[0:00] uh they agree with the fact of General statute and that's what we're trying to

[0:04] say here and that also that the Fidelity bond is not going to be individually

[0:09] required on all the people that handle money for the city because it's not just

[0:14] the four people that work downstairs in Revenue collections you probably are

[0:18] going to touch every department and it would be extremely cost prohibitive to

[0:24] try to get individual Bonds on each one so basically the policy says the council

[0:29] agrees that we have a blanket Bond because that's how the city has always

[0:32] handled it we have an insurance policy um we we have many policies as you're

[0:37] aware of but our blanket Bond covers anybody that handles public funds or

[0:42] public assets or inventory so that's essentially what this policy is

[0:47] referencing we're just trying to get things put in writing and get the

[0:51] council to agree with it and and so therefore it is there for future

[0:55] councils to operate off of I have no problem Council uh as this one is again

[1:01] intended to be setting a policy non-controversial this is intended to be

[1:05] something that is improving our internal accountability measures did not see this

[1:09] one as being something that was that was controversial but still given it's the

[1:13] first time Council has seen it wanted to be under new business instead of the

[1:16] consent agenda is there any or any thoughts concerns or debate on this one

[1:22] I have no problem with it no we should be bonded hearing none I'll entertain a

[1:27] motion to adopt you need a motion to adopt and move forward I have a

[1:32] resolution yes sir okay so moved right motion has been made yes made and

[1:37] properly seconded all right motion is made and properly seconded to uh to

[1:42] approve the resolution of adoption of fidelity Bond policy uh is there any

[1:46] further debate hearing none all in favor please raise your hands all oppos same

[1:51] sign seeing none motion passes sign that one tomorrow morning thank you have a

[1:55] good

[1:57] evening all right item s .3 I'm picking up on a trend you just want me to go

[2:02] straight to him oh there is a couple comments You' like offer a

[2:08] prep this one is just so everyone's clear is a is a it's a RightWay closing

[2:13] of a a platted RightWay on a on a piece of paper so it doesn't exist in reality

[2:18] but because it is a public RightWay we have to follow North Carolina General

[2:22] statutes to properly and legally close the public right

[2:27] away Perfect all right Mr Helmer welcome thank you us through this Council

[2:36] um well I thought there were some slides in there um any um yeah so uh this the

[2:44] property is located on Kyler bestest Road this is a permanent RightWay

[2:48] closure uh Mark let me interrupt you just for a second Council it is in the

[2:52] agenda packet that was distributed online so those who are if anyone's

[2:56] looking at it online right now it is 106 perfect it is in the agenda packet I

[3:02] don't know why it's not up there page 106 very good P yeah so the the property

[3:07] considered for a public rideway permanent closure is a

[3:12] 297.00 ft uh a piece of of property uh located uh on the south side of Kyler

[3:19] best road um according to GIS and the petitioner is uh Robert uh Strickland

[3:27] Horus best and Judith uh Pope uh again this is this is public rideway

[3:33] there is no uh no public improvements uh constructed within this rideway uh uh

[3:40] just a little background uh the uh the applicant uh came through early in

[3:46] 20124 with a request uh during that review it was noted that there was

[3:51] little interest in the surrounding neighborhood to be tied into this this

[3:55] piece of street so uh the a conditional rezoning

[4:00] conditional zoning was submitted by the applicant uh showing uh a site plan uh

[4:06] with this piece of land being a private driveway as opposed to a publicly

[4:10] maintained Street uh so that was approved as a condition of approval of

[4:15] that conditional resoning that this property be abandoned uh or or be uh

[4:20] that they request the property uh to be uh right away to be closed uh and a

[4:26] private driveway be constructed in its in its place

[4:30] uh so with that uh it is a condition of the approval of that that conditional

[4:36] zoning and with that the uh uh staff is requesting that Council adopt a

[4:42] resolution setting a DAT of the public hearing for a r permanent RightWay

[4:47] closure all right so Council what we will be voting on uh this evening is we

[4:52] adopt a resolution uh scheduling the public hearing we're not actually voting

[4:56] on the right of way closure or not we're voting on the resolution to schedule the

[5:01] public hearing any any comments or questions or concerns on the resolution

[5:04] to set the public hearing no hearing none uh do I hear uh do I hear a motion

[5:10] to adopt the resolution setting the public hearing so moved all right

[5:13] motions been made motions made properly seconded uh do I have any debate hearing

[5:20] none all in favor say I all opposed same son see none motion passes all right so

[5:26] we will set that one for what was it February 17th so that'll be the second

[5:30] meeting in February all right sounds good all right so next uh Mr Helmer

[5:37] might as well stay up front we have two public hearings we

[5:42] will begin with 8.1 the conditional zoning 1124 for woten development

[5:48] company it is for property located at the corner of Maplewood Drive in North

[5:52] Berkeley Boulevard uh Mr Helmer if you would begin with the brief and then

[5:56] we'll go from there thank you Mr Mayor this is a a 1.4 2 acre tract of land uh

[6:02] owned uh by Wooten development company they are also the the applicant for this

[6:07] proposal uh they are uh the current zoning of this property is office

[6:12] institutional and uh some neighborhood business uh zone property in there uh

[6:17] they they are requesting that the property be res zoned to Neighborhood

[6:20] business conditional zoning District um the the comprehensive land use plan has

[6:25] identified this property as being suitable suitable for mixed use uh one

[6:30] and medium density residential uh or a portion of it as being uh suitable for

[6:37] residential uh the applicant is requesting a change of zoning from the

[6:40] subject property uh uh uh from office and institutional Oni to the

[6:45] neighborhood business uh conditional zoning district for the purpose of

[6:49] constructing a multi-tenant uh commercial retail

[6:53] Center uh in your packet is a a a a map showing the comprehensive land use plan

[7:00] and the area in purple is is basically uh the the plan is recommending uh that

[7:07] these properties in purple be uh are suitable for mixed use type developments

[7:13] uh there is a small portion uh in the light tan area that is actually um uh

[7:20] medium density

[7:24] residential so the office institutional neighborhood business district the exist

[7:29] the exist zoning uh the uh is established to provide for the

[7:33] development of office and Community institutions that have similar

[7:37] development characteristics and required locations close to residential and

[7:41] Commercial uses this District encourages a commercial uses and forbids industrial

[7:47] uses uh the neighborhood business district uh is pro uh established to

[7:52] provide the services uh and Commercial development needs to uh serve primarily

[7:57] adjoining neighborhoods uh is uh intended to promotee the development of

[8:02] small pedestrian oriented establishments whose character and use is compatible

[8:06] with nearby residential neighborhoods maximum building uh gross area is 24,000

[8:13] ft the neighborhood uh business conditional zoning District which is

[8:17] proposed uh is established to uh provide uh the services and Commercial

[8:23] development needed to serve primarily the adjoining neighborhoods the district

[8:28] is intended to promote the development of small pedestrian oriented

[8:31] establishments whose character and use is compatible with nearby residential

[8:36] neighborhoods uh with that uh the surrounding zoning districts uh include

[8:42] uh some general business and neighborhood business to the north

[8:46] office institutional uh and residential R9 to the South uh R R9 residential to

[8:53] the East and office institutional to the West uh the the zoning map in your

[8:58] packet shows U the neighborhood business properties

[9:02] uh just adjacent to and just to the north of subject property and then

[9:07] immediately to the South is uh the Oni District uh there's some Oni uses at

[9:11] that corner and then some um random residential across the street uh located

[9:17] within Oni District so uh this property that's being requested for rezoning uh

[9:22] is essentially kind of an extension of that existing commercial District

[9:28] um expanding Southward uh the applicant has requested

[9:35] that uh that the the the they play he's requesting or volunteering a limiting

[9:42] the uses uh permitted in the district uh primarily he's is uh excluding or or uh

[9:52] non-permitted or he's basically saying that he will not be permitting uh bingo

[9:57] parlor internet cafes sweep stake facilities electronic gaming

[10:02] operations um however he's requesting that all commercial retail Center uses

[10:08] uh that are permitted in the neighborhood business zoning District be

[10:11] uh approved as part of this conditional rezoning

[10:17] so uh the the city land use plan locate locates these Parcels within the the

[10:22] mixed use one and medium density residential uh portions of the land use

[10:26] designation the neighborhood business zoning district is a corresponding

[10:30] zoning District to the mixed use one land use designation this is not a

[10:33] corresponding zoning District to the medium density residential land use so

[10:37] it's just basically we're saying there that there is a small portion of this

[10:41] track that is uh identified for residential U so the comprehensive plan

[10:47] doesn't get right all the time but it is what it is so uh staff is not

[10:52] distributed they proposed conditional resoning to the TRC ultimately the

[10:57] application is going to have to come back with a full set of drawings for

[11:01] staff review uh he submitted a 70% drawing so it's not a complete site plan

[11:07] but it it basically demonstrates how the the site will be developed out so um

[11:13] there are some pictures of a similar development right next door which he

[11:17] currently owns and it's it's going to be very similar to that except a lot more

[11:22] green um uh let's see I requested a plan be

[11:28] added and and it's not

[11:33] everywhere I would like to just uh briefly describe the project um and in

[11:38] your packet there is uh uh substantial information I will make this brief but I

[11:43] also want to provide you with this information uh and get it in the record

[11:49] um so uh the we've already discussed the land use uh I I would like to go to the

[11:55] physical improvements uh the property is proposing access to the site from the

[12:00] existing driveway cut along North Berkeley Boulevard and one from mwood

[12:04] Drive uh the approved driveway permits will be required from ncdot and city of

[12:10] Goldsboro prior to site plan approval uh the applicant is proposing

[12:14] 8,450 ft commercial structure for the site uh currently consisting of Five

[12:19] Tenant spaces uh parking will be provided uh 59 parking spaces total

[12:25] which equates to one space per 150 square ft of retail space um the project

[12:31] will be providing sidewalks along um uh Maplewood uh drive and uh uh North

[12:37] Berkeley Boulevard uh a lighting plan has not been submitted but uh is

[12:42] understood that if the the site does uh uh provide a lighting plan it will have

[12:47] to meet minimum city of Goldsboro unified development or uh minimum

[12:50] ordinance standards um interconnectivity um has been shown uh tying the proposed

[12:59] uh strip center uh into the existing uh retail Center just to the north uh

[13:05] engineering uh City Water and Sewer is available at the site um City

[13:10] engineering will require approval of storm water calculations and drainage

[13:13] plants again it's a 70% drawing so the engineering portion of the storm water

[13:18] uh Is Res is reserved for later however the plan does show a site a suitable

[13:23] site on the property for a storm water pond so uh Landscaping um

[13:30] uh Street trees have been provided along Maplewood Drive and North Berkeley

[13:34] Boulevard and a type uh a 10ft wide uh landscape buffer has been is shown on

[13:40] the uh the East uh north and east side of the property a 10-ft buffer is uh is

[13:47] is actually type a buffer is normally a 20ft they're showing a 10-ft reduced

[13:52] buffer because they're going to

Goldsboro City Council Meeting 01-06-2025

Transcript