MINUTES
STATE
OF
The Henderson County Board of
Commissioners met for a special called meeting at 6:00 p.m. in the
Commissioners' Conference Room of the
Those present
were: Chairman Grady Hawkins, Vice-Chairman Larry Young, Commissioner Bill
Moyer, Commissioner Charlie Messer, County Manager David E. Nicholson, County
Attorney Angela S. Beeker, Planning Director Karen C. Smith, Planner Autumn
Radcliff, County Engineer Gary Tweed, Utilities Director Jim Erwin and Deputy Clerk
to the Board
Absent was:
Commissioner Shannon Baldwin who had previously been recused from the
proceedings.
QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCEEDING
Chairman Hawkins called the
meeting to order.
Chairman Hawkins – “I make
the motion to go into public hearing. All those in favor of the motion say
aye.”
In unison – “Aye.”
Chairman
Hawkins – “Okay Ladies and Gentlemen, we are here today to continue the
quasi-judicial proceeding on the following application: Vested Rights
Application #VR-03-01 submitted by Glade Land Fund for a development vested
rights for the development to be known as Fox Glen. This is a continuation of the hearing
originally convened on January 14, 2004.
I want to remind everyone that the proceeding will be conducted under
the Henderson County Board of Commissioners Rules of Procedures for
Quasi-judicial Proceedings. Unless
otherwise decided by the Board, only persons previously made a party will be
allowed to participate as a party in today’s continuation of the hearing. Those persons include: Karen Smith, Planning Director, Gaston
Campano and Glade Land Fund, LLC, Applicant, uh, Kenny Long, Skip Brewer,
Vickie Edmonds, Donna Riley, Bruce Thompson, Jane Berry, Kathy Cheekos, Ron
Raiola, Jeff Klutz, and Steven Moore.
Okay, before we begin, I want
to point out for the record that one of our Board members, Shannon Baldwin,
recused himself from the proceedings, and will therefore not be present.
I also want to ask the Board
members whether they have received any information concerning this application
since January 14, 2004, and if so, what information has been received so that
the information can become part of the record today. Anyone received any?”
Commissioner Moyer – “Well we
got a copy of the uh, transcript, but uh.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Okay I,
I, think that’s a copy of uh.”
Angela Beeker – “Yes, and all
the parties got that too.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Very well
then. Uh, just a brief overview of the procedure for today. All persons who
speak and participate, including any witnesses that will be called, will be
placed under oath if they have not already taken one previously. I want to remind everyone placed under oath
previously that they are still under oath.
Unless otherwise decided by the Board, we will begin tonight’s hearing
by asking the Applicant, Gaston Campano, if there is any additional evidence
that he wishes to present as a part of his principal case. After the applicant is finished, staff and
the other parties will be allowed to proceed with their evidence. All parties will be given an opportunity to
ask questions of all witnesses testifying in the proceedings. The Board will be given an opportunity to ask
questions also. After the evidence is presented the Board will discuss the
issues raised and will make a decision.
The Board must make a decision on the application within 30 days of the
close of this hearing. The Board’s
decision must be made in writing within 45 days of the close of the hearing.
Uh, we need to identify all
parties to the proceeding. As I stated, the Board acknowledges the following
persons as parties. As I call your name,
please answer so that we will know you are present. Uh, Karen Smith.”
Karen Smith – “Here.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Present.
Gaston Campano, is here. And Glade Land, uh okay, Fund LLC. Kenny Long? Skip
Brewer? Vickie Edmonds? Donna Riley?
Okay, thank you. Uh, Bruce Thompson?”
Bruce Thompson – “Here.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Jane
Berry? Kathy Cheekos?
Kathy Cheekos – “Here.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Okay,
thank you. Ron Raiola? Jeff Klutz? And Steve, Steven Moore? Mrs. Beeker in a,
in a proceeding, uh one of these is continued, uh did we need to address the
absence of these people to both parties to see if we want to proceed or.”
Note: The parties to the
proceeding present were Karen Smith, Gaston Campano, Donna Riley, Bruce
Thompson, and Kathy Cheekos.
Angela Beeker – “I don’t
believe so. I just believe these parties lose their right to part, you know, to
participate. To, to finish their participation in the proceeding.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Okay.
Will all parties to the proceeding not previously sworn, and all witnesses that,
that you intend to call which were not previously sworn, come forward to be
sworn. We have any of those?”
Bruce Thompson – “Yeah.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Okay. You were previously sworn were you
not?”
Bruce Thompson – “Yeah. But I
need to …” Mr. Thompson was speaking from
the back of the room.
Chairman Hawkins – “As a, as
a witness?”
Bruce Thompson – “As a
witness….”
Chairman Hawkins – “Okay I
think then only she needs to come up to be sworn. Any, any other?”
Commissioner Moyer – “Grady?
Can I ask Mr. Campano? Is uh Mr. Hernandez gonna give testimony?”
Gaston Campano – “No.”
Angela Beeker – “I believe he
took an oath anyway.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Well he
was a part of the uh, Glade Land Fund LLC, applicant. I think.”
Angela Beeker – “He took an
oath last time.”
Chairman Hawkins – “I think
that was under the, the uh,
Karen Smith – “Uh, Mr.
Chairman I was gonna ask um, I think you had wanted some of the folks from um,
Utilities and the
Chairman Hawkins – “Okay Mr.
Tweed and Mr. Erwin. If you wanna come up with uh. I don’t know who else is out
there…”
Karen Smith – “Mr. Chairman,
sorry, also to interrupt, if the parties want to raise their hands I can give
them the materials that you have in front of you.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Okay.”
Karen Smith – “They’re from
last time but I can…”
Chairman Hawkins – “Okay. The
parties that are here, if you don’t have all the materials Mrs. uh, Mrs. Smith
will give them to you if you’d raise your hand. And if the rest of you would
just give uh, the Clerk your uh, your name and address, I think we know the
Staff, uh, and we, we’ll proceed with swearing um in.”
In unison – “I do.”
Chairman Hawkins – “And again,
let me remind everyone who was already sworn that uh, that you’re still under
oath uh, also. Okay, the completion of the applicant’s evidence. Uh, Mr.
Campano is there any additional evidence that you wish to present, uh, as part
of your principal case?”
Gaston Campano – “Yes, what
I’d like to do is call up to the front here Luther Smith uh, who can give you
an update on, uh, the activity that’s occurred and some minor changes that have
occurred on the site plan since the last, uh, public hearing.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Okay.”
Luther Smith – “Mr. Chairman,
Members of the Board, my name is Luther Smith. I’m here to speak or add
additional uh, evidence, information on behalf of the uh, applicant, Glade
Holding. I had a …”
Commissioner Moyer – “Luther,
while you’re doing that is the latest one we have dated January 12, 04?”
Luther Smith – “Uh, the last
one you have, yes sir. But I would like to give the Board a copy of this plan,
which was updated as of today to show you all that had occurred as far as the
property…”
Chairman Hawkins – “We need
everybody to get a copy of that?”
Angela Beeker – “All the
parties.”
Luther Smith – “Yes I have
copies for …”
Chairman Hawkins – “And the,
the, uh, Karen would you him hand those out to the other parties please? Thank
you.”
Luther Smith – “Also for your
information we’ve updated, you have, given an original progress summary at the
first hearing. Again we simply updated that to indicate the information I’ll be
giving you here.”
Angela Beeker – “If you’ve
got enough. Thanks.”
Commissioner Moyer – “Grady
do we have to mark this new diagram as an exhibit number?”
Angela Beeker – “I’d be a
good idea to. Um, Amy needs to be able to identify which ones were handed out
this evening.”
Chairman Hawkins – “But we
don’t have, do we have any other exhibits, or new exhibits?”
Angela Beeker – “So far we
have these two. Ac, actually these are um, I guess updates to your application,
to the application?”
Luther Smith – “They’re
updates to the application and uh, each of those, a former copy of each was
entered as an exhibit during the original uh, meeting and then these are just
updates.”
Chairman Hawkins – “So we
just enter it maybe as updates to the original exhibits.”
Angela Beeker – “I think as
long as, um, Amy notates, um, if she wants to assign a number system, but
typically if it’s approved that would be attached as part of the decision. The,
the, the actual map that is approved is attached.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Yeah,
okay. And that’s the one we’re looking at so we need to identify it somehow.”
Commissioner Moyer – “I don’t
believe there’s a date on it, that’s what gave. Is there a date on this
Luther?”
Luther Smith – “On what?”
Commissioner Moyer – “This
latest print that you, uh.”
Luther Smith – “Yes it is.
It’s very, very small, you can read it on this one.”
Commissioner Moyer – “Well
that’s embarrassing, you’re saying I’m too old to read this.”
Luther Smith – “…dated it for
today. It’s 10/5/2004 is the plan.”
Chairman Hawkins – “You, you
can just note that I think, just.”
Commissioner Moyer – “Where
is that?”
Luther Smith – “I believe we
added that date on the write up also…”
Angela Beeker – “It’s down
here, beside the name block.”
Commissioner Moyer – “It is?”
Several people in unison –
“Yeah.”
Commissioner Moyer – “Take
your word for it.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Right
above the M in S 32 on the.”
Commissioner Moyer – “Oh
yeah.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Okay
everybody square with that? Everybody got a copy of these, uh, witnesses and
other parties? Okay, go ahead Luther.”
Luther Smith – “Okay. Uh, if
I may I’ll just run down very quickly some uh, changes and things that have
occurred uh, since this meeting or this proceeding was initiated. Uh, we did,
uh, continue to work on the project and, and get a variety of things done. Uh,
at the time of the original application the property was owned by an estate I
guess. Mr. Tate can clarify that, but, and Glade Land Fund was the applicant
and the agent. Uh, it’s my understanding Glade Land Fund now owns the property.
Uh, so the ownership has changed, has transferred to Glade Land Fund. Again
since uh, January, uh, the following permits, in terms of moving forward with
construction on this project are in place. We have received from NCDOT uh, the
drive permits both for uh, the road entering off of
Commissioner Moyer – “Um hum.
Yea, that’s right. You’re right.”
Chairman Hawkins – “From the
north.”
Luther Smith – “Um, and also
an acceleration and deceleration lane as you entered and came out of the
project. When we submitted the, the, the permit request to DOT we were informed
that they are in the process of re-planning that entire Howard Gap corridor out
to Park Ridge Hospital and asked us to drop the acceleration deceleration lanes
at this time. They approved it simply as, our three lane entrance coming out.
After they complete their work we’ll then talk to them about … probably if, if
they felt the need for it and we felt the need for it add the, those other
lanes. But at this point in time they asked us to drop that from the permit.
Um, but both of those permits are in place. Uh, the Corp of Engineers has
signed off on the stream crossing that we have. Uh, and also the wetland
delineation in the, in the project. Uh, NCDENR has approved erosion plans uh,
with their, uh, all of the details and so forth for all of the elements of the
project with, with the exception of the townhouse area. We have not submitted
that area yet. Uh, the City of
Angela Beeker – “Which um,
part did you don’t have the sedimentation and erosion control plan for? You
said there.”
Luther Smith – “Town, the
townhouse section we have not submitted for any permitting on that section, the
townhome section in other words.”
Angela Beeker – “And as far
as your calculation of open space you still exclude the roads?”
Luther Smith – “No. We are
not, that does not include the road. That is just land, land area exclusive of
the roads.”
Angela Beeker – “Okay.”
Luther Smith – “Uh, I really
don’t know what the road right-of-way is but, according to the zoning ordinance
would include the roads yes, but we haven’t, no.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Any, any
member of the Board have questions for uh, Luther? Does of the uh, additional
parties, uh, or witnesses?”
Angela Beeker – “Just
parties.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Just
parties, have any question, any of the parties have questions for Luther. Uh
Karen, do you have some?”
Karen Smith – “This is just
really for clarification. Um, you had mentioned 40% of the land area in the
project is common open space?”
Luther Smith – “That’s
correct.”
Karen Smith – “Okay, okay.
And then to follow up on Mrs. Beeker’s question, the open space does not
include roads does the limited common space include roads?”
Luther Smith – “No. But the
limited common space is an estimate number because the town house area has not
actually been surveyed out yet. That’s why I said about 4½, 5 acres limited
common area.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Any, any
other questions?”
Angela Beeker – “Does the
common space include, when you say limited common space are you referring to
open space or are you referring to like the, any buildings or amenities or
anything like that.”
Luther Smith – “Uh, limited,
what I’m referring to as limited common areas for example in the apartment area
is all of the land area that is built upon either by roads or building within
the property boundary of that apartment block.”
Angela Beeker – “Okay.”
Luther Smith – “The same down
in the townhome area so it is, it is just land area that is limited common
space. Again it’s defined as limited simply because it’s primarily for the
residents of those units as opposed to everybody in the development.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Any, any
other questions? Karen did that cover what you needed? Okay.”
Luther Smith – “And, I also
have uh, in addition to the handouts there are two, a total of three full size
copies of the drawing for the Commissioners, the Board.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Okay
thank, thank you Luther. Uh, we’ll take uh, staff evidence. Ms. Smith do you
any evidence you wish to offer?”
Karen Smith – “I may need to
take a little bit of time to um, compare the former plan with, with the current
plan because my, my comments were based on the prior plan. You have a handout…”
Chairman Hawkins – “Do you
want to take a minute? Do you need a minute to look?”
Karen Smith – “I may need a
minute just to compare some things where there just may be some um.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Okay.”
Karen Smith – “In, incorrect
conclusions I draw. I do have a copy of my comments though. They are from, what
was to be the February 16th meeting I think. So I’ll go ahead and
pass those out now and um. Or if you want the other parties to go I can try to
do this while, while they go.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Why don’t
you just take a minute to do that cause you probably need to listen to the
other parties also in case you have some questions.”
Karen Smith – “I do just want
to let the Board know, um, for the, for tonight’s hearing because we has to uh,
start uh, with the fresh date, we didn’t continue it from a prior date to time,
to time, date and time specific, we did advertise tonight’s hearing in
accordance with the provisions of the vested rights ordinance as well as the
uh, Board of Commissioners Rules of Procedure for uh. Quasi-Judicial
Proceedings. And so, we did have the notices, uh require notices in the
Times-News. We sent the applicant a certified letter of the notice. And then,
um, as a courtesy we sent notices of the hearing to the adjoining owners and
then um, not to testify for Mrs. Beeker but Mrs. Beeker actually notified the
parties, uh and sent those minutes out.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Okay.”
Commissioner Moyer – “Grady would
it be, would it be easier Karen if you just gave them your comments and they
may just say that’s been taken care of or that’s resolved and save you going
all through that, uh, they’ll know right off, Luther’ll know right off the bat
whether they’ve been taken care of.”
Karen Smith – “…could do that. I’ll do that.”
Commissioner Moyer – “Good
comments.”
Karen Smith – “Mr. Chairman
I’m ready to give it a try here.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Everybody
had a chance to look through at least the first four pages?”
Karen Smith – “I’m sorry. I
thought you were waiting for me, if you need more time.”
Chairman Hawkins – “No,
that.”
Commissioner Moyer – “No we
were waiting for you.”
Chairman Hawkins – “We,
we’ll, we’ll go along with you as you go through.”
Karen Smith – “Okay. Um,
first of all I was gonna just see if the Board needed for me to go over any of
the vicinity information. I do have some maps that were not in your packet –
things such as the um, an aerial view of the property, USGS um, map with topography
although they have shown contours. Um, I also have some photographs and um,
the, uh, a excerpt from our Comprehensive Plan Growth Management Strategy and
the
Chairman Hawkins – “Any,
anybody need any of that? Uh I think, I know, I think most of us including
Charlie is very familiar with where it is.”
Karen Smith – “I have it if
you need it later.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Okay, if,
if we need it we, we’ll just call for it.”
Karen Smith – “Okay. Um, I’ve
reviewed the application for the vested rights, um, under Chapter 189 of the
Henderson County Code and I do have the following comments. It looks like the
revised, revised master plan when reviewed along with the revised project
summary uh does generally meet the definition of a site specific development
plan. Um there were a couple items that I did want to see, the applicant should
address in more detail. And again, that will be up to the Board and Attorney if
you have enough information on a site specific development plan.
The first has to do with
building and structure locations. Um, they’re supposed to show the approximate
location of buildings, structures and other improvements. The, um, they’ve got
the general locations for the apartments and town, townhouses shown. Um, as is
the minimum proposed separation between the buildings and you also have a
general layout of the villas and cottages and actually the layout as approved
uh, conditionally by the Planning Board. Um, we, I just wanted to see if the
Board wanted to consider making the proposed minimum distances that they’ve
shown on the plan between structures as well as the proposed minimum lot set
backs a condition of the development vested right if approved. So that’d be
something to take into consideration um, if, if they’re um, okay with that
being a fixed condition. Okay?”
Chairman Hawkins – “Okay.”
Karen Smith – “The um, second
point had to do with rec, the location of recreation uses. Um, they are
supposed to show the approximate location um, of the recreation area and they
have done that but I don’t believe the building and structures were actually
shown within that recreation area at this point.”
Luther Smith – “Yeah they
should be shown …”
Karen Smith – “Okay I’m
seeing a community building now. Okay. This one may be satisfied then. Um, as,
as far as those buildings are concerned um, I don’t know that the applicant had
provided for any um, type of minimum setbacks from roads or property lines or
distances between recreation buildings and that sort of thing. Um, course North
Carolina building codes will apply, but if the Board wanted uh, the applicant
to propose a minimum standard in that regard, um, you may, I wanted to see if
you’d be willing to do that. Or if the applicant would be willing and then
making those part of the vested right ordinance if so. Otherwise you can just
specify that
Next point has to do with
building and structure dimensions. Um, the ordinance requires the approximate
dimensions including height be shown for proposed buildings and other
structures. Um, we do have the average lot size for the townhomes, the villa
and cottage lots. Um, while the approximate building sizes aren’t shown we, we
expect that the dwellings will be single family on the villa and cottage lots
and that they’ll have to fit within the proposed setback shown on the plan. Um,
the revised master plan I believe this one still does, shows ten apartment
buildings, yeah ten apartment buildings and four unit townhome buildings. Um,
there is a two unit townhome building. Actually, no that’s, I guess that’s been
changed, they’re all four unit. Okay, alright. Um, so we don’t need to address
any deviation from the four unit standard. Um, application materials also do
not address whether there may be more or less than ten apartments in each
building, and we may want to again have the applicant address this and if they
need the flexibility to alter that number to build that into the permit.
Uh, building height, um,
cottages and villas homes have a maximum building height of 35 feet for each
but that’s been designated. Um, the project summary also defines how the
applicant measures building height. The revised master plan also shows a
building height of 35 feet for the townhomes and, let me see, it’s still 50
feet for the apartment. The um, I guess the applicant ha, has not addressed the
maximum building height for the recreation structures and uh, other buildings
and that is something they wanna consider proposing we could make a condition
of the vested right. Um, getting back to the, the other buildings, um, the R-10
district is what I’ve used as a comparison for a lot of my comments. Uh, just
because that is sort of the density that this project um, will be built under.
And the, the 50 foot um would exceed an R-10 requirement. 35 feet being uh, the
maximum height in our R-10 district. I’m not saying there’s anything
necessarily wrong with 50 feet but just to note that, that it does exceed um,
some of our residential districts in our zoning ordinance.
Uh, lets see, size of the
recreational buildings, um, they had suggested 1,000, a minimum of 1,000 square
foot, um, heated space, but there is no other indication about the size of the
building as far as I can see. And for, may the applicant to address this. Um,
commercial uses, you have a, a layout of the proposed commercial building, and
again the size doesn’t appear to be shown on the, on the plan. Um, again ask
the, the applicant to perhaps address this with the Board. And the Board may
want to discuss whether or not to limit that size um, in terms of building
footprint or the gross floor area of the building since it will be multistoried
or something like that. We do in the Zoning Ordinance define gross floor area
um, if that’s something you want to take a look at. Uh, and as for building
height on the commercial uses um, it doesn’t specify a maximum building height
for the commercial building. Um, they’ve said it will be two stories. They want
to propose a height, and you may want to consider it as a condition.
Uh, the application materials
don’t address the size of the proposed signage, um particularly the entrance
features and signs and that for the commercial building if any. Um, ask that
the applicant address if there’s any other information that they wanna present
to the Board about signs. Um, and if there are any standards that they would
want incorporated into the vested right, vested rights ordinance. Um, you may
also want to look at uh, establishing a condition that would require a future
compliance if the signs are later uh, with any uh, zoning ordinance
requirements or, or, um, outdoor advertising ordinance and that sort of thing.
Um, the Board of Commissioners
under the Vested Rights Ordinance can appro, approve or disapprove a plan based
on the need to protect public health, safety and welfare. Uh, is, uh, very
broad uh, thing to look at and you can also require terms and conditions on the
Vested Rights Ordinance that are necessary to protect health, safety and
welfare. Uh, some of the other items that the applicant might want to address
with the Board, and the Board may want to consider have to do with the uh,
density of development and open space. Um, again this, this, uh is in the Open
Use District currently. Um, they’re proposing a gross residential density of
4.2 units per acre. Um, again our R-10 without getting into doing 4 unit
apartment buildings and such would allow 4.3 units per acre. So it’s roughly an
R-10 density.
Um, under the planned unit
development standards of the zoning ordinance which one can do in a, in a, um,
R-10 District the applicant can proposed the placement um, of the allowable
number of units anywhere on the property provided the overall density doesn’t
exceed the number of units that are allowed. Um, the applicant has shown um,
the, the change in the open space and the limited common areas. Um, and also
the amount that’s in new streets and parking. And again he said something about
the common, limited common area being sort of a flexible number and so the
Board will need to consider whether or not it wants to make that an absolute
standard or, or build some flexibility in on the totals. Uh, total amounts of
required open space and common, limited common areas. Um, until the proposed
buildings and lots and roads are located on the property again that open space
um, number may, may fluctuate a little bit.
Uh, perimeter setbacks and
buffering, um, applicant has proposed setbacks from the perimeter of the
property of 30 feet from the northern and southern property lines. 30 feet from
what appears to be the edge of the right-of-way of Patty’s Chapel Road and 50
feet from what appears to be the edge of, um, right-of-way of Howard Gap Road.
Um, it looks like the only element shown within that setback are road and
sidewalk crossings, open space easements, entrance features and signs, a lift
station, which I’m not sure if that’s still on the plan, and parking. Um, for
individual residential lots these would, uh, these standards would exceed what
would be required in an R-10 district, so nothing wrong with that. Um, in a, in
a planned unit development you typically look at the perimeter boundary and see
if there will be, is anything on the perimeter, um, that would require the
developer to consider privacy of adjoining um, owners and you can require
setbacks from property lines and rights-of-way uh, based on the zoning. You can
also require screening for non, uh single family residential structures and
require that structures on the perimeter be located so they’re not detrimental
to the neighborhood. And again that’s under the zoning ordinance but I’m just
trying to make the Board aware that in looking at this project you may want to take
some of these things into consideration.
The only buffering, um, that
I have noted on the plan are the 30 buffers that are proposed on both sides of
the streams that run through and any protection that will provided to the
wetland areas um, and the, let’s see the 30 foot protected buffer zone on each
side, um, is shown on the plan. We do require a minimum 30 foot setback for
building or structures from perennial streams under the subdivision ordinance
but we do not require or specify how you treat that setback, um, whether it has
to be vegetated in a certain way or anything like that. So um, prior to your
January 14th meeting I had talked to representatives of the
applicant about whether any buffering or screening would be provided on the
perimeter. At that time they had said that they were probably gonna maintain
some of the existing vegetation. But during the um, January 14th
hearing the applicant indicated that Glade, uh, would be willing to install a
landscape buffer or fence. And so I think the Board probably needs to discuss
that further with the applicant as to the specifics of those items. Um, and
whether or not you want to require it and uh, under what basis you want them to
maintain it.
Um, application materials
don’t appear to address lighting within the project. Again I’ve spoken with
representatives of the applicant about whether it will be provided,
particularly in that commercial area um,
and the parking areas and recreation areas. Uh, while it appears there will be
lighting there were no specifics plans for such. If the applicant wants to
address that, um, to the Board, um, I would just ask that the Board consider
that, um, a condition where they wouldn’t be allowed to have the lights shine
um, so as to disturb adjacent roads or residential dwellings.
And the hours of operation on
the commercial uses, um, again we’re in open use right now so this really isn’t
regulated but under the Vested Rights Ordinance um, the Board might want to
consider, um, and the applicant may want to propose uh, some hours of operation
or at least give us some idea of, of how that might work.
I did also look at um, how
this plan complied with other ordinances and you heard Mr. Smith talk about the
Henderson County Subdivision Ordinance. Um, I have, Autumn is gonna pass out,
just so you have it for the record. Copies of two letters of approval,
conditional approval, excuse me, for a master plan and development plan for
Phase I, which was the villas and then approval of a revised master plan and a
development plan for the cottage section. Um, Planning Board conditionally
approved Phase I and the original master plan and then staff appro,
conditionally approved Phase II and the revised master plan. Um, we’re allowed
to do that under the uh, provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance. And so I
wanted the Board to have, and the other parties to have copies of what
conditions the Planning Board uh, has imposed and staff, based on the
Subdivision Ordinance has imposed on the subdivision aspects of this, um,
project.
Mr. Smith did address some of
the, the approvals that they have since gained and so it may address some of
the items on those lists from the Planning Board and Planning Staff. Um, one of
the standards or one of the requirements from that has to do with, um, getting
a letter of capacity for sewer from the Cane Creek Water and Sewer Department
and then also getting a um, getting a final approval of water and sewer plans,
uh, before they could record a final plat. And so that is one issue that I
wanted to bring up this evening. It was an issue with the Planning Board level
and um, one of the reasons I, the County Engineer and Utilities Director are
here and the applicant will probably need to talk about that, um, at some point
about how that’s going to be provided.
Um, as far as the Zoning
Ordinance, um, it’s open use and right now they’re not required to meet, um,
any specific standards for this project. Um, it is in the area that’s being
studied uh, by the US 25 North uh, zoning study. Uh, we still haven’t totally
settled on a district at this point but, um, it will likely be residential it
just may not be a district that would allow the project at this density.
Um, there, you may wanna look
at some condition that has to do with compliance with the Subdivision
Ordinance. There may be some things in the Subdivision Ordinance that require a
little bit of alteration from the plans you have in front of you, particularly
for that townhouse section which we haven’t reviewed yet. And so again, maybe
some flexibility needs to be built in as to how to address those issues.
Um, I mentioned utilities, um
as far as the sewer um, and I’ll probably as, call I guess
Chairman Hawkins – “Let me
uh, let me ask first if uh, uh, if anyone has any questions for you and then
uh, from uh, either the uh, applicant or other parties or the Board. Anybody
have any questions for Karen at this point? Okay,
Gary Tweed – “There’s not a
whole lot to tell you about on the sewer at this point in time. Uh, sewer for
this project has not been worked out. Uh, the issue has been around on how this
project can gain access to the Cane Creek Water and Sewer District which is
some distance away going north on Howard Gap Road. The applicant at, at your
January hearing indicated that he’d planned to put in a lift station and tie to
the force main which serves the
Chairman Hawkins – “Does any
of the Board or parties have questions for Mr. Tweed?”
Commissioner Moyer – “I do
for
Gary Tweed – “Correct.”
Commissioner Moyer – “Can
that not be transferred to the Cane Creek Water and Sewer District so it will
become in a government entity and then this problem would go away?”
Gary Tweed – “We, if the
school district would transfer that line to us then it would be considered a
public sewer and could be used to its limit of what that capacity is. We have
asked the School Board in the past, they’ve indicated that they would be
willing to transfer it to us, provided that we also take their lift station that
serves the school. We went back to them and said that that would be considered
if they would upgrade their lift station to our standards. Their current
station they have is not built to the Cane Creek standards, and they refused to
do so. So that’s kind of where that was left with the School Board.”
Commissioner Moyer – “But is
it possible that the developer would agree to do that if we, as part of working
this out?”
Gary Tweed – “That would be a
question for the developer.”
Chairman Hawkins – “You have
any other questions? Anybody else have a question for Mr. Tweed? Thank you
Bruce Thompson – “On what’s
been said so far?”
Chairman Hawkins – “Just,
just the evidence that you wanna present to the Board.”
Commissioner Moyer – “Grady,
excuse me, at what point are we gonna get, the um, applicant’s response to this.
Cause a lot of these were questions that maybe, they’ll foresee that’s no
problem, we we’ll mark that, or we have no problem with this.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Well I, I
was gonna give um a little chance to look those over because eventually we need
to go through those and, and ask him which of those he’s able to respond to. If
that’s the question from the Board we can do that now.”
Commissioner Moyer – “I would
like, while it’s still fresh in my mind, but.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Yeah.”
Commissioner Moyer – “But I
think Angie may have an issue.”
Angela Beeker – “I have a
suggestion. Um, it, because it’s so detailed and this is so, this is probably
the most complex vested rights application that’s been before the Board, um, I
don’t know that it’s reasonable to ask the applicant tonight to come up with
all the sudden setbacks and things like that. Uh, my suggestion would be to
take all the evidence and hold the hearing open and let myself and Karen and
the applicant sit down to talk about or, or come up with some propo, a proposed
set of these standards and responses to these questions back to the Board, that
we could distribute back to the parties too at the same time so when you put,
brought it back together, everyone could respond to those. Um, because I know
that you’re gonna work out that level of detail tonight.”
Chairman Hawkins – “I, I
wouldn’t think so not with ten pages of uh, things. I, I almost thought that
the, that they had had privy to that prior to the meeting but apparently not.
Is that cre, is that cre Mr., uh, true Mr. Campano?”
Gaston Campano – “Yeah. If I
could address the issue. The uh, yeah as far as I’m aware we didn’t but as we
went through and as Luther was just explaining to me uh, the majority of these
items are already addressed in this latest plan. There are a few minor things
such as the setback and the uh, commercial area which we don’t have actually
shown on the plan. But none of them are any issues, it’s just a matter of, you
know, seeing what the dimensions are cause they are designed it’s just a matter
of putting the dimensions on there.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Would you
be comfortable with working with Mrs. Beeker’s suggestion that uh, we, we take
the rest of the evidence and give the, the, the three of you time to look at
those in detail, make response so we can share that with the other parties uh,
and hold the, hold the meeting open until you’ve had time to do that and
distribute it?”
Gaston Campano – “Yes, we’re we’re fine doing that and we’d be agreeable uh, to
make sure the details are in general compliance with the plan that’s being
shown there.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Okay.
Will that work for you Bill?”
Commissioner Moyer – “Yeah. I
was hoping we could get it wrapped up tonight but.”
Gaston Campano – “Yeah, we
were too.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Well I,
I, I was…”
Gaston Campano – “…some
simple way to do that.”
Chairman Hawkins – “…with as
many uh, as many things here plus we’ve got to integrate that with what came
out of the Planning Board to some extent I would think, and uh, and I think
that could be time consuming.”
Angela Beeker – “I think the
Board can come to a sen, con, consensus at the end as whether you’re leaning
towards granting the vested right or not so you have some indication. Then it
would just be a matter of if that’s the Board’s, the direction the Board’s
leaning that, of working out those details. Um, I do, I would like to um,
after, at the close of the evidence um, talk to the Board in Closed Session
about the sewer issue.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Okay. We’ll
have to I guess amend our agenda for that.”
Angela Beeker – “I think that
you can make that motion any time to do that.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Okay,
okay, thank you Mr. Campano.”
Commissioner Moyer – “Well
can I ask Mr. Campano”
Chairman Hawkins – “Oh sure.”
Commissioner Moyer – “to
comment on the sewer. Well he or Luther, who ever is gonna do that cause I’d
like what.”
Chairman Hawkins – “What your
plan is.”
Gaston Campano – “…I could go
ahead and give you uh, comments on the sewer and where we are with the sewer
right now. Uh, number one we have spoken with some utility companies, uh and we
do think there is possibilities. We understand that we’re gonna need sewer to
make this happen. Uh, we do think there are some possibilities to deal with the
uh, sewer companies and, and though we have looked at that route we actually
have that on hold. We have prepared a schematic and a sketch plan of connecting
the school into a brand new lift station that would eliminate the school’s lift
station completely and we have already contacted the engineer for the school
system and he has a copy of the plan as of this morning and is arranging a
meeting. Uh, effectively what we’re trying to do is even if we can get a
private utility company, before we start signing agreements that are difficult
to undo we wanna make sure we get the best solution for everybody involved
including the school cause our discussions with the school have been that they
do not wanna be in the sewer business, that’s not what they do. And that this
is the opportunity to eliminate their lift station, put in a fully upgraded
lift station that meets all public standards, use the same force main, and
effectively eliminate the maintenance of that system. Uh, I know understand the
school is technically a private entity, but, you know it would be a matter of
finding a way to make that work. And we wanna explore that possibility before
we proceed any further with any private utility companies.”
Commissioner Moyer – “And you
would transfer that? You would then transfer that to the County, it would
become part a.”
Gaston Campano – “If we can
get the County, that we would negotiate with the County but yes our intent
would be to take that uh, design a system that the County is also fully and
completely satisfied with both for our needs and any other needs that they feel
we’ll have in that area. And, and to transfer that to the County and make it a
full public utility. Uh, and again we do feel we have other options we just
don’t wanna go full force with these other options and end up with two parallel
systems running next to each other, one with a private utility, the other with
the schools.”
Commissioner Moyer – “Can I
ask
Chairman Hawkins – “Sure.”
Commissioner Moyer – “If that
would satisfy what he is mentioning if, if that was to work.”
Gary Tweed – “It, it, it gets
back to your policy of taking over lift stations. Um, it’s been your past
policy not to take over lift stations from projects. So, and in this case if it
remains a private lift station, and say you did take the force main, then you
would have the school, which is another entity tied into a private system which
under your current ordinance is not allowed. So, you know there’s some policy
things here that would have to be looked at if you wanted to pursue that
approach.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Does that
answer your question?”
Commissioner Moyer – “Yeah
but I think this…”
Chairman Hawkins – “I mean it
doesn’t answer the problem but it answers your question.”
Gaston Campano – “Uh, if, if I
can add, we do understand that, and we’re, we’re aware of that issue. Uh, again
we do feel there is likely a way that we can work two parallel systems but we
just think in one form or another it is just simply, in a large way, uh, I
don’t wanna say foolish, but I guess it seems foolish to have two systems
parallel to each other and before we do anything of that sort we wanna try to
explore all the possibilities to eliminate the school system. We know the
County doesn’t normally wanna take on a lift station largely due to the
maintenance of the lift station but the reality of the matter in this
particular case, you have some very unique circumstances in that the County,
through the school system, is paying for the maintenance of the lift station.
Whether it’s one department or the other, you can pull the money out of your
right pocket or your left pocket, but it is a count, it is a lift station the
County does pay for. Uh, so we wanna explore those possibilities and see are
there some circumstances where it makes sense to get a better lift station that
the one you’re paying for that has a much higher, uh, standard, to meet the
public standards of a lift station in lieu of having two systems. And, and
again we have actually started some initial meetings and we do recognize that
getting the ability to deal with the sewer of this property is necessary for
this plan to actually take place.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Okay
then, in that uh, in that event then we’ll uh, we’ll proceed down that way.
We’ll go ahead and take the evidence uh, from the other parties if they have
any to offer and then we’ll have your discussion on the.”
Angela Beeker – “Okay.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Uh, for
any other parties that are here do you have any evidence that you want to
present? Are you a party or a witness?”
Commissioner Moyer –
“Witness.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Okay,
who’s calling you for a witness?”
Bruce Thompson – “Oh I, I
am.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Okay.
Alright if you wanna.”
Angela Beeker – “I, identify
yourself sir.”
Bruce Thompson – “I’m Bruce
Thompson.”
Angela Beeker – “Okay.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Mrs.
Thompson.”
Susan Morgan – “Hi, I’m Susan
Morgan. And um, I have a question that goes back to the very beginning of the
meeting. On, how this meeting was called. I guess I’m a little confused because
I was here on January 14th and when we, uh, ended that meeting at
7:00 p.m. on January 14th we were sent I believe two to three
certified letters and those meetings kept being cancelled. And I think one of
the times it was due to weather. And now it is October 5th and we
did not receive, uh, an announcement about this meeting certified mail, and I’m
a little concerned that there aren’t more people from Beth, from my, um,
potentially subdivision. Um, and I’m wondering if everybody got the letter. But
then I’m thinking it just might not make any difference because now since then
they have bought the property and uh, it looks like this is going to go
through. From what I can tell it’s just a sew, sewer issue. And I, I guess my
question is, is there any, do the um, the neighbors of the surrounding area
have any say so in this thing. And if they do I’m concerned that not everybody
was aware of the meeting. That’s my question.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Uh, I’ll
ask uh, either Mrs. Smith or, or Mrs. Beeker to answer the notification
procedures. Uh, we, we assume that everything was notified properly and I.”
Susan Morgan – “My, my
question again, this meeting was not, uh, certified mail. Before I had to go to
the post office, sign, get the letter. This time it just came to my house.”
Chairman Hawkins – “What, I,
I.”
Susan Morgan – “My question
is I’m concerned that not everyone was aware of the meeting.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Karen did
you send out meeting notices or was it advertised in the paper as a, uh, as a
new meeting or what.”
Karen Smith – “I didn’t do
the notices to the parties. I did the notices to the adjoining owners and to
the applicant. And we did have four notices in the paper, and I, I can’t speak
for the notice that went to the parties, I’m not sure. Mine was hand delivered,
I’m right across the street…”
Susan Morgan – “And again, if
it’s not an issue it appears to me that this is gonna go through. I was under
the impression back in January that the people were here to try to stop the
development because it was such high density. But if there’s no, I mean if we
don’t have a say so on getting this stopped then...”
Chairman Hawkins – “Well you,
you, you certain have a say so, that’s the reason you’re a party to the
hearing.”
Angela Beeker – “Well she’s
not a party, that, that’s the first thing.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Or a
witness. Uh, but the, the people that are party to the uh, that were made part
of the hearing, that, that is exactly…”
Angela Beeker – “Did you, did
you request to be a party at the last.”
Susan Morgan – “I was, I
didn’t get here in time.”
Angela Beeker – “Okay.”
Susan Morgan – “But I am
involved.”
Angela Beeker – “Um, I’m not
uh, uh, under oath but I can submit the notification that went out to all the
parties. I got one of those back as undeliverable, to Mr. Moore, and he is not
here. Um, actually it wasn’t the notification of the um, hearing that came back
it was the um, minutes that came, that came, that came back. When I sent out
the minutes for everybody. Um, I’m not aware of any legal requirement to send
em certified.”
Susan Morgan – “Okay well I
was, they all came certified before.”
Angela Beeker – “Um, and none
of them cam back, except that one to Mr. Moore. So um, I, I frankly don’t see a
problem or an issue with it. Um, I don’t know if people had personal conflicts
or whatever. Um, certainly if parties um, are approved by the Board they can
call and check and find out what the status of things are. Um, but I feel like
we’ve done everything reasonable and legally required to notify them of the
hearing. Because it was advertised in the paper. Karen can you repeat what,
what you did? She sent it to all or the adjacent property owners in addition to
what I sent out and most of the parties identified themselves as being adjacent
property owners. So those people would have gotten actually three mailings as a
part of this. Um, it, there were two parties if memory serves that were in the
vicinity that were allowed to participate so they would have only gotten my two
mailings, but most of the parties should have gotten three. So.”
Karen Smith – “My mailing was
not certified because it was, now that we’re in the process of the hearing
they’re not parties necessarily and so mine was just a, a courtesy notice to
let them know. Um, but I did send those to the adjacent owners, certified to
Mr. Campano under your, um, Rules of Procedure for Quasi-Judicial Proceedings,
and then um, it was in the paper. You have to do four notices, two twice a week
for the two weeks prior to the hearing week and so we had legal notices
September 22nd, September 25th, September 29th
and October 2nd.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Okay.”
Susan Morgan – “I’m not
questioning the legality of the notice of the meeting, I, I, my interest is
sparked that we got three certified letters back in January and February and
then we got a message on our phone that in my mind, I thought it was a dead
done deal that it was not going forward. And now, I get the letter to the
people that were here that were actually parties at the January 14th
meeting with the minutes and, you know, now I feel like this is, you know, it’s
gone a lot further. My, my question is why, you know, they were going certified
and then it was stopped and then nobody’s here so it’s just, I not…”
Chairman Hawkins – “Well I
can’t question why nobody’s here”
Susan Morgan – “I can.”
Chairman Hawkins – “but
apparently the uh, the procedure’s been followed. So I would ask as a witness
do you have any evidence to present?”
Susan Morgan – “No.”
Angela Beeker – “And I would
tell the Board at this point I would recommend the Board complete the hearing.
I a party wishes to challenge it on the back end due to this issue they
certainly could do that, Um, but at this point I would recommend the Board proceed.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Okay.
Okay then uh, was there any other evidence uh, from any of the parties? Yes
mam, please come up.”
Donna Riley - “…last time I
came here I didn’t get a notice. Excuse me, Donna Riley. I did not get a notice
that it was cancelled and I came here and there were parties from the Board of
Education that were at this meeting and I see they were not notified this
time.”
Chairman Hawkins – “We
received a letter from the Board of Education that was turned in to evidence.”
Donna Riley – “But Mr. Jones
was here last time because he and I had a conversation as we were leaving the
cancelled meeting. And he did state that they would be a party of the hearing.”
Chairman Hawkins – “I, I.”
Angela Beeker - “I can make a
suggestion to the Board. Um, I have, the Board has indicated that if you’re
going to approve the, that you’re gonna hold the hearing open I have no problem
sending out a certified letter to all the parties so that they have one last
opportunity to come in and, you know I’ll send them the same thing that gets
sent out to the parties that are here, and they would have an opportunity at
that time to come in and comment. I mean, I, I’d be perfectly willing to do
that.”
Chairman Hawkins – “I, I was
curious as to why the Board of Ed. Didn’t make it over. I was looking at the.”
Karen Smith – “The Board of
Edu, I sent, they were on my um, list for adjacent owners and uh, this time it
went to Dr. Page, who replaced Dr. Burnham. Um, Bo Caldwell called me yesterday
and they had decided that they were not going to come and participate, that
they had given you the letter. Now last time I think they had notified the
Principal at the school. Um, I don’t think that was…”
Chairman Hawkins – “Yeah I
remember that.”
Donna Riley – “Well I had talked
to Shirley McGee and also David Jones and they had stated.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Well if
we’re gonna hold the hearing open I don’t think the Board has any uh, problem
with sending out letters uh, Angie as you submitted, as you suggested.”
Angela Beeker – “Okay.”
Chairman Hawkins – “That tell
you when we’re gonna reconvene.”
Donna Riley – “Like I said I
didn’t get a notice several times that it was cancelled so I did.”
Karen Smith – “I, well I was
gonna notice that, I, I have a copy of a returned mail to you, if you’re Donna
Riley, that was undelivered. So I don’t know if it was from that particular
hearing but I can pull it out and...”
Angela Beeker – “Karen. I, I
will do that.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Okay.
Okay do, do.”
Donna Riley – “That was just
my point that the Board had, and I had talked with the, Shirley McGee, the
Principal and she was interested in.”
Angela Beeker – “Um hum. Well
the, the Board of Education was not made a party. Therefore they would not have
gotten this notice that I sent out because I only sent it to the parties
because only parties at this point, you know, have a right to fully participate
in the hearing.”
Donna Riley – “Well but they
could certainly could have been called as a witness.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Yeah.”
Angela Beeker – “And any
party could do that.”
Donna Riley – “Right, and
like I say I think…”
Chairman Hawkins – “But
apparently the Board of Ed. chose not to be here this evening.”
Donna Riley – “…talking about
their sewer system…involving.”
Angela Beeker – “Do you have
any evidence Mrs. Riley?”
Donna Riley – “Um, no, not at
this point.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Okay.
Is.”
Angela Beeker – “This’ll be
your only opportunity to offer any.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Any, any
other questions uh, by any of the other parties for Mrs. Riley?”
Kathy Cheekos – “My name is
Kathy Cheekos and I was here at the January 14th meeting. I just
wanna support these two uh, women that I also did not receive, unless it was
buried in that packet. I got the minutes from the January 14th
meeting, did get phone calls about the
cancellations. I got a phone call that indicated that the request had been um,
revoked or.”
Angela Beeker – “Tabled.”
Kathy Cheekos – “Tabled or
something, right. And so, sort of forgot about this meeting. Along came the,
the minutes, I read through those. I do not recall seeing, unless it was buried
somewhere in that cover letter that came with the minutes, about tonight. So I
got a call last evening, about 9:00 from my next door neighbor saying ‘are you
coming?’ and I didn’t know what he was talking about. He said he received his
notice on Saturday. And I know I’ve not received anything recently at all.”
Angela Beeker – “Okay.”
Kathy Cheekos – “I just
wanted to substantiate that it’s not just um, their mail.”
Angela Beeker – “You did,
when did you receive the, as I’m reading it um, I may have misspoke on me
sending out two. It looks like I sent out one but on September 13th
I sent a letter to all the parties notifying them of the meeting and enclosing
the minutes, on September 13. When did you receive that?”
Kathy Cheekos – “I, it was
probably several weeks ago yes, that I received the minutes.”
Angela Beeker – “And that
also in the cover letter had the.”
Kathy Cheekos – “Okay.”
Angela Beeker – “’I write to inform
you that on Tuesday’ it was the very first sentence, ‘that on Tuesday,
September 7, 2004 the Board of Commissioners set a date to resume the
Quasi-Judicial proceeding for Tuesday, October 5th at 6:00 p.m. to
proceed with the vested rights application. I’m enclosing a copy of the minutes
and’.”
Kathy Cheekos – “Okay I
missed that.”
Angela Beeker – “Okay.”
Kathy Cheekos – “That’s my
oversight.”
Angela Beeker – “Okay.
Kathy Cheekos – “Thank you
very much.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Okay. Any,
any question uh, for Mrs. uh, Cheekos?”
Angela Beeker – “Did you have
any evidence about the plan?”
Chairman Hawkins – “Okay.
Any, so we’ve got uh, all the questions uh, that we wanted to ask.”
Bruce Thompson – “I have one.
Uh, Bruce Thompson. It says um, your name was?”
Karen Smith – “Karen.”
Bruce Thompson – “Karen, Uh,
she had pointed out some uh, things for you to uh, consider. And what I think
is the uh, most important thing that should be considered is the safety of the
children since you’re putting in 198 units right directly across from a school.
Uh, I don’t have kids so I don’t know the ages, what, 12 and younger? That um,
let’s figure 198, figure 10% of those are retirees which is about the average
there in uh, Fletcher area. Um, so that’s gonna, and you figure two adults per
household, although this is
Chairman Hawkins – “I’m not,
not sure that’s down Fletcher’s jurisdiction but it may be.”
Bruce Thompson – “Uh.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Is it.”
Unknown – “Yeah.”
Bruce Thompson – “Yeah it is
cause uh, doesn’t uh, city police have like two miles outside city limits to
uh, to be uh, yeah.”
Commissioner Messer – “…they
control that intersection.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Then why
aren’t they doing the zoning?”
Commissioner Young – “Did
um.”
Bruce Thompson – “And, as far
as the sewer goes, yeah I agree I don’t want the County to get into the uh,
lift pump, uh, maintenance end of it too cause wasn’t it just a couple years
ago Cane Creek uh, Sewer System was in such, uh, arrears on some debt or
whatever that the rates were jacked up, you know, higher that any place in the
County. Cause I’m a Fletcher resident, and we were paying that off and now that
it’s been paid off our rates really didn’t go down all that much quote unquote.
So, you know, I don’t wanna see my water bill, I’m tired of doing that you
know, it’s expensive to go to the toilet. And uh, you know, so, yeah I don’t
want you to get in the uh, sewer business either. If they wanna build that lift
station and pay for it, or and have the residents of Fox Glen pay for it you
know, for the 150 years down the road that’d be fine but I don’t wanna see my
taxes going to pay for another lift station when it’s not needed. When
everything else around there is basically septic. Cause I know there in Beth
Eden we are zoned for septic and we’ve been approved for septic. So I’m not
gonna have, you know, it’s gonna, I paid my one time cost of the toilet and of
my water on well, you know, I don’t wanna have to be paying double for somebody
else’s water and sewer also which is what my taxes go to. So, but the main
thing is you gotta think about safety for the kids, cause that’s an awful lot
of traffic on a two lane road. Thank you.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Any, any
questions for uh, Mr. Thompson from anyone? Okay.”
Commissioner Young – “Did we
not get a letter from the School Board that they concern about the safety of
the…”
Chairman Hawkins – “It’s part
of your packet. Uh, if you’re gonna send out notices are you suggesting then
that we keep it open to, to take um, uh, evidence or are you suggesting that we
go ahead and do the closing remarks at this time, as far as proceeding.”
Angela Beeker – “I think if
you send out certified letters to address the concern that’s been raised that
you would have to hold it open for them to have additional evidence. But they
could also comment on the proposed order at that time as well. They’d have
something specific in their hands to respond to which is more than they usually
have.”
Chairman Hawkins – “Well then I quess at this point if we’re going to proceed
with uh, your, your meeting with the developer to address the questions that we
got then, that we’d need to uh, uh, discontinue the meeting at this point and
let you do that and bring it back and send you letter.”
Angela Beeker – “Except that
I would like to talk to you about the sewer in”
Chairman Hawkins – “Okay.”
Angela Beeker – “in closed
session.”
Chairman Hawkins – “You have
a, a, statute for me to.”
Angela
Beeker – “I do. I, I will word it and then you can say you make that motion but
I need a motion for you to go into closed session pursuant to 143-318.11(a)(3) to
consult with an attorney employed or retained by the public body in order to
preserve the attorney-client privilege between the attorney and the public
body, which privilege is hereby acknowledged.”
Chairman
Hawkins – “Okay, I’ll make that motion.
All those.”
Commissioner
Moyer – “Before you do that can we continue this before we do that so the
people can leave and?”
Angela
Beeker – “I think you can say that no other action is gonna be taken and, when
you come out but I don’t think you can continue it till you have come back out
of closed session. You can’t actually make the motion to do that. You could
tell them when you’re gonna continue it to, but you can’t actually make that
motion.”
Chairman
Hawkins – “Do we have a con, a date, do, do you know a date that Karen, that
ya’ll have taken a chance to work this out? Uh, for those of you that are
parties that, basically if, if we have to closed session, um, we can’t
terminate or, or set our continuation till we come back out. If we’re
anticipating not taking any further action and, and tell you, you don’t have to
sit here till, till we come back out to find out we’re not gonna take any
further action is, is…”
Angela
Beeker – “I don’t anticipate it taking more than five or ten minutes in closed
session.”
Chairman
Hawkins – “So it won’t be uh, the attorney doesn’t think we’ll be back there
very long so uh, uh, I, why don’t we just go ahead and go in, Bill, into closed
session if it’s gonna be that short and that’ll give maybe Karen and uh, and
ya’ll to find out a date that you can find out before you leave here that we’re
gonna continue the hearing.”
Angela
Beeker – “Okay.”
Chairman
Hawkins – “Okay, the motion on the floor, all those in favor of that motion say
‘aye’.”
In
unison – “Aye.”
Chairman
Hawkins – “Okay we’ll be back very shortly.”
Following
closed session, Chairman Hawkins called the meeting back to order. October 20th
was recommended as a possible date for continuation of the hearing. Chairman Hawkins made the motion to keep the
Quasi-Judicial hearing open to October 20, 2004 at 6:00 p.m. All voted in favor
and the motion carried. Mrs. Beeker will notify the parties of that new
hearing date.
Attest: