BY DEBBIE PAGE
debbiepage.iredellfreenews@gmail.com

Possible policy change discussions dominated the Troutman Town Council agenda briefing on Monday afternoon, including debate on speed hump installation and noise ordinances. With the expiration of Gov. Roy Cooper’s Covid-19 executive orders, changes in the remote participation policy were also up for debate.

Due to Mayor Teross Young’s absence following the passing of his father, Mayor Pro Tem Paul Henkel chaired the meeting.

SPEED HUMPS

Town Manager Ron Wyatt and Police Chief Josh Watson have recently fielded speeding complaints in several neighborhoods, leading to requests for speed humps.

The town’s 2011 speed hump policy requires that 75 percent of a street’s adult homeowners support the installation on a town-maintained street with a 25 mph or less sped limit and a minimum of 501 to maximum of 4,000 vehicle traffic trips per day.

The police chief, fire chief, and town manager must also review and approve any speed hump request and direct the number and location of humps.

The street must have a no-parking zone 100 feet in both directions from the hump and have warning signage and speed recommendations over the hump. The hump must also be marked with bright diagonal stripes.

The required petition for speed hump installation warns that street noise from braking and acceleration may increase and that emergency response times may decrease after installation. Other issues are hampering street cleaning and snow renewal and creating possible liability issues if vehicles are damaged.

After one recent complaint, Chief Watson gathered traffic and speeding data on the street using the town’s speed and radar trailer. He recorded 1,400 trips, with only eight drivers over the speed limit. The highest speed recorded was 29 mph in a 25 mph zone.

The data did not indicate a significant speeding issue or the need for speed bumps, Watson said. He is currently gathering data on another neighborhood complaint.

Wyatt said Chief Watson can gather data and then assign personnel to an area to address frequent speeding violation periods rather than jumping to speed hump installation.

Council member George Harris, who served on a town board in Virginia, said in his experience there, after installation, residents were soon asking for speed humps to be removed.

Wyatt also pointed out that installation of the plastic humps damages the street. He said homeowners associations would need to pay to put them in and would be responsible for any damage to the street from installation or later removal.

Watson supported using community education, data gathering tools, and enforcement actions before resorting to speed humps. “There are a lot of other options,” he said.

Council member Paul Henkel said the policy needed updating, including specifying who is financially responsible for purchase and installation of speed humps. He suggested revising the policy to deal with any “what ifs” to make the policy clear to HOAs.

Council member Jerry Oxsher suggested that the policy establish a metric threshold to allow speed hump installation. Watson said he would investigate those criteria and report back to council.

NOISE COMPLAINTS

The town has received complaints about late-night music at a business on the south side of town. The current noise ordinance was last examined to address construction noise on Murdock Road several years ago.

Town Planner Lynne Hair found that the “current ordinance is lacking in its ability to provide a clear definition of what constitutes a noise violation.”

Under the current policy, music is illegal during the evening hours.

“At what point is it too loud? Too late?” asked Wyatt.

Wyatt said the town needs to make a fair policy that protects both business people and community members with the “teeth” of a decibel meter to make determinations objective.

After examining the current ordinance and those from surrounding communities, Hair and her staff put together changes that list specific acts that qualify as loud and disturbing noises, the time of day when such noises are violations, and a decibel level used to measure the violation based on the time of day and use.

Disturbing noises listed include prolonged horns or signal devices, loud music, noisy pets, loud vehicles, whistles, exhaust discharge, compressed air devices, construction operations, loud noises near school, church, or hospital during operation hours, loading and unloading operations, bells or gongs, hawking peddlers, attention-getting devices, loudspeakers on vehicles, or business noises near residences between 9 p.m. and 7 a.m.

When responding to a complaint, TPD officers will measure the noise on an “A” weighting scale with type-two decibel meters meeting American Standard Institute Incorporated requirements.

Daytime hours for the ordinance are 7 a.m. to 9 p.m., with 65 decibels allowed in residential areas, 60 in multifamily areas, and 70 in commercial areas. During nighttime hours (between 9 p.m. and 7 a.m.), noises can reach 60 decibels in residential areas, 55 in multifamily, and 65 in commercial.

The changes also list noise exceptions, including sirens and alarms, but security alarms not ceasing after 30 minutes would be a violation. Other noise exceptions are warning devices such as tornado sirens, aircraft, sporting or permitted events, lawn equipment, and noise from existing businesses prior to this ordinance.

The town manager or police chief would have the authority to attempt to remedy a violation through voluntary compliance. Unresolved problems would be designated as a Class 3 misdemeanor, punishable by a maximum 30 day jail sentence and/or a $50 fine.

Hair suggested a section be added requiring persons planning events with amplified sound to acquire an amplified sound permit from the police department at least 15 days before the event. The permit would require written notification of adjoining property owners within 1,000 feet and an affidavit submitted that verifies nearby residents were notified.

The ordinance also limits the time amplified sound may occur. No permit will be issued allowing more than 20 hours of excess amplification per year at a public entertainment venue with a capacity of 1,000 or less. The limit is 10 hours annually for other locations.

Council members and Chief Watson stressed that no one is going to go around looking for noise violations. “I think it should be a complaint-driven issue,” said Watson.

The council plans to consider the revised noise ordinance at its October or November meeting.

REMOTE PARTICIPATION POLICY

With the expiration of the governor’s executive order, Town Attorney Gary Thomas said that council needs to examine its remote participation policy implemented on March 20, 2020, at the start of the pandemic.

The town policy currently allows council members to use remote participation at two regular meetings and two other meetings per calendar year, though the council can vote to exceed this limit.

A physical quorum is required for an absent member to participate remotely, but the remote participant cannot participate or vote in quasi-judicial hearings, closed sessions, or public hearings on rezoning issues.

Wyatt said that remote council members can still participate and vote once the order lifts, but Thomas disagreed, saying participation is allowed but no voting. Wyatt said voting is allowed, but conceded it could be challenged during the next 30 days by a member of the public.

To overcome any vote challenge. Wyatt said the N.C. School of Government (COG) advised the council vote again on the issue with all physically in attendance at the next meeting. He also believes that the likelihood of a challenge is “miniscule.”

Henkel disagreed with remote participation in closed sessions at all because of security integrity issues, especially since the person cannot vote on a closed session issue. He also stressed the importance of being present during public hearings to see facial expression, body language, exhibits, and other information presented.

Thomas agreed, saying the state statute says members must be present for public hearings.

Thomas said N.C. Statute 166A states that remote participation and voting are allowed only during a state of emergency order. The town’s adopted current policy allows remote participation and voting in all but the prohibited situations, which runs counter to the statute and could open the town to court challenges to remote votes, warned Thomas.

Thomas then shared a COG article that said towns can continue streaming and emailed comments but cannot ban people from attending public meetings or participate in meetings remotely. The article said that towns have no clear authority to allow remote participation.

Thomas said the council can do something different but must be prepared for any lawsuits. Wyatt again disagreed, saying that an in-person vote can be taken later to negate any challenges.

Wyatt noted COVID-19 is still around, along with flu season and life events like deaths in the family or business obligations also possible. He also asserted that the council has been operating this way for over two years without issue and no lawsuits have happened anywhere across the state.

Council members decided to leave the policy as is for now but asked Wyatt and Thomas to get a COG review to ensure that it complies with state law before they decide to keep or revise the remote participation policy.

TROUTMAN CITIZEN/ORGANIZATION OF THE YEAR DEADLINE EXTENDED

Town Council extended the deadline date for nominations for Troutman’s Citizen and Organization of The Year awards to August 15. Nomination forms must be turned in by that date.

2022 Organization of the Year Nomination Form
2022 Citizen of the Year Nomination Form

COMING UP THURSDAY NIGHT

♦ Setting September 8 public hearing date to hear the annexation request for just under 769 acres of Barium Springs/CHA property.

♦ Consideration of the Joint Economic Development Agreement Between the Town of Troutman
and C.R. Onsrud, Inc.

♦ Consideration of a Murdock Road commercial request for heavy industrial conditional zoning of 303 Murdock Road (beside the cement plant) for the purpose of commercial/warehousing uses.

♦ Consideration of a text amendment, requested by Barium, LLC., that would add a mixed-use zoning category to the town’s Unified Development Ordinance. This text amendment would apply to any mixed use projects to come before the town in the future and will add a much-needed category to the UDO, according to Hair.

♦ Consideration of a UDO text amendment authorizing the town to enter into development agreements and establishing procedures for this process. This addition is needed to comply with the N.C.G.S 160D-1001 statute, said Wyatt.