MINUTES
STATE
OF NORTH CAROLINA BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
COUNTY
OF HENDERSON JUNE 9, 2004
The Henderson County Board of Commissioners met for a special called meeting at 9:00 a.m. in the Commissioners' Conference Room of the Henderson County Office Building. The purpose of this meeting was a workshop and public input session on the County Comprehensive Plan (CCP).
Those present were: Chairman Grady Hawkins, Vice-Chairman Larry
Young, Commissioner Bill Moyer, Commissioner Charlie Messer, Commissioner
Shannon Baldwin, County Manager David E. Nicholson, Assistant County Manager
Justin Hembree and Clerk to the Board Elizabeth W. Corn.
Also present were:
Planning Director Karen Smith, Project Planner Josh Freeman, Planner Nippy Page
and Public Information Officer Chris Coulson.
CALL TO ORDER/WELCOME
Chairman Hawkins called
the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. and welcomed those in attendance.
COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (CCP)
Public input on the CCP was scheduled for this meeting, and at a meeting scheduled for the following evening. Chairman Hawkins discussed several recent zoning requests that dealt with the major thoroughfares and that type of philosophy being used in the planning document, given that the concept had not been agreeable within two recently affected communities. Josh Freeman stated that the CCP does promote the concept of concentrating commercial and community facility developments at key intersections, in part as a continuation of policy direction from the 1993 plan. He discussed the concept in relation to standard planning practices.
Chairman Hawkins also
questioned how the sale of beer and wine, which is currently not allowed in the
County, would play into future development of things like food stores and
restaurants. Mr. Freeman answered that as policy stands, he did not believe it
would be a factor. He noted that if the Board were to allow beer and wine sales
in the County it would have a generative effect on commercial development, but
the CCP does not address that.
1.
Eva
Ritchey
– Ms. Ritchey stated that she did not feel the public had had enough time to
review the documents and be prepared to make comments. The documents were not
available to be pulled off the Internet until June 7th.
Chairman Hawkins stated that he believed the documents would be available online June 1st. Josh Freeman answered that the documents were on the Internet on June 1st, but some people did have difficulty downloading them due to the file size. He also stated that the CCP was available in the libraries, in the Planning Office, at CopyWorks, and on CD for $1.00. He answered several questions from the Board regarding the availability of the document to the public.
Ms. Ritchey expressed concern about how quickly the County is doing the public input process. She wished to have it noted that the cost for a color copy of the document was $127, the cost for a black and white copy was almost $30. She stated that while the draft CCP was a worthy work, it lacked the resources to make it work.
Ms. Ritchey specifically addressed disparities within the plan with regards to transportation, citing the need for better infrastructure. She stated that she had looked at a memo put out by Planning Staff, and if the Board really wants a Plan that will produce and provide, she requested that the Board adopt the recommendations of the Planning Staff. She discussed the merits of several of those staff recommendations. Finally, she suggested having a representative from the school system on the Henderson County Planning Board.
2.
Chip
Berning
– Mr. Berning stated that he did not wish to speak.
3.
Rick
Merrell
– Mr. Merrell congratulated the Board, Planning Staff and all volunteers for
all the work that had gone into the CCP. He stated that he had spent 34 years
marketing real estate in Henderson County, and what people buy when they come
from other areas is our quality of life. The CCP could be the future to
maintaining that quality of life. Mr. Merrell stated that the key issue in the
Plan was that it was soft and suggestive, while the staff memo added backbone
and strength. He encouraged the Board to pay attention to that memo. He also
felt that throughout the body of the text, the following word replacements
should be made: “should” replaced with “shall”, “consider” replaced with “do”,
“support” replaced with “fully fund”, and “promote” replaced with “champion”.
Mr. Merrell briefly
spoke to the housing element, stating that mobile homes are not affordable
housing, they are predatory housing. Mobile homes depreciate in value like
cars, and deprive the owners of equity buildup.
4.
George
Shipley
– Mr. Shipley stated that he was the past President of Habitat and the current
President of the Coalition for Affordable Housing. He spoke to the housing
section, stating that nothing in that section said the County was going to do
something to alleviate affordable housing. He asked that the document contain
action-oriented language.
Chairman Hawkins thanked
everyone for their input, and stated that the Board would continue the dialogue
on the subject. He stated that the Plan was not written as an ordinance, though
a lot of ordinances would probably spin off of it in the future.
Commissioner Baldwin
discussed the language in the draft CCP, stating that making the process more
action oriented could be taken care of with the implementation schedule and the
way that it is written. Commissioner Moyer expressed concern that if the
implementation schedule just implements “consider”, it doesn’t solve the
problem. Chairman Hawkins questioned where the implementation schedule
currently stood. Josh Freeman answered that Staff would have the implementation
schedule to the Board by the following Monday. He also stated that it would be
available on-line Monday morning.
Chairman Hawkins stated
that study of a Flood Plain Ordinance had already begun, and he thought that
might be included early in the implementation plan. He also felt the Highway 25
North Corridor Study would be included in an initial implementation plan. David
Nicholson noted that one thing he keeps coming back to is the relationship
between completing the CCP and getting back to the Zoning Ordinance Rewrite discussion.
Commissioner Baldwin
stated that the Board had the document as it had been submitted. They had
requested staff’s perspective on some of the issues, and were now asking them
to put together an implementation schedule. He questioned what the Board was
asking staff to implement, the submitted document or the document with the memo
calling for changes. Commissioner Moyer agreed that there were some key
fundamental issues included in staff’s memo that would require some work to
integrate into the Plan. Commissioner Baldwin felt the Board should come to a
consensus on including the proposals submitted by staff following the meeting
scheduled for the following evening.
Commissioner Messer
agreed that the Board should agree on an implementation schedule, but at some
point the Board will have to look at the cost of implementing the plan. With
regards to agriculture, the Plan calls for farmers to be able to keep some of
their land preserved, but he questioned where the money would come from to help
preserve it. He also expressed concern about affordable housing since the Board
has no control over building materials.
Commissioner Baldwin
agreed that whatever the Board adopts, they should be willing to fund. He felt
they would be dependant upon the County Manager to make sure the resources were
available to implement what they adopt, but it comes down to when they adopt it
and plan to start implementing it. Commissioner Moyer expressed his concern
about the Board’s willingness to fund this new plan when services already in
place were not being funded.
Commissioner Young
stated that this is just a plan, and something that will take a period of time
to implement. He stated that affordable housing is not in Henderson County
because of the cost of building and the cost of land. He had received several
calls from citizens asking when the Board was going to put impact fees on
builders and developers to help pay for infrastructure. He felt that would add
to the cost of housing. He also spoke to the transportation issue, stating that
the Board had very little control over transportation as it is controlled by
the State. He expressed concern that the Upward Road project was projected to
be completed in 2008 when it was supposed to be started in 2004.
Jack Lynch addressed the
Board, stating that Upward Road was on the TIP. All the TIP projects destined
for a four to six year study period were up to a six-year study period. He
discussed the Howard Gap Road and Cummings Road projects, stating that they are
moving along rapidly. He felt that we needed to work hard with DOT, and noted
that he talks to them about twice a week to keep the lines of communication
open. Mr. Lynch also spoke to bus transportation, discussed the funding sources
available and plans in place to retain those funding sources. There followed
additional discussion about funding and future transportation plans.
Commissioner Messer
stated that the industrial development zones in the plan are the industrial
development zones we already have. He stated that the Board had recently
approved another industrial area when they approved the Pepsi Cola Company
going out Highway 280. That area is going to expand, as is Highway 25 once it
has been widened to 5 lanes. The plan states that large commercial development
should be located where water and sewer services are present. While he felt
that idea was fine, in the past 20 years the County had let major developers
control where water and sewer is because they’ve put it in. He also discussed
impact fees because of the impact large developments have on infrastructure. He
felt the County had to have a plan, had to stick to it and had to try to
implement it as quickly as possible.
Eva Ritchey addressed
the Board on transportation funding. It was her opinion that Henderson County
had not done everything it could do to put in a viable transportation system in
Henderson County, and that the County was not totally dependent on the DOT. She
wished to state for the public record, that she had met with the DOT and had
requested an HOV lane for the I-26 widening. The DOT had indicated an
unwillingness to do so. She questioned why anyone would be willing to spend
$100 million without studying all the alternatives.
Chairman Hawkins then
discussed some of the wording differences between the staff memo and the draft
CCP. He pointed out that even the memo contains language such as “cautious
exploration” and “consideration of action”. He reminded the Board that this is
a planning document, and there is a long time period for it. It will probably
be reflected in a lot of ordinances, but did not feel you could make a county
ordinance in the CCP.
Commissioner Messer
spoke to the most recent Henderson County flood plain maps, stating that they
had last been updated by the State in 1983. Karen Smith answered that a
representative from the NC Department of Emergency Management had visited in
January to evaluate the areas where we may have needed detailed studies due to
fill and the like. That evaluation had uncovered no significant problem areas
based on the old maps. The state had also indicated that we can use the old
maps to get a program started, and when new maps come out we would be able to
update ordinances.
Chairman Hawkins
discussed the housing element, density as it applies to affordable housing and
the need to have available sewer. To capitalize on infrastructure already in
place would require expanding the density in most municipalities. He questioned
the response from the municipalities on the possible increasing density in
their jurisdiction. Mr. Freeman answered that he could not give the
municipality’s response, as his team had not gotten to the point of having
substantial conversations with Planning Boards and Councils. However, as a
general rule most of the Planning Staff would agree that the municipalities
have a role to play in increasing densities and that there were some ordinance
revisions that would need to take place. Sewer is the most important component,
but that must be matched with ordinance revisions to maximize the use of the
sewer system. There followed discussion about the necessary involvement and
cooperation of the municipalities.
Commissioner Baldwin
stated that the community-based process would lead to additional input as the
plans begin to be tailored to the small areas. He emphasized that the Board had
changed the CCP planning process, with the result being more input from the
residents of the County. There were 15 community meetings, and every municipal
elected official could have come and participated in the meetings. He expressed
that if bolder language needed to be added to the CCP to create a more
action-oriented document, he was in favor of that. He also expressed that the
implementation schedule needed to be action-oriented. He then requested that
David Nicholson provide some projection of funding attached to the
implementation schedule so the Board will know what they will be faced with
each budget cycle.
Finally, Commissioner Baldwin stated that he did not wish to exclude input from the municipalities, but was not in favor of stretching out the process to allow further input from the municipalities. The research had been done, the Board had received good recommendations, and he felt the CCP should be adopted with the type of language that said the County would aggressively pursue implementation. Commissioner Moyer stated that he agreed, with the exception of the municipalities. The municipalities had been told that they would have a chance for input and that the County wanted a plan that was also acceptable to the municipalities. There followed discussion about how flexible the document was intended to be, its ability to change with future input, and the role of the implementation schedule with respect to possible municipal input.
Commissioner Messer
stated that he would like to know more about future plans, and would like to
have one map from the municipalities that showed future annexation plans.
Chairman Hawkins stated that the County had requested such a map, but had been
unable to obtain such information. There was some discussion about which
municipalities even had such information.
Commissioner Moyer
stated that one thing that bothered him in the implementation schedule was that
they showed the Zoning Ordinance Rewrite at 18 months. Karen Smith answered
that they wanted to make sure the draft Zoning Ordinance as written fulfilled
the goals of the CCP. She stated that the 18-month time frame was to allow
enough time to complete the project, though she hoped it did not take that long.
Josh Freeman stated that
in the discussed staff memo, they had not covered the myriad of “considers”,
“explores”, “shalls” and “think-abouts”. In some places that type of wording is
very appropriate, but in others he felt there was enough information to say
something more explicitly. Commissioner Baldwin asked if Staff could go back
through the CCP and make some recommendations on language. It was the consensus
of the Board to have Mr. Freeman provide recommendations on some of the
language in the draft.
5. Dick Baird – Mr. Baird stated
that the draft CCP was a good document. He spoke about where the retiring
baby-boomers were going to end up, and was concerned about the lack of
elder-care elements in the plan. He also spoke to the ever present need to
attract industry, and felt that going to the State to change Corporate Tax Laws
was the only way that would ever happen. He expressed concern about the
disparity of income between groups in the community, and felt that a larger
retirement population would exacerbate that problem. Finally, he had great
problems with the community input, stating that the wrong questions had been
asked.
ADJOURN
Chairman Hawkins made the motion to adjourn the meeting at 10:36 a.m. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Attest:
Elizabeth Corn, Clerk to
the Board Grady
Hawkins, Chairman