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