxed as a triplex for the county as well. So, everything leads to the suspended triplex as an
existing structure, not a single-family resident So, with what the county has shown us for tax records and for
previous zoning maps, we actually would like to request that 309 N Wilson be considered an existing triplex.
We would like to grandfather clause in, if this is possible, to have this to be considered existing structure as a
triplex and not be considered a newly converted triplex bemuse this would cause financial hardship on us,
and it's been like 50 years.
Can 1 ask a couple of questions at this time?So, this is not a proceeding where you get to ask for a variance f rom
what you have applied for. So, are you speaking in favor of your request for a special use permit? Are you
opposed to a special use permit?
Dolan: Well, so, I was told that's what we had to do. Obviously, I want it to be a triplex, but I don't want to be
newly converted triplex because it's already triplex.
So, are you in favor of your application or are you opposed to your application?
Dolan: I'm in favor of it being.
OK, 1 need to ask you a few questions about your documentation. Do you desire for these documents to be
• received in to evidence as a part of this proceeding?
Dolan: I do.
OK, ifyou'll give me just a minute from for the council benefit Item number two is a statement from a third parry
who's not here to be cross examined and in my opinion would not be admissible into evidence. Items number one,
she has provided testimony of her own personal knowledge. Item number three, she has item number 4. Since it's
from Mr. Adler and he is present, could be cross examined, I think would be permissible. Items. #S. She testified
that she gathered that information herself, so I think that would be permissible. Item number six is not any city
code information, that's something from the county, so that's not relevant and the last item of Mr. Strickland's
obituary is an out -of -court statement and that in my opinion would not be admissible either. So, I would
entertain a motion to receive into evidence item 1,3B. Four and five.
349
Dolan: Sir, could I ask if number?
Not right at this moment
Motion by Council Member Sills and second by Council Member Hargis. Is there any discussion about receiving
items 1,3B, four, and five into evidence? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion signify by saying aye, all
opposed, motion carries.
And is there a motion that items 2,6 and an unnumbered item being an obituary of Belvin Strickland, not be
received into evidence? Motion by Council Member Sills.
Hargis: What is the item number six?
Hold on one second I have a motion on the table. Second by Council Member Gaulden. OK, I'm sorry
Hargis: What is item number 6?
She testified that it's something from the county.
Dolan: It's not applicable, it's not applicable.
Have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion about excluding items 2,6 and an unnumbered item obituary
of Belvin Strickland from the evidence? Hearing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye, any opposed,
motion carries. OK ma'am, doyou have further testimony?
Dolan: Well, I was just going to ask if #2 if I could remove the cover letter bemuse the other items are,1 think,
imperative bemuse it tells you about my, how the house has been zoned. So, is it possible to just remove the
cover letter and keep the items that are behind it? Those are the tax records from the Harnett County. I do
think that those are warranted that possible.
Who made the handwritten notes on them
Dolan: Me after I talked to somebody, so 1 understood everything that
So based on her testimony and personal knowledge of the handwritten notes made on the items attached to item
two, and the fact that they are otherwise public records, I would entertain a motion that those tax records be
received into evidence. Is there a motion that only the tax records but not the cover letter from Harnett County
Tax department be received into evidence?
Motion by Council Member McNeil that the tax records be included and not the cover letter. Have a motion. Is
there a second? Motion diesfrom lack ofa second. All Right Ma'am, doyou have anyfurther testimony?
Dolan: I do not at this time
OK, Are there anybody present who's been sworn to provide testimony that has any questions for this witness?
Anybody from the Council have questions for this witness?
Mayor Pro Tern Sills: just What is your ultimate goal with this property? If you had a magic wand, what are
you gonna make happen here?
Dolan: We would like to continue the use of the triplex. We would like to update the home to bring it to the
22nd century, because it's not right now. We would like to bring it up to code.
Unintelligible comments by David Berg.
Dolan: So, we've already done, as you can see in the picture that George has on the top left here. It's already
looked. It already looks a lot better and we're going to keep working on it The home was neglected and in.
Yeah, the home is neglected by the previous owner. We had one tenant that's been living there for 13 years
and said that the previous owner didn't do anything for 13 years while she lived there.
Unintelligible comments by David Berg.
So that we can move forward. Making this home up to code and everything it needs to be and our ultimate.
I'm sorry to interrupt you. Ifyou're both gonna answer questions - Could you state your name for the record,
please because you've notyet testified?
My name is David Berg.
Thankyou, Sir. I'm sorry, you can finish youranswer, ma'am.
Dolan: And the other thing is our goal is to increase the property value bemuse you know we paid X amount
for this property. And I think with us making the improvements and bringing it, updating it, I think we can
improve the property value. The look and curb appeal of not only this home but the whole neighborhood
a
350
because right now it's it was it was neglected. It is already been improved, but we started on the outside and
now we need to go to the inside. There's a lot of work that needs to get done.
Any other questions of the applicant?
Hargis: Yeah, so, so there are people living there now, right? OK and. The question that I had, and I asked
George earlier because this letter in this packet is addressed to George. But I'll ask you guys this because I
don't know because it says that the structure located in. Your house there, if you wanted to convert it to two
family dwelling, you had to have a fire separation would be required by the by this North Carolina code. And
• you would have to design construction that must form to be competent by competent draftsman and North
Carolina engineer. North Carolina architect work should be performed by North Carolina license general
contractor. If you convert it to a three-family dwelling, then you would have to do even more. You would have
to put in, it looks like you would have to put in water sprinklers. I mean.
Berg: We're going to try to get it grandfathered in
Dolan: Well, that's why we.
Hargis: Well, that's not what you're here for I don't think
Dolan: But that's what we've been asking all along and we were told this is what we had to do
Hargis: I think you're here if I'm speaking out of turn, I don't know but I think you're here to apply for a
special use permit that would be whatever conditions that the board puts on. Different than grandfathering
something in. So just like when Tilghman asked a while ago if you were in favor of this or not,1 think that you
should think about that
Dolan: So, I think the conditions that are in that letter there are for a new build. Newly converted and that's 1
think is where we're, I feel like it's vague because our property is not a newly converted. So, we're not sure
why that applies per se.
Hargis: Yeah, I feel your pain on it because I understand. I mean if you have a, if you have a piece of property,
you know. I'm a believed as limited to the government as you can have. And I think that you know, people
should be able to do some stuff with what they want to do within some sort of boundaries or confinement
• You know, you show some of these houses that are you know, that are currently, I would not put any one of
them up as prized possessions for the City of Dunn or something that would make people want to come here
or make businesses, attract businesses or anything like that
Dolan: I agree.
Hargis: And I don't think this one will either and I think you know that you know on the application you had
said this is for low-income housing. And well, it says.
Dolan: I didn't put that...
Hold on, Councilman. I don't, I don't mean interrupt you. There will be an opportunity for discussion amongst
council at this point It'sjust do you have a question for?
Hargis: Well, she said she didn't know that that was on there. That's the question. Did you know that?
Dolan: I didn't put low income because 1 don't know where that came from.
Hargis: I guess that's it for me.1 just wanted to just kind of let you know my thoughts kind of out there. Just
Bradham: I have a question too and I apologize if you've already answered this. It may be in the packet, but
you I see your address is Smithfield. Do you have triplex that you are doing currently in Smithfield or is this
your first project?
Dolan: this is our first multi home,
• Bradham: OK
Dolan: We have other properties that we own, but this is our first multifamily property that we that we own.
Council Member McNeil: So, this will take you, how many years do you think?
Dolan: It depends on what is required to bring it up to code. So, if we are required to have a sprinkler system
right now, I'm being told that there is a shortage of Labor for this and that I don't know how long that could
happen. I don't know if everything goes on hold because you can't find the tradesmen.
Berg: There's like 200 in the state right now.
Dolan: And all new homes right now are requiring sprinkler system. So, 1 don't know if.
351
McNeil: Do you have other options besides what you are you coming here for today?
Dolan: I think the only other option we would have would be to either convert back to a single family or to
convert it to a duplex.
McNeil: Because I see how old these units are. So that's kind of my question.
Unintelligible comments by Berg.
Otherquestions?
Dolan: I'm sorry, so the other option would be duplex.
Council Member Gaulden: And I have a question. You say your tenants were there 13 years and they're going
to have to leave now. Do you plan on allowing them to come back when you finish it, or you said it was three
families in there? So, is it somewhere like they're gonna be displaced and have to find somewhere else to go?
Dolan: Yeah. So, when we acquired the property, they did not have a lease. So, we put it in place a month -to -
month lease with them. And so, after speaking with George and kind of talking about the amount of work that
we're gonna need to put into the property. We determined that it would be in the best scenario because you
don't wanna be pulling, you know, wanna be plumbing, what people try and sleep and whatnot. So, it would
be in our best interest and liability wise not to have occupants. So, what we did was we gave each person a
letter and we took, gave them their 30 day notice for their lease and we said that if they needed to have a
reference from their landlord as they're looking, that we would give them a reference, as long as they can, you
know, as long as they pay their last month like they're supposed to. And also, we told them that when it's
done that, we would be in contact with them. So right now, Unit A is a couple, Unit B is a single person and
Unit C is a mother and son.
Gaulden: OK So, you're saying they do have an option to go back there if they want to?
Dolan: Yeah, OK, definitely.
Gaulden: And as my council colleagues stated, it is on here that it does say low-income housing, but that was
that was my only question for you though. Thank you.
Other questions of the applicantfrom council?
Hargis: Just to go back just to clarify this that you filled this out right? Do you feel that this application and it
said on the second page what your uses were and under two. It says the request and use is essential and
desirable to the public convenience and welfare for low-income housing. You put that in there, right?
Dolan: Did you write that? Berk looks at application. Unintelligible comments..
Yes, We'II come back to him, but any other questions of the council for the applicants?And nobody here to cross
examine the applicants, thank you very much. Ne4 we will hear from people opposing the request Is there
anyone here to speak in opposition to the request far the special use permit?OK, this is the final opportunity of
council members to ask questions of the applicant or of Mr. Adler, since there were no opponents, and we will
entertain further questions from council members at this time. Once the meeting at public meeting is closed, the
only questions to be posed can be for clarification. There may be no new evidence. So now is the opportunity to
ask questions, final questions of either Mr. Adler or the applicants. This is also if there are any conditions that the
Council would desire to place upon granting the special use permit You must ask them of the applicant at this
time if they would accept that as a condition as a part of granting the special use permit So first we'll go any
further questions, Mayor. I thinkyou had one for Mr. Adler?
Mayor: Has this property had a minimum housing inspection on it since all this transpired?
Adler: Yes
Mayor: How did that how? What were the results of that?
Adler: The reports are being written on each unit
Hargis: I can't hear.
Adler: The reports have been are in the process of being written. He had said that they would take some time,
they would be pretty extensive reporting.
Mayor: So, another question if If the board doesn't, all this was generated because they were working without
a permit and the city found out about that So if this, if the action tonight and they're requesting is not
approved, what happens? To their tenants and what happens to the property? Are they in violation?
Adler: The Minimum housing process would continue. And whether or not if it met a certain level of as
determined by minimal housing code. It could be they could receive an order to repair or demolish within a
certain number of days. And that's what would proceed. But one thing I guess I would like to mention is that
352
we did extensive searching in our office, both paper and electronic. And we found nothing that approved a
triplex. We looked back through microfiche of council minutes, which go back to 1900. And there would have
gone through council to approve a triplex. That we found nothing. I contacted the post office. And the three
mailboxes were established in 99. So, there is no dispute that the house has been informally unpermitted,
used as a triplex for an extended period of time.
Mayor: Are you saying that's being used illegally? In the current use, is that what you're saying?
Adler: Yeah, I would.
• Mayor: So next question. If minimum housing is favorable to them, will they continue to be able to use the
house for three rental units illegally?
Adler: No. No. If it's. If it's denied, then the triplex is not permitted.
Sills: Which means those families have to go.
Adler: Yes.
Hargis: When do you expect the minimal housing report to be done?
Adler: I don't know. I'd have to. John Ganis is working on it, and I don't know. He's pretty busy and he's only
here two days a month.
Hargis: 1 mean you're talking months or years or what are you talking?
Ader: No, it wouldn't be, it would be within a month,
Hargis: Within the next month. So, if we would ask them to tell them where you got this on the agenda, maybe
they would hurry up a little bit. Maybe.
Adler: He, yes. One of the things that I just wanted to kind of emphasize tonight is that the discussion is on the
use rather than the building itself. That's what that was. That's an important thing and that's one of the
reasons why 1 didn't ask Brad Sutton to come from that building inspector.
• Mayor: I want to ask one more question. Where it is to be. If this is approved tonight Does that mean that
then they have to meet the conditions that that they inspect? The planning department in the county has
written up that they will have to bring it up to code on each unit They will have to provide firewalls between
the units. And if it's more than two units, they have to have a sprinkler system. If this is passed tonight is that
the rules they have to come by.
Adler: The sprinkler system I'm not sure about, but the other rules would be, and I would say that the.1 would
interpret the code to say that they would need a dumpster. And I don't know the length of time that they
would be given to bring it up to code to minimum housing. I'm not, I'm not sure exactly about that But there's
both the building code and the minimum housing code. And there's the fire code, they would all apply, and
they would all have to be addressed.
Gaulden: Can I ask something?
Is it a question?
Gaulden: Yeah.
Yeah. Go right ahead.
Gaulden: George, if they were working without a permit and you're waiting for the inspector's report How
are they working without a permit? And then why is the why are we still waiting on the report from the
inspector? If they're working without a permit? It seems like the inspector should have already had the report
in front of you today to present to council tonight
• Adler: Steven Hodges put a stop work order on the house.
Gaulden: OK So how did it come about that they were working without a permit but?
Adler: They were. Stephen Hodges, the code enforcement officer, driving around saw a set of stairs going up
outside. Outside stairs going to the second floor and they didn't look proper. And he called the office and no
permit had been issued. So, he went and approached them and that initiated this whole procedure.
Gaulden: OK, thank you.
Any other questions of Mr. Adler?
353
Sills: So, the property was purchased. It was sold to the owners as a triplex and now through your extensive
research, we feel like it probably is not a triplex done properly with permits and applications and through
whatever mechanism. Good old boy system. Slap on the back They've got a mailbox and a water meter and a
power meter. Is that correct?
Adler: They have one water meter, and they have 3 electric boxes that the boxes come from Duke. The water
meter is the city's. And if you look at Harnett Counties GIS, the address is 309. Not ABC.
Hargis: Now, when you said a while ago that you're not sure about the sprinkler system, but that's in this
letter. What? Why? Why would that? What would? 1 don't understand that
Adler: 1 think that it would depend on the year of the code. The year of the code that is applied. And I have to
say that that's what Bad Sutton told me. Because it's possible that an earlier code could be referred to, but I
don't But I don't know that I don't wanna muddy the waters. If you were, if you would like, we could arrange
it for them to come and speak. However, the distinction is between the code, the building code, the fire code,
the minimum housing code. And then there's the use. And what we're talking about here with the special use
permit is the use.
Hargis: I understand, but I'm my question is what we're, if we approve it with a special use and we put these
conditions on there then they're going to have to go for or you know they have to do it And so that that's the
question you know that we probably should have. I personally think that we should wait to get the, the, the
inspections back see how it goes, see what they say about that rule, see how that works and then talk about it
Maybe at the work session or talk about it in the next meeting or whatever. That's my opinion, but you know,
what's right.
Well, right now were in the middle of a quasi-judicial hearing. Were not having a discussion and a debate and a
vote. So, are there any other questions for Mr. Adler?
Sills: So, what happens? Let's just say we vote against this. What happens tomorrow with these people and
their property.
Adler: They still have a stop work order on the house.
Sills: And they still got three families living in more than likely illegal triplex.
Adler: That's my understanding that they're in the process of so that they can do work on the house. Because
the extent of the work in each unit is enough to make it not possible to live in the unit while the work is going
on. But they would be able to make it a duplex.
Sills: So, we deny this tonight, then they can tarn it from the illegal triplex to a certified duplex.
Adler: That would be a choice of theirs.
Any other questions Mr. Adler? Actually, you can ask Mr. Adler a question, yes.
Unintelligible comments by Dolan.
Yeah, I'm sorry, ma'am, if you can, ifyou could up
Hargis: OK I can't hear anything anyway, so that's right
Dolan: I just wanted to know, I guess, George, in general. If this. 1 know that there are certain conditions that
you would like to have or that need to be applied and one of them is to bring up the fire code, and we totally
agree with that I mean, if it's just my family living there, I'd want to make sure that they were safe, no doubt
about it So, I have no opposition to that But is it possible? Bemuse I think what Brad is referring to. From
what we from what our review online has found is that that is for band new buildings. And again, that's why
Cm asking why I keep trying to establish this as an existing triplex. Is it possible to revert back to a previous
code that may not require a sprinkler system?
Berg: There's not a multipurpose family house built in 1929 that has fire sprinkler in Dunn right now, I
guarantee you.
George, if you know the answer to that question you can answer it That's a building code matter that if that's
outside of your knowledge you cannot answer it
George: No
Alright Council, are there any other questions for the applicants and or are there any conditions thatyou would
like far them to consider if in the eventyou elect to grant the special use permit?
McNeil: 1 have a question, how is this actually possible if it's not under code? How are people living? Why are
they still there if it's not up to code?
Are you asking the applicant?
354
McNeil: I guess, or can I ask Mr. George or is that?
Well, we had finished his question, but ifyou still have a question for him, you can ask him a question.
McNeil: OX Mr. George this is for you.
Adler: IPs my understanding that we don't have the legal authority to evict tenants unless the building's
condemned.
• Any questions from council for the applicants or any conditions that you would like to ask the applicants to
consider as a part of yourdeliberation on the special use permit?
Mayor: I have one final question and that will be for the owners of the property that's why were you working
there without a permit with the extensive of amount of work that you're doing?
Berg: Well, we called the City of Harnett County and they said we could do siding, and we do windows as
we're doing and roofing
Mayor: Where?
Berg: Harnett County
Dolan: We mistakenly, we could not find information on the city of Dunn's website that was, but Harnett
County has a very detailed like when these inspections and what doesn't on their website and it was and it
said that if you were installing windows in the same openings, if you were installing siding existing type or if
you were installing existing type roof that you do not need a permit So, we did not have a permit and my
husband erroneously decided that he wanted to put some steps up, and that's where he made a mistake. He
should not have put steps up, because that does require permit and that was against my judgement
Any other questions of the applicants or any conditions that the Council wishes to ask the applicant to consider
as a part of considering the special use permit?
Hargis: I got a procedural question, and it would be effective what they're like so if we. If we turn this down,
how long would it be isn't there a time frame that they have to wait to come back and ask for something?
isYes, and l don't know off the top of my head under the new UDO what that timefrome is. Butyes,you can't refile
the same application unless you have new evidence and material...
Hargis: Right
within a certain period of time
Hargis: So, my question to you, to you would be, would you rather? Just for you and everybody can decide
what they wanna do, but would you rather wait and come back? Or for us or make this decision and then put
these conditions on you because I'm going to if I make the motion, I'm going to say that you have to do what
the county says here and that may make it where you can't do it So, if you would like to wait and see what the
inspector says, the building inspector, the questions that we have about the sprinkler system that George
doesn't know, those things, we can consider that in the in the future without having you. But if we turn it
down tonight, you will not be able to bring this back for six months, I know.
Dolan: I think what would happen is if you put those conditions on and that is indeed. Yeah, I think we could
still confirm with Brad if those are the correct codes, and he would tell us as we're going through the
permitting process what needs to be done. I think George put that in as an example of what Brad had from the
current media. So, we could go back to Brad, and he could clarify for us what's needed. But I think we would
like to move forward. And I think if it comes to us that you guys say that this is a triplex and that we have to
do all these things, we may have to take legal action against the person that sold us the house because they,
they and their realtor knowingly sold the house in the condition it is.
Hargis: I understand. I get it
isNow, once we close the public hearing, there can be no further evidence. There can be no further questions except
for clarification. You can't ask for conditions. Are there any conditions that George has already appropriately
pointed out, which we can talk about when we close the public hearing, is this hearing is only about the use and
it's not about the building code or the fire code or things of that nature? Any development is going to have to
require about whatever the law requires as it relates to those items? So are there any conditions that you wanna
ask the applicant to consider as a part ofgranting the permit ifyou grant it
Sills: So, is this where we would say we want a dumpster, and we want the dumpster wrapped in decorative
lattice?
I suppose you could do that your planning director is of the opinion that the UDO already requires of that
whetheryou make it condition or not But I supposeyou could make that an explicit condition ifyou wanted to
ask the applicant that
355
Mayor: I would say that that by law, this letter was written by the chief code official in Harnett County to
George Adler, our Planning Director, and it clearly states that the structure located at 309 N Wilson, formerly
occupied as a single family dwelling, would require the following under the North Carolina Building Code.
And it goes on to state that if you convert it to a two-family dwelling that it would have to have fire separation
between each one. And it clearly says that the law says that if you do a triplex that it would have to not only
have fire separation, but fire extinguishers would have to be installed. So, I don't think it's a question of
whether or not it would have to be. I think the law clearly says that and I think that that would be one of the
conditions is that it would have to be done to the North Carolina building codes. Is that correct?
Well, itsgonna happen.
Mayor: How do you change that?
It's gonna have to be done to the North Carolina building code whetheryou make it a condition or not Ifyou
want to make it an explicit condition on your consideration of approving the permit you can. But they're going
to have to comply with the building code, whatever it requires, whether you make it a condition or not And the
fire code and the fire code and the minimum housing code and any other codes that are applicable. This is about
the use and all of that or other regulatory areas which they will have to comply with. So, are there any
conditions that the council wishes to ask the applicant to consider as a part of your deliberation and considering
the special use permit?
Sills: 1 want a dumpster with decorative lattice that protects the beauty and the entirety of the neighborhood
so that you can't tell that it's a dumpster.
OK, so what he's asking you is, will you agree in the event they grant your special use permit that a dumpster
will be required that will be enclosed in decorative lattice? Is that what?
Sills: Yes sure.
Will you agree to that as a condition in the event they grantyour permit? I'm sorry, is thatyes?
Dolan: We can agree we have to figure how to do that, but we can agree.
Are there any other conditions that the Council wishes to ask the applicants to consider as a part of your
deliberation on the special use permit?
Hargis: I'm, I'm going to reiterate what this is, what William said a while ago and what I've been asking
earlier about the, the chief code official for Harnett County for inspector that these conditions be put in there
so that everybody understands that's what, that's what they got to do. 1 know that they're building code, but
they're.
So, so areyou asking them to agree to a condition that they have to comply with the building code?
Hargis: Yes. And one of those and one of that is laid out in this letter about the firewalls and that kind of thing
and that's for the safety of the people there.
Dolan: We agree to any fire codes, we agree to that
So, so they're asking Ifyou will agree to a condition that as a part of granting the special use permit that the
redevelopment of the property will comply with all building fire or other regulatory codes. Will you agree to that
condition?
Dolan: Yes
Hargis: So, fire sprinklers?
Dolan: If that's what the code requires.
Are there any other conditions that the Council wishes to ask the applicants to consider? Nearing none at this
time, I'll entertain a motion to close the hearing
Motion by Bradham, second by Gaulden. Is there any discussion? Those in favor signer by saying aye Any
opposed? Motion carries
We're out of the hearing and you're now an item for decision under tab 15.
Bradham: Tilghman, I'm just curious, is this, is this the same setup where you ask us a series of questions, yes
or no? Or is this different?
Yes. So, if you turn to the third page of your agenda, tab 15, you will see that there are six criteria that the UDO
requires thatyou must determine are satisfied. If any one of those sir are notsatisfied, then the permit is denied.
If all sir are satisfied and were going to have an individual vote on each one of them. Then the permit is
approved, but we will have a wrap up motion that you will be able to include your conditions as a part of
granting the permit OK
356
Bradham: So, explain to me because this is a little tricky in my opinion. So, this first one that they use will not
materially endanger the public health or safety if located where it proposed so. If, the answer to that question
is yes. Then that means that we it's OK or am I backwards?
Yeah, if use will not materially endanger the public health or safety. Now that is the proposed use, that's not the
condition that the property is in now. So, ifyou determine that it will not materially endanger the public health
orsafety as a triplex, then you vote that that condition has been satisfied. Ifyou think it will endanger the public
health orsafety if located where proposed, you would vote against that
• Bradham: Yes or no. OK
So, were gonna start with that one. So, is there a motion for or against whether or not the criteria #1 is
satisfied. And state as a partof the motion why it will not materially endanger the public health orsafety or why
itwould materially endanger the publichealth orsafety.
And ifyour motion is it will not materially endanger the public health or safety and you just wish to adopt the
reasoning stated in the package, you could do that as well, because that's been received in evidence. And as part
of the record.
Mayor: Hey I'm the Mayor and Tilghman's running the meeting. But yeah, I mean you guys got to make a
decision. I mean we've got six of these to decide on.
Hargis: So individually get started
Yeah, one ata time.
Sills: So, I think I don't want to speak for anyone else but in conversations, it feels like if this was a gold plated,
21st century, modem build, good to go situation, then the use of the land is what we're. So, we need to take
away the, the, I mean, lets face it, dilapidated property structure and just look at the use of the land?
Well, no, because if, as Mr. Adler pointed out if it was, if it wasjust dirt and they wanted to put triplex there, it
would require rezoning and a different special use permit This is specific to redeveloping a single-family
residence into a triplex So, there's the proposed use to take a single-family residence and turn it into a triplex.
• Sills: That particular wooden structure?
Yes, that particularfamily residence on that particular lot
Sills: Look I'm no contractor or building inspector, but I'm also no the idiot and this thing just looks bad and 1
would not want to live in it and I would not want my family living in. So, I'm gonna vote. I'm gonna move that
we deny #1 because it is not up to code. Bradham second.
With motion and a second, is there any discussion on the motion? Does everybody understand the motion? All
those in favor of the motion signify by saying aye. Motion carries so criteria number one has not been satisfied.
Criteria #2, that the use meets all required standards of this ordinance. Is there a motion that criteria #2 has
been satisfied?
Sills: I would say that this does meet for this particular number coo. So, move to approve #2 as stated in the
packet Have a motion? Is there a second? McNeil second. Have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion?
All those in favor signify by saying aye. Criteria #2 is satisfied.
Number 3, that the use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property. Is there a motion
that criteria either is or is not satisfied?
Sills: Again, I'm no realtor builder, but just driving down the street and looking around and just feel like this is
this is not the property, at this point. This is not the property that I would again want for this part of town or
my family to live in. So, I'm gonna say that this will substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting
properties. Is that in the form ofa motion? So moved, that's the motion. Is there a second? Hargis second.
• Bradham: And I'll just say it seems to me like from our discussions a lot of ambiguity about what's been met
was not met and there's no reports I mean. So, I would agree with that
We have a motion and a second that criteria #3 that the use will substantially injure the value of adjoining or
abutting property. Is there any discussion on the motion? All those in favor signify by saying aye, aye. Any
opposed motion carries
Criteria #4. Adequate utilities, access, roads, drainage, sanitation, and other facilities have been or are being
provided. Is there a motion that crimrla for is satisfied?
Hargis: I make a motion that that is adequate.
I have a motion. Is there a second on the motion?
357
Hargis: So, you have adequate sewage drainage and all that They don't I may I make the motion that they do
they I mean they got trash pick up there and they got utilities are provided and they got access to roads and
all that I make a motion that that is OK.
There's a motion that criteria #4 has been satisfied. Is there a second? McNeil seconded. Discussion? Yes, Sir
Mayor: To just bring up the question that Are there really adequate utilities provided there if there's one
water meter and the city is getting paid for three separate residents to live at one house? With one water and
sewer bill.
Hargis: I didn't realize they were.
Well, no. I think this criteria simply means that you have water and sewer available to the property. Whether it's
properly being billed and metered and all of that is not a special use consideration. It's just does it have power.
Does it have water? Does it have sewer? Which it does. So, there's a motion and a second that criteria #4 has
been satisfied. Is there any further discussion?Motion carries with Sills and Brodham opposed.
Item number S. Criteria is the establishment of the proposed use will not impede the orderly development and
improvement of surrounding property. Is there a motion that that criteria has either been satisfied or not
satisfied?
McNeil: Motion that it has not been satisfied #5. Bradham second. Any further discussion on the motion is that
the establishment of the proposed use will impede the orderly development and improvement of surrounding
property. Any further discussion on that motion? All those in favor signify, by saying aye. Any opposed motion
carries
The final criteria is the requested use will be in conformity with the city's adopted comprehensive plans. is there
a motion about criteria number six has been satisfied?
Sills: So, for clarification point of order is 3 to 2. Three no 2 yeses. So, did the nos carry? So, would that make
number six a no?
Number six is a separate criteria. When we. I'm sorry, I might maybe I don't understand the question.
Sills: So, is number six a summation of what all we're just doing?
No number six is just whether or not the proposed use is in conformity with the comprehensive plans of the city.
That does not mean that one through 5 have been satisfied.
Sills: So, is a triplex in conformity with the comprehensive plan?
The land use plan? Yes.
Sills: Well, I think, I mean, I would say I move that it does conform even though I don't really like.
There was a motion, that criteria number six has been satisfied that the use does conform with the city's adopted
comprehensive plans. Is there a second? Motion dies for lack of a second. Is there a motion that the requested use
will not be in conformity with the city's adopted comprehensive plans?
Hargis: Well, I make a motion that it doesn't, because it isn't part of the gateway, that's part of the, I mean its
as a gateway, that's what this says. Certainly, is not the first thing that I would want a visitor from Dunn to see
when they came here.
So, motion that the use is not in conformity with the city's adopted comprehensive plans. Is there a second?
McNeil second. Motion and second. Is there any discussion? All those in favor of the motion signify by saying aye,
any opposed? Sills opposed. OK, posses 4 to one.
OK, so you've been through the six criteria, and you have determined that four out of the sic have not been
satisfied. So, at this time it would be appropriate to entertain a motion to deny SUP-01-24 as a special use on
parcel pin 1516-78-0032.000 as presented based on four of the six criteria having not been satisfied. Sills motion •
and second by Gaulden. Motion and second. Is there any further discussion? All those in favor signify by saying
aye, any opposed? Motion carries.
Evidence has been flied with the City Clerk
Mayor asked for a quick report on the minimum housing standards on this property
CZ-03-23 Mixed Use Conditional Zoning for parcel on Susan Tart Road
The applicant, Ben Stout, is out of the Country on a scheduled vacation and has asked to continue until the
March meeting so if you have any request or questions for him.
Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Sills and second by Council Member Hargis to table until the March Regular
meeting. Motion unanimously approved.
358
Acceptance of Juniper Creek Stormwater Planning Frant SRP-S W-ARP-0098
City Manager Neuschafer presented Offer and Acceptance from the NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Water Infrastructure for LASH ARPA funds designated for the Juniper Creek Stormwater Planning
Gant. Project SRP-SW-ARP-0098 for Pearsall St
The ARPA grant funding will cover 100% of eligible smrmwater study, design, or plan costs from the SL 2021-
180 appropriation. The City has been approved for a funding award of $400,000.
Motion by Mayor Pro Tern Sills and second by Council Member Gaulden to adopt the resolution making the
• applicable assurances contained therein and accepting the LASH ARPA Funding offer of $400,000 for Juniper
Creek Stormwater Planning. Motion unanimously approved. A copy of the Resolution (R2024-08) is
incorporated into these minutes as Attachment #9.
Highway 301S Elevated Tank Engineering Services Proposal
City Manager Neuschafer presented an engineering service agreement to update the prior design, plans,
permits, and specifications needed to rebid the 500,000-gallon elevated water storage tank project for
construction. The timeline of the project is 12 to 16 months to completion. The land (Arrowhead Rd near the
railroad tracks) is already under the ownership of the City of Dunn. The project was designed and bid in 2013,
the City chose not to proceed with the project This agreement will update information on work that was
already done for this Iocaion. The cost is $30,300 to update to current standards and prepare bid
documents.
Motion by Mayor Pro Tern Sills and second by Council Member Bradham to authorize City Manager
Neuschafer to enter an engineering agreement with Davis Martin Powell for updates for US301 S Elevated
Tank design and bid documents. Motion unanimously approved.
Annexation Petition - Non -Contiguous NC SSE - Rooms To Go Distribution Company LLC
City Manager Neuschafer presented a petition requesting the voluntary non-contiguous annexation of
property located at NC 55 E, PIN #1526-45-4121.000, already owned by Rooms To Go for expansion. This
petition was received under Part 4 of Article 4A of Chapter 160A of the General Statutes.
Motion by Council Member Hargis and second by Mayor Pro Tem Sills to adopt the Resolution Directing the
City Clerk to Investigate the Voluntary Annexation Petition ANX-01-24 as presented. Motion unanimously
approved. A copy of the Resolution(R2024-09) is incorporated into these minutes as Attachment#10.
• Adopt Revised Schedule of 2024 Council Meetings
City Manager Neuschafer shared that the revised schedule is being presented as Council discussed at the
retreat to incorporate work sessions.
Motion by Council Member Bradham and second by Council Member Gaulden to adopt the Revised 2024
Regular Meeting Schedule for the Dunn City Council as presented. Motion unanimously approved. A copy
of the Resolution (R2024-10) is incorporated into these minutes as attachment #11.
Administrative Reports
City Manager Neuschafer shared information from retreat and that staff will develop proposed goals by the
next meeting.
Finance Director McNallan provided the following financial report for the period ending January 31, 2024:
• The City has $11,839,455 cash, compared to $14,260,125 last year. The decrease is primarily due to
unreimbursed grant/loan proceeds for capital water and sewer projects.
• Water and Sewer Revenues for the month were $620,007 with total collected year to -date at $4,166,852
or 52.1%of budget, compared to $3,984,195 in 2023.
• Property Taxes collected for December are$1,739,071, compared to$1,670,567 last year.
• Sales Tax receipts were $293,433, $46,960 more than last year, with total collected to -date of $1,174,671
or 38% of budget
• Utilities Sales Taxes received for the year are $194,989, compared to $185,812 last year.
• Building Permit Fees collected total $93,780 or 59% of budget compared to total collected last year of
$82,363.
• • General Fund expenditures for month are $826,119, with total expensed to -date at $7,332,575 or 53.4%
of Budget, compared to $6,924,853 in 2023. Revenues to -date are $7,614,429 or 55.5% of budget
Water and Sewer fund expenditures for the month are $523,970, with total expenses to -date at
$3,610,178, or 33.4% of budget, compared to $3,547,834 last year. Revenues to -date are $4,432,389 or
41.1% of budget
• Stormwater fund expenditures for the month were $1,510, with total expenses to -date of $222,437, or
52.2% of budget Revenues to -date are $288,027 or 67.6% of the budget
• The benchmark for this period is 58.3%ofthe budget
• McNallan also updated on debt service and liens and assessments.
Reports were also received as follows: Planning and Inspections Report, Public Works Report, Public Utilities
Report, Parks and Recreation Report and Police Report
Announcements/Information
Mayor Elmore announced upcoming events and activities.
359
With no further business to discuss, Mayor Elmore adjourned the meeting at 8:55 p.m. with no objections.
•
0