MINUTES
STATE
OF NORTH CAROLINA BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
COUNTY
OF HENDERSON JULY 24,
2002
The Henderson
County Board of Commissioners met for a regularly scheduled meeting at 9:00
a.m. in the Commissioners' Conference Room of the Henderson County Office
Building.
Those present
were: Chairman Bill Moyer, Vice-Chair
Marilyn Gordon, Commissioner Grady Hawkins, Commissioner Don Ward, Commissioner
Charlie Messer, County Manager David E. Nicholson, County Attorney Angela S.
Beeker, and Clerk to the Board Elizabeth W. Corn.
Also present
were: Planning Director Karen C. Smith, Finance Director J. Carey McLelland,
Assistant to the County Manager Selena Coffey, Planners Nippy Page and Josh
Freeman, Property Addressing Technician Curtis Griffin, and Deputy Clerk to the Board/Volunteer
Coordinator Amy Brantley.
Absent was
Public Information Officer Chris S. Coulson (on maternity leave).
CALL TO
ORDER/WELCOME
Chairman Moyer
called the meeting to order and welcomed all in attendance.
PLEDGE OF
ALLEGIANCE
Commissioner
Hawkins led the Pledge
of Allegiance to the American Flag.
INVOCATION
County Manager
David Nicholson gave the invocation.
DISCUSSION/ADJUSTMENT
OF AGENDA
Chairman Moyer
requested the following additions to the agenda:
1. Under Staff Reports - AD-3" -
Property Addressing update.
2. Under Staff Reports - AD-4" -
Renaming of the National Guard Armory.
3. Under Important Dates - add continuation of
Quasi-Judicial Proceeding for Statutory Vested Rights for 11:00 a.m. today (Harry L. Schenimann) to set
a site visit (continued from Monday,
July 22, 2002.
Chairman Moyer
made the motion to approve the revised agenda.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
CONSENT AGENDA
Commissioner
Gordon asked to pull one set of minutes for some corrections, July 10, 2002.
Chairman Moyer
made the motion to approve the consent agenda, all but the July 10
minutes. All voted in favor and the
motion carried.
The CONSENT
AGENDA consisted of the following:
Minutes
Minutes were
presented for the Board=s review and approval of the following
meetings:
April
17, 2002, regular meeting
June
25, 2002, special called meeting
June
27, 2002, special called meeting
July
8, 2002, regular meeting
July
11, 2002, special called meeting
Tax Collector=s Report
Terry Lyda,
Henderson County Tax Collector, had provided the Board with the Tax Collector=s Report dated
July 19, 2002 for their review and information.
Approval of
Closed Session Minutes
The Board was
requested to adopt the following motion:
Motion - The
following closed session minutes are hereby approved and shall be deemed sealed
as provided by Section 11-6 of the Henderson County Code:
Minutes
for the closed sessions held on February 20, 2002, March 11, 2002, March 20,
2002, and April 1, 2002 as presented and revised during the closed session of
July 8, 2002. The Clerk is authorized
to correct any typographical errors discovered subsequent to the July 8, 2002
closed session.
NOMINATIONS
Notification of
Vacancies
The Board was
notified of the following vacancies which will appear for nomination at the
next meeting:
1.
Nursing/Adult Care Home Community Advisory Committee - 1 vac.
2. Zoning Board
of Adjustment, Hendersonville - 2 vac.
3. Juvenile
Crime Prevention Council - 1 vac.
Nominations
Chairman Moyer
reminded the Board of the following vacancies and opened the floor to
nominations:
1. Equalization
and Review - 1 vac.
There were no
nominations at this time so this item was rolled to the next meeting.
2. Juvenile
Crime Prevention Council - 2 vac.
There were no
nominations at this time so this item was rolled to the next meeting.
3.
Nursing/Adult Care Home Community Advisory Committee - 2 vac.
There were no
nominations at this time so this item was rolled to the next meeting.
4. Zoning Board
of Adjustment, Hendersonville City - 1 vac.
There were no
nominations at this time so this item was rolled to the next meeting.
5. Zoning Board
of Adjustment, Fletcher - 1 vac.
There were no
nominations at this time so this item was rolled to the next meeting.
6. Mountain
Area Workforce Development Board - 1 vac.
There were no
nominations at this time so this item was rolled to the next meeting.
COMPREHENSIVE
COUNTY PLAN (CCP) UPDATE
Chairman Moyer
explained that at the last meeting action was deferred on this item due to the
fact that Mr. Martin could not be present at that time.
Mr. Martin
explained that he was in the midst of having a new grandbaby during the last
meeting and thanked the Board for their patience.
Selena Coffey
distributed copies of a bound AGrowth Management Policy@. Copies of a AGrowth
Management Strategy@ were also distributed for the Boards review and
information.
Mr. Dennie
Martin, Martin-McGill Associates, provided the Board of Commissioners with an
update on the progress of the Comprehensive County Plan. The Update focused primarily on the proposed
Growth Management Strategy materials, which were just distributed to the Board. The Growth Management Strategy is a key
element of the Comprehensive County Plan, therefore it was explained in detail.
Mr. Martin
explained that this project began last fall.
At that time a project outline and schedule were approved. The outline consisted of four principle
components:
1.
Review of the priorities and objectives of the project with the County
Commission and with the members of
the Advisory Committee, staff, and chief elected officials of the municipalities in Henderson
County.
2.
Gathering of the data and the assumptions for the project.
3.
Development of Growth Management Policy.
4.
2020 Comprehensive Plan
He stated that
a draft of the first three phases has been completed. They are currently working on the plan elements. In the original schedule the project would
have been finished in August 2002. They
are currently behind that schedule and it is stretching out for a number of
reasons now with an estimated completion date of Thanksgiving or shortly after,
dependent upon NCDOT completing the Thoroughfare Plan.
Mr. Martin
complemented the Planning Staff and Selena Coffey for the help and
contributions they have made to the project.
Mr. Martin
stated that he considers the AGrowth Management Policy@ a statement of
policy by the County related to managing growth. It is a general policy statement but it also forms the basis of
the framework for all the plan elements to follow. He spoke of a concern for balance in the Comprehensive Plan and
the need to balance change and growth with issues like protecting the quality
of life and community value, heritage, and the environment in Henderson
County.
It was the
consensus of the Board to hold a workshop on this issue to discuss policy
issues. Several items were brought up
that stressed the need for a workshop.
The Board
planned to set a workshop under AImportant Dates@ later in this
meeting.
The purpose of
the AGrowth
Management Policy@:
1.
Provides a policy framework for the 2020
Comprehensive Plan.
2.
Reflects the diversity of the county=s
needs and the wide range of factors which influence and direct growth.
3.
Recognizes three Growth Paths:
C
Henderson Urban Corridor
C
Rural Community Areas
C
Rural/Agriculture Regions
There
was discussion about the municipal land use plans and the transportation
plan. The transportation plan affects
all of this. Water and sewer is
important but transportation is essential.
There was some discussion of policy issues and it was the Board=s
consensus to hold a workshop to discuss policy issues. Several items were brought up that stressed
the need for a workshop.
2002
SCATTERED SITE HOUSING GRANT
The
Board had received documents associated with Henderson County=s 2002 Community
Development Scattered Site Housing Grant.
Henderson County has been awarded $400,000 to go toward owner-occupied
rehabilitation programs. Mr. Nicholson
explained that these documents had been prepared by our consultants,
Benchmark. These are required policies that
are associated only with this program.
Many of these documents were
familiar to the Board since they were required by our previous CDBG grants. The documents included the following:
1.
Procurement Policy
2.
Code of Conduct
3.
Fair Housing
4.
Complaint Procedure
5.
Citizen Participation Plan
6.
Section 3 Plan
7.
Equal Employment
8.
Anti-displacement and Relocation
Assistance Plan
Mr.
Nicholson informed the Board that Lee Smith was present from Benchmark to
answer any questions the Board might have.
The
plan is to take pre-applications during the month of August. There will be a screening process to make
sure that persons are eligible for the program. There will be a selection committee made up of the City Managers
(with the exception of Flat Rock because they did not wish to participate) and
Mr. Nicholson. Habitat and Home Aid
have also been invited to participate.
Following
some discussion, Commissioner Hawkins made the motion to approve the
presented policies and procedures for this program. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
US
25 SOUTH CORRIDOR STUDY
At
the July 8, 2002 meeting, the Board of Commissioners had asked that the US 25
South Corridor Study be placed on the July 24, 2002 meeting agenda for
discussion. The Planning Board and
Planning Department presented a draft of the Study to the Board of
Commissioners on January 7, 2002.
Following the presentation, the Board of Commissioners accepted the
Study and approved it for distribution as a draft to the Local Government
Committee for Cooperative Action (LGCCA) and the Planning Boards of the City of
Hendersonville and the Village of Flat Rock.
The
Planning Department reviewed the Study with the LGCCA, the County=s
Transportation Advisory Committee and a subcommittee of the City of
Hendersonville Planning Board. Village of Flat Rock Councilwoman Judy Boleman,
who served on the US 25 South Corridor Study Committee presented the study to
representatives of the Village of Flat Rock. Written endorsement about the
study from the Village of Flat Rock and the City of Hendersonville were also
presented for review.
The
subcommittee priorities (not recommendations) were:
1.
Protect the aesthetics of the corridor.
2.
Protect the historical and mixed use
character of the northern portion of the study area, north of Erkwood and
Shepherd.
3.
Protect the historically residential
character of the southern portion of the study area, south of Erkwood and Shepherd
down to the Village of Flat Rock.
4.
Enhance the health and viability of
commercial properties in the northern portion of the study area.
5.
Protect the properties values throughout
the study area.
6.
Reduce some of the nonconforming uses
with regard to the zoning ordinance.
About 43% of the acreage in the northern portion of the study area is in
commercial land use; however, only 21% is actually zoned for commercial
uses. That area has historically been
under various commercial uses for many years.
There are a series of mixed use, commercial, and residential uses that
are currently nonconforming with the current R-15 and R-40 zoning. In the
southern portion of the study area R-40 zoning is in conflict with the lot
sizes in that area with quite a few being much smaller than that and were much
smaller prior to the application of R-40 zoning.
7.
Work to maintain U.S. 25 South as a two
lane highway, preserve and enhance the current traffic capacity of U.S. 25
South, particularly addressing the issue of the excessive number of curb cuts
along the corridor and also dealing with the design of several intersections, particularly the
Erkwood/Shepherd intersection with U.S. 25.
8.
Improve traffic safety conditions along
the corridor again adjusting curb cuts and intersection design.
9.
Improve pedestrian and cyclist access
throughout the corridor.
10.
Resolve the problems of failing septic
systems.
11.
Discourage the use of satellite
annexations by the municipalities, particularly with regard to land use issues.
12.
Encourage the adjustment of the 1997
annexation agreement boundary.
Josh
Freeman explained that there are a whole series of recommendations intended to
address those priorities.
The
Study Report recommended the following:
Land
Use Recommendations:
1.
Increase options for landowners along
U.S. 25 in the northern portion of the study area, particularly those that will
have access to public sewer, by changing some zoning districts to a single
district that allows a mix of single and multi-family residential and
small-scale commercial uses similar to those that already exist there.
2.
Restrict the development of new
industrial and commercial uses and maintain the lower and medium density of
residential areas in the southern portion of the study area.
3.
Improve standards for signage, buffering,
landscaping building scale, etc. in the Zoning Ordinance to better protect the
character of the corridor. Amendments
to specific zoning districts as well as a corridor overlay district are
proposed.
Transportation
Recommendations:
4. Development of a comprehensive access
management program in cooperation with NCDOT to address curb cuts along the
U.S. 25 South corridor. The study
proposed that the County consider establishing a corridor overlay district in
the Zoning Ordinance to implement the access management program.
5.
Realignment of the intersections of U.S.
25 South with Shepherd Street and Erkwood Drive and improvements to the
intersections of Brooklyn Avenues and U.S. 25 South and Balsam Street and U.S.
25 South. Installation of turn lanes
along U.S. 25 South, where appropriate.
Provision of sidewalks and bicycle lanes along U.S. 25 South within the
study area.
6.
Amendment of the Zoning Ordinance to
require more specific analysis, during the permitting process, of certain land
use regarding traffic generation and their impact on the capacity of U.S. 25
South.
7.
Installation of a planted, elevated
median on U.S. 25 South to provide separation between northbound and southbound
traffic. Such median would also
restrict certain turning movements along the highway, except that turn lanes
would be provided at appropriate locations.
Jurisdictional
Matters Recommendations:
8.
Support of the extension of sewer lines
to serve failing septic systems.
9.
Discouragement of land-use oriented
satellite annexation in the study area by municipalities.
10.
Adjustment of the Annexation Boundary
between the City of Hendersonville and the Village of Flat Rock such that it
runs east along Shepherd Street to the intersection of U.S. 176 and Shepherd
Street.
Chairman
Moyer spoke briefly about the transportation recommendations stating that a
presentation was made to the Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC) and the
recommendation of the TAC was that these be referred to the Thoroughfare Planning
Group and the Comprehensive County Planning Group for their consideration in
working into the Plan. He explained
that one did not fit that recommendation (#6. Amendment of the Zoning Ordinance
to require more specific analysis, during the permitting process, of certain
land use regarding traffic generation and their impact on the capacity of U.S.
25 South), stating that he felt the Planning Board would have to review that
item.
Following
discussion, it was suggested the Chairman write a letter to the Mayor of
Hendersonville and the Mayor of Flat Rock to find out what their plans are
regarding annexations.
Direction
to Staff
Chairman
Moyer asked staff to pull everything together and come back to the Board with
the remaining area, based on the above recommendations, and what staff would
recommend the Board implement. It might
be as simple as taking R-40 to R-15 in this small area. Chairman Moyer felt strongly that the
satellite annexations issue had to be part of the study. Some of the issues may be dealt with as part
of the Zoning Ordinance Rewrite. This
Board will debate the issues and try to come up with a recommendation which
they can take back to the LGCCA.
UPDATE
ON PENDING ISSUES
Legislative
Update - Angela Beeker
Angela
Beeker informed the Board that the Article 44 Sales Tax Legislation failed the
second reading in the House. That was
originally part of what we had been calling Senate Bill #1292 and early last
week it was removed from 1292 and put into a separate Bill, House Bill #1633
because there was an understanding among the powers that be that if they would
do that it would pass. The Sales Tax
portion only was voted down at the second reading before the House. A motion was made to reconsider that
however. If a motion to reconsider were to pass then it would be as if that
vote voting it down had never occurred and it would be eligible for
reconsideration by the House. The motion
to reconsider has not been voted on yet.
As of right now the Sales Tax is dead.
There
has been no Bill passed to limit the authority of the Governor to withhold
local funds. There were several
introduced. There have been none that
have been ratified.
According
to this morning=s News and Observer the House did fold out a preliminary
budget yesterday and has sent it to various subcommittees. The recommendations that came out now have a
$288,000 hole in them as a result of the Sales Tax measure failing.
Ms.
Beeker reminded the Board that Senate Bill #1292 had other revenue measures in
it dealing with income tax and other taxes and revenues of the State, like the
elimination of the marriage tax penalty and things like that and some corporate
tax loopholes. The House budget as
presented assumes that is going to pass but it hasn=t yet. If it doesn=t pass then you=re looking at a
$455,000,000 shortfall in the budget.
According to the News and Observer the Senate has said that they
are going home. Until the House acts on
some sort of budget the Senate is going home.
If they go home without making any changes to the budget then of course
it would be up to the Governor to balance the budget.
Ms.
Beeker attended the County Attorney=s Conference last week and Jim Blackburn
pointed out to the County Attorneys that there were two Bills introduced to
allow the School Budgets more flexibility.
They were both aimed at when you could reduce an appropriation to the
school after your budget has passed.
While Mr. Blackburn doesn=t think either of those is going to pass, he
is forecasting that there is going to be a push on behalf of the Boards of
Education to attempt to get local taxing authority.
David
Nicholson stated that he is hearing everything, back and forth, about the Sales
Tax issue. He felt there is a real push
to get a reconsideration of that vote.
The Sales Tax failed by two votes.
Commissioner
Ward stated that our whole budget is based on this sales tax. He felt that it might be prudent to freeze
personnel and capital expenses until we find out something on the sales
tax.
Chairman
Moyer asked Mr. Nicholson to explain where we stand with respect to employees
etc. Mr. Nicholson stated that he is
going through the current positions that are vacant and releasing some of
those. We have begun the process of
advertising for some of those positions.
He has released some capital items and on some he has told the
Department Heads not to plan to spend for them but rather to be patient and see
what happens. Mr. Nicholson stated that
he had not overreacted but overall had taken a wait and see attitude.
INFORMAL
PUBLIC COMMENTS
1.
Eva Ritchey - Ms. Ritchey took issue with the fact
that this portion of the meeting (Informal Public Comments) is not
televised. She stated that the Board is
spending the public=s money and doing the public=s business and the public has
a right to hear public comment.
She
also addressed appointments that the Board makes. She brought it to the Board=s attention that we are a diverse
community and that when you have a Planning Board that doesn=t have a single
woman on it, you do not have a Planning Board that reflects this
community.
She
understood that it was the Republican Caucus who kept the Sales Tax from
passing. She stated she would like to
ask Trudi Walend why the Republicans in Raleigh did not support that tax
knowing that we needed it in this year.
She expressed that she felt the Board, as a fully Republican Board,
should ask your representatives why they didn=t support that tax.
Ms.
Ritchey then addressed a statement from the Times-News concerning the
Scheniman hearing. She spoke about the
problem with Janice Moore at Howard Gap Road and stated that the process needed
fixed regarding zoning matters.
2.
Dick Baird - Mr. Baird agreed with Ms. Ritchey
about the public comment part of the meeting needing to be televised. He recommended the Board of Commissioners
reconsider that issue.
He
stated that he was encouraged by the performance of the Board of Commissioners,
stating that he thought they were doing a fine job.
He
spoke to the issue of fund balance and asked the Board to consider bringing the
County=s fund balance down to 8% (from approx. 9%) and to spend anything above
the 8% on our debt.
Mr.
Baird then addressed the issue of the failed Sales Tax and stated that it was
an unnecessary tax for our county.
He
briefly addressed infrastructure issues stating that the county must maintain
control over where water lines go
because it has such an effect on how the county develops. He quoted
Commissioner Gordon about the need to find the proper balance between standard
of living and quality of life. He
stated the key to that is to have a good infrastructure plan.
Chairman
Moyer stated that the Board will consider the issue of taping Informal Public
Comments on a future agenda since that issue was raised today.
9-11
Commemoration - David Nicholson
A
group had been put together to recommend a plan for a September 11
commemoration for our county.
Mr.
Nicholson is a member of the group along with the Hendersonville City Manager,
Chris Carter, and they recommend that we continue with our tradition of
remembrance and commitment in lieu of a patriotic celebration. The proposed the following:
On the morning of September 11, 2002, they
propose that the citizens of Henderson County line up on both sides of Main
Street in Hendersonville. At the time
of the attack, World Trade Center=s Towers, the Pentagon and the crash of
United 93, the bell would be rung at the Historic Courthouse. During this time they suggest that a
fire truck, police car and a military vehicle drive the length of Main Street
in specific remembrance of those who lost their lives in performing these
services.
During the period of the attacks, approximately
8:00 - 10:00 a.m. they would recruit volunteers to read the names of the
victims of the attacks as well as the members of the military who have lost
their lives defending our freedom since September 11, 2001 on a stage located
at the Historic Courthouse. Mr. Nicholson stated that this number is
just short of 3,000 names. LGCCA also
suggested that bell ringing take place throughout the county, not just at the
historic courthouse.
Although
the above would be the main event, they also suggested that a community-wide
message board be created to allow persons to share their thoughts and
remembrances. They encourage the flying
of the American Flag at homes and businesses and encourage individuals to wear
Flag lapel pins or ribbons to note the day.
It was also suggested that persons be requested to turn on their
headlights while driving to show their support. They encouraged other groups or communities to plan events to
observe the day, as they feel appropriate.
The
cost for this event should be minimal.
They suggested the units of government to jointly purchase 2,000 small
American Flags to be distributed along Main Street that morning at a cost of
$800. Henderson County would supply the
stage and sound system at the Historic Courthouse. The Kiwanis Club has offered
their assistance in distributing the flags that morning and helping coordinate
the day=s activities.
Mr.
Nicholson has also talked with Dr. Burnham about the schools participating in
the ceremony.
Chairman
Moyer asked for the Board=s endorsement of this so that work could move forward
on the efforts. It was the unanimous
sense of the Board to proceed.
Resolutions/Proclamations
- David Nicholson
Mr.
Nicholson had researched the issue of the adopting of resolutions/proclamations
by elected boards. Although he was
unable to locate any specific written policies, many North Carolina local
governments have procedures that they follow.
These procedures cover the broad range from no outside resolutions to >we
put any and all= resolutions on the agenda and let them decide. Based on this research and the Board=s
previous discussions, he suggested the following recommendation:
It shall be the policy of the Henderson County
Board of Commissioners to only consider resolutions or proclamations that
directly effect the operations of county government. However, the Board may consider other resolutions or proclamations
submitted and endorsed by one of its members.
The
Clerk had prepared a table listing the 52 resolutions and proclamations the
Board had adopted in the year 2001 for the Board=s reference.
After
considering the above list, Mr. Nicholson suggested that there are times that
the Board may want to consider resolutions honoring individuals/groups or
noting special community events. As a
standard procedure, he suggested that all resolutions requested by persons or
groups in the future be placed in the Commissioners= mailboxes. Staff would only place
resolutions/proclamations that are outside of normal agenda items on the agenda
if requested by a Commissioner. Also, a
member of the public may appear during Public Input and ask for the Board=s
support for their cause.
Much
discussion followed. It was the
consensus of the Board to continue to allow the Chairman to use his own
judgement concerning whether or not resolutions/proclamations would go on the
agenda. The Board then would have the opportunity to adopt or deny
adoption. People also have the option
of offering a resolution or proclamation during Informal Public Comments.
Angela
Beeker offered that most of the resolutions/proclamations that the Board is
asked to adopt are really statements of policy. She stated that the Board is free not to adopt those statements.
Recess
Chairman
Moyer called a brief technical recess stating the Board would go into public
hearings following the recess.
CONTINUATION
OF QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCEEDING - Harry Schenimann
This
proceeding had been continued until today at this time. The Board needed to set a site visit to go
out and view the site off Howard Gap Road, the subject of the Schenimann
application.
Following
discussion, Chairman Moyer made the motion to continue this quasi-judicial
proceeding to August 21 at 1:00 p.m. for the purpose of a site visit, to be
convened at the site. All voted in
favor and the motion carried.
PUBLIC
HEARINGS
PUBLIC
HEARING - HOME PROGRAM - Amendment to 2002 Asheville Regional Housing
Consortium Action Plan Habitat for
Humanity: Redirection of HOME Funds
Commissioner
Ward made the motion to go into public hearing on this item. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Selena
Coffey reminded the Board that Habitat for Humanity had requested the
redirection of $50,000 in HOME Program funds as approved in January 2002. Because the redirection of HOME funds does
constitute a major amendment to the Consortium=s one-year action plan, a public
hearing is necessary.
The
purpose of this public hearing is discussing an amendment to the 2002 Annual
Action Plan of the Asheville Regional Housing Consortium. The amendment is necessary because Henderson
County has changed the site location of an activity to be conducted with
$50,000 of HOME Program funds awarded by the consortium. Henderson County Habitat for Humanity is the
actual developer that will carry out the activity on behalf of Henderson
County. Henderson County Habitat for
Humanity originally intended to use the funds to purchase 10 vacant lots in the
Village of King Creek, on which it would construct 10 owner-occupied housing
units. The Village of King Creek
development is located on Highway 176 in Hendersonville. Now Habitat plans to use the funds for the
acquisition of a 32-acre tract of vacant land on Stepp Road adjacent to Clear
Creek Elementary School in Henderson County.
Habitat intends to construct 50 owner-occupied housing units for low and
moderate income families. Construction
of single-family, owner-occupied housing units is an eligible use of HOME
program funds.
Malcolm
McCormick, Habitat, came forward and presented the actual requests and was
available to answer any questions. He
informed the Board that this would have no adverse effect on the King Creek
Development.
Sherman
Fearing, Consortium Staff, was also present to answer any questions.
Public
Input
1.
Sherman Fearing - Mr. Fearing had signed up as an
attendee, not to speak.
Following
discussion, Commissioner Hawkins made the motion to approve the redirection
of the Home Funds as requested and presented.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Commissioner
Ward made the motion for the Board to go out of public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
PUBLIC
HEARING - CDBG HOUSING DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
Habitat
for Humanity: Highlander Woods
Commissioner
Ward made the motion for the Board to go into public hearing for this
issue. All voted in favor and the
motion carried.
Selena
Coffey reminded the Board that this public hearing was held to receive public
input on a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) application proposed by
Habitat for Humanity for the Highlander Woods development.
In
addition to Malcolm McCormick from Habitat for Humanity, Kate O=Hara from
Land-of-Sky Regional Council was present to answer any questions.
Commissioner
Hawkins had asked a question about the location of this development in
conjunction with Clear Creek School.
Mr. McCormick showed the location on the map. The development backs up to the school property. The Board asked that the schools be notified
of the next public hearing so they can comment if they wish.
Malcolm
McCormick requested the Board=s approval for the submission of a CDBG Grant in
the amount of $250,000 which is the
maximum they can apply for, at the rate of $10,000 per house for 25
houses. This grant will be for
infrastructure, installing water lines, streets, power lines, etc. They expect
to meet with the Department of Commerce on August 8th to discuss
this project. They need the Board=s
approval to be able to proceed. The applicant would be Henderson County,
similar to the way the Grove Hills
Development took place.
Kate
O=Hara reminded the Board that two years ago the Board had agreed to file an
application with the North Carolina Department of Community Assistance for the
Grove Hills Project in Flat Rock.
Because Habitat for Humanity does not have the ability to file directly
for funding from the Department, the application has to go through the County
Commissioners. The Commissioners would
follow the same procedures that were followed with the Grove Hills
Project. Habitat had asked Land-of-Sky
to prepare the application but that would have to be an agreement between Land-of-Sky
and the County. The funding for that and the planning costs for that would come
out of the grant money as part of the planning line item. This is the first of two public hearings
that are required to be held. This
hearing is simply to receive public input and for the Board to agree to proceed
with the filing of the application.
Before the application is sent to DCA a second public hearing is
required.
Sherman
Fearing explained that part of the process of review for this particular
project at Highlander Woods is that they have to conduct an environmental
review assessment (HUD speak for a major review). It is not an environmental impact statement or phase I
environmental review. It is outside of
that. It=s an assessment that they have
to conduct as a responsible entity for the Consortium. Part of that review
process is solicitation of comments from various agencies that are responsible
for overseeing natural environmental policy acts. They do contact local Boards of Education, County Boards of
Education, and City Boards of Education to get comments from them on the impact
of a particular project.
Public
Input
There
was none.
Commissioner
Ward made the motion for the Board to go out of public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
It was the consensus of the Board to support
the project as presented and wish them well.
PUBLIC
HEARING - on Road Names
Commissioner
Ward made the motion for the Board to go into this public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Rocky
Hyder stated that the purpose of the public hearing was to receive comments on
the following road names:
Old Name Proposed
Name
Samuley St. E.
Walker Street Ext.
Sugarloaf Ridge
Rd Ivy
Hill Rd
Jewel Dr Leucothe
Cove Rd
Axiom Way Pats
Pl
New Road Names (Initial Names)
Bynums
Pl
Orchard
Valley Dr
Trail
Creek Rd
Chairman
Moyer stated that the Board members had a copy of a letter from Lloyd and Dovie
Blythe with respect to Walker Street.
The document expressed that the Blythes were in agreement with the
renaming of the road to E. Walker Street Ext. but wished to remained #310
instead of #58. The Board asked Mr.
Hyder to look into this and see if she could be accommodated. Chairman Moyer submitted a copy of the
letter to become part of the record of the meeting, copy attached.
Public
Input
1.
Dean Davis - Mr. Davis was not present when his
name was called.
Rocky
Hyder stated that Mr. Davis had come into their office. Staff was required to change the road name
leading to his property because it had three dwellings. He wasn=t particularly happy about it. The road in question was not on the list for
today=s public hearing.
Commissioner
Ward asked Mr. Hyder to follow-up with Mr. Davis. Mr. Hyder was also asked to
contact the Blythes about E. Walker Street Ext.
Commissioner
Gordon made the motion to approve the road names as presented. All voted in favor and the motion
carried.
Commissioner
Ward made the motion for the Board to go out of public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
PROPERTY
ADDRESSING APPEAL - Quasi-Judicial Proceeding
Commissioner
Gordon made the motion for the Board to go into Quasi-Judicial Proceeding. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Pursuant
to Section 142-17 of the Henderson County Code, the property owners of proposed
Horizon View Drive appealed the naming of their private drive.
Chairman
Moyer - AAlright we are in a quasi-judicial proceeding which is a - very much
like a court proceeding to determine the rights of individuals. Only those parties that show that they have
a direct - will be directly affected by this matter, have specific right in it
will be approved as parties by the Board.
Only those parties that are recognized by the Board as having an
interest in this outcome will be able to participate in the hearing, ask any
questions, give any testimony and it will be treated somewhat like a judicial
proceeding. The uh staff is certainly
recognized as a party and who will be speaking on behalf of the staff.@
Rocky
Hyder - AI will be speaking on behalf of the staff and will also - may refer to
Mr. Griffin at some point.@
Chairman
Moyer - AAnd the applicants are certainly recognized as a party and who will be
appearing on behalf of the applicants? Would you come up and state your name
and address please.@
Joanna
Walker - AMy name is Joanna Walker.@
Chairman
Moyer - AAnd your address?@
Lyn
Sutton - AI=m Lyn Sutton. I=m one of
the three parties involved. The third
party is a Mr. Muir and he=s out of the country at this time and he has asked
us to speak on his behalf as well.@
Chairman
Moyer - AOkay, anyone have any problem with any of these people? Is there anyone else in the attendance that
wishes to be a party to this proceeding?
I would ask that you step over to the Clerk and be sworn in. Everybody
has to be sworn in. All testimony is
under oath. Curtis, are you gonna speak
also, possibly?@
Curtis
Griffin - APossibly, sir.@
Chairman
Moyer - AAlright, go ahead then and get sworn in.@
Clerk
to the Board - AI need each of you to place your left hand on the Bible or at
least touch the Bible with your left hand, raise your right hand - do you swear
or affirm that the testimony you shall give to the Board of County
Commissioners shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth,
so help you God.@
In
unison - AI do@
Chairman
Moyer - AAlright if you=ll all be seated.
There is a procedure that we will follow. It=s a little cumbersome for you and it=s also cumbersome for us
but we=ll do the best we can to move through it in an efficient manner. We=ll have a presentation of the case by the
staff and in this case Mr. Hyder and then there=ll be a chance for questions
and then we=ll have the applicant put on their evidence and there=ll be a
chance for questions of all the parties.
We don=t have that many parties so it won=t be a problem and then we=ll
move through that as quickly as we can.
Right Mrs. Beeker?@
Angela
Beeker - AYes sir.@
Chairman
Moyer - AAlright, Mr. Hyder would you present the overall case?@
Rocky
Hyder - AAs part of the county-wide addressing project staff identified this
particular private drive as having three dwelling upon it and therefore
according to section 142-7, paragraph E of the Henderson County Code and
Addressing Ordinance the road must be named.
I will submit as Exhibit A.@
Angela
Beeker - AAt this time if you would just give just a general overview.@
Chairman
Moyer - AJust an overview. I=ll get you
back for evidence, OK?@
Angela
Beeker - AYou=ll get a chance to do your evidence.@
David
Nicholson - AIt=s confusing for everybody.@
Rocky
Hyder - AAfter the naming of said road the appellants contacted our property
addressing office and expressed their wishes to appeal under section 142-17 of
the Henderson County Code and that=s the point we=re at to this point.@
Chairman
Moyer - AOK, thank you. Any questions
for Mr. Hyder at this time?@
Commissioner
Hawkins - ARocky is the - uh - is the uh - I guess I=m trying to understand the
- the complaint here. Is it the name of
the road or the number - the number that=s been assigned to the physical
addresses or both?@
Rocky
Hyder - ABased on the correspondence and and contact we=ve had with the
appellants they would prefer to maintain an address on Ray Hill Road. They - they don=t want this particular road
named nor do they want to be addressed off of this particular - the new road
name. They prefer to maintain an
address on Ray Hill Road which is the closest intersecting road with their
private drive.@
Commissioner
Hawkins - ASo - so is this a road naming or a property addressing - I guess is
what I=m getting at cause I=m a little confused as to which one we=re dealing
with.@
Rocky
Hyder - AUh basically from staff=s prospective, Commissioner Hawkins, this is
very clearly a matter of section 142-7(e) of the County Code that says if three
or more dwellings are on a private drive, that must be named and that=s
basically what - the point we=re at.@
Commissioner
Hawkins - ASo the road naming is the primary thing.@
Rocky
Hyder - AYes sir.@
Angela
Beeker - AI think@
Chairman
Moyer - AThis is not an uncommon issue having faced it myself. Uh where you have a private drive, and in my
case on Rutledge that goes back and a couple of houses back there and all of a
sudden they want to say you=re no longer Rutledge Drive. You are now whatever we name this road, even
though your entrance is on Rutledge Drive and anybody coming down there would
be looking for that and not this other drive so it is - that is the problem.@
Angela
Beeker - AAnd I was just going to say that the petitioners will also be able to
tell you what exactly they are objecting to.@
Chairman
Moyer - AWould you happen to have a map or diagram that shows this at all
Rocky?@
Rocky
Hyder - AYes sir.@
Chairman
Moyer - AI think that=s part of it.@
Rocky
Hyder - AThat was what we were gonna put in as exhibit A but we can certainly
put that up if you want to earlier.@
Chairman
Moyer - AWhy don=t you put it up now, you can introduce it when we get to your
evidence.@
Rocky
Hyder - AMr. Griffin has it.@
Mr.
Griffin put the map up for viewing.
Chairman
Moyer - ASo the Board can see.@
Rocky
Hyder - AHorizon View Drive is the proposed naming of the private drive in
question today and it intersects with Ray Hill Road. If you=re coming from Brannon Road it=s probably about one and
one half tenths of a mile on your left.@
Chairman
Moyer - AWould you show the location of the three homes that require this to be
named?@
Rocky
Hyder - AThe first one is what we have indicated as 133, the second one would
be 165, and the third one would be 273 at the end of Horizon View Drive.@
Chairman
Moyer - AIf you=ll let that up there, I think that=ll help the applicant when
they@
Rocky
Hyder - AOK@
Chairman
Moyer - Ato orient the Board with their matter. Thank you. We=ll now proceed with the admission of
evidence by the applicant. Which one
will speak or - we prefer one at a time.@
Lyn
Sutton - ATeam effort@
Chairman
Moyer - ATeam effort@
Lyn
Sutton - AUh Mrs. Walker would like to uh just present some pictures to you
just that you can put things into
prospective, whether you want to admit these as evidence or not is - is not
important.@
Chairman
Moyer - AWould you go back and give your name and address again as part of your
testimony.@
Lyn
Sutton - AOh again.@
Chairman
Moyer - AAs part of your testimony so that we have it.@
Joanna
Walker - AMy name is Joanna Walker. My
address is 61 Ray Hill Road, Horse Shoe.@
Chairman
Moyer - AOK@
Lyn
Sutton - AAnd I=m Lyn Sutton from 59 Ray Hill Road.@
Chairman
Moyer - AMrs. Walker you have a uh - an exhibit you=d like to hand out to the
Board for consideration? You need to
give the staff and all parties - so you need to give Mr. Hyder one and give it
to - particularly to the Clerk and to the Commissioners to the extent that you
have it. Mr. Hyder?@
Lyn
Sutton - AHe needs one and then - theres - I=ve got five other ones so you can
pass it@
Angela
Beeker - AAre they all the same?@
Lyn
Sutton - AYeah, all the same.@
Angela
Beeker - AOh OK.@
Lyn
Sutton - AJust uh copies.@
Chairman
Moyer - AWell why don=t we share and then be sure to give the Clerk one and we=ll
mark this Exhibit One, we=ll use the numbers?@
Angela
Beeker - AOK. Ms. Corn if you=d put Exhibit One on yours.@
Several
people were talking as they passed around copies and shared them.
Lyn
Sutton - AHad we known it was going to be this formal we would have been uh
better prepared with some sort of - something impressive.@
Chairman
Moyer - ADon=t worry, we=ll get through it.
Could you or Mrs. Walker explain this - what you handed us as Exhibit
Number One please.@
Lyn
Sutton - AYes. If you look at the
picture, this is the entrance to our easement uh picture taken from the
opposite side of Ray Hill Road looking down the easement. And if you=ll look at where the pick-up
truck is making a left turn, that=s - making a turn into the first driveway for
the first property and if you continue on through the easement you=ll see a
little star there and that=s the end of the easement and the beginning of the
other two properties. So all of that is
readily recognizable from Ray Hill Road.
The problem that we have is that the - we believe that the Ordinance was
constructed primarily to improve emergency vehicle responses to the various
properties. And from my experience I
believe that we set up the potential for actually increasing the emergency
vehicle response times. Now I need to
give you a little perspective of where I=m coming from - my background so that
you can understand how my opinions were developed. I worked for the largest fire department south of Washington,
D.C. for almost 24 years. I personally
responded to thousands of calls and uh at the end of my career I ended up being
in charge of research and development for the Dade County Fire Department. It
was not my responsibility to analyze response times but about ten years ago I
got drawn into a project, kind of as a side issue, with the expansion of the
department. We had to plan for
seventeen new fire stations in a period of about five years. So my task was to make sure that equipment
and the proper equipment was ready for these fire stations when they came
online. Some cohorts of mine were in
the same division were tasked with the responsibility of identifying the
specific pieces of property where we were going to build these fire stations
and to kind of project the needs in the future. And it was very
difficult to do this based upon the information that our computer people and
management information folks were giving to us. A lot of this stuff would come out in chart form, graph form and
it was really very difficult to interpret so since we have this large project
and had to pinpoint things we asked for some of the gurus to come up with a
better way to understand this data and the entire county where we responded
which was about one thousand nine hundred and twenty some miles square, which
is a pretty big county, was all broken up into small response grids, little
squares and every time we would receive a call we would give it a grid number
so that we could retrieve the data later on and kinda anticipate and measure
what our performance was. Well this
project brought us to a new dimension in it because in the short terms there
were a lot of blank numbers - or blank grids with no numbers in them in the
short term so we asked for a five year study and not only a five year study but
a five year moving average study covering a period of ten years starting from
say 85 to 90 and 86 to 91 and 87 to 92, etc.
And to put the various response times in these grids and to put the
response numbers, the number of incidents that were in these areas and then to
color code them for us so that we could develop a picture of this and what we
got was you take a - imagine a fire station as being a point then you would
think that everything as you traveled out away from it would be pretty
even. We color coded it. Up to three minute response were pink, four
to six were blue, seven to nine were yellow, ten and above were red. So now that we have a graphic representation
of the way we respond to different places and what we saw was kind surprising
because it was not an even - like radiating circles coming out from the fire
station. There were various colors
blended in in places. Now a lot of them
could be explained by geographical obstructions. You would see maybe blue in a pink zone, you=d see yellow in a
blue zone. And whenever you really got
in there and looked at it closely you could see seven and eights surrounded by fives so - well why - why is
it there? It=s easy to explain when
there=s expressways, when there=s drainage canals/flood control canals,
railroads, lakes and in this case around here mountains so those were easy to
explain but still there were a lot of splotches that we couldn=t explain so we
asked them to pull the reports, the individual incident reports that the data
was based upon and when we did we started pulling these reports and the common
denominator that showed up was they were individually named, very small streets
out of the normal numbering sequence and the parallel is identical to what you=ve
done to us on Ray Hill Road. So this is
just a one particular incident and we=re not trying to attack the
ordinance. We just want a variance for
this particular little piece of land and we want to be logically numbered into
that sequence.@
Chairman
Moyer - AThank you. Mrs. Walker do you
have anything you=d like to add?@
Joanna
Walker - ANot really other than we had talked about possibly having a sign
right at the entrance from Ray Hill to our little lane that would give the
numbers on it - of the residents - the three residences that are there. We=ve already numbered - we already have
numbers and we have numbers on our homes as requested several years ago. We did - made that change and by the way we
were before Mr. Sutton moved next door to us uh we went through the long
process of being asked to name that lane.
We were not - we were - we had - nobody is left except for us, my
husband and I and my husband has terminal cancer so the house - the property is
in my name now which is why I=m here and uh I was the only one that didn=t
agree with the name that they had picked as a matter of fact but I went with
the majority - that name is not even close to what you=ve now shoved on us uh
after being - after going through and having letters going back and forth
between all the neighbors and trying to pick a name for the road if we thought
we had to and then - now we have all new neighbors there. So it=s been a bit of a mess for us. We have a great deal of correspondence to
our home too and it would be a real hardship on me to have to change - to
change the address when I=m not just a normal household, I=ve got a lot going
on and it would be a real hardship for me as a widow to have to go through all
this process. I=m going through enough
as it is. This is just sorta the straw
that broke the camel=s back kind of thing. I would respectfully hope that you
will listen to us on this and I have no objection - we=ll even pay for the sign
if you want us to - that would number the roads and say - and point an arrow -
with the sign pointing up our lane.@
Lyn
Sutton - AThe problem once you get to the easement on Ray Hill Road is not the
problem. The problem is not getting -
or getting to the houses on the easement.
The problem is finding the beginning of the easement on Ray Hill
Road. Ray Hill Road is numbered from
zero to six hundred, going from south to north. You have even numbers on the east, odd numbers on the west and it=s
a nice common sequence, no matter whether you=re coming from the north or
whether you=re coming from the south, you follow the numbers till they get
smaller or till they get bigger and there you are and there=s your
easement. You have signs that show you
where the houses are, bingo, you=re there. If you do not have the house with -
or have this easement within that normal numbering sequence then you set up
delays both - or the potential for delays in the 9-1-1 center and in the
responding units because they do not automatically clue in to this natural,
well known, geographic landmark.@
Chairman
Moyer - AThank you. Any questions from.@
Joanna
Walker - AIt=s very easy for people to find our home with the directions we
give them and it=s gonna be not so easy.@
Lyn
Sutton - AActually it=s easier to find my house than sometimes I like but uh I
had a three year old daughter who picked up the phone and started playing with
it and I had hey put that down and within ten minutes I had a police officer at
my door. She had dialed 9-1-1 and they
used like a caller ID system and it told them where it was and he was - he was
right there so@
Commissioner
Hawkins - AOn - on your picture that you gave us the portion where the pick-up
truck is turning in - is there another house just to the left of that or is
that the first house you=d see, the one on?@
Lyn
Sutton - AThat truck is turning into uh my driveway and my house would be to
the left.@
Joanna
Walker - AMy house is the one in the picture.@
Commissioner
Hawkins - ASo from Ray Hill Road you - you look directly onto both of those
houses.@
AUm
huh@
Commissioner
Gordon - AWell is the property though there - if we go back to the plat, was
there another piece of property between your property and Ray Hill Road?@
Joanna
Walker - AThere=s a piece of property where the fence is which their entrance
is on Ray Hill Road.@
Lyn
Sutton - ARight@
Joanna
Walker - ANot on our - not on our lane at all.@
Commissioner
Gordon - ASo you don=t front on Ray Hill at all?@
Lyn
Sutton - ANo, just the easement does and we do not.@
Commissioner
Hawkins - ASo where=s the third house?@
Joanna
Walker - AThe third house is you go past my house and up - up the - in the
trees.@
Commissioner
Hawkins - ASo you couldn=t see it from Ray Hill Road?@
Joanna
Walker - ANo you can=t@
Lyn
Sutton - ANo@
Commissioner
Hawkins - AOK, that=s what I wanted to clarify, thank you.@
Lyn
Sutton - ANo, you cannot.@
Chairman
Moyer - AAlright any other?@
Lyn
Sutton - AOur - our contention of course is that if we have proper signage
there then - then it=s no problem. The
problem is finding the easement in a logical numbered sequence.@
Chairman
Moyer - AMr. Hyder do you have any questions for uh - not testimony yet. Do you have any questions for uh@
Rocky
Hyder - AI do have a few.@
Chairman
Moyer - AMs. Walker or Mr. Sutton?@
Rocky
Hyder - AJust for the record Mr. Sutton, how many dwellings are accessed from
the easement as you call it?@
Lyn
Sutton - AThree.@
Joanna
Walker - AThree@
Rocky
Hyder - AOK and would you mind giving the Board directions to your house from
Boylston Highway?@
Lyn
Sutton - AFrom where?@
Rocky
Hyder - ABoylston Highway, Highway 280"
Lyn
Sutton - ABoylston Highway?@
Joanna
Walker - AThat=s 280.@
Lyn
Sutton - AOh, that=s 280. See that=s
yet another name. I was thinking of
Boylston Road.@
Joanna
Walker - AYes.@
Lyn
Sutton - AFrom uh 280 you would have to?@
Joanna
Walker - A2.3 miles@
Lyn
Sutton - AI was just gonna - get to Ray Hill Road, go south 2.3 miles and look
for the numbers in sequence - that=s all and there it is.@
Rocky
Hyder - ASo it=s your testimony today that there are numbers posted along Ray
Hill Road to your house?@
Joanna
Walker - AOn our mailboxes@
Lyn
Sutton - AJust on the mailboxes. There
are not numbers posted yet because we don=t know what numbers to post yet.@
Rocky
Hyder - AThat=s all - all the questions I have.@
Lyn
Sutton - ADefinitely not. If you can
tell us what numbers to post we=ll be more than happy to post em@
Chairman
Moyer - AThank you very much. You may
have - you may have a seat now. Uh
for our County Attorney in scanning the ordinance do we have a variance
procedure in the ordinance?@
Angela
Beeker - AYou do not.@
Chairman
Moyer - AI did not think we did.
Alright.@
Angela
Beeker - AYou - you would have to find some basis why the action that was taken
by the property address coordinator or by this Board previously was incorrect
under the terms of your ordinance.@
Chairman
Moyer - AAnd would you again cite for the Board the section of the ordinance
pursuant to which this road was named?@
Angela
Beeker - AWell there - I believe I - I=ve heard two issues - the naming of the
road but also the numbering so I think they=re objecting to, correct me if I=m
wrong, both the naming of the road and assigning you a new address. Or is it
just the address, just assigning you an address?@
Lyn
Sutton - AAssigning a name to that little easement.@
Angela
Beeker - ARight so it=s a naming issue and you don=t want your number changed
either, right?@
Lyn
Sutton - AWe want a Ray Hill Road address so we can be@
Angela
Beeker - AOK@
Lyn
Sutton - AThat would be up to the@
Several
people were talking, hard to make out.
Chairman
Moyer - AI think it=s a naming issue.@
Commissioner
Gordon - AWell uh@
Angela
Beeker - AI think it=s both@
Commissioner
Gordon - AI think uh - I think perhaps@
Chairman
Moyer - AThey=re willing to take any number you want on Ray Hill as long as -
as long as they are identified as Ray Hill Road.@
Commissioner
Gordon - ABut no - I=m sorry but the way I was understanding it - it might be
different for each individual but Mrs. Walker was very clear that she was
concerned about having a change of address that she would have to process.@
Chairman
Moyer - AYes, she did that.@
Commissioner
Gordon - AAnd so a change of numbering would necessitate that just as much as a
change of street names so I think we need to bear that in mind.@
Chairman
Moyer - AUm huh, that=s correct.@
Commissioner
Gordon - AOK@
Angela
Beeker - AUm I believe you were citing section 142-7 as the uh - paragraph E as
the authority for the naming. Um the
numbering falls under that really also.@
Commissioner
Gordon - AWhat was that number again?@
Angela
Beeker - AIt=s 142-7 is the relevant section, subparagraph E is particular to
the naming um but also lumped in that section is the numbering also - 142-7
says street naming but it=s both.@
Chairman
Moyer - AMrs. Walker would you come back up a minute. I want to get clarification of this issue just to be sure. Do you understand we=re talking about two
issues - the naming of and the numbering.@
Joanna
Walker - AThe naming is of - of the road is more important to us than the
number. If we have to settle for - we
would like to have - to retain. I would
like to retain the 61 Ray Hill Road if possible but if that isn=t possible then
we would still like to be on Ray Hill Road.
That would make a minor thing and even if it=s a slightly different number
the post office will probably find us for some time.@
Chairman
Moyer - AAlright@
Joanna
Walker - ABefore because it is a major job for me with all the business that I
conduct.@
Chairman
Moyer - ASo the number=s a concern but the name is the larger@
Joanna
Walker - Athe name is the biggest concern and we object strongly to the name
that was picked for us when we were given - you know we were first asked to
choose a name and then - and we don=t like the name, it doesn=t apply to our
area at all.@
Chairman
Moyer - AOK thank you.@
Joanna
Walker - AThe name is the most important but we=d like - if we can have both
that would - that would really please us.
If we can=t we would still like to have Ray Hill Road.@
Commissioner
Gordon - AOK@
Chairman
Moyer - AOK thank you. Mr. Hyder. Do you have another question before we get@
Commissioner
Gordon - AUh. I want to ask Rocky a question.@
Chairman
Moyer - AOK, would you prevent - present your evidence Mr. Hyder?@
Rocky
Hyder - ASure. In accordance with 142-7(e) which we have discussed.@
Angela
Beeker - ACall this exhibit number - you are A@
Rocky
Hyder - AExhibit A, I=ve got it listed as Exhibit A.@
Chairman
Moyer - AWell then we have a one and an A.@
Angela
Beeker - AThat=s OK.@
Chairman
Moyer - AAlright.@
Commissioner
Hawkins - ALawyers can keep up with that.@
Chairman
Moyer - AYou wouldn=t if you had a big case I can assure you.@
Rocky
Hyder - AThe ordinance says that properties with three or more house shall be
named and uh we=re demonstrating with
Exhibit A as well the testimony of the appellants that there are three
dwellings on this particular easement, private drive, whatever you wish to call
it; therefore, it falls within the realm of that standard.@
Chairman
Moyer - AAnd the three being properties 133, 165, and 273?@
Rocky
Hyder - AThat=s correct. The same
properties that the appellants have signed as part of their uh request for
appeal. At this point staff would like
to introduce as supporting evidence Exhibit B.@
Chairman
Moyer - AYou=ll give the applicant copies of all this right?@
Distribution
of Exhibit B.
Rocky
Hyder - AExhibit B, item one is a photograph approaching the proposed Horizon
View Drive from the north on Ray Hill Road.
What we particularly want to point out here is there are no numbers at
the beginning of that road. The mailbox
numbers that - that were mentioned before are across the road from that
particular road but there is nothing that specifically identifies that
particular road serving any particular address. Picture number two of Exhibit B is the approach to Horizon -
proposed Horizon View Drive from south on Ray Hill Road. Basically you will see again that is an
opening to a driveway at this point but there=s no particular markings. Three is a view similar to what the
appellants proposed or uh was shown to the Board - that is a view looking
straight up Ray Hill or Horizon View Drive from Ray Hill and the last picture,
number four would be a view of what we=re proposing as address number 133, Mr.
Sutton=s driveway, from Horizon View Drive.
That is not from Ray Hill Road.
That is from Horizon View Drive.
The purpose of this exhibit is to demonstrate that staff not only
contents that we will not increase the response time to this particular
property by the addressing project but we will actually improve the response
time to this particular property by having a road sign at the corner there so
that is clearly identified and then house numbering off of this particular road
will actually improve the ability of our emergency responders to respond to a
certain area. Our provision of
emergency services in this county is much different than they are in some of
your larger counties such as Dade County Florida and in which we have people
responding from different areas. They
are not always responding from the central station. Our Sheriff=s Deputies are mobile; therefore, they must either
have a good knowledge of the area or have good directions to a home. So far, up to this point we have been able
to depend on our emergency responders to have a good knowledge of the area but
as our population approaches 100,000 people we all realize that that will not
be the case in the future. Our last
exhibit, staff would like to submit as supporting evidence is Exhibit C. Exhibit C is a - what is commonly referred
to as a Misty Report. This is the
information that would show up on the 9-1-1 screen in the event someone dialed
9-1-1 from one of the houses or locations on what is proposed to be Horizon
View Drive. As we have shown before in
Exhibit B, even though the houses are numbered off of this particular road
there is no indication from the beginning of that road or from the area where
the private easement is intersected as to what house number is where;
therefore, we contend that our proposal to name this private easement is a
better proposal and improves the service. Just as an example directions from Boyleston Highway or Highway
280 would be take Ray Hill Road about 2.3 miles, turn right on Horizon View,
133 is the first house on your left.
That=s very clear directions that would be apparent to our dispatcher
and we will be able to provide services in that manner. Uh and our last comment I would like to say
that staff has already offered and certainly would be willing to work with the
appellants on the naming of this particular drive, if they don=t like Horizon
View Drive then we=re certainly willing to work with them on that. It became obvious to us that apparently
county staff from a previous administration may have worked with these folks
but we can find no record of that; therefore, we certainly would be willing to
accept the responsibility and would be more than willing to waive the fee if it=s
with the Board=s approval for the naming of that road since that road would not
require the fee because it intersects with the public road on the initial
naming so we would treat that just like it=s an initial naming if that would be
the pleasure of the Board. At this
point in time that=s all the supporting evidence staff has to submit.@
Chairman
Moyer - AOK, you=ll get - wait - you=ll get your turn. Commissioners do you have any questions?@
Commissioner
Hawkins - AI have one question Rocky because uh it seems to have come up. When the county names a road we also provide
a road sign with it, do we not?@
Rocky
Hyder - AThat=s correct.@
Commissioner
Hawkins - ASo if it=s - if your road was named whatever there would be a sign
at that driveway which makes it - would appear to me that there=d be no
question then as to where the road was versus where it is now.@
Rocky
Hyder - AThat=s correct in roads that intersect with state roads we do provide
a sign for those particular places.@
Commissioner
Hawkins - ASo they=d have the road sign.@
Rocky
Hyder - AAnd in this case there would be a road sign provided.@
Angela
Beeker - AMay I ask Rocky a question?@
Chairman
Moyer - ACertainly@
Angela
Beeker - AUm where are the mailboxes?@
Rocky
Hyder - AThe mailboxes are across the road.@
Angela
Beeker - ABut they=re on Ray Hill Road?@
Rocky
Hyder - AFrom the drive they are on Ray Hill Road. They are across from the entrance to that private drive.@
Angela
Beeker - ASo if the road is renamed they would need to move their mailboxes
onto that road.@
Rocky
Hyder - AThat is an issue that they have to deal with the post office on. We don=t - don=t get into that issue at all.@
Chairman
Moyer - ANo - that=s - the post office will not come back to those private
roads and deliver. I - we=ve been
through that up and down and around.
They cannot do it cause we=ve tried to move the mailboxes and they
refuse to go in private roads like that and deliver so you have to leave the
mailboxes out there and they have to be on the other side of the road and gives
a - that gives a name out there that - so - trust me I=ve been up and down on
that one.@
Commissioner
Ward - AI have too.@
Chairman
Moyer - AMany times and uh@
Commissioner
Ward - AI=m facing it now.@
Chairman
Moyer - ASo that creates some of the problem.@
Rocky
Hyder - AWe=ve never contended that the property addressing project did
anything in regards with the post office other than we=ve tried to coordinate
those efforts. Certainly putting your
house number on a post office box is not going to be acceptable according to the
ordinance, as posting your address to your property, that=s two separate
issues, completely separate issues.@
Angela
Beeker - ABut - so your emergency responders then would not look to the
mailbox, they=re gonna look for the house number.@
Rocky
Hyder - AThat=s correct. They=re - the
ordinance requires the posting of the parcel address and that will be either on
the house itself if it=s visible from the road on which is named or at the end
of the driveway, if it=s not visible from the road which is named. Uh using a
post office - a lot of people get this issue confused but there is nothing to
do with your mailbox that that complies with the property addressing ordinance
other than the fact that we=ve tried to coordinate that with the post office so
that the mail delivery is consistent.@
Commissioner
Gordon - AIs - what would be the acceptable thing to do on a mailbox in a
situation like that, just put a name on it or put the name and the street name
as well - you know signs I=ve seen headings that do that.@
Rocky
Hyder - AWhen I changed my address at my home I put the house number, the road
which it was off of and the name, my last name and for a couple of weeks it was
still - you know a little difficult for my deliverer to find everything that I
needed but it - it worked itself out.@
Commissioner
Gordon - AOK@
Chairman
Moyer - ABut you still end up with a mailbox on that side of the road with a
Horizon address on it even though it=s on Ray Hill Road.@
Commissioner
Gordon - AYeah, I understand that@
Chairman
Moyer - AThere=s no way to avoid it at least that I=ve been able to find
out. Alright, Mr. Sutton you now have
the right to ask Mr. Hyder any questions that you would like. This is not evidence now but you ask
questions on what he has presented.@
Lyn
Sutton - AOK. If your emergency
responders - uh on Exhibit B- reach this point where it=s labeled number one
and they saw a sign here that identified this as 596163 would it not be as easy
to identify this location as it would be Horizon View Drive? I think the main - what I=m asking is if there=s a sign here that meets state
standards, reflectivity, height, size, numbering style, the kind that the
firefighters are used to looking for and it said 5961- 63, maybe even an arrow,
would they not know to turn down this easement?@
Rocky
Hyder - AThey may know to turn down the easement at that point in time but
first of all our firefighters when they=re looking for road signs they normally
look for names and the second point is that particular situation doesn=t have
any opportunity for growth in the possible future. It doesn=t necessarily continue to identify what particular house
is located down that driveway, just those particular sets of signs.@
Lyn
Sutton - AI don=t see - there=s no@
Rocky
Hyder - AIt will tell you that there are three houses down that drive is what
it will tell you.@
Lyn
Sutton - AExactly, exactly@
Rocky
Hyder - AI=m looking for exact location.@
Lyn
Sutton - AAnd I=ve been trying to get a - an answer about proper signage
probably for the last five years but this process has been very very cumbersome
and I=ve gotten different answers cause I=ve personally have wanted to put up a
sign out there that makes it easy for them to find me but I=m not willing to go
out and spend a couple hundred dollars if it=s gonna change and it is changed
several times over the last couple of years. So uh - and I think these would be
- these are good pictures, they do identify us very well; however, uh again my
contention would be that finding this spot is more - on Ray Hill Road is more
difficult if it=s named anything other than something in the logical numbering
sequence.@
Chairman
Moyer - ASir at this point you=re just to ask Mr. Hyder any questions you have.@
Lyn
Sutton - AOh OK.@
Chairman
Moyer - AYou=ll have a chance to make . . .
comments.@
Lyn
Sutton - AOK uh.@
Chairman
Moyer - AAny other questions, Mr. Sutton?@
Lyn
Sutton - AIt has to be in a question form huh?@
Commissioner
Ward - ALike Jeopardy.@
Lyn
Sutton - ANo, I don=t want to@
Chairman
Moyer - AYou=ll have a chance to make a statement later.@
Lyn
Sutton - AOK good.@
Chairman
Moyer - AMrs. Walker, do you have any questions?@
Commissioner
Ward - AI have one question, Mr. Chair if I may for Mr. Hyder. If we=re assuming we=re renaming Ray Hill
Road so we=re going down where was it two miles or whatever down Ray Hill to -
yeh 2.3 miles we=re assuming that will be something like 2130 or whatever the
nomenclature will be so using that example we=re going on a tenth increments or
what increments are we using that is standard now?@
Rocky
Hyder - AOn this particular road because it didn=t have an addressing system
off of the road itself, we used the distance-based addressing system which is
one address every 5.285.@
Commissioner
Ward - AIf we=re using that system, at the intersection of that road what would
that number be - have you - I know Curtis is dying to@
Rocky
Hyder - AI uh - I drove the road - their measurement is 2.3 miles, my
particular odometer measured it at 2.4 miles.
That would be in a distance-based equation which Ray Hill Road is not
distance based@
Commissioner
Ward - AYeah@
Rocky
Hyder - AThat would be 2400"
Commissioner
Ward - ASo we=re not gonna use distance-based on that road, it=s just a
findable address?@
Rocky
Hyder - AWe will be using distance-based from the intersection of Ray Hill Road
and what is proposed as Horizon View Drive and 133, - let me get my map back in
front - 165, and 273 are distance-based addresses.@
Commissioner
Gordon - AThe uh property - well I shouldn=t - the 273, what size parcel of
property is that?@
Lyn
Sutton - AAbout 23 acres?@
Rocky
Hyder - AI don=t have the acreage in front of me but it certainly is a large@
Lyn
Sutton - AI think about 23 acres.@
Commissioner
Gordon - ASo there=s certainly potential for more homes to be developed there
at some point in time?@
Lyn
Sutton - AI - maybe way down the road but not with the guy that=s in there now.@
Chairman
Moyer - AAny other questions for Mr. Hyder.
Ms. Beeker, do you have some questions?@
Angela
Beeker - ANo sir@
Lyn
Sutton - AActually the potential for developing that property is limited by the
easement and the easement is only wide enough to - to access just into the one
little corner and geographically they couldn=t really do anything with it.@
Chairman
Moyer - AOK, thank you Mr. Hyder.@
Rocky
Hyder - AOK@
Chairman
Moyer - AMr. Sutton do you have any additional testimony, any additional
evidence that you=d like to put in at this time?@
Lyn
Sutton - ANaw, just make a - make a comment that Henderson County is in a - in
a growth mode similar to what I experienced, hopefully not as - nearly as - as
big or as rapid because the planning for it is very and the procedures that you
go through, although often times well intentioned, you kinda have to stumble
through them and make exceptions from time to time and then we find the process
and you get better as you go along. I
think that it was pretty wise to have a - an appeals process built into this
ordinance cause it=s really a sticky one.
Uh I think it - the ordinance itself uh serves - solves many more
problems than it - than it creates but there are exceptions where the - the net
effect is counter to what was intended and I think that this particular case is
- is an example of that.@
Chairman
Moyer - AThank you. Ms. Walker, do you
have any closing comments?@
Ms.
Walker stated something but it could not be made out.
Chairman
Moyer - ANo, wait a minute. You have to
come up here to speak, I=m sorry. With
our camera system and everything we can=t pick you up over there.@
Joanna
Walker - AI think that I - I think I can speak for Mr. Muir in the fact that he
is a very very busy business man who travels throughout the world. He has a great deal of mail coming to his
house, both UPS and various Fed Ex and things like this. This would be even harder for him with all
the people that he=s dealing with um so I know we speak for him. He was sorry but he - he=s out of the
country on business right now and his wife is with him so that=s why they
couldn=t speak but they are 100% with us on this matter.@
Chairman
Moyer - AThank you.@
Joanna
Walker - AAnd we hope@
Chairman
Moyer - AMr. Hyder, do you have any objection to that statement being put in
about Mr. Muir?@
Joanna
Walker - ANo, I have no objection.@
Chairman
Moyer - AOK thank you. Mr. Hyder, do
you have any closing comments?@
Rocky
Hyder - AStaff would like to uh@
Chairman
Moyer - AWait a minute, sorry@
Commissioner
Gordon - ACan I ask one more question?@
Rocky
Hyder - AYes mam.@
Commissioner
Gordon - ACan anyone tell me the width of the road right-of-way on Horizon View
Drive. It=s platted there and I wonder
if anyone has a - a@
Someone
answered but they were not at the microphone.
Commissioner
Gordon - A60 feet OK, that=s what I - thank you.@
Chairman
Moyer - AAlright before we go to Mr. - any other questions then before Mr.
Hyder gives closing comments? Alright
Mr. Hyder.@
Rocky
Hyder - AOur - our closing comments are basically two items. One - we feel that the road was named in
accordance and pursuant to the Henderson County Code, section 142-7(e). It=s consistent with that. Many roads have been named in this county
consistent with that paragraph and we maintain that would protect the integrity
of the ordinance to maintain same. Uh
we also feel like that our evidence uh Exhibit B has demonstrated that - that
we would not be reducing the services but we would actually improve the likelihood
of our emergency responders whether they be volunteer coming from whatever area
would be able to find this location.@
Chairman
Moyer - AThank you. Did you have
additional closing comments?@
Lyn
Sutton - AJust one quickie.@
Chairman
Moyer - AAlright.@
Lyn
Sutton - AJust one quickie from an experiential level. We found that a greater call volume was
coming in by cell phone as I started to retire than coming in through the - the
land lines and therefore the dispatch centers have a much more difficult time
locating these - these references because the cell phones don=t give you a land
reference and as things grow it=s gonna get more and more that way. A lot - a lot of folks are uh actually
giving up their land lines and use - as we grow on there will be more and more
of that.@
Chairman
Moyer - AThank you. Ms. Beeker will you
give some legal advice to the Board as to what their rights are in light of the
provisions of the ordinance?@
Angela
Beeker - AYes sir. The question that
you are being asked to answer pursuant to this appeal section is >are the
actions that were taken to name the road and subsequently number the road in
accordance with the ordinance= - were the provisions of the ordinance
followed? Um a lot of what you heard
today are public policy considerations behind the ordinance and so if you feel
that the terms of the ordinance itself - you - you wish to change that public
policy, that would not be for this proceeding but a subsequent proceeding to
consider if you wish to amend the ordinance but the question that=s really
before you today is um were the actions taken in accordance with the provisions
of the ordinance as it=s written today?@
Chairman
Moyer - AWould you speak to the issue of a variance?@
Angela
Beeker - AYes sir. The ordinance does
not provide a variance procedure for hardship cases or for any other reason and so in my opinion you would not be uh
- have the authority unless you amended the ordinance to provide for a variance
procedure which would again come later.
Currently as it stands you don=t have the authority to issue a variance
because you - when the ordinance was passed it was not included.@
Chairman
Moyer - AQuestions from the Board of Mrs. Beeker? I think the - the grasp of the legal issues what we can do is
very very limited in this situation whether that=s right or wrong but I do
agree with her interpretation that we are being asked that appeal from whether
the actions of the group was in accordance with the ordinance and that=s really
the very very narrow issue. I think we
certainly can, as Mr. Hyder has offered, uh have him go back to the group and
see if they can work out a solution with respect to a name that would work out
but short of amending the ordinance we are - we are locked in to what the
ordinance says as Commissioners.
Commissioner Hawkins?@
Commissioner
Hawkins - AI guess I just have a couple comments from the Ray Hill - from the
folks that live that close to Ray Hill Road you know I can certainly see why
that driving down particularly for your two addresses would be fairly easy to
see from Ray Hill Road and you could associate. The area of concern I have on that is the third house up there
cause you can=t see it from Ray Hill Road and I - I think that=s one of the
reasons uh for the ordinance. Uh also I
think there was some uh concern about not having the street sign there which
will be one put there when the road is properly named. Uh and I think that the
point was brought up about the cell phones is very well taken and I think that
increases the - the urgency if you will to have the - the road named and laid
so someone can find it as a physical address and in as much as uh the property
addresser coordinator has indicated that maybe you can seek a road name that=s
- that is uh suitable to you, I think that uh - that the procedures of the
ordinance have been followed and I think you have a better physical address
with the road sign down there which takes out from the responder which one of
those houses he=s looking at. If you
look at the mailbox over there it doesn=t tell you anything. You drive up to the mailbox and stop but
that=s not where the fire is, it=s somewhere else. Uh I think that the post office and we=ve worked with them before
is certainly able to take three numbers on that mailbox physically located out
there and deliver your mail. Uh even if you just change your number and still
kept Ray Hill you=ve have to go through the same thing of changing your
addresses. I would venture that the new
Fed Ex guy that coming to Mr. Muir=s house up there would have a difficult time
of finding it if he couldn=t see it from Ray Hill Road so I would hope that uh
that maybe we would be able to install a road sign there with a name that the
three of you could agree on and number the houses appropriately in accordance
with the ordinance and uh and be sure that you are able to receive or for folks
down the road would be able to receive emergency services in a timely manner.@
Chairman
Moyer - ACommissioner Gordon?@
Commissioner
Gordon - AUh I speaking to the legal issue I think the uh considerations of the
ordinance have been complied with. I
find no problem with what=s been done in that respect. Speaking to the policy issues here I think
it=s uh - what is being done is still appropriate. There is certainly potential there for more homes to be on that
road and I think it would be a very big mistake at this point to not - not to
give that road a name. From personal
experience my parents live on a three home country lane that accesses Highway
280 and it has already made a significant difference for them in having an
identifiable street sign at the road and I - I really think that once this is
done there will - you will find that it will be much easier to find your homes
and I hope that you will give it a chance to work and I agree that I - I think
we should treat this naming as an initial naming and give them the opportunity
to select their own name.@
Chairman
Moyer - AAny other comments from any Commissioners?@
Commissioner
Ward - AWell the only thing that I can say - I=m having the same problem you
are and I can relate to exactly everything that you=ve said but it boils down
to the fact that I=m gonna have to adjust just probably like everybody else in
the county is gonna adjust. I think the
staff has done exactly - when we first took this out it was a findable address
that was the common - when you apply the law to it it=s not so simple. But uh -
I think right now that everybody can find my address by my directions just like
Mr. Sutton and Ms. Walker can but I think we have to look at ten to fifteen to
twenty years down the road so we don=t want to have to spend all this time - we
started this twelve years ago and we=re coming to a head right now and I just
don=t want to have to have a backset where Commissioners ten years in the
future is gonna have the same trouble that we=ve had. Unfortunately I=m gonna
have to adjust and unfortunately I can=t see any other way but to give a street
name and I know staff will work with you uh as they are working with me. I=m having more trouble with the post office
than I am with staff but that=s another.@
Chairman
Moyer - AYou=re gonna lose that one.@
Commissioner
Ward - ABut uh@
Chairman
Moyer - AIf you win let me know.@
Commissioner
Ward - AI know exactly what you=re saying and - and I=m at the same
predicament that you are but I guess I=m
gonna have to adjust and hope that yuns can understand how to adjust also.@
Chairman
Moyer - AAny other further discussion.
Ms. Beeker, any further advice you want to give the Board?@
Angela
Beeker - ANo sir. Um the Board of
course will have to vote and then direct me to bring you back an order
consistent with - you know making the findings of fact consistent with - with
your order. And then you=ll of course need to um go out of quasi-judicial
proceeding.@
Chairman
Moyer - AMay I have that motion?@
Commissioner
Ward - AI=ll make a motion to go out of the hearing, public hearing.@
Chairman
Moyer - AAll in favor of that motion say aye.@
In
unison - AAye@ (unanimous)
Chairman
Moyer - ADoes the Board wish to have any further discussion or is it ready to
proceed to direct Mrs. Beeker to prepare a draft of an order.@
Commissioner
Gordon - AYes@
Commissioner
Ward - AI think - I make a motion that we prepare an order - have staff prepare
an order to finding of facts that - to this case that the staff obeyed the
ordinance - the letter of the ordinance that they presented the name as a
findable address and they can interpret that.@
Chairman
Moyer - AAlright, do you need anything further Mrs. Beeker?@
Angela
Beeker - ANo sir, I=ll bring back an order and include it in your agenda for
your approval consistent with that.@
Chairman
Moyer - AAll in favor of that motion say aye.@
In
unison - AAye@ (unanimous)
Chairman
Moyer AAlright@
Commissioner
Ward - AAnd I wish something would have come out of this that had evidence for
me but evidently it=s not but I feel for them.@
Chairman
Moyer - AYeah and I=ve been through the same thing so we can certainly
understand your efforts. We ask that if
you have a problem with the name that you please get with staff as soon as can
cause we will be coming out with an order saying that the road will be named,
that=s been voted on but we will certainly work with you and do whatever we can
to come up with something that=s - that meets your needs. Alright.@
NCACC
Voting Delegate
Chairman
Moyer was originally planning to attend the NCACC Conference on August 23-25 in
Forsyth County but is not going to be able to attend. He asked if another Commissioner would be able to attend to
represent Henderson County. Commissioner Messer stated that he would try to
attend if no one else was planning to.
Chairman
Moyer made the motion to make Commissioner Messer
voting delegate for Henderson County.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
UPDATE
ON PROPERTY ADDRESSING
Much
has happened in the last couple of weeks.
Chairman Moyer asked Mr. Hyder to update the Board.
Rocky
Hyder used this as a chance to not only update the Board but also to address
some of the customers who may watch this meeting on Cable TV. His staff sent out 3300 notices as the last
batch for the county rural routes.
Shortly after they arrived, staff noticed that they began to have a much
larger percentage of customers coming in.
People were lined up coming into the Property Addressing Office. Up to that point our contractor had a very
good track record with previous mailings with an error rate of about nine
tenths of one percent. In this mailing
there was an error rate of eight percent.
Staff contacted them as soon as they encountered this influx of
customers. The contractor immediately dispatched someone to our offices and
found some serious quality control issues.
The contractor is in the process of fixing those problems now. Staff was overwhelmed with customer comments
for about a week. That has slowed down
and Mr. Hyder was happy to report that it appears to be back to close to a
normal day today. Staff is still
dealing with a lot of those 8% errors.
Mr.
Hyder did not feel that this was a real setback, the county part is done. All the data collection is complete within
the City of Hendersonville. Our Field
Technician now is verifying all those streets and their=s will be mailed out
soon. Laurel Park will come a little
later but they have been willing to work with us up to this point and try to
resolve most of their issues.
Mr.
Hyder explained the procedure his staff follows when there is an error:
AWhen
someone contacts us with an error they normally talk to Mr. Griffin first and
he talks to that person one on one. We
bring up their information on our database and review it there with them over
the phone to make sure the information we have appears to be correct and in
many cases if there=s an error that=s easily spotted at that point, we correct
that error and send them out a notification of the correction at that
point. Other cases are not so
clear. You just can=t sit in front of a
computer and see the real issues there and that=s when we visit the site our
self and we look at the information that they provided us, we look at the
information that=s provided by our contractor, and when we visit the site we
try to marry that information up to see if there has been a mistake on our part
or the contractor=s part, rectify that mistake. If there hasn=t been, we notify those people that we did not find
an error and therefore the change would be effective. Now that=s not always exchanging good information. That=s not telling people what they want to
hear but at least we are responsive to them.
We physically view the site and make recommendations based on an actual
visit. If the customer hasn=t contacted
us and we find an error we immediately send another correction notice out to
follow that and explain to them that the previous notification was found to be
in error and this happens many times on corner lots, as you can imagine so we
notify them at their last known mailing address of what the correction would
be.@
NAMING
OF THE HENDERSONVILLE NATIONAL GUARD ARMORY
The
Board had received a request to name the National Guard Armory located on the
Spartanburg Highway. Chairman Moyer asked Commissioner Hawkins if he was aware
whether anything was moving along on that request.
Commissioner
Hawkins had talked to the County Manager about finding out:
1.
If the National Guard Armory had a name
2.
If it did, who named it
He
had heard nothing back from David yet.
There
was some discussion about finding out whether the other veterans groups would
support this.
Mr.
Nicholson stated that from the research staff has done they cannot find where
it was named at all. Ms. Beeker has
pulled the statute to find out who actually owns the building.
Angela
Beeker stated that the Department of Crime Control and Public Safety actually
controls the building. The State owns
it but it is managed for them by the Department of Crime Control and Public
Safety. They would likely be the ones
to authorize the naming.
Chairman
Moyer asked staff to send them a letter to see what the procedure is for naming
the building. It was the consensus of
the Board to name it on the up-coming September 11 anniversary date.
CANE
CREEK WATER & SEWER DISTRICT
Commissioner
Gordon made the motion for the Board to convene as Cane Creek Water & Sewer
District Board. All voted in favor and
the motion carried.
Commissioner
Ward made the motion for the Board to go out of Cane Creek and reconvene as the
Henderson County Board of Commissioners.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
IMPORTANT
DATES
Chairman Moyer
asked if any Commissioners would be out of town in August. There were none.
There was
discussion of setting a workshop on the County Comprehensive Plan. Selena Coffey informed the Board that Dennie
Martin could only meet the week of the 26th. The Board set the workshop for Thursday,
August 29 at 3:00 p.m.
CLOSED
SESSION
Chairman
Moyer made the motion for the Board to go into closed session as allowed
pursuant to NCGS 143-318.11 for the following reasons:
1.(a)(4) To discuss matters relating to the
location or expansion of industries or other businesses in the area served by
the public body.
All
voted in favor and the motion carried.
Commissioner
Hawkins made the motion for the Board to go out of closed session at 1:27
p.m. All voted in favor and the motion
carried.
ACTION
following Closed Session
There was none.
ADJOURN
There being no
further business to come before the Board, Commissioner Hawkins 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