|
Cary Town Council Minutes Thursday, January 25, 2007 6:30 PM Council Chambers 316 N. Academy Street, Cary, N.C.
Present: Mayor Ernie McAlister, Mayor Pro Tem Jack Smith, Council Members Jennifer Robinson and Julie Robison
Absent: Council Members Marla Dorrel and Nels Roseland
A. COMMENCEMENT
1. Call to Order (Mayor McAlister)
Mayor McAlister called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m.
_________________________
2. Ceremonial Opening (Ms. Dorrel)
Mrs. Robison provided the ceremonial opening.
_________________________
3. Adoption of agenda (Town Council)
Mayor McAlister announced that the applicant has requested to remove item F.1. (06-REZ-28) from this agenda and reschedule it to the February 8, 2007 council meeting agenda.
ACTION: Mrs. Robinson moved to approve the agenda as amended. Mayor Pro Tem Smith provided the second, and council granted unanimous approval.
_________________________
B. CONSENT AGENDA (click on this link to see full text minutes of the consent agenda)
1. Regular Consent Agenda (any regular consent agenda item pulled for discussion will be discussed at the end of the old/new business portion of the agenda, which is item H on this agenda)
a. Consideration of approval of the minutes of the regular town council meeting held on January 11, 2007. (Approved)
b. Consideration of adoption of certificates of sufficiency and resolutions calling for public hearings on the following annexations:
(1)
06-A-35
(2)
06-A-36
(3)
06-A-38
c. Consideration of adoption of the January 2007 tax report. (Approved)
2. Planning and Development Committee, January 18, 2007 (any committee consent agenda item pulled for discussion will be discussed at the end of the committee discussion portion of the agenda, which is item G on this agenda)
a.
Singh Green Level
Road Subdivision Request to Make a Payment-in-Lieu of Thoroughfare
Improvements (EN07-072)
b.
Briarcliff Apartments Request to Close Connector Road (EN06-060A)
C. RECOGNITIONS, REPORTS, AND PRESENTATIONS
There were no recognitions, reports and presentations on this agenda.
_________________________
D. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Mixed
Use Sketch Plan 06-MU-07, Cornerstone
Background Information
Existing Zoning: Residential
40 (R-40) Requested: Mixed Use Sketch Plan
Zoning Overlay District: Cornerstone Community Mixed Use Center
Land Use Plan Designation: The subject parcels are located within the mixed-use Cornerstone Community Activity Center, which encompasses all four quadrants around the intersection of Davis Drive and High House Road. A community activity center is intended to include a balanced mix of commercial, office/institutional and residential uses at moderate-to-high densities. The Land Use Plan also provides an alternative recommendation of either Low Density Residential (1-3 dwellings per acre) or Traditional Neighborhood Development.
Acreage: 67.90 ±
Location: Northeast quadrant of Davis Drive and High House Road
Applicant: Greg Sanchez High House Davis, LLC 4309 Emperor Blvd., Suite 110 Durham, NC 27703 (919) 941-5745
Applicants Contact Person: Charles Smith Withers & Ravenel, Inc. 111 MacKenan Dr. Cary, NC 27511 csmith@withersravenel.com (919) 469-3340
Town of Cary Case Manager:
316 N Academy Street Cary, NC 27513 (919) 469-4342
jennifer.currin@townofcary.org Summary of Requested Rezoning
The mixed use sketch plan submittal, incorporating Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND) standards as outlined in the LDO, such as vertically-based mixed use design, proposes a combination of office, retail, restaurant, and residential uses. The proposed sketch plan specifies 4 single family dwelling units, 450 multi-family dwelling units, and 370,000 square feet of office, retail, restaurant, and civic uses. While the overall maximum is 370,000 square feet for all permitted uses, individually up to 350,000 sq. ft. of retail/restaurant uses is allowed and up to 90,000 sq. ft. of office use is allowed. The applicant is proposing a maximum building height of 5 stories. The only reduction being requested by the applicant to the LDO requirements is a reduction to the parking standards.
A. Transportation
High House Road Existing Roadway Section: 5 lanes, right of way (ROW) varies Future Roadway Section: 4 lane median divided, 100 ROW Schedule: N/A Sidewalk Requirements: Both Bicycle Requirements: Wide outside lane Transit Requirements: Bus shelter with concrete pad is required approximately 70 feet prior to the third entrance in the westbound direction on High House Road. Dimensions of the bus shelter should at least 5 foot wide and 12 feet in length with a bench included. Must have metal supports with clear sidings for safety and security.
Davis Drive Existing Roadway Section: 4 lane median divided, right of way (ROW) varies Future Roadway Section: 4 lane median divided, 100 ROW Schedule: N/A Sidewalk Requirements: Both Bicycle Requirements: Wide outside lane Transit Requirements: None
B. Traffic Impact Analysis:
A draft traffic impact study has been prepared by town traffic consultant, Sepi Engineering dated January 2007.
The study (07-TAR-231) recommends the following improvements to meet Town of Cary Adequate Public Facilities Requirements. 1. High House at Davis Drive Construct a westbound right turn lane on High House Road across the entire frontage of the development. The westbound approach should include left turn lane, two through lanes, and a right turn lane. Construct a northbound right turn lane on Davis Drive across the entire frontage of the development. 2. Cary Parkway at High House Construct a southbound right turn lane as indicated in the Searstone TIA. 3. Davis Drive at Riggsbee Farm Road/Site Drive #1 Install a traffic signal. 4. Davis Drive at Stone Creek Village Drive/Site Drive #2 Install a traffic signal. 5. High House at Searstone Drive/Site Drive #3 Install a traffic signal
These improvements and the requirements of the Town of Cary Comprehensive Transportation Plan will provide mitigation for site impacts as required by the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance.
In December 2005, the Town of Cary completed the road improvement which changed Davis Drive from a two lane road to a four lane median divided roadway. This improvement has cut travel time in half. Travel times from US 64 to Morrisville Carpenter Road was reduced from 23 minutes to 11 minutes. This improved travel time generated drivers from Cary Parkway and NC 55 to shift to Davis Drive. As a result in 2006, the traffic volume on Davis Drive increased 60%. Twenty (20%) percent of the increase appears to be traffic diverted from Cary Parkway.
Early 2007, NCDOT opened NC 55 to the future four lane section. As a result, all traffic diverted from NC 55 should return to that highway. With the improved travel times on NC 55, drivers from Apex and Holly Springs and southwestern Wake County should return to NC 55. Recent counts (1/17/2006) from the traffic camera at Davis Drive and High House Road indicate that traffic volume on Davis Drive has already decreased by 10%+-. As more drivers divert back to NC 55, additional reductions to traffic on Davis Drive are expected.
NCDOT plans to start construction on Davis Drive north of Morrisville Carpenter Road to RTP in the spring. This construction should also divert traffic to NC 55.
Additional traffic studies (07-TAR-236) are in process for this area. The Searstone PPD has requested an update to the Traffic Impact Study prepared in 2001. That draft study update is due February 14, 2007 from Sepi Engineering to the Town for review.
When that study (07-TAR-236) is complete new traffic counts will be conducted to determine traffic flow and traffic impacts in the area if both projects with NC 55 open for three months were approved.
C. Parks & Greenways: A 10 wide, concrete multi-use trail is required along the north side of High House Road. A payment-in-lieu will be required for any subdivided residential development.
Reference Information
Meeting Schedule: Town Council Public Hearing Date: January 11, 2007 Action: Council continued the public hearing until January 25, 2007 Date: January 25, 2007
Planning & Zoning Board: Date: May 21, 2007
Town Council Action: Date: June 28, 2007
Applicants Justification Statement Submitted November 27, 2006 Please note that the following statement is that of the applicant and does not necessarily represent the views or opinions of the Town of Cary:
How is the proposed request reasonable? In explaining how it is reasonable, please address the following, if applicable:
The proposed request is reasonable. The size of the parcel is ideal for the proposed uses. The proposal is for a Traditional Neighborhood Development and this use is shown of the Towns Land Use Plan for this site. The proposed development would complete the development at the Davis Drive and High House Road intersection with a type of mixed use development encouraged by Town planning guidelines, but, to this point, not implemented. The primary benefit provided through the development of this proposal would be the completion of a perimeter ring road improving traffic flow around the already busy Davis Drive/High House Road intersection. An additional benefit is to increase the non-residential tax base for the Town. The perceived detriment is related to increased traffic, but until the traffic study is complete, it is our belief that the proposed transportation improvements will greatly improve the functioning capability of the intersection. All of the proposed land uses are compatible with the land use plan and existing development in the area. The development pattern that presently exists in this area is prerequisite to the proposed type of development and, therefore, is very compatible. A reduced parking standard is the only modification to LDO requirements since those standards speak only to suburban parking situation and not mixed use situations as this call for.
Schools:
Current Enrollment and Building Capacity is based on the 20th day of the school year for 2005-2006 as supplied by the Wake County Public School System. School assignment will be determined at the time of development.
*The Projected Number of Additional Students is only a rough approximation. The actual number of students will vary depending on several variables, such as dwelling unit type, number of bedrooms, dwelling size, and other factors. For example: The basis for making this calculation is based on multipliers provided by the Wake County Schools Office of Student Assignment. During the rezoning process, student yield can not be accurately determined due to unknown variables.
Refer to the January 11, 2007 council meeting minutes for the staff presentation. A valid protest petition was filed on this case.
Mayor McAlister noted that this hearing was continued from the January 11, 2007 meeting. He welcomed speakers to present new and relevent comments without repeating comments made at the previous meeting.
Mr. Chuck Smith, the applicant, stated the existing cemetery will remain in its current location. He stated there is an existing home on the property that he believes is on the Triangle area historic register. He presented a letter to the clerk (Exhibit A is attached to and incorporated in these minutes) stating that the owner will move the home to another property.
Mr. Jason Hallman spoke about his concerns. His comments are attached to and incorporated in these minutes as Exhibit B.
Mr. Tom Plant expressed his concern about increased traffic, which will negatively impact the existing quality of life. He believes the traffic impact analysis is understated by 40,000 square feet. He stated two additional lights will result in three traffic lights in just 1,800 feet, which seems like it will cause more traffic back-ups. He stated a right-turn lane will cause more water runoff and will result in more potential for flooding to the Georgetown homeowners, who already experience flooding problems. He requested that the Town thoroughly review all these issues for accuracy.
Mr. Joseph Robinson outlined the current land use for this site for a community activity center. He stated this proposal far exceeds the community activity center concept.
Mr. Xiaopu Yang spoke about his concerns. See Exhibit C attached to and incorporated in these minutes for his comments.
Mr. Lloyd Hinnant spoke about his concerns. See Exhibit D attached to and incorporated in these minutes for his comments.
Mr. Bob Myers, representing the Friends of the Page Walker Hotel, spoke about the preservation of the Maynard-Stone house on the site. See Exhibit E attached to and incorporated in these minutes for his comments.
Mr. Basavane Goud spoke about his concerns. See Exhibit F attached to and incorporated in these minutes for his comments.
Ms. Heather Patisaul stated developments like this are very popular in Atlanta, but Atlanta is already urban. She stated the proposal will create additional traffic and lower the current standard of living. She questioned the demand to support this and the surrounding development. She stated the schools cannot support any additional children. She does not understand who will want to live here, and she added it does not seem suitable for families with children or single people. She would like the area to remain a traditional neighborhood. She stated the proposal would be great in the right location, but she does not think the proposed location is suitable.
Ms. Tara Rheault is generally pleased with the plan, and she thinks the building style and public art will enhance the corner. She likes the idea of high-end retail and restaurants that are walkable to nearby residents. She appreciates that the developer has been and continues to be willing to work with residents to minimize the impact of the development on their neighborhood. She is pleased they have agreed to try to waive the Orum Drive connection, they have verbally agreed to increase the size of the retention ponds to a 25-50 year flood retention, and they have provided assistance to address the Bridle Creek outlet. She believes they can reach an agreeable building height after seeing elevation balloons that the developer has agreed to provide. She stated anything that is developed at this site will result in increased traffic.
No one else came forward to speak, and Mayor McAlister closed the public hearing.
Mrs. Robison is pleased that the applicant has proposed an increase in flood detention facilities. She wants information about the detention facility at the Stone Creek development in order to compare the data. She would like to see more work on this issue. Ms. Currin stated staff will provide this data.
Mrs. Robinson stated the applicant plans to propose changes based on citizen feedback and the traffic impact analysis. She is concerned about forwarding this to the Planning and Zoning Board based on the changes that might occur. She would prefer to table this until changes are made to give everyone a chance to look at the changes to the proposal. She suggested that council members meet with staff to understand the results of the transportation impact analysis.
Mrs. Robison and Mrs. Robinson think a flooding simulation project would be beneficial.
Mr. Chuck Smith understands the significance of this project. He is to agreeable to tabling this as long as staff can proceed with offering the staff comments.
Mayor McAlister stated the staff recommends referring this case to the April 16 Planning and Zoning Board meeting, and this seems to allow plenty of time.
Mrs. Robison thinks tabling this now provides more of a legitimate assurance for the citizens.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith asked if would create a hardship if this project is referred to the May Planning and Zoning Board meeting. Mr.Chuck Smith does not think this will cause a problem.
Mrs. Robinson and Mrs. Robison asked about another public hearing. Ms. Currin stated another public hearing is not required at the Planning and Zoning Board level, but the board may allow comments.
Mrs. Robinson suggested a third public hearing before council if there are significant changes made to the plan.
ACTION: By consensus, council concurred with having another public hearing at the March 22, 2007 council meeting, which will keep the item on track for the May 21, 2007 Planning and Zoning Board meeting.
_________________________
2. Public hearings on the following citizen-initiated annexation petitions (Mr. Dan Matthys):
a.
06-A-34, The Park at
Langston, LLC
Annexation Petition Number: 06-A-34
UTILITIES:
MEETINGS:
b.
06-A-37, Albert Murray
Council Heirs, ETAL
Annexation Petition Number: 06-A-37
UTILITIES:
MEETINGS:
AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING LANDS NOT CONTIGUOUS TO THE MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES OF THE TOWN OF CARY , NORTH CAROLINA
WHEREAS, on 10/13/2006 , the Town Council has been petitioned under G.S. 160A-58.1 to annex the area described below:
Albert Murray Council HEIRS C/O Rebecca Ann Prince EXECUTOR; Bonnie Council & William K. Hodge; Reba R Mills HEIRS C/O Peggy E. Hatcher EXECUTOR; Wake County Parcel Identification #0723023522 portion, 0723022038, 0723024260; including 19.54 acres, plus 0.00 acres of adjacent right-of-way; which are Non Contiguous to the existing municipal limits of the Town of Cary; and
WHEREAS, on 12/14/2006, the Town Clerk of the Town of Cary certified the sufficiency of said Petition, the same being duly made after investigation; and
WHEREAS, on 12/14/2006, the Town Council of the Town of Cary ordered a public hearing on the question of said annexation and Notice of a Public Hearing was published in the newspaper of general circulation as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the matter came for public hearing before the Town Council of the Town of Cary on 1/25/2007, at which time all persons opposed and all persons in favor of said annexation were allowed to be heard; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council hereby finds that the area described herein meets the standards of G.S. 160A-58.1(b), described as follows: a. The nearest point on the proposed satellite corporate limits is not more than three miles from the corporate limits of the Town. b. No point on the proposed satellite corporate limits is closer to another municipality than to the Town. c. The area described is so situated that the Town will be able to provide the same services within the proposed satellite corporate limits that it provides within the primary corporate limits. d. No subdivision, as defined in G.S. 160A-376, will be split up by this proposed annexation. e. The area within the proposed satellite corporate limits, when added to the area within all other satellite corporate limits, does not exceed ten percent (10%) of the area within the primary corporate limits of the Town. f. The public health, safety, and welfare of the Town and of the area proposed for annexation will be best served by annexing the area described herein;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Town Council of the Town of Cary , North Carolina that:
Section 1. By virtue of the authority granted by 160A-58.1, the area described in the petition and depicted on the attached map, is hereby annexed to and made a part of the Town of Cary, effective on the 1/25/2007 with a condition that the property owner connect to the Town of Cary sewer/water line based upon the Towns policy(ies) in place on the effective date of this ordinance. A map and description of the annexed area are on file in the Planning Department, Cary Town Hall.
METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION
Section 2. That from and after the effective date of this ordinance, the territory and its citizens and property shall be subject to all debts, laws, ordinances and regulations in force in the Town of Cary, and shall be entitled to the same privileges and benefits as other parts of the municipality. Said territory shall be subjected to municipal taxes according to G.S. 160A-58.10.
Section 3. The Mayor of the Town of Cary shall cause an accurate map of the newly annexed territory together with a copy of this ordinance, duly certified, to be recorded in the Office of the Register of Deeds of Wake County and in the Office of the Secretary of State of North Carolina.
Section 4. Pursuant of G.S. 160A-22, the Town Clerk is directed to update the Official Town Map by drawing in the territory annexed, or setting out the boundaries in a written description, or showing the current Town boundaries by a combination of these techniques. Such a map shall also be delivered to the Wake County Board of Elections as required by G.S. 163-288.1.
Section 5. Pursuant of G.S. 160A-23, the boundaries of Electoral District A are hereby revised to account for and include the territory annexed, and the Official Town Map of Electoral Wards is hereby amended to include the annexed territory in the said Electoral District.
Adopted on 1/25/2007.
Mayor McAlister opened a public hearing for both annexation petitions. No one came forward to speak, and the mayor closed the public hearing.
Mayor McAlister noted that 06-A-34 will come back to council in February for final action, and no action is needed at this meeting.
ACTION: Mrs. Robison moved to appove annexation 06-A-37. Mrs. Robinson provided the second, and council granted unanimous approval.
(Resolution is also on file in the town clerks office.)
_________________________
E. PUBLIC SPEAKS OUT (one hour time limit)
Mr. Kenneth White stated he has a water runoff problem on Medcon Court, and he has not gotten any satisfaction from the staff. He has already had someone fix the problem, which disqualifies him from the Towns program. Otherwise, he stated he qualifies for the Towns program. He asked for council assistance.
Mr. Brian Cain stated 06-AC-02 was previously denied by council and a plan will be re-presented to council this year. He and other residents in Lochmere Village are in favor of the plan. He understands that the council may consider excluding residential development from activity centers, but he does not believe that retail will be successful on this property and it will detract from property values. He stated traffic is a problem, and studies show less traffic with residential than with retail or office development.
Mr. Brent Miller, representing Friends of the Page Walker, outlined a local ordinance for the Town of Apex to help preserve historic properties. He encouraged the Town of Cary to seek this same enabling legislation, and he urged the council to add this to the Towns legislative agenda.
_________________________
F. LAND DEVELOPMENT DISCUSSION ITEMS (any item pulled from the land development consent agenda for discussion [item B.2. on this agenda] will be discussed during this portion of the agenda)
This item was removed from this agenda and will be placed on the February 8, 2007 council meeting agenda.
_________________________
G. COMMITTEE REPORTS (discussion items)
Planning and Development Committee, January 18, 2007 (any item pulled from the committee consent agenda for discussion [agenda item B.3.] will be discussed during this portion of the agenda) (Mr. Roseland)
There were no Planning and Development Committee discussion items.
_________________________
At this time Mayor McAlister suggested to move to agenda Item I, closed session.
ACTION: Pursuant to G.S. 143-318.11(A) (3) and (4), Mayor Pro Tem Smith moved for closed session for the following purposes, Mrs. Robinson provided the second, and council granted unanimous approval:
1. CONSULT WITH ATTORNEYS EMPLOYED BY AND/OR RETAINED BY THE TOWN IN ORDER TO PRESERVE THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE BETWEEN THE ATTORNEYS AND THE TOWN. AMONG OTHER THINGS, THE COUNCIL EXPECTS TO CONSIDER AND GIVE INSTRUCTIONS CONCERNING THE HANDLING OR SETTLEMENT OF A CLAIM, JUDICIAL ACTION, MEDIATION, ARBITRATION, OR ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE.
2. DISCUSS MATTERS RELATING TO THE LOCATION OR EXPANSION OF INDUSTRIES OR OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE TOWN.
Following closed session, Town Manager Coleman stated that Healthways, Inc. is a health management consulting firm that provides health consulting services to insurance companies, group health employers, etc., and they plan to bring over 100 jobs to Cary with an average salary in excess of $60,000 per year. The One North Carolina Fund requires the company to make certain commitments on a schedule (i.e., when jobs will be brought to Cary, etc.), and in exchange for bringing those jobs, the State provides a financial incentive and asks for a local match. He stated in this case the State is providing $40,000, and the match includes requested contributions in the amount of $25,000 from the Town and $15,000 from a local corporation. In addition, the Town will be asked to sign a contract that requires Healthways to live up to the agreement for bringing the jobs to Cary within a certain amount of time.
Mrs. Robison asked how long Healthways will have to deliver the jobs. Mr. Coleman stated they will have three years, but their commitment is to bring them to Cary immediately. Mrs. Robison asked what kind of reporting comes back to the council. Mr. Coleman stated the Town will administer the funds in cooperation with the State Department of Commerce, and he is certain the Town will receive reports, and staff can bring these reports to council. Mrs. Robison requested a status update on this and other incentive allocations that the Town has made over the recent past.
ACTION: Mayor Pro Tem Smith moved to approve (the request as outlined by Mr. Coleman). Mrs. Robinson provided the second, and council granted unanimous approval.
_________________________
H. OLD/NEW BUSINESS (any item pulled from the regular consent agenda for discussion [agenda item B.1.] will be discussed during this portion of the agenda)
1. Consideration of adoption of the Town of Cary 2007 State Legislative Agenda and award of contract for lobbying services. Council may take action. (Mr. Bill Coleman)
STAFF REPORT Town
Council, January 25, 2007
Each year for the past six years the Town has retained the services of a lobbyist to assist the Town with local legislation that will help us more effectively address the concerns of the citizens of Cary and support other legislation that benefits the Town. In addition, the lobbyist tracks proposed legislation that might impact Cary positively or negatively so the Town elected officials can respond appropriately.
Because 2006 was a short session, the Town Council decided not to request new legislation but did request the Towns consultant, Jack Cozort of Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice to monitor legislative activity for issues related to or impacting Town government. Mr. Cozorts report on legislative activity for the 2006 session is below:
MEMORANDUM TO: Town of Cary
FROM: Jack Cozort
DATE: October 26, 2006
RE: Report on 2006 Session of North Carolina General Assembly
I. Introduction The 2006 Session of the North Carolina General Assembly was one of the most intense short sessions in recent memory. While the short session is normally reserved for actions involving the State budget, the 2006 short session considered a wide range of subjects, including eminent domain restrictions, video service competition, landfill moratoriums, and many other issues. A report on the issues of particular interest to the Town of Cary follows, along with comment on interim studies, and issues to watch for in the 2007 session.
II. Interbasin Transfer Laws Senator Dan Clodfelter of Mecklenburg introduced Senate Bill 1561 that would restrict the ability to transfer water from one river basin to another. The bill never came up for a vote in committee. However, Senator Clodfelter has a keen interest in this issue because of the situation in his home county of Mecklenburg, and he is expected to introduce this legislation again next year. I am not aware that it is being considered for study by any of the interim study committees prior to the 2007 session.
III. Eminent Domain Restrictions Several bills were introduced in the 2006 session to place restrictions on the power of local government to exercise its eminent domain authority. We worked with the League of Municipalities in an effort to see that the bill that did pass would be the least onerous on local government. The bill that passed, House Bill 1965, is attached. We also worked with the League to keep under wraps more dangerous eminent domain legislation, such as House Bill 2213. HB 2213 would have amended the State Constitution. That bill ended up in the Rules Committee in the House, where it died. A copy is attached. It is expected that additional legislation involving restrictions to eminent domain will be introduced in the 2007 session.
IV. Solid Waste Issues The General Assembly enacted Senate Bill 951, Public-Private Solid Waste Collection, and Senate Bill 1564, Amend Solid Waste Franchise Statutes. Both of these pieces of legislation had great momentum by the time the 2006 Session began in May. Our primary goal was to work with the League of Municipalities to keep each bill in a form palatable to local government.
V. Video Service Competition Act This legislation was the product of a great deal of work in the 2005 Session and in the interim between the 2005 and 2006 Sessions. The bill that passed, House Bill 2047, was the product of a great deal of give and take among all the interested parties.
VI. Clean Water Bonds There was a great deal of interest early in the 2006 Session in providing for a bond issue to provide funds for grants for wastewater and drinking water projects. Our goal was to support the bonds and to make sure that urban municipalities would also have the opportunity to participate in such a bond program if it passed. The issue never got any traction in the 2006 Session, and neither the House bill nor the Senate bill ever came up for a vote. This issue is likely to come up again in the 2007 Session.
VII. Landfill Moratorium In the very last days of the session, the General Assembly enacted Senate Bill 353, an act to impose a moratorium on any action involving the construction of a new landfill in the State for a period beginning 1 August 2006 and ending on 1 August 2007, with certain enumerated exceptions. If this moratorium is extended, it could have serious ramifications. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||