Currituck Shooting Club UP Case Analysis (BOC 5.4.15)

Transcription

STAFF REPORT
Board of Commissioners
DATE: May 5, 2015
PB 14-24 The Currituck Shooting Club
ITEM: PB 14-24 The Currituck Shooting Club request for a Use Permit to operate an outdoor
shooting range.
LOCATION:
Moyock: 913 Caratoke Highway
TAX ID:
0015-000-0031-0000
0015-000-032B-0000
ZONING DISTRICT: Agricultural (AG) and Heavy Industrial (HI)
PRESENT USE:
(unpermitted)
Extractive
Industry
(sand
mine)
OWNER:
William Spruill
PO Box 146
Moyock NC 27958
APPLICANT:
The Currituck Shooting Club Inc
Troy Moser Incorporator
112 South Street
Moyock NC 27958
LAND USE/ZONING OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY:
Land Use
NORTH:
Farmland
SOUTH
Farmland, Retail, Residential
EAST:
Woodland, Farmland
WEST:
Reclaimed Sand Mine
and
Outdoor
Shooting
Range
Zoning
AG
GB
AG
GB
LAND USE PLAN
CLASSIFICATION: The 2006 Land Use Plan classifies the site as Full Services within the
Moyock subarea. The 2014 Moyock Small Area Plan classifies the site as Limited Service.
SIZE OF SITE:
58.70 acres
COMMUNITY MEETING:
A community meeting was held on August 27th, 2014 at TEM
Tactical gun shop in Moyock. Mr. Moser, his son, and Eldon Miller, all representing the shooting
range, and one citizen attended the meeting. No issues were raised.
I.
NARRATIVE OF REQUEST:
1. The applicant is requesting a use permit for an outdoor shooting range. The applicant is
currently operating an outdoor shooting range and needs the use permit to bring the site
into compliance with the UDO.
2. The applicant states that this will be a private shooting range open to club members
only.
PB 14-24 The Currituck Shooting Club, Troy Moser
Use Permit
Page 1 of 32
3. According to the applicant, the range is located in the bottom of an inactive sand pit
(Spruill Mine), bordered on all sides with a back stop berm of a minimum height of 25’.
4. According to the applicant, the Currituck Shooting Club has adopted an EPA plan to
assure an environmentally safe facility.
They will reclaim lead shot and projectiles
every six months.
II.
QUESTION(S) BEFORE THE BOARD:
Use Permit Criteria and Staff Findings:
Use permits (UP) are intended to allow the Board of Commissioners flexibility in the
administration of the UDO. Through the UP procedure, property uses which would otherwise
be considered undesirable in certain districts can be developed subject to conditions of
approval to minimize any negative effects they might have on surrounding properties.
In order to approve a UP, certain criteria must be satisfied. The criteria and suggested
findings of fact are outlined as follows:
1. The use will not endanger the public health or safety.
It is staff’s opinion that the evidence in the record, prepared in absence of testimony
presented at a public hearing, supports the finding that the use will not endanger the
public health or safety.
Preliminary Staff Findings:
a. A registered engineer has certified that the design, specifications, and plans for
range construction are in compliance with the UDO (Attached). The engineer is
also certifying that the range facilities are designed as specified by the most
current edition of the National Rifle Association of America (NRA) Range Source
Book and the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) most current edition of
Best Management Practices for Lead at Outdoor Shooting Ranges.
b. The UDO was recently amended to allow outdoor shooting ranges if specific
requirements are met. That text amendment included language that ‘no part of a
shooting range shall be located within 200’ of any property line and less than
one-half mile from an existing residential dwelling, school, waterfowl
impoundment (flooded area), or Currituck Game Commission sanctioned
waterfowl rest area.’ This location meets those requirements.
c. It is a subsurface shooting range.
2. The use will not injure the value of adjoining or abutting lands and will be in harmony
with the area in which it is located.
presented at a public hearing, supports the finding that the use will not injure the
value of adjoining or abutting lands and will be in harmony with the area in which it is
located.
a. The UDO was recently amended to allow outdoor shooting ranges if specific
requirements are met. This location meets those requirements.
b. It is a subsurface shooting range.
3. The use will be in conformity with the Land Use Plan or other officially adopted plan.
presented at a public hearing, supports the finding that the use will be in conformity
Use Permit
Page 2 of 32
with the Land Use Plan and Moyock Small Area Plan and other officially adopted
plans.
The 2006 Land Use Plan classifies this site as Full Service within the Moyock
subarea. With respect to nonresidential uses, it is essential that the existing
community character be preserved in the Full Services area. The proposed use is in
keeping with the policies of the plan, which include:
a. POLICY ED1: NEW AND EXPLANDING INDUSTRIES AND BUSINESSES
should be encouraged that: 1) diversify the local economy, 2) train and utilize a
more highly skilled labor force, and 3) are compatible with the environmental
quality and natural amenity-based economy of Currituck County.
b. POLICY ED4: In addition to the recruitment and expansion of major new
industries, the considerable value of SMALL BUSINESS START-UPS,
EXPANSIONS AND SPIN-OFFS shall also be recognized.
The 2014 Moyock Small Area Plan classifies this site as Limited Service within the
Moyock subarea. The proposed use is in keeping with the policies of the plan, which
include:
a. POLICY TO1: Encourage the continued development of Moyock as a destination
to Hampton Roads and the Albemarle Region by developing additional
recreational opportunities and promoting historic and cultural sites.
b. POLICY R 1: Expand and develop recreational opportunities for all ages and
users including access to the water and natural environment, walking trails, multipurpose fields, multi-purpose community building, and other non-traditional types
of recreational opportunities that are consistent with the Currituck County Parks
and Recreation Master Plan.
4. The use will not exceed the county’s ability to provide adequate public facilities, including
but not limited to schools, fire and rescue, law enforcement, and other county facilities.
Applicable state standards and guidelines shall be followed for determining when public
facilities are adequate:
presented at a public hearing, supports the finding that the use will not exceed the
county’s ability to provide adequate public facilities, including but not limited to
schools, fire and rescue, law enforcement, and other county facilities.
a. The proposed use will not produce additional burdens on schools, fire and
rescue, or other public facilities.
TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
Pursuant to the Unified Development Ordinance, the Technical Review Committee
recommended denial at their September 11, 2014 meeting subject to the following:
1. Based on the suggested findings provided by the applicant, staff has determined it is
probably false that the use will not endanger the public health or safety. (The
Engineer’s certification was received in March 2015 and addresses this concern.)
2. Outstanding TRC comments were not addressed including:
Use Permit
Page 3 of 32
a. A registered engineer must certify that the design, specifications, and plans for
range construction are in compliance with the UDO. (UDO Section 4.2.4.F.5)
(Received)
b. The parking lot must be surfaced with gravel, concrete, or asphalt and must
contain wheel stops for each space. The site plan does not indicate surface
material. (Corrected)
c. The entrance road must be graveled (UDO Section 5.1.4.A.5); The county
engineer may inspect and approve existing parking area and entrance road to
determine if existing/alternative materials are acceptable. (UDO Section 5.1.6.F)
(The County Engineer inspected the site, approved the existing haul road,
and a corrected parking area plan was received)
Items Addressed After Planning Board Meeting, Updated 1/22/15
1. Shading is required for the parking area that is compliant with the Unified Development
Ordinance (UDO). (UDO Section 5.2.5.D) A landscaping plan has not been provided.
2. Handicap accessibility required from parking lot to shooting station. At least one
shooting station must be accessible. If it is technically infeasible to make shooting range
accessible, an engineer must verify infeasibility. If technically infeasible, an accessible
path must be installed to reach a viewing area. Written exceptions/alternative
arrangements as approved by the Department of Insurance are required. A revised site
plan is necessary demonstrating compliance with the State Building Code.
3. NCDENR staff advises that the applicant cannot have an active shooting range within
the permitted boundaries of the mine. If a shooting range is something that is still being
considered, then that area of the active mine must be released from the requirements of
the Mining Act.
4. Once the mine reclamation has been accepted as being in compliance with the
requirements of the mining permit and the site released from the mine permit
requirements, any further dewatering would have to comply with whatever rules may
apply to the pumping activity, possibly through the Div. of Water Resources.
IV: PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION:
Ms. Newbern moved to deny PB 14-24 due to applicant not having all the necessary
recommendations completed that were recommended by the Technical Review Committee.
Mr. Clark amended the motion by adding based on the suggested findings provided by the
applicant, staff has determined it is probably false that the use will not endanger the public
health or safety. Ms. Newbern accepted the amendment to her motion.
Mr. Bell seconded the motion. Ayes: Mr. Clark, Ms. Bell, Ms. Newbern and Mr. Bell. Nays: Mr.
Cooper and Mr. Craddock. Motion for denial carried 4-2.
THE APPLICATION AND RELATED MATERIALS ARE AVAILABLE ON THE COUNTY’S
WEBSITE:
Board of Commissioners: www.co.currituck.nc.us/board-of-commissioners-minutes-current.cfm
Use Permit
Page 4 of 32
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS (2/2/15)
Mr. Woody stated his concern with the lack of a certification signed by a registered engineer
and stated based on this omission the Board cannot approve. Mr. Woody did review the
applicant's resolutions and plans that had been submitted to address other requirements of
the Planning Board. The Planning Board did recommend denial based on the requirement
that the request will not endanger the public health or safety.
Commissioner Griggs asked about the NRA source book requesting an engineer sign off,
but not require it. It was explained that the ordinance may not be re-written at a meeting,
and the ordinance states the engineer signing is a requirement under the ordinance. It was
also stated that subdivisions, culverts, commercial development and a number of other
items requiring engineering certification.
Andrew Shilling, Moyock, an Attorney representing the Currituck Shooting Club asked if
approval could be made with conditions. Attorney McRee said it is possible, but the
determination of public safety needs to be decided. It was determined that the principal
issue is the engineering certification. Mr. Woody, when asked, answered that an approval
without an engineering certification would typically be a minor issue, such as a change in
building plans. Questions were asked and answered regarding the requirements necessary
to approve and what actions were taken by the applicant to meet those requirements.
Herbert Mullen, Elizabeth City, Attorney representing a local resident opposed to the
shooting range, asked if responses had been received from the applicant with regard to the
requirements under the special use permit. Mr. Woody said responses had been received,
and reviewed the submittals with Mr. Mullen. Mr. Mullen questioned the distance of the
nearby school, and Mr. Woody clarified the school is more than a half mile away, as
required.
Troy Moser, Moyock, and owner operator of TNT tactical and Director and President of the
Currituck Shooting Club, was questioned by his attorney, Andrew Shilling, who asked
several questions of Mr. Moser pertaining to location and operation of the shooting range.
He asked if an engineer was hired and Mr. Moser said he has hired Hyman and Robey as
the engineering firm who began preparing the certification about four or five weeks ago.
During questioning, it was stated that the engineer lacked the qualifications to certify the site
but that the NRA recommendations are being followed. There are outstanding requirements
that need to be met as recommended, but Mr. Moser does not want to go forth without
approval due to the costs involved with proceeding. The EPA best practices for lead
abatement were discussed and it was stated that Hyman and Robey were not qualified to
certify that aspect. Chairman O'Neal questioned Mr. Shilling, asking if the applicant had
submitted a certified plan by a registered engineer per the Unified Development Ordinance.
Mr. Shilling answered no.
Commissioner Griggs asked Mr. Woody to speak to the point raised that significant
monetary expenditures may be necessary, with the applicant's hope of getting approval. Mr.
Woody said the certification is for the plans, not for buildings. The purpose of the
certification is so applicants are not burdened with heavy expenditures without the benefit of
approval prior to construction.
Use Permit
Page 5 of 32
Mr. Mullen asked Mr. Moser about the process of obtaining the ability to shoot at the range,
as well as what maximum caliber would be permitted. Mr. Mullen again raised concerns
about the location of a nearby school, and Mr. Moser explained the safety methods
implemented and logistical factors applied would not allow for ammunition to go outside of
the range area.
Eddie Hyman, of Hyman and Robey, was questioned by Mr. Shilling. Mr. Hyman recounted
the tasks he has worked on related to the shooting club. He explained his firm was not able
to certify the plans due to the lack of expertise required for this type of certification, those
being the NRA recommendations and the EPA best practices. When asked if he could
determine a cost for certification, he said he did not know. Commissioner Griggs asked
several questions regarding qualifications and certifications, to which Mr. Hyman said he
believes a bolistics type engineer and structural engineer would be required. Chairman
O'Neal clarified there were no engineering firms in Currituck County in response to Mr.
Shilling's question of structural engineers located in Currituck County. Mr. Hyman was
questioned by Mr. Mullen, at which time he told the Board that a number was given to Mr.
Moser about a week ago in an effort to help him secure a structural engineer to help with the
project. It was clarified as well that an engineer is state specific. Mr. Woody explained
again that the certification is for range plans for construction. It was the consensus of the
Board and those testifying that there is no such thing as a "bolistics" engineer. Mr. Woody
said a structural engineer should be able to certify the plans. Mr. Robey said there is a
structural engineer located in Dare County.
Mr. Shilling called Dr. Richard Peddicord, a PhD in Environmental Science. Dr. Peddicord
reviewed his credentials with the Board, including his involvement in the EPA development
of its best management practices policy and his work in using the EPA best management
practices to develop policies for 150 shooting ranges. He stated engineers will typically
certify, and he works with many engineers to develop the environmental stewardship
management plan. Dr. Peddicord reviewed how he works with the engineer to develop a
site plan. He believes most engineering companies have never designed a shooting range,
and in his experience the engineer used for certification is typically a civil engineer familiar
with the structures within a shooting range. He explained Mr. Moser has contracted with him
to develop an environmental stewardship plan, with cost for the design ranging from $59,000, based on complexity. Chairman O'Neal asked if he has ever been involved with a
range that was given final approval before the site plans had been submitted. Dr. Peddicord
noted he has been involved at varying stages for many ranges, but he cannot recall
specifically this situation. He went on to answer questions regarding water issues and lead
abatement within a range in a pit, finding the design attractive from an environmental
perspective.
After testimony, Mr. Shilling summarized, acknowledging they did not have the engineering
certification and would not have been able to acquire it prior to tonight's hearing, and had
planned to request approval with the condition that the engineering certifications be acquired
later. He requested a continuation of the hearing to grant them more time. Chairman
O'Neal asked if they were aware they needed the certifications prior to coming to the
hearing, and chose to come anyway. Chairman O'Neal stated that many applicants spend
thousands of dollars to secure their engineering certifications to appear before the Board,
and Mr. Moser is not being treated any differently.
Use Permit
Page 6 of 32
Mr. Mullen spoke, suggesting denial, stating the applicant wasted the Board's time knowing
they had not met the requirements necessary for approval.
Board discussion ensued, along with several questions posed to the County Attorney as to
what affects may be to the application based on consideration of denial or recess motions.
After discussion, Commissioner Beaumont moved to recess so the applicant has the
opportunity to meet the requirement, to be reheard in 90 days. The motion was seconded
by Commissioner Griggs and carried, with Chairman O'Neal voting against.
RESULT:
CONTINUED [6 TO 1]
MOVER:
SECONDER:
AYES:
Paul M. Beaumont, Commissioner
David L. Griggs, Vice Chairman
NAYS:
O'Neal
Griggs, Aydlett, Payment, Beaumont, Gilbert, Hall
PLANNING BOARD DISCUSSION (12/9/14)
Mr. Craddock asked how the existing mine’s reclamation affects the area adjacent to it.
Ms. Glave said once the mine reclamation has been accepted as being in compliance with the
requirements of the mining permit and the site released from the mine permit requirements, any
further dewatering would have to comply with whatever rules may apply to the pumping activity,
possibly through the Division of Water Resources.
Ms. Bell said at the last Planning Board meeting the board talked about Mr. Spruill’s use permit,
and it was stated that until Mr. Spruill could get his use permit that shooting at the range was to
cease. Could staff provide an update?
Ms. Glave stated she was aware of one subsequent violation from the Code Enforcement
Officer.
Ms. Bell said the shooting has continued even though it was supposed to cease.
Ms. Glave said yes according to the Code Enforcement Officer.
Mr. Cooper asked the status of the engineer certification.
Ms. Glave said Mr. Moser said he has hired Hyman & Robey to do the report, but staff has not
received it.
Mr. Moser said he would like to table this request until the next Planning Board meeting. He is
working with Hyman & Robey and Mr. Spruill is waiting for final approval from the state. Mr.
Moser said the Currituck Shooting Club has been in operation for over two years and the first
year without any complaints. Mr. Moser said they are aware of staff recommendations and
have been working diligently to complete them and have been giving planning staff updates.
Mr. Woody said under the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) the applicant can ask for one
deferral and the request for a second deferral will result in the withdrawal of the application.
Use Permit
Page 7 of 32
Ms. Bell said citizens were here last month to hear the case and Mr. Moser asked for it to be
tabled to the next meeting, and now they are here again and Mr. Moser is asking for it to be
tabled again. Ms. Bell said this is not fair to the public.
Mr. Moser said he is representing 200 current active members of the shooting club. Mr. Moser
said he is not aware of any violations done by any of his members on this property. Mr. Moser
said the violations that have been submitted are allegations, which they are appealing. Mr.
Moser said they are doing what the county commissioners have told them to do, which is to
keep on operating.
Ms. Bell asked Mr. Moser if there has been shooting on the range since November 4 th.
Mr. Moser said no and he has the NRA records which he has to have for insurance purposes.
The board discussed since the registered engineer report had not been submitted to county
staff, Mr. Moser should have asked for this request to be tabled before the meeting instead of
waiting at the meeting, since citizens came to the meeting.
Mr. Moser said he was not aware there was an ordinance in place as Mr. Woody had stated. It
was not intended of wasting anyone’s time since they are actively moving forward to meet all
the obligations that the county has requested. Mr. Moser asked for a continuance of the case so
he will be able to meet his obligations for the request.
Mr. Woody said the planning board could not grant another continuance; because of the
county’s ordinance. If the applicant requests a second deferral, it will result in the withdrawal of
the application.
Mr. Moser said he will go ahead and present his case. Mr. Moser said he is the president of
The Currituck Shooting Club which has been operating over two years. The club is incorporated
and recognized under the state corporation as a member only club. The club operates on
private property and has not had a violation during the first year. Mr. Moser said this is a
business and it serves a very important public service here. The club is not a money maker it is
more a public service. Members pay to be part of the club, but they do not have to pay to use
the shooting range. Mr. Moser said the club is not here to cause any animosity or not here to
hurt property values. Mr. Moser said the club wants to work with the county, be good stewards,
safer, quieter, and grow. The opposition the club has seen has not been detrimental; it has
actually brought further awareness to what needs to be done to be good neighbors.
Mr. Frank Flora said he opposes the shooting range as it will devalue his property because he
has property close to the range.
Ms. Flora said she was a member of the Moyock Small Area Plan and this request is not
compatible with the surrounding area. She is concerned that there is a school nearby and the
noise from the range.
Mr. Elliott said he was here tonight on behalf of Haywood Ward who owns property in the
Currituck Reserve subdivision. Mr. Elliott said 88 acres are within ½ mile radius of the shooting
range and this property will be developed in the future. The property is zoned single family
residential. Mr. Elliott said Mr. Haywood is concerned with the danger of the shooting range.
Use Permit
Page 8 of 32
Mr. Cooper asked staff with the ½ mile separation requirement to an existing structure, how
does this apply to homes that may be built later.
Ms. Glave said the separation is for existing homes not for homes that may be built in the future.
Ms. Brumsey said she has a farm next to John Flora and asked everyone who doesn’t want the
shooting range to please stand up. Approximately eighteen people stood.
Mr. Harcum said he owns property north of the sand mine. Mr. Harcum said he and his sons
plan on building a house on the property in the future and he is concerned with safety and land
rights.
Mr. Mullen, attorney representing Mr. Flora, asked Mr. Tate to give his credentials. Mr. Tate is a
certified real estate appraisal in the State of North Carolina. Mr. Tate said any factor which
would strongly affects property values would have to be considered in the appraisal and a
shooting range would fall into the category of not another home. A landfill is another example
that would have to be considered because it is not the same conforming use.
Mr. Mullen asked Mr. Howard to come before the board. Mr. Howard said he has been a real
estate broker in Currituck County for 38 years, has a background in real estate development,
real estate appraiser, and general contractor. Mr. Mullen asked Mr. Howard how the shooting
range would affect surrounding property values. Mr. Howard said property values are
determined by several different factors: location, availability and desirability. Mr. Howard said it
is his professional opinion that the shooting range would make adjacent properties less
desirable.
Mr. Mullen said a shooting range would reduce the value of adjoining property and he is
concerned with the noise from gunfire.
Mr. Gaither said he is concerned that the shooting range would negatively impact property
values and the noise from gunfire.
Ms. Clements said she is concerned that the shooting range will decreased property values.
She is concerned why this use would be approved right in the middle of Moyock.
Mr. John Flora said he is building a house on the same road as Moyock Middle School. Mr.
Flora said he began hearing the noise of gunfire in early spring or summer coming from the
direction of the sandpit. Mr. Flora said he talked with county staff and Mr. Moser did not apply
for a use permit until August 28, 2014. Two weeks earlier, August 13 th, county staff sighted Mr.
Spruill, The Shooting Club, and Mr. Moser for a violation. No findings were found at this time.
Mr. Flora has continued to complain to the county staff and the sheriff’s department. Mr. Moser
was sighted again on September 13 th and October 30th by county staff. Mr. Flora said either on
November 29th or 30th he could hear shooting again. He called the sheriff’s department to have
them come out, but the sheriff’s department couldn’t get in because the gates were locked. In
the report it states the deputy could hear the shooting, but couldn’t see exactly where it was
coming from because the gates were locked. Mr. Flora is asking that this request be denied.
Mr. Moser said The Currituck Shooting Club is not Blackwater because the volume cannot be
compared to Blackwater. The safety requirements for an outdoor shooting in the county’s UDO
have many requirements which will be met. Mr. Moser said Blackwater has not stopped
Use Permit
Page 9 of 32
residential growth or lowered property values. Mr. Moser is respectively asking the board to
table this request so they can meet the requirements of the Planning Board.
Mr. Clark said one of the use permit criteria is that the use will not endanger the public health or
safety.
Mr. Craddock as Mr. Mullen if he hired Mr. Tate to perform an analysis about external
obsolescence that may occur with the shooting range?
Mr. Mullen said he did not employ him.
Mr. Cooper said the current standards which were reviewed and passed concerns him with what
he is hearing tonight. The county has a text amendment which states no part of a shooting
range shall be within 200 feet of a property line and not less than ½ mile from an existing
residential dwelling. The board is also hearing professional testimony, that even meeting these
standards, it could injure the value of adjoining properties. Mr. Cooper said the board does not
have the registered engineer certification to determine if the use will endanger the public health
or safety.
Mr. Craddock said the information that has been presented from Mr. Tate and Ms. Clements are
their professional opinions, which are not based on facts. Mr. Craddock talked about the noise
levels and how you might mitigate sound. Mr. Craddock asked staff how the sheriff’s department
measures the noise level.
Mr. Woody said the sheriff’s department doesn’t measure just one sound. The machine is run
for a specified time frame and it will give you an adjusted decimal level.
Ms. Bell said she is concerned that surrounding properties have been approved to be developed
without knowledge that a shooting range may come.
Ms. Newbern asked if the Planning Board denies this request would it go to the Board of
Commissioners; and if it is tabled would it come back to the Planning Board.
Mr. Woody said that is correct.
Mr. Mullen said if the Planning Board were to table this request, when it comes back, it will have
two new board members who will not be familiar with what has taken place tonight.
Mr. Cooper asked staff where the rules are not being met. Is it the registered engineer
certificate, handicap accessibility, and other parking requirements as far as the UDO is written?
Ms. Glave stated yes.
Ms. Bell is concerned that Mr. Moser has been operating even though he is in violation.
Mr. Craddock asked Mr. Spruill who is in charge of locking the three gates.
Mr. Spruill said he is and Mr. Moser.
Use Permit
Page 10 of 32
Mr. John Flora said there is a case which is pending in Harnett County regarding a similar
situation and tax value decreasing. A letter was sent to Mr. Paul O’Neal from Joe Miriello
regarding the case.
Mr. Craddock said the Planning Board did receive a copy of the letter. The person who wrote
the letter is not a certified real estate appraiser in the State in North Carolina. He is a tax
appraiser, and these are two entities that are governed by two different bodies. The real estate
appraisers are governed by the NC Appraiser Board and tax appraisers are governed by the
Department of Revenue.
Mr. Clark closed the public hearing.
ACTION
Ms. Newbern moved to deny PB 14-24 due to applicant not having all the necessary
recommendations completed that were recommended by the Technical Review Committee.
Mr. Clark amended the motion by adding based on the suggested findings provided by the
applicant, staff has determined it is probably false that the use will not endanger the public
health or safety. Ms. Newbern accepted the amendment to her motion.
Mr. Bell seconded the motion. Ayes: Mr. Clark, Ms. Bell, Ms. Newbern and Mr. Bell. Nays: Mr.
Cooper and Mr. Craddock.
Use Permit
Page 11 of 32
Use Permit
Page 12 of 32
Use Permit
Page 13 of 32
Use Permit
Page 14 of 32
Use Permit
Page 15 of 32
Use Permit
Page 16 of 32
Use Permit
Page 17 of 32
Use Permit
Page 18 of 32
Use Permit
Page 19 of 32
Use Permit
Page 20 of 32
Use Permit
Page 21 of 32
Use Permit
Page 22 of 32
Use Permit
Page 23 of 32
Use Permit
Page 24 of 32
Use Permit
Page 25 of 32
Use Permit
Page 26 of 32
Use Permit
Page 27 of 32
Use Permit
Page 28 of 32
Use Permit
Page 29 of 32
MEMORANDUM
To:
Troy Moser
From: Tammy Glave, Planner II
Date: September 11, 2014,
Re:
Use Permit – Outdoor Shooting Range - TRC Comments
The following comments have been received for the September 17, 2014 Technical Review
Committee meeting. This case was tentatively scheduled for the October 13, 2014 Planning
Board meeting; however, staff has been directed to hold this application to allow it to run
concurrently with the use permit application for the mining operation on the same property. The
mine use permit is scheduled to be heard by the Planning Board on November 4, 2014. All
outstanding items and plan corrections must be received by October 20, 2014 to be placed on
the November 4th Planning Board agenda. TRC comments are valid for six months from the
date of the TRC meeting.
Planning, (Tammy Glave, 252-232-6025)
Denied/Resubmit:
1. A registered engineer must certify that the design, specifications, and plans for range
construction are in compliance with the UDO. (UDO Section 4.2.4.F.5) (Received)
2. Provide proof of minimum $500,000 accident and liability insurance coverage. (UDO
Section 4.2.4.F.5) (Received)
3. At the pre-application meeting, it was indicated that you could have up to a maximum of
200 people at an event. Please show where the overflow parking will be accommodated
beyond the required spaces for the range.(No longer planning special events per Mr.
Moser)
4. The parking lot must be surfaced with gravel, concrete, or asphalt and must contain
wheel stops for each space. The site plan does not indicate surface material. Also, the
entrance road must be graveled. (UDO Section 5.1.4.A.5) The county engineer may
inspect and approve existing parking area and entrance road to determine if
existing/alternative materials are acceptable. (UDO Section 5.1.6.F) (County Engineer
has visited the site and approved existing haul road and proposed parking area
surface material.)
5. Shading is required for the parking area that is compliant with the Unified Development
Ordinance (UDO). (UDO Section 5.2.5.D) A landscaping plan has not been provided. (It
has been determined that the existing vegetation meets the intent of the ordinance
and it cannot be removed.)
6. The county special use permit for the existing mining operation is expired and must be
renewed. The use permit for the outdoor shooting range cannot be considered until the
use permit for the mine is issued. (Permit has been renewed.)
7. It appears that the state mining permit for this site will expire on October 14, 2015 and
the mine must be reclaimed at that time. NCDENR Division of Energy, Mineral, and
Land Resources, Land Quality Section, must approve modifications to the state mining
permit in order for the proposed use to occur. (State Permit has been addressed.)
Use Permit
Page 30 of 32
Currituck County Building Inspections (Spence Castello, 252-232-6020)
Denied/Resubmit:
1. Handicap accessibility required from parking lot to shooting station. At least one
shooting station must be accessible. If it is technically infeasible to make shooting range
accessible, an engineer must verify infeasibility. If technically infeasible, an accessible
path must be installed to reach a viewing area. Written exceptions/alternative
arrangements as approved by the Department of Insurance are required. A revised site
plan is necessary demonstrating compliance with the State Building Code. (Revised
plans submitted that meet Building Code requirements.)
Currituck County Engineer (Eric Weatherly/Michelle Perry, 252-232-6035/Currituck Soil
and Water (Mike Doxey, 252-232-3360)
Reviewed with comment:
1. Provide DENR concurrence for use of mine as a shooting range. (Provided)
2. We have concerns that County staff does not have the internal resources to inspect and
advise that the facility is in compliance with the standards of Section 4.2.4.F of the UDO.
(Private Engineer has certified facility.)
Currituck County Fire and Emergency Management (James Mims, 252-232-6641)
Approved with comment:
1. Approved for use. May have further comments in regards to site and operation.
Currituck County GIS (Harry Lee, 252-232-4039)
Reviewed without comment.
Currituck County Parks and Recreation (Jason Weeks, 252-232-3007)
Approved with comment:
1. This facility could address requests that the county has received for a shooting range
assuming that the club membership is open to Currituck residents that wish to join.
Currituck County Utilities (Pat Irwin, 252-232-6061)
Albemarle Regional Health Services (Joe Hobbs, 252-232-6603)
1. PLEASE CONSULT WITH THE NC DEPATRMENT OF ENVIROMENT AND NATURAL
RESOURCES AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION (WASHINGTON REGIONAL
OFFICE) AT 252-946-6481 TO DETERMINE IF ANY PERMITS ARE REQUIRED. ALSO
CONSULT WITH CURRITUCK COUNTY HEALTH DEPT. AT 252-232-6603 IF ANY
EXISTING OR FUTURE BUILDINGS WILL REQUIRE SEWAGE TREATMENT AND
DISPOSAL OR A PRIVATE WELL.
NC Division of Coastal Management (Charlan Owens, 252-264-3901)
NCDENR Land Quality Section (Pat McLain, 252-946-6481)
1. The applicant cannot have an active shooting range within the permitted boundaries of
the mine. If a shooting range is something that is still being considered, then that area of
Use Permit
Page 31 of 32
the active mine must be released from the requirements of the Mining Act. (Area
released)
2. Once the mine reclamation has been accepted as being in compliance with the
requirements of the mining permit and the site released from the mine permit
requirements, any further dewatering would have to comply with whatever rules may
apply to the pumping activity, possibly through the Div. of Water Resources. (Land
Quality determined that existing dewatering permit addresses this activity also.)
NC State Archeology (Lawrence Abbott, 919-807-6554)
1. Project area has been utilized as a sand mine. An archaeological survey is not
recommended.
Use Permit
Page 32 of 32

Currituck Shooting Club UP Case Analysis (BOC 5.4.15)

Transcription

Similar documents

Freedom Business Park - Powell`s Point, NC

Women`s Introduction To Handguns Basic Pistol

Back - Cerritos Rod and Gun Club

Rangemaster - JWWalker.net

Property Highlights

2016 Nationals Shooting Deals! Blackwing Shooting Center NEW

Birmingham News Article - Monday Morning Quarterback Club

05/2014 - Quantico Shooting Club

Dry Fire Gear List - Center Mass Group

application for shooting gallery/range license