MINUTES
STATE
OF
The Henderson County
Board of Commissioners met for a regularly scheduled meeting at
Those present were: Chairman Bill Moyer, Vice-Chairman Charlie
Messer, Commissioner Larry Young, Commissioner Shannon Baldwin, Commissioner
Chuck McGrady, County Manager Steve Wyatt, Assistant County Manager
Also present were:
Planning Director
CALL TO ORDER/WELCOME
Chairman Moyer called
the meeting to order and welcomed all in attendance.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Commissioner Young led
the Pledge of Allegiance to the American Flag.
INVOCATION
Commissioner Shannon
Baldwin gave the invocation.
INFORMAL PUBLIC COMMENTS
1.
Dick Baird – Mr. Baird explained that he had followed the
Alternative Task Force proceedings closely, attending four of their five
meetings. They are honing in on a local
bill sales tax increase of 1/2 % and a local option bill land transfer tax up
from ½ to 1%. Each is estimated to
generate approximately $4.5million. He
mentioned three revenue sources available, if the Board has the courage to
examine them: “1. stop assuming the state’s responsibility by hiring teachers
above the state’s requirement. With 63
county funded teachers at $42,000 per, the available revenue is around
$2.6million this year and it’s growing. 2. access a user fee on every child
utilizing our public schools. One
hundred dollars per child would yield revenue of around $1.3million this year
and growing. Those opting to not use
public schools are paying double. Why should those attending public schools not
pay a nominal user fee? 3. get rid of the illegal aliens. Efforts are underway and I urge you to
aggressively press forward. Conservative
estimates place direct taxpayer support of illegal aliens in the county at
around $5million each year. Their
departure would free that revenue to be applied against legal citizen
needs. The additional synergistic effect
would be that school construction needs would be delayed and spread out so that
they are more easily managed. Totaled up both proposals yield around $9million
annually. That is a property tax rate
equivalent of about ten cents. The
difference is that my proposal does not impose additional taxes on anyone.”
2.
Fred Roane – Mr. Roane spoke to the issue of sedimentation
and erosion control ordinance that is on the agenda today. He had reviewed the latest draft ordinance
and the summary memo. He stated that it
appeared that staff had done an exemplary job to produce the latest draft to
incorporate the public comments from the last meeting on the issue. “The slope issue has been addressed in detail
with explanations and drawings sufficient for most to understand. I think the additional language yet states
the average slope will be calculated only for disturbed areas is very helpful
and reflects the purpose of the ordinance.
The addition of requiring a sketch plan for all projects is also a part
of this step and I think the staff, again has done a real good job in details
in that ordinance. As a member of ECO I
think we appreciate the work that the staff has done. The two areas that still
need clarification, if you please, are under the mandatory standard section
200-105e which is on page 12, refers to an approved express permit program and
it’s kinda left hanging. There’s no
explanation what that means or a definition of what that program is about and
so I’m not sure how that stands. And ECO
still contends that a 25 year storm standard should be used instead of the 10
year provision. Other local governments
are using a 25 year standard and it would appear our county would be lax in
accepting water quality and/or erosion control standards less than our
neighbors. So I respectfully request these two points be considered prior to
the ordinance being finalized.”
DISCUSSION/ADJUSTMENT OF AGENDA
Commissioner Baldwin
requested an adjustment. He had asked staff to pull the minutes regarding the
meeting that took place
Chairman Moyer stated
that it had been arranged for that item to be on the agenda for the next
meeting and Stan Duncan would be present for it. He had requested some additional information
and staff should have it all by the next meeting, the board can have a thorough
discussion and resolve the issue at that time.
Commissioner Baldwin –
“Well just let the record show that I asked for it to be placed on the agenda
this evening.”
Commissioner McGrady moved the adoption of the agenda,
striking the update on pending issues, part 2 which is all of the proposed
ordinances related to illegal immigration and all of the resolutions related to
illegal immigration.
There was some
discussion, for and against. The question was called on the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried
three to two with Commissioners
CONSENT AGENDA
Commissioner McGrady moved the adoption of the consent
agenda. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
The Consent Agenda
consisted of the following:
Minutes
Draft minutes of the
following meetings were presented for the Board’s review and approval:
Tax Collector’s Report
Terry F. Lyda, Henderson
County Tax Collector, had provided the Tax Collector’s Report dated
Financial Report – September 2006
Cash Balance Report – September 2006
The two above reports
were presented for the Board’s information and consent approval.
The high percentage of
budget used in Elections is due to the payment of invoices for the new voting
equipment in the current fiscal year.
This budget will be increased by a budget amendment to be approved by
the Board of Commissioners which will appropriate fund balance for the $560,000
in financing proceeds received in the previous fiscal year.
The current YTD deficit
in the emergency 911 Communications Fund is due to the purchase of new
technology and equipment during the first quarter that was budgeted in the
current fiscal year.
The YTD deficit in the
CDBG-Scattered Site Housing Project, the Crisis Housing Assistance Program, the
Mills River Watershed Protection Project and the Lewis Creek Restoration
Project is temporary due to timing differences in the expenditure of funds and
the subsequent requisition of Federal and State grant funds to reimburse
project expenditures.
The YTD deficit in the
Balfour Elementary Automotive Training Center Project will be reimbursed from
the drawdown of Public School Building Capital Funds (ADM) that were approved
for this specific project.
The YTD deficit in the
Mills River Elementary School Project, which was pulled from the 2006A COPs
financing, includes architectural fees that have been paid on the project that
will be reimbursed from a future financing debt issue.
Henderson County Public Schools Financial Report – September
2006
The School’s report was
presented for information and consent approval.
Budget Amendment
The Board approved an
installment contract financing loan for $560,000 in the previous fiscal year
(FY 2006) for the purchase of new voting equipment for the County. The invoices for this new equipment were not
received from the State nor the vendor and paid until the current fiscal year
(FY 2007). Therefore, the $560,000 in loan proceeds was included in the General
Fund’s Fund Balance at
The proposed budget
amendment for the Board’s review and approval appropriates the $560,000 from
the General Fund Balance and increases the Board of Elections accounts for the
purchase/payment that has occurred for the new voting equipment in the current
fiscal year.
It would be
appropriate for the Board to approve the
proposed budget amendment to pay for the new voting equipment since the total
loan proceeds for this purpose were included in the General Fund’s Fund Balance
at
Non-Profit Performance Agreement
Subsequent to the
approval of the FY 2006-07 Budget, staff has distributed the funding agreements
to the non-profit agencies receiving County allocations. Staff will be including signed funding
agreements on the Board’s consent agendas as we receive them from the agencies.
Staff recommended that
the Board authorize the Chairman to execute the funding agreements and, in
doing so, authorize the release of the first of the aforementioned agencies’
quarterly allotments.
Soil and Water Operational Agreement Amendment
Included in the agenda
packet was a proposed amendment to the Operational Agreement for
The 1998 agreement named
a U.S. Natural Resources Conservation Service (federal) employee as the
department head for the District. A
County employee has served in this position since 2004. This amendment serves to appropriately
reflect this employee’s status as a County employee and results in no financial
impact for the County.
The Assistant County
Manager recommended approval of this amendment.
Water line Extension – Summit Springs
The City of
The City of
The
Sewer line Extension – Kenmure Phase 6
The City of
The City of
Offer to purchase tax foreclosed property
Leon G. Bass offered to
purchase, for the sum of Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00), certain real estate
which was subject to a tax foreclosure by the County. The property is described as 0.12 acres in
Hunters Crossing subdivision, with Henderson County PIN 9559270793.
It is believed that this
lot was originally reserved for a utility easement of some sort by the
developer, and never conveyed. As best as can be determined, it is not used for
any purpose at this time, and was foreclosed by the County in 1993.
If the Board agrees to
provisionally accept this offer, it would be subject to advertisement and upset
bid pursuant to the Board’s policy, adopted
If the Board is so
inclined, the following motion was suggested:
I move that the Board provisionally accept the offer of Leon
G. Bass to purchase the property described in this agenda item, subject to the
procedures required by this Board for tax foreclosure sales.
Appointment of Delinquent Tax Collector
William Lee King has
been recommended to be appointed as Delinquent Tax Collector, the position
formerly held by Darlene Burgess, the new
If the Board is so
inclined, the following motion was suggested:
I move that William Lee King be appointed as Delinquent Tax
Collector, with an effective date of September 18, 2006.
Proclamation – Human Rights Day
The Human Relations
Council of Henderson County requested that the Board of Commissioners read and
adopt the prepared Proclamation proclaiming
A copy of the
Proclamation is attached and incorporated as a part of these minutes.
NOMINATIONS
Notification of Vacancies
The Board was notified
of the following vacancies which will appear on the next agenda for
nominations:
1.
Criminal
Justice Partnership Program – 6 vac.
2.
Fire
and Rescue Advisory Committee – 2 vac.
3.
4.
Laurel
Park Planning Board – 1 vac.
5.
Library
Board of Trustees – 1 vac.
6.
Nursing/Adult
Care Home Community Advisory Committee – 2 vac.
7.
Planning
for Older Adults Block Grant Adv. Comm. – 5 vac.
8.
Travel
& Tourism Committee – 4 vac.
Nominations
Chairman Moyer reminded
the Board of the following vacancies and opened the floor to nominations:
1.
Apple Country Greenway
Commission – 1 vac.
Commissioner McGrady
nominated Colette Summitt. There were no other nominees. Chairman Moyer made the motion to accept Ms. Summitt by
acclamation. All voted in favor and the
motion carried.
2.
Child Fatality
Prevention Team – 1 vac.
There were no
nominations at this time so this item was rolled to the next meeting.
3.
Downtown Hendersonville
Inc. – 2 vac.
Commissioner Messer
nominated Lawrence Winson to position #2.
There were no other nominees. Chairman
Moyer made the motion to accept Mr. Winson by acclamation. All voted in favor and the motion
carried. One vacancy remains open.
4.
Environmental Advisory
Committee – Chair
Chairman Moyer stated
that Mr. Lowles has already been appointed chair.
5.
There were no
nominations at this time so this item was rolled to the next meeting.
6.
There were no
nominations at this time so this item was rolled to the next meeting.
7.
Commissioner Young
nominated Mike Greene to position #2.
Commissioner McGrady
nominated the incumbent, Edward J. Fortaw, to the same position.
This was rolled to the
next meeting for a vote.
8.
Historic Preservation
Commission – 1 vac.
Mayor Roger Snyder had
notified Chairman Moyer that he will be the representative for
Chairman Moyer made the motion that the Board appoint Mayor
Snyder as
9.
Juvenile Crime
Prevention Council – 3 vac.
10.
Nursing/Adult Care Home
Community Advisory Committee – 1 vac.
There were no
nominations at this time so this item was rolled to the next meeting.
11.
Transportation Advisory
Committee – 1 vac.
ETOWAH LIBRARY BIDS
Gary Tweed introduced
John Pendergraff, the architect on this project.
John Pendergraff
explained that on September 28, three bids were received for the proposed
Etowah Branch Library. The high bid was $1.435million and Cooper Construction
was the low bid at $1.215million. There
was a fourth bid received but was not received in time so it was thrown out. The
low bid from Cooper is within budget, including four alternates on the
project. The four alternates and the
base bid are all still within the budget for the project. The budget for the project was $164 square
foot. With all the alternates the low bid comes in at $156 square foot. He
recommended that the Board enter into a contract with Cooper Construction to
perform construction of the project as is on the construction documents.
Bill Snyder was asked to
explain the reasoning behind this project. Mr. Snyder explained that the Etowah
Library is currently in what used to be the
Commissioner McGrady
stated that the Library Board is fully supportive of this project and has
recognized this as a need.
Start of construction
would be as soon as a contract is negotiated and signed and the contract would
run for 12 months. Completion of the
project is planned for December 2007.
Carey McLelland stated
that he would be working on an installment loan for this project. We have debt service budgeted for this year
in the current year budget, for half the year.
He will be working on getting bids for an installment contract
loan. We will have to have Local
Government Commission (LGC) approval since this project involves real
estate. We have a reimbursement
resolution in place so we can begin with the project. He will bring forward an application to the
LGC in the near future. Half the loan payment is coming from the Trust
Fund. Some county funds will have to be
involved in making the debt service payment.
Steve Wyatt stated that
this is consistent with the County’s Strategic Plan. The county commitment for the next fifteen
years is $75,000 per year for the debt service for a total of $800,000 which
will have to be budgeted in the regular budgetary process as debt service.
Commissioner McGrady made the motion to authorize the
negotiation of a contract with Cooper Construction, the low bidder for the
Etowah Library project. All voted in
favor and the motion carried.
SEDIMENTATION AND EROSION CONTROL PROGRAM
REDRAFT
Anthony Starr reminded
the Board that in their packets was the draft Soil Erosion and Sedimentation
Control Ordinance. The draft reflects
the changes requested by the Board of Commissioners at the last meeting
regarding this issue. Staff considered
the direction given by the Board as well as public comments. Many of the public concerns were already
addressed or have now been addressed with the draft ordinance.
The current draft
implements the 10 year storm option as opposed to the 25 year storm option, at
the direction of the Board from the last meeting. It also includes, in section 200-104-C-1 and
attachment 2 (page 9 of the ordinance) provisions for a sketch plan, the same
provisions discussed previously regarding thresholds for slope, and also
anytime someone disturbs more than 100 sq. ft. staff would have to obtain a
sketch plan. The sketch would not be
designed by a professional. Someone
could simply print off something, staff could print it off for them at the
Planning office (a map from GIS of their property) and they could draw in the
areas where they might put the building with dimensions, driveway, areas to be
disturbed and indicate what measures they might have put in place such as silt
fencing. There was also a clarification
that was added in the ordinance as to how the average slope was calculated
under C-1-B&C. It says that the
average slope shall be calculated only for the disturbed area as opposed to the
average slope for the entire lot. That addressed some of the concerns that were
expressed. It also includes the penalties provisionally discussed before with
penalties up to $5,000 per day. Each day
is considered a separate violation. It
also allows for the revocation or suspension of other county issued permits
which would probably be used before such a steep fine. Section 200-111 has a
provision for a “mud mat”. A mud mat has
to be an appropriate size, depending on the site. Larger sites would have to have a larger mud
mat area. It allows the mud to come off the tires of the vehicle so it isn’t
tracked out onto the main roads. The current draft includes an effective date
of
Steve Wyatt informed the
Board that the City of
Chairman Moyer made the motion to adopt the Soil and
Sedimentation Erosion Control Program as presented with an effective date of
October 1, 2007. A vote was taken and the motion carried four to one with
Commissioner Baldwin voting nay.
Chairman Moyer thanked
ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES ORDINANCE RFP
Chairman Moyer reminded
the Board of discussions on several occasions of an adequate public facilities
ordinance (APFO). At the Board’s meeting
on August 2 a thorough discussion was had and staff was directed to proceed to
prepare an RFP but asked that it be brought back to the Board with an overview
before sending it out. It was on the
agenda today for that purpose.
The draft RFP indicates
a proposal deadline of
There was discussion to
move the proposal deadline up to January 15, particularly due to the up-coming
holiday season.
Commissioner McGrady made the motion to approve the
submittal of the RFP for the adequate public facilities ordinance with the
proposal deadline date of January 15, 2007.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
NUISANCE ORDINANCE ENFORCEMENT REPORT
Chairman Moyer explained
that one of the accomplishments of the year was the adoption of the nuisance
ordinance.
Toby Linville explained
that the Public Health Nuisance Ordinance has been enforced since
Toby Linville shared
some of the success stories with the Board.
Some of them had been building for 10-20 years and it will take longer
than the few months the ordinance has been in place to get them completely
cleaned up.
Chairman Moyer told Toby
Linville that he and his staff had made tremendous progress in the time that
we’ve had the ordinance. He encouraged
them to keep it up. It will make a tremendous
difference.
UPDATE ON PENDING ISSUES
Mental Health Update
Illegal Immigration
This item had been
pulled from the meeting, early in the meeting.
STAFF REPORTS
There was nothing
further.
There was nothing
further.
PUBLIC HEARING – Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG)
2006 Housing Development Program
Commissioner McGrady made the motion for the Board to go
into public hearing. All voted in favor
and the motion carried.
The Board received a
copy of the Public Hearing Notice.
Karen Kiehna, Housing
Specialist with the
Public Input
There was none.
Commissioner McGrady made the motion for the Board to go out
of public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
No action was required
at this time.
PUBLIC HEARING – Entry Gate Ordinance
Commissioner Baldwin made the motion for the Board to go
into public hearing. All voted in favor
and the motion carried.
Staff had surveyed the
County and had identified eight existing gated communities and four more under
construction. Some of the existing communities will not meet the requirements
of Section 2 paragraphs A and B (setback and turnaround distances.)
Section 2, Design
A.
All
subdivision or community entry gates constructed
hereafter shall be setback sufficiently far from public road or street
access to allow for the stacking of at least three vehicles out of the public
travel lanes on the public road or street.
B.
All entry gates
hereafter constructed shall have an additional setback between the point of the
access control device and the entry gate to allow a vehicle which is denied
access to safely turn around and exit onto a public street.
Public Comment
There was none.
Chairman Moyer stated
that there was discussion of this item at the Fire and Rescue Advisory
Committee meeting and of the Fire Chiefs in attendance there was unanimous
support for these amendments recommended by Mr. Hyder.
Commissioner McGrady made the motion for the Board to go out
of public hearing. All voted in favor
and the motion carried.
Commissioner McGrady made the motion to adopt the ordinance
with the recommended amendments recommended by
QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING
Special Use Permit Application SP-06-01 for the
Planned Unit Development known as Vistas at Champion Hills
Mr. David Phillips, Applicant for Kasey-Phillips
Development, LLC, Owner
Commissioner Messer made the motion for the Board to go into
public hearing. All voted in favor and
the motion carried.
Chairman Moyer – “This
will be a quasi-judicial proceeding. It
is not near as informal as the last. By law, in certain situations like this,
we’re required to have a quasi-judicial proceeding. It’s very much like a court proceeding and a
lot more rigid. We have to follow a lot
more rules. So this will be a quasi-judicial public hearing on the following
petition: Special Use Permit SP-06-01 for the Planned Unit Development known as
The Vistas at Champion Hills where David Phillips and Kasey Phillips
Development, LLC, represented by Chris Day are the petitioners.
A quasi-judicial
proceeding, as I mentioned, is very much like a court proceeding, and is one in
which ones individual rights are being determined under specific rules of
procedure. As such, not every person has
the right to give evidence in a quasi-judicial proceeding. Under the Rules of Procedure for Quasi-Judicial
Proceedings, only persons who can demonstrate that they will be affected by the
outcome of the decision are allowed to participate in the proceeding. All persons who are allowed to speak and
participate in this hearing, including all witnesses, must be placed under oath
and that will be done by the Clerk to the Board in a few minutes. The petitioner is an automatic party to the
proceedings so they don’t have to apply.
The staff is automatically a party to the proceeding. Others who desire to become parties must come
forth, explain how they would be affected by the proceeding, such as if you
live next to it or across from it or traffic will affect it, whatever your
reason for wanting to be a party to it.
You need to come forth and state that.
The Board then will vote as to whether or not to make you a party to the
proceeding. If you are a party to a
proceeding, you can call other witnesses to speak. They don’t have to be a party. You can call
other people to speak. They have to be
sworn in as well but they don’t have to be made parties to the
proceedings. Are there people in
attendance here that would like to become parties to this proceeding? OK, Mam
would you please come forward, state your name, your connection to this matter
and then the Board will decide.”
Commissioner McGrady –
“Mr. Chairman, she’s an adjoining property owner on the map that we’ve got and
I believe she’s properly a party here.”
Chairman Moyer – “Any
objection from the Board?” There was none. “Alright Ms. Hills, you are a party
to the proceeding.”
William Camp – “William
Camp. I own property beside this project.”
Chairman Moyer – “I’m
sorry, your name again sir.”
William Camp – “William
Camp, C-a-m-p. And my property adjoins this property.”
Commissioner McGrady –
“Again on the map that we have Mr. Chairman, it shows his property right
adjoining it.”
Chairman Moyer – “Any
objection to Mr. Camp being made a party?” There was none. “Alright, Mr. Camp
you are a party to the proceeding. Thank you.”
William Camp – “Thank
you.”
Chairman Moyer – “Next?”
Jim Barnette – “Jim
Barnette. I have adjacent property and also Mr. Verne Snyder who owns property
adjacent to it and who is presently in
Chairman Moyer – “Well
you can check em on your own.”
Jim Barnette – “OK,
fine.”
Chairman Moyer –
“That’ll be fine. No objection to Mr. Barnette?”
Commissioner McGrady –
“He’s also an adjoining property owner.”
Chairman Moyer –
“Alright Jim, you’re a party. Thank you. Next?”
Michelle French – “Thank
you. Hans and Michelle French and we’re also adjoining property owners.”
Commissioner McGrady –
“Yeah.”
Chairman Moyer –
“French? OK. Any objection to Mr. French?” There was none. “OK, you’re a party
to the proceeding.”
Michelle French – “Thank
you”
Chairman Moyer – “Is
there anyone else that wishes to be a party to the proceeding? Alright, then
I’ll have to ask that all parties including anybody you want to call as a
witness, please come up to the Clerk to the Board, including the petitioner and
staff. Everyone has to be sworn in that will be giving testimony. This is where
you learn which is your right hand and which is your left. It gets tough.”
Chairman Moyer – “Or the
shoulder of somebody you can reach.”
In unison – “I do.”
Chairman Moyer – “The
way we will proceed now is the Planning staff will summarize the petition and
what is sought and the Board may have questions, then we’ll have the petitioner
or petitioner’s attorney or a representative present their evidence and again
the parties will have a chance to ask questions as we go along. Good evening.”
Chairman Moyer – “I
think you better identify yourself for the record.”
Chairman Moyer – “Did
you give copies to the other parties?”
Staff distributed those.
I would now like to
enter exhibit D which Anthony is gonna pass out again for you. This includes the Planning Board and staff
recommendations regarding the application.”
Chairman Moyer – “Is
this different than what’s in exhibit B that you gave us.”
Matthew Cable – “Yes.
Exhibit B just kind of summarizes. This
gives a little bit more detail and has a little bit more background information
on the Planning Board’s recommendation. On
Should the Board of Commissioners approve the application, the Planning Board
recommends that such approval be subject to the following conditions in
addition to any other conditions that are discussed during the hearing and any
conditions that the Board of Commissioners may impose.
The Planning Board
recommended conditions are as follows:
·
As
related to density requirements and the permitted flexibility to create lots
which do not meet the minimum dimension requirements of the zoning district,
the applicant has proposed lots with units that do not appear to meet the
minimum 50 foot set-back from the center line of internal streets. While that can be reduced, the Planning Board
does recommend that no structure should be placed closer than 40 feet to the center
line of that internal street and that would be a 20% reduction in the
set-back. I believe that the applicant –
it appeared that one of the units might have come up as close as 38 feet so
they were fairly close in compliance with that recommendation.
·
As
related to height limitations the applicant proposed structures which would not
exceed 20 feet in height and that all the structures would be single
story. The Planning Board recommends
that those just be conditions that are stated in the order and this relates, of
course, to privacy and perimeter treatment purposes. They evaluated those based on the height
restrictions they had proposed.
·
As
related to the perimeter treatment, the applicant has proposed the 20 foot
buffer which I showed you earlier to serve as that screen in transition between
the development and the adjacent property.
The applicant has indicated that a portion of the buffer will need to be
disturbed but has proposed that the area will be re-vegetated after the grading
in that area is complete. The Planning
Board made it’s recommendation that the 20 foot undisturbed buffer be a
condition except where indicated as necessary for grading in the vicinity of
the Snyder property and that such buffer in that vicinity be re-vegetated in
accordance with the harmony of the existing vegetation which the applicant did
propose themself. This slide shows you the small area in the south portion,
there in red, that was going to be disturbed by grading to put in that
road.
·
As
related to water and sewer systems, the Planning Board recommends that the
applicant submit plans and other documentation to insure that the systems are
designed by a professional engineer, approved by local and state agencies and
constructed as designed prior to final plat approval.
·
As
related to the control of signs, the Planning Board recommends that the Board
of Commissioners may want to request more information with regard to the type,
size and lighting of the proposed sign in order to determine if there will be
any adverse influences. As noted on this
side there is one proposed sign and it gives you a general idea of the location
but they have not provided any detail about the sign, it’s size or any lighting
related to that sign.
·
As
related to the conveyance of open space, the Planning Board recommends that the
applicant grant to the PUD residents all common open space by restrictive
covenant and that they submit guarantees of that restriction to the county
attorney. And that would be just in
accordance with the zoning ordinance.
·
And
as related to the maintenance of open space, they recommend that the applicant
submit instruments that would set forth permanent care, create a homeowner’s
association with by-laws, and in each deed make membership mandatory for the
home buyer and that the county attorney and the Board of Commissioners would
approve the Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions as well as the by-laws of
that association.
·
The
Planning Board, in regard to documentation of erosion and sedimentation control
plan, recommends that they submit said documentation prior to beginning any
construction on site as a condition.
·
And
as related to a worsening traffic congestion, the Planning Board recommends the
applicant provide the Planning Department with a copy of the driveway permit
that was issued by NCDOT, at such time as it is issued. Again, that’s just to insure traffic
congestion and safety issues.
I’d like to enter now
exhibit E which includes additional staff comments which did not result in any
additional conditions from either staff’s perspective or the Planning
Board. I’m also going to get Anthony to
pass out exhibit F which includes photos of the subject area just so that you
can get an idea of what that subject area currently looks like from both Little
Willow Circle and Willow Road and I would certainly be happy to answer any
questions as those are being passed out or afterwards.”
Chairman Moyer – “Well I
guess one of the questions that jumped out at me in respect to your comments on
condition D say the Board of Commissioners may wish to request. Has this information been requested? It seems to me a little late to say the
Commission should be asking for this stuff.”
Chairman Moyer – “You
still have not received it then I guess?”
Chairman Moyer – “Are
you going to go through exhibit E now?”
Chairman Moyer – “No
that’s alright if there’s no issues there, that’s fine.”
Chairman Moyer – “Do you
have – the Board have questions for Matt at this – none. OK Matt, thank you.”
Commissioner McGrady –
“The other parties?”
Chairman Moyer – “I
think I’m gonna wait till we do the petition.”
Commissioner McGrady –
“OK”
Chairman Moyer – “Mr.
Phillips, you speaking on behalf of the”
David Phillips – “I
probably would default to start with my engineer, Chris”
Chairman Moyer –
“Alright when you come up just identify yourself and who you’re speaking for
and go from there.
Chris Ehler – “Mr.
Chairman, fellow Commissioners, my name is Chris Ehler, actually not Chris Day
with Civil Design Concepts. Chris Day is
here today. He is also an engineer in
our office but I just wanted to touch base briefly on a couple of the
conditions. We concur with the majority
of the conditions that have been issued on the project and feel like that this
planned unit development allows us really to develop this property in a very
respectable way. We could develop it
with the R-20 zoning but we’ve asked for the planned unit development to try to
cluster the units within a fashion that we can preserve the majority of the
perimeter vegetation and so we hope that by the granting of this planned unit
development we can do so and preserve a lot of the integrity of the green
that’s on this property ‘cause it is currently vegetated from end to end. As
far as the signage, we are working with a project architect to try to
coordinate and we’ve given him the direction to keep the architectural
standards within the Champion Hills community and to uphold the integrity of
what – of the existing and surrounding signages in that area so we’ve not got
into the details specifically ‘cause they’re working on the facades of the
actual units and they want to blend that in with the signage as well so but we
feel it will be fairly mild in nature because the sign is directly below one of
the units and we don’t want to light it up too much, but it will be subtle
enough to recognize and identify it as the Vista’s community. I’d be glad to entertain any specific
questions you may have. One of the
things I did want to point out is that the actual – we are identifying the
parcel to the left of the entrance as an out parcel, not to be included as open
space and there was some contradictory identification in some of the reports
here tonight that indicated that it might actually be considered open space and
it is identified clearly as an out parcel and with no direction as to what we
intend to do with that at this time.”
Chairman Moyer – “Matt
is that alright with you?”
Chairman Moyer – “But
they’re basically reserving the right to come back and do something in the future. Well if you – open space – then – I mean
there’s quite a difference there.”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“Sure there is.”
Chairman Moyer – “Mr.
Ehler, these other conditions, you say you’re generally in agreement. Are there any that – that cause you a problem
or that you do no agree to?”
Chris Ehler – “Not at
this time. Again the reason we’ve asked
for the variance and the set-back length of the unit to the road is again to
cluster them up closer to the road to try to preserve that vegetative buffer
along the perimeter so we would ask that consideration be given but as far as
the remainder of them, we feel after reviewing the plans that we can – can meet
the rest of the conditions that have been given.”
Chairman Moyer – “ So
you’re telling me the 40 feet set-back is a problem for you?”
Chris Ehler – “It is
not. If we can get it to 40. We’ve got one that’s within 38 and I think we
can adjust that out to 40, 50 is a problem without cutting quite a few more
trees down so we would ask that the 40 be considered.”
Chairman Moyer – “If we
came up with language that the sign had to be in keeping with the character but
subject to approval of the Planning Department staff, would that be something
that you could work with?”
Chris Ehler – “Most
definitely.”
Chairman Moyer – “Board
have questions for Mr. Ehler or. I’m
sorry, does anybody else from the applicant want to make the comment now?”
David Phillips - “Well
good evening Mr. Chairman and Board, David Phillips on behalf of Casey Phillips
Development. We just really are kinda playing off of what Chris just said –
want to do a real nice development that disturbs the least amount of space and
really fits in nice, has a lot of cover around the extremity and each unit be
on a basement. That wasn’t mentioned
earlier but just by the topo of the project but I think the single level and
height restrictions are something that will probably keep it very nice for the
area as well and I would be open to any questions which you might have too.”
Chairman Moyer – “The
Board have questions for Mr. Phillips or Mr. Ehler at this time?”
Commissioner Young –
“I’ve just got to get a clarification on these pictures that you all handed
out. Or maybe the staff handed out.”
Chairman Moyer –
“Actually I think staff handed them out. Matt.”
Commissioner Young –
“This top picture looks like it drops considerably and it’s low in there, is
that right?”
Commissioner Young – “It
looks like it’s a pretty good grade going up?”
Commissioner Young –
“Green space, is that what would be?”
Chairman Moyer – “Now
the way – the way this will work as part of the – Matt you can sit down for a
moment. Each of the parties now will have the opportunity to ask questions of
the - the applicant, Mr. Ehler or Mr. Phillips.
This is not the time that you make statements or put in – you know what
your position is but if there’s anything that they said that you think needs –
you have a question on or needs clarification, you have the right to ask them a
question. I’ll go down the – the list
and ask each of you. You can just pass but you will have a separate time at the
end of this where you’ll be able to make your statement and share your concerns
but this is your chance to ask the applicant any questions that you have and
I’ll start. Ms. Hills, do you have any questions? Come up to the microphone please.”
Chairman Moyer –
“Certainly. Mr. Ehler or Mr. Phillips, you wanna?”
David Phillips – “Sure,
I don’t know what the best way to point to this is but”
Chairman Moyer – “Why
don’t you stay there and talk and Matt why don’t you come up and let him – you
help identify which it is for him.”
David Phillips – “The
property is actually currently split zoned and the parcel Matt is pointing to
right now is actually zoned open use and that’s the parcel that we’re preserv –
saying will not be a part of this development.”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“Matt, come around and show us as well.”
Chairman Moyer – “After
you’re finished there, show us, alright?
We can’t see that. I guess where we
stand on that piece is – it wasn’t clear. The Planning Board may have thought
that was open use but the applicant is saying it was always intended as”
Commissioner McGrady –
“Open space you mean.”
Chairman Moyer – “Open
space yeah. But it is open use isn’t it?”
Commissioner McGrady –
“It is open use but.”
Chairman Moyer – “But I
meant open space.”
Chairman Moyer – “Some
of it was open space. Alright, do you have any other questions at this time Ms.
Hills? Mr. Camp, do you have any
questions?”
William Camp – “Pass.”
Chairman Moyer –
“Alright. Mr. Barnette?”
Jim Barnette – “I do.”
Chairman Moyer – “OK”
Jim Barnette – “I’m real
concerned about that out parcel there because I thought it was going to be open
use. My property is adjacent to there and I would like to know exactly what
they intend to do in the future for that piece of property. They must have some plans if they’re gonna
keep it as an out parcel.”
Chairman Moyer – “Well,
let’s give them a chance to answer that question. What are your plans for that
– what will you share with us with respect to your plans for that space, Mr.
Phillips?”
David Phillips – “Thank
you. It’s just a natural out parcel by the way that this other piece develops
and we strictly said for future development that it would have to meet any
guidelines or requirements – you know once that was determined but we really
don’t have any specific plans right now – just for – just wanted to reserve the
right for - for future development.”
Commissioner Young –
“But is that part of the green space that you’re talking about?”
David Phillips “No sir.
It wasn’t outlined by our engineers as part of the open space but it would just
remain as is until – you know some future time that we propose.”
Chairman Moyer – “Matt
if they proceeded under this special use permit to want to develop that, would
they have to come back – go to the Planning Board, submit their plan, get
approval, get conditions, just like they’re doing with the rest of this?”
Chairman Moyer –
“Through the whole process. So I guess
the answer, Jim, they could – if it stays as the out parcel it could be
developed but there would have to be an amendment to the special use permit,
they’d have to come back and submit a plan and go through the same process with
respect to that parcel.”
Jim Barnette – “Can I
ask another question?”
Chairman Moyer – “Yeah,
certainly.”
Jim Barnette – “Well, it’s
just a small parcel and about three fourths of it’s almost straight down, just
what other purpose could it be used for other than maybe one residence?”
Chairman Moyer – “Mr.
Phillips, do you want to comment – answer that?”
Jim Barnette – “I’d just
like to get it clarified.”
David Phillips –
“Without having been engineered for what it could be used for – I mean that
potentially could be one – you know like you say. It just hasn’t been studied
for what it could be used for so.”
Commissioner Young –
“How many acres is in that parcel?”
David Phillips – “A
little over two acres there and actually all the documentation – we actually
excluded that PIN from the actual application so it’s not – it was just – it
was shown as a parcel because it was surveyed and shown as two parcels on one
survey but as part of our initial application it was not – it was requested to
be excluded as part of the application as an out parcel so that was documented
in our initial submittal and it’s roughly – I think it’s 2.64 acres.”
Both Mr. Phillips and
Chairman Moyer are talking and I can’t make out what they’re saying.
Chairman Moyer – “ … the
buffering that went around the outside of it – it made it look like it was
included in the”
David Phillips –
“Correct again in the survey but there is enough internal room to provide the
required buffer from within. The
buffering that was shown on the out parcel was done by staff but internally
there is enough to get the 20 foot buffering within the parcel in question.”
Both Mr. Phillips and
Chairman Moyer are talking and I can’t make out what they’re saying.
Chairman Moyer – “…
outside the buffering then?”
David Phillips –
“Correct.”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“I’ve got a question.”
Chairman Moyer –
“Alright Mr. Baldwin.”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“Yeah. I may need to ask Matt as well but I’ll ask you too. You’re asking for
twenty units on the acreage that’s there and your total – total acreage is
12.65 or more?”
David Phillips –
“Actually it’s”
Commissioner Young and
David Phillips are both talking and I can’t make out what they said.
Commissioner
David Phillips – “10.9
acres is what we’re actually – the 12.89 yes does. So it’s 10.9 that actually
holds the twenty units that we’re asking.”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“10.9?”
David Phillips –
“Correct.”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“Well with the twenty units now – I saw on there it said that the density would
require three more units. Is that three more units on the 10.9 acres? Because
someone had to”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“I didn’t ask about open – minimum lot size.”
Chairman Moyer – “I
think the issue”
Commissioner Baldwin
“I’m asking about density. And so you’re saying that – that on a 10.9 acres,
they can put twenty-three units?”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“If they chose to.”
Commissioner
Commissioner Baldwin –
“OK”
Chairman Moyer – “Thanks
Matt. Jim, additional questions at this
time?”
Jim Barnette – “No, I’m
still concerned about it. I just hate to
see it in the future some time.”
Chairman Moyer – “Well
you’ll have a – you can make your statement later and raise your concern and
lay out your issue.”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“I’ve got one last question. The 10.9 acres and the 12.6 or whatever it
was. Are those two separate PIN
numbers?”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“They’re under one PIN?”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“They’ve never been separated? They’re under one PIN.”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“And one more time, the total acreage was 12.”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“In one PIN?”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“OK, thank you. Matt, one last question. How many units can you get on the
12.89?”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“So where did you – how did you conclude twenty-three on the 10.9 if there are
no density requirements?”
? – “There is R-20.”
Chairman Moyer – “That’s
R-20. The other piece is just open use.”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“Across the road is open use?”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“That’s confused open use and open space.”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“Yeah, alright.”
Chairman Moyer – “Ms.
French do you have questions? Larry, do you. I’m sorry.”
Commissioner Young – “I
had a question of Matt and their engineer about the sewer system that they’re
planning to put in and Matt talked about the creek. Would you point to where the creek runs up
there on that map and then I guess the next question – does that creek run through
other people’s properties?”
Commissioner Young –
“Does that creek run down through other people’s properties that’s here to
witness at this hearing?”
Commissioner Young –
“Adjoining properties I guess”
Chairman Moyer – “Let’s
ask the applicant. Mr. Ehler?”
Commissioner Young – “I
guess the question that I’ve got to ask him is are you going to put a pack
plant in? Is that what you’re gonna put in cause you’re gonna have to run it to
a creek, right, if it?”
Chris Ehler – “Actually
no. There’s an existing pump station for Champion Hills directly across the
street and we have permission from them and a copy of that is in – and signed
by Champion Hills within your package here allowing us permission to extend a
gravity line across the street and tie into that pump station that we pump back
to the City for treatment so the creek”
Chairman Moyer –
“Anything else?”
Commissioner Young –
“No”
Chairman Moyer –
“Anybody else? Ms. French, now your
chance to ask your questions.”
Michelle French – “Yes,
may I ask if they will be selling memberships to Champion Hills? Will they be
offered or sold with these properties?”
Chairman Moyer – “Mr.
Phillips, you want take that one?”
Michelle French – “Will
memberships to Champion Hills be offered or sold with these properties?”
David Phillips – “That
is my understanding.”
Chairman Moyer – “Well,
you gotta come up to the microphone. That’s the only place we can pick you up
and you’ve gotta be on the record.”
David Phillips – “That
is my understanding that memberships could be obtained, is that your question?”
Michelle French – “Uh
huh.”
Chairman Moyer – “If you
bought a property, you can get a membership to Champion Hills?”
David Phillips – “To
Champion Hills.”
Chairman Moyer – “Ms.
French, do you have other questions?”
Michelle French – “Uh, I
do have a concern about the stream. I
just myself, my husband and I paid about $2,000 to clean up silt from.”
Chairman Moyer – “You’ll
have a chance to make a statement. Do you have any questions?”
Michelle French – “Uh
where is their entrance in reference to the Willow Preserves? Right directly on
the same circle which is under construction right now and then my next question
would be what is – what would be the timing of – will they wait till that
project is finished or will this be going on consecutively?”
Chairman Moyer – “Fair
question, we’ll ask Mr. Ehler or Mr. Phillips, which – who wants to deal with
that?”
Chris Ehler – “I’m
familiar with the adjacent development but I’m not familiar with their schedule
as far as construction. I think our intentions, and David you may want to talk
– would probably be – you may want to talk a little bit more about this but I
think our intentions are to be starting sometime the first of the year in
construction so we’ll put in all the necessary measures to preserve and you
know protect the integrity via all the erosion control measures as much as
possible. We will have one – we
minimized our crossings in the creek and again with the natural buffer
preserved between the – the denuded area and – or the disturbed area and the
streets and the creeks. We feel like there’s gonna be a good natural buffer to
protect a good portion of that but we’ll also have required measures in place
that will be maintained on a regular basis to prevent erosion from leaving the
site.”
Chairman Moyer – “Ms.
French, does that answer your question?”
Michelle French – “Thank
you. Just one more question.”
Chairman Moyer – “Am I
to understand there’s one ingress and one egress to the development and how
many lanes will that be?”
Chairman Moyer – “Mr.
Phillips or Mr. Ehler.”
? – “That is correct.
There is one point of entry and it does create a loop internally and it is a –
a two-way ingress and egress so it’s 20 foot wide – twenty foot wide. Thanks.”
Chairman Moyer – “Other
questions from any other people? Staff, do you have questions? Matt, do you
have any questions for Mr. Ehler or Mr. Phillips at this time? No? Alright,
well then this is a time when each of the other parties will have a chance, not
to ask questions but to make a statement, raise your concerns, whatever you
want and then all the other parties will have the right to ask you questions
for clarification. So we’ll go right down the list.
Chairman Moyer –
“Alright, don’t go too far. I’ll run down the list. Mr. Camp, do you have any questions for Ms.
Hills?”
William Camp – “No sir,
I don’t.”
Chairman Moyer –
“Alright. Mr. Barnette, do you have any questions for Ms. Hills?”
Jim Barnette – “No other
questions.”
Chairman Moyer –
“Alright. Ms. French, do you have any questions for Ms. Hills? Applicant, do you have any questions or
respond to any way to what Ms. Hills said?”
? – “The only thing I
would like to say is regards to the placement of the entrance – we did place it
in a location we felt like would be safe enough and far enough into the curve.
It’s about 150 plus feet which is more than what DOT would require for sight
distance. Also we placed it in a location that allows for a relatively flat
entry into the existing roadway there which – allowing for a safe stop
condition to be obtained before making a turn in or out. The steepest portion of the road is on back
into the site which is about a 10%, just slightly above 10% so the roads are
fairly mild and we tried to work with existing topography as much as possible
and make it as safe as possible of an entry.”
Chairman Moyer – “Staff,
do you have any questions for Ms. Hills? Is that a no, Matt?”
Matt Carble– “Yes.”
Chairman Moyer –
“Alright, Mr. Camp, this is your opportunity to make a statement, if you would
like. You don’t have to.”
William Camp – “Well I
don’t have anything to say. I’m for it.”
Chairman Moyer –
“Alright. Well, you can come up and say that if you want. I mean you’re a party
so you can come and make whatever statement you want at this time. Alright, Mr.
Barnette?”
Jim Barnette – “Well,
I’m still concerned about that out parcel there. I think initially I thought it was gonna be
open use and I think it should be some kind of designation placed on this
before it’s completely approved, exactly what it’s gonna be used for. I mean
somebody could put a barn down there or dance hall or whatever. It is open use.
I just think that’s a very critical point to make sure that we know what’s
gonna be in that out parcel and speaking for Mr. Snyder who is in
Chairman Moyer – “Ms.
Hills, do you have any questions for Mr. Barnette? Mr. Camp, do you have any questions for Mr.
Barnette?”
William Camp – “No sir,
I don’t.”
Chairman Moyer –
“Alright. Ms. French, do you have any questions for Mr. Barnette? Applicant, Mr. Ehler or Mr. Phillips, do you
have any questions for Mr. Barnette? Staff? Alright, then we’ll move to Ms.
French. This is your opportunity to make your statement.”
Michelle French – “Thank
you. I just have real sentimental concern
for the waterfall. My property is right on a seventy foot water show and it’s
been disturbed from the other development that is in progress right now, Willow
Preserve, and has cost us $2,000 in cleaning out silt because the screening
wasn’t properly done and in fact we had to bring in city water because of some
issues with the pond that is at Champion Hills. We’ve turf sprayed when we were
fed off of a spraying firm many years prior so I’m just concerned about –
ecologically about the stream there and the water and just wanted to voice that
and I forgot to ask a question whether they intend to pave that whole circle?”
Chairman Moyer –
“Alright, we’ll get the answer. Alright does any – Ms. Hills, do you have any
questions for Ms. French? Mr. Camp, do you have any questions for Ms. French?
Mr. Barnette, do you have any questions?
The Applicant, do you have any questions for Ms. French? I wish you’d
address the issue of the paving of the road since she raised that.”
? – “Our intentions are
to pave the – the road that we’re proposing within the community but not the
existing perimeter road that bisects the property cause it will not serve the
units that we’re proposing so it – they’ll stay as they are.”
Chairman Moyer – “Staff,
do you have any questions for Ms. French? Now what we’ll do. Jim, do you have
another question?”
Jim Barnette – “Can I
make one more comment?”
Chairman Moyer – “Yeah,
come on.”
Jim Barnette – “I think
we should all be concerned about the water run-off and I’m not sure that’s been
addressed here tonight completely so, if somebody could educate me a little bit
on that, I’d appreciate it.”
Chairman Moyer – “OK.
Mr. Ehler, do you”
Chris Ehler – “Again,
we’re trying to preserve as much of the vegetation as possible to slow the
water down. We hope it will control the velocity. Currently what we’re
proposing would just be a conveyance system to convey the water off the top of
this knoll and to the existing drainage basins that are out there. And so we’ll
try to – try to minimize that as much as possible but it will go back into it’s
drainage basin as it currently falls to currently.”
Commissioner Young –
“That – let me ask a question about that.
The way it is now though it’s sort of a gentle flow back to the – when
you put storm sewers in and collect it and then run it into those, you’re gonna
put it in at a greater force. Are those existing storm sewers gonna be able to
carry that velocity?”
Chris Ehler – “What
we’ll try to do is again – we tried to design it to where it doesn’t concentrate
too much. We’re not gonna try to put a stormwater collection system that will
put an entire pipe system that will outfall in one concentration point. We will try to disperse it as much as
possible again back into its natural areas, put velocity dissipaters at the end
of the pipes to where it slows the water down and then dissipates back through
the natural vegetative buffer as it currently does.”
Chairman Moyer – “Thank
you. Now each of the parties is gonna have a chance to make closing remarks.
You don’t have to repeat anything you said. That’s already on the record. This is only if something else has come to
mind and you’d like to make closing remarks or highlight but I think you’ve all
done a good job laying out your concerns. But I will go down the list starting
with the petitioner, do you have any closing remarks you’d like to make?”
? – “Thank you, I know
that you know any time a new development goes in, there are always concerns
about the land that’s disturbed and proper erosion control measures put in
place to contain that disturbance and hopefully
you know what we’ll be able to do with this project is disturb a minimum
amount of land, by the way we’re proposing putting it in, and that’s really
important in a situation and an area like this and then we’re committed to
working with the erosion control folks here in Henderson County in making sure
that you know we put the measures in first before we disturb anything and
maintain em and do a real good job with that and I’m sure that as we go into that
that the folks here with erosion control you know will make sure and hold us to
that fire, so we plan on that. Thank
you.”
Chairman Moyer – “I’m
gonna run down each of the parties again and you’ll have a chance to make a
closing statement or closing remarks if you like. Ms. Hills, any further statement to make?”
Martha Hills – “Just one
comment that the developer for the Preserve on Willow spoke to us and told us
that they were planning to pave the outer perimeter road in conjunction with
this group wanting to do that and I just wanted them to confirm or not that
that’s gonna be done or they’re wanting that to be done.”
Chairman Moyer – “Do you
want to comment on that, Mr. Ehler?”
Chris Ehler – “I’d say
that the developer is not opposed to it. We’ve not got any agreement to
participate in it because there’s no benefit to – to the development we’re
proposing but I know that we would not be opposed to it being – being paved if
that was the adjacent developer’s desire, to make it a part of that.”
Chairman Moyer – “Mr.
Camp, do you have any closing remarks? Thank you. Mr. Barnette, do you have any closing
remarks? Ms. French, do you have any closing remarks?”
Michelle French – “No”
Chairman Moyer – “Staff?
Now the evidence has all been presented and everybody has had their closing
remarks and a chance to ask questions, it would be appropriate for the
Commissioners to discuss the issues presented today. I think as you all know, we can either vote
today, direct staff to bring back findings of fact and conclusions consistent
with the decision to a future meeting of the Board for our review, or we can
continue our discussion and decision until a later date. The Board knows the Board must issue a
written decision within 45 days of the conclusion of this hearing. Russ, do we
go out of public hearing now? Fine. Discussion of the Board. I’ll leave it open in case some issue comes
up that we need to get.”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“I’ve got a few concerns. Some of the other Board members may want to help me
out on this. One is that we’ve made a finding that the county recognizes those
as one parcel because there’s one PIN.
There’s one site plan that was submitted and the site plan shows the
buffer around the entire 12.89 acres, that’s a finding. There is a stream on
site that has already been affected by development up stream. I think it
probably would be prudent for us to add a condition that the soil and
sedimentation control plan be designed to contain a 25 year storm event, simply
because we’ve already heard as a matter of fact that development has impacted
the stream. Also as Commissioner Young,
through a series of questions, established that there is an issue of storm
water. There is more roof top, there is
more driveway, there’s more paved area, there are a number of issues that’s
gonna add storm water volume and increase velocity unless measures are taken to
dissipate the storm water as the applicant has said that they would do. I think we ought to make that a condition
that they design the plan, submit the plan for staff approval. Those are
my concerns and that’s what I learned
from the presentation as a matter of fact.”
Chairman Moyer –
“Alright, let me be sure as we build this, we get it. Working backwards would be dispersion of
storm water run-off as a condition, right?”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“Yes in accordance with a plan that’s designed and submitted for staff
approval.”
Chairman Moyer – “I’m
not sure what your finding was with respect to – true it’s one PIN, it’s buffer
goes around the outside?”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“Well in that when we approve this application, we approve this application for
the entire 12.89 acres and that any further development that would take place
would have to come back before the process and the special use permit would
have to be amended to allow for any additional development, which would give
adjoining property owners the opportunity to address proposed development at
that time.”
Chairman Moyer – “And
was there a third one, Mr. Baldwin?”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“Erosion control.”
Chairman Moyer – “Got
that. Later development.”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“We – 25 - designed to contain a 25 year storm event on site because there was
a finding that development, which would be under the jurisdiction of the state
and they mandate a 10 year storm event, didn’t contain the sediment that
actually made it into the stream so I think we add the condition that they
design to a 25 year storm event.”
Chairman Moyer –
“Alright, discussion by other Commissioners? Commissioner McGrady ready?”
Commissioner McGrady –
“I’d love to understand what the difference between 10 and 25 years here,
before we condition it, means.”
Chairman Moyer – “We
could certainly ask and have it brought back.”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“I think one of the defining differences is that the State had jurisdiction of
development that’s taking place now and the State mandates only a 10 year event
and that wasn’t enough to contain the sedimentation that made it’s way into
Mrs. French’s stream.”
Commissioner McGrady –
“Yeah but that – that may be true but it also might be true that we have a
development that – you know is in compliance or didn’t maintain it’s
sedimentation control and – and storm water devices because of a laxity of
enforcement that – you know is just as plausible that you know there’s another
cause for the problem that – that is being complained of here.”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“Well I would say that’s – that’s merely conjecture and what we’re doing is
we’re adding a performance standard that has to be met to ensure that the
sediment doesn’t make it’s way into the stream.”
Chairman Moyer – “Other
Commissioners want to raise”
Commissioner Young –
“Well the question that Commissioner Baldwin raised about soil and
sedimentation, we are in the process of passing that ordinance and I – I think
that they ought to be bound to that ordinance.”
Chairman Moyer – “They
won’t be, it’s not effective you know until”
Commissioner Young –
“Well that’s where Commissioner Baldwin is going, that they need to be bound by
that ordinance even though it’s”
Commissioner McGrady –
“The ordinance we adopted was only 10 years.”
Commissioner Young – “10
years – that’s - you know the difference between 10 year and 25 year I
understand from a civil engineer is a 10 year is 7 inches of rainfall in a 24
hour period, a 25 year is 8 inches of rainfall in a 24 hour period. That’s the definition that a civil engineer
give me, I don’t know. I’m not.”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“But you just have to design your retention basins to accommodate the volume
that comes with the 25 year standard and that’s all I’m saying, is a matter of
a condition to address sedimentation issues.”
Commissioner Messer –
“Well let me say that that – that parcel that Mr. Barnette talked about is
definitely some concern. But if they had to back through the procedures then
this would be on record that this night occurred. Speaking on the storm water –
you know I think that the applicant has proven himself, said that you know he’s
willing to work with the county and we don’t even have an ordinance yet. We,
the County Commissioners voted on this ordinance an hour, hour and a half ago,
for ten years and if he’s gonna participate, be the first participant to work
with our planning staff and so forth, you know I think that’s good. I think that that sets the standard for the
community up there. We know what kind of community is there and this parcel is
just gonna be really add to it and the fact that they’re gonna get – I guess golfing
or privileges in the property across the street tells you something – that this
is, in my opinion, that this is a state of the art you know development that is
going to go hand in hand. So I really don’t – you know do not have a problem
with it.”
Chairman Moyer – “Well
let’s take these one at a time. I think the – it appears, at least judging
consensus that the feeling of the Board is that the two plus acre piece should
be considered as part of the special use permit so that if it’s developed,
they’d have to come back to this – to the Planning Board and this Board to
state what’s gonna happen and we’d have a chance to – to be reviewed. Am I
reading the Board correctly? So we would want that as an additional condition.
The other one that was brought up”
Commissioner McGrady –
“I don’t know whether that’s conditional and I think it’s – the application is
the application.”
Commissioner McGrady –
“But but yeah, it’s a finding of the facts that we set forth there. That would
be fine.”
Chairman Moyer – “Well,
there are certainly several statements on the record that they view it as not
part of the – of the”
Commissioner McGrady –
“They view it as an out parcel but that doesn’t mean it’s not part of the
special use permit.”
Chairman Moyer – “Well,
they’re gonna move the buffer in and put that piece entirely out. I think it’s
gotta be very clear that that’s part of”
Commissioner McGrady –
“I guess I didn’t understand that.”
Chairman Moyer – “Yeah,
Mr. Ehler stated they were gonna move the buffer inside that piece so it would
be outside entirely. Well, be that as it may. If it’s clear, if it’s not. I think it needs to be stated. I think there
is an issue of the dispersion of storm water. The commitment was to do that. I think Commissioner Baldwin was suggesting
that we have a condition specifically related to that, some type of plan to be
approved by staff so that there would be a clear dispersion of storm water to
eliminate the – not eliminate, alleviate the affect of it all being put in at
one time. Is that the consensus of the Board?”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“Yes.”
Chairman Moyer – “Matt,
I’m gonna give you your chance after I’m finished, to come back and tell me
what- if anything is not clear. I think the other one, a little trickier to
deal with – the signage situation. I don’t know exactly how to deal with that
other than – which Mr. Ehler I think, maybe Mr. Phillips indicated would be
satisfactory- that if there is a condition or finding condition that the
signage would be in keeping with the character of it and that the – their plan
and signage would be submitted to staff for their approval, I got the
impression that would be satisfactory to the applicant. Is that agreeable to
the Board as a way to deal with the signage issue and what staff has raised?”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“I think it’s very difficult for staff to determine what’s in harmony and
what’s not in harmony in the absence of some type of standard or some type of
plan that’s actually reviewed. I mean it seems like we’re giving a lot of discretion
to staff.”
Chairman Moyer – “Well,
I realize that but the applicant said”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“I mean basically staff would be bound to approve whatever is submitted and in
not having standards I don’t think we could ask for a whole lot more. I think
we could place a condition that any lighting associated with the sign would be
down lighting to deal with glare.”
Chairman Moyer – “ …
specifically but I want them to be able to prove the signage as well.”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“OK.”
Chairman Moyer – “Is
that agreeable to the Board that that be a condition? And then the last one –
25 year storm, I don’t believe we have agreement at all on this one. I think
the – we’ve talked about the 10 year tonight and that they would be subject to
the same as everybody else is in the county and I think that’s where I am. I
think there’s probably three votes for that so I’ll put it to a vote if you
want but we’ve not required a 25 year storm.”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“Let’s put it to a vote.”
Chairman Moyer –
“Alright. Then my recommendation is that they would have the same requirement
as everybody else in the county with respect to 10 and 25 year and the storm
water soil erosion and they would be part of the state program until we get our
program adopted. All in favor of that motion, say aye.”
In unison – “Aye” Commissioners Messer, McGrady, Young, and
Chairman Moyer.
Chairman Moyer –
“Opposed?”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“Aye”
Chairman Moyer –
“OK. I believe I’ve covered all the
conditions I heard raised by the Board. Matt, would you like to comment and see
if there’s any clarity or anything I’ve confused you or the Board has confused
you on?”
Several people answered
at once – “Down lighting”
Chairman Moyer – “And
there was a concern there that the – Mr. Baldwin raised which is certainly
valid that it’s very wide open just to say it has to be subject to the – in
keeping with the character and subject to the approval of the Board, that puts
you in a very difficult position. If you
can tighten that up in any way, we’d be happy for that.”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“Such as color”
Commissioner McGrady –
“I think what we’re thinking about is in terms of colors, materials, that sort
of thing. I mean you don’t want to – you know. You don’t want a big purple sign
– you know in the entrance to this – this neighborhood. Unless all the houses
turn out to be purple which would surprise me.”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“I mean I would – I think we probably could even ask the applicant to come back
to the podium and simply give general type of parameters with respect to size,
color could be earth tone, materials could be natural or whatever they would
propose. I think we could lock them into some general things that they may
propose and then just make that a part of it.
That would give at least Matt something to go by.”
Chairman Moyer – “Mr.
Phillips or Mr. Ehler, are you willing to do that, help us with that? We’re
trying to make this a little more objective in fairness to you as well to us so
that it’s not wide open.”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“Well, Matt may have a bad day and say forget it, we’re not going”
? Mr. Ehler or Mr.
Phillips – “I’ll try. I think our real
intent is to play off of the entrance way to Champion Hills. And to be in
keeping with that with those earth tones, those type of elements that are used
in that signage so that would be our intent so maybe you can – you know base
the approval off of did we – did we kind of meet that”
Chairman Moyer – “Is it
in keeping with the color”
? again – “Right, scale”
Chairman Moyer – “Well
that’s awfully big.”
? again – “It would be
appropriately scaled down – you know”
Chairman Moyer – “Yeah,
I would hope so.”
? again – “For our
development for sure.”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“OK, alright, well.”
Chairman Moyer – “Let’s
use that then. We’ll do that. Matt, anything else you want to raise issue on?”
Commissioner Messer –
“Well ours don’t go into effect until October so as long as they abide by the
state rules and get Mr. Beck or whoever comes out then I think – I mean that’s
the rule.”
Chairman Moyer &
Commissioner McGrady – “No he’s on storm water, not soil erosion.”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“And would you know the difference if you saw it.”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“Well, we have engineers here – on staff here with the county and they can tell
the difference between a dissipater and straight piping when you’re funneling
everything from one central location – now that’s”
Chairman Moyer – “Yeah,
we’re not there yet anywhere in the county so.”
Chairman Moyer – “What
would you be comfortable with, Anthony?”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“Well and I’ll – you know we’ll try to work with staff in trying to find some
broad enough parameters that they can use.
I think that’s one possibly but this thing of we don’t have any
standards therefore throw the door open and let them do as they please dudn’t
wash with me and that’s what we’re saying. But if we can set some parameters
that they have the technical expertise to – to evaluate, I’m OK with that.
Again, we may want to ask the applicant to come forward and tell us what it is
that they’re proposing and if that generally sounds acceptable, then we can
make that as a condition.”
Chairman Moyer – “Let’s
hear from Mr. Ehler and see what he.”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“He may have some proposals.”
Chris Ehler – “This is a
controversial subject all over western
Commissioner Baldwin –
“So Buncombe has one?”
Chris Ehler – “In the
process of it. And they’re right in the same steps you all are, they’re trying
to pass things. But basically, currently what we’ll be having to adhere to is
the North Carolina Department of Environmental Health and Natural Resources,
Land Quality Division’s standards for erosion control and sediment. They also do have storm water velocity
requirements and so velocity dissipation is not an easy calculation and the way
that we typically do it is based on the out fall of the pipe there’s a certain
amount of water that can come out of that pipe and therefore you put a certain
volume of stone, length, depth, and width to accommodate the maximum amount of
water that will come out of that pipe. So velocity control that we’ll put in
place will meet Department of Environmental Health and Natural Resources’
requirements. The advantage that we have
here, where you typically have controversy is is where your out fall directly
at a property line directly at an adjacent property where there’s a structure
there and it eats out and you don’t have the room to maintain it. Fortunately here we’ve got a lot of room
between and around this perimeter site because of this planned unit development
design that enables us to put a lot more velocity dissipation and control and
slow the water down before it actually exits the property. So I feel confident
and the Department of Environmental Health and Natural Resources have really
tightened down because of all the complaints.
It’s a lot more difficult, they get out there a lot more frequently and
I feel like – I feel fairly confident that we’re gonna have good controls even
from the state level. In the past 3-6
months I’ve seen them out more than I’ve seen them in probably the past five
years combined, on sites, getting out a lot more so I feel confident that we’ll
have measures in place that will definitely control - control the velocity of the water as it out
falls out of the pipes. And again it’s our – our company’s policy to try to put
as many in as possible because again concentration out-falling into one
location is where you typically have your most problems.”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“Well short of having them submit a plan for staff to take a look at, I think
we’re looking at multiple outlets and dissipaters at the end of the outlets.
Beyond that we’ve gone beyond our expertise and I think it would.”
Chris Ehler – “It’s to
our advantage too. They become maintenance – if you don’t put enough velocity
dissipation on it, it becomes a maintenance issue for Homeowner’s Associations
and they’re calling us a year and a half later - ‘Can you help us come up with
something’? If we have steep out-falls
that the pipes come down at angles, we put bins typically on the bottom to
dissipate it before it actually ends up in the stone dissipater at the end so
we’ll be as creative as we can to maximize dissipation as much as possible
because I think it’s mutually beneficial, both from a developer and a – and a
neighbor standpoint.”
Chairman Moyer – “Tony,
can you write up a condition based on what Mr. Ehler just said? I think that’s as far as we can go right
now.”
Commissioner Young –
“Let me ask Mr. Ehler a question or two.”
Chairman Moyer – “Mr.
Ehler, we’ve got another question here.”
Commissioner Young –
“These storm sewers and storm water run off junctions that you’re gonna be
running into, are they owned by the state? Is that who put those in?”
Chris Ehler – “These
will actually be private so they’ll be maintained by the Homeowner’s Association.”
Commissioner Young –
“But I mean the ones that you’re gonna eventually run into, is that state or
Champion Hills. Is it DOT or is it”
Chris Ehler – “DOT
maintains from right-of-way line to right-of-way line and I’m not exactly sure
what it is out there on that state road but once the water traverses into the
right-of-way then and it gets into a pipe network system or a cross pipe in the
DOT right-of-way that is maintained by the DOT.
The ones that we’re proposing are private and will be maintained by the
Homeowner’s Association.”
Commissioner Young – “So
does their engineers and the storm water environmental engineers and you, do
you all work together to see that this does not cause damage further down?”
Chris Ehler – “Yeah,
typically the DOT designs to a 25 year storm and again so a lot of the private
developments that are designed to a 10 year storm, on cross pipe, on cross
drainage only.”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“… pounce on you”
Chris Ehler – “But this
being an old property, we don’t – we’re not contending with 100 acres up-stream
that’s coming through our site like you typically do but – yeah typically as an
engineer you’d analyze from an entire drainage basin. Fortunately our’s is very small on this site”
Commissioner Baldwin –
“You said basically DOT sizes to a 25 year event to accommodate that.”
Chris Ehler –
“Accommodate future development in a lot of cases, on cross drainage. On a typical subdivision though we’d get away
with a 10 year- their requirements are a 10 year design on a standard
subdivision too.”
Chairman Moyer – “Mr.
Ehler thank you. I’m gonna move that we approve the special use
permit application SP-06-01 with the conditions that are listed on exhibit D, A
through I, I believe it is, with the – the three additional conditions that we
made with respect to signage. Of course, that really gets blended into E,
condition E from the Planning Board and then we have the – the – what I’ll call
condition that the out parcel is really part of the special use permit and the
dispersion language that we just talked about Anthony. I think they’re the conditions that I have
written down. Russ, is that clear to
you?”
Russ Burrell – “ I just
want to make sure that you’re incorporating the ones suggested by the Planning
Board, you did that so that was the only comment I had.”
Chairman Moyer – “Plus the couple additional. Alright, all in favor of that motion, say
aye.”
In unison: “Aye” Unanimous.
Chairman Moyer – “And
you’ll bring that back to the Board then, it will be brought back, it will be
written up – the findings and ….. have a chance to look at it, it will come
back to the Board for a final approval.”
Commissioner McGrady – “I move we go out of public hearing.”
Chairman Moyer – “Motion to go out of public hearing. All in favor, say aye.”
In unison – “Aye” Unanimous.
Chairman Moyer – “OK,
thank you very much. We’re at the end of
our public hearing.”
IMPORTANT DATES
Set Public Hearing on Special Use Permit Application –
Leoni’s Mountain Lake Homes
Chairman Moyer expressed
concern regarding this planned unit development known as Leoni’s Mountain Lake
Homes. He asked
Chairman Moyer stated that that would be the organizational meeting.
Commissioner McGrady
stated that the new Board member is coming from the Planning Board so he will
have seen this.
Commissioner McGrady moved that the Board schedule a
Quasi-Judicial Hearing on the special use permit amendment for Monday, December
4 at
ADJOURN
Commissioner McGrady made the motion to adjourn the meeting.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Attest:
Elizabeth W. Corn, Clerk
to the Board
William L. Moyer, Chairman