STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
COUNTY OF HENDERSON MAY 3, 1999
The Henderson County Board of Commissioners met for a regularly scheduled meeting at 5:30 p.m. in the Commissioners= Conference Room of the Henderson County Office Building at 100 North King Street, Hendersonville, North Carolina.
Those present were: Chairman Grady Hawkins, Vice-Chair Bill Moyer, Commissioner Renee Kumor, Commissioner Don Ward, Commissioner Marilyn Gordon, County Manager David E. Nicholson, Assistant County Manager Angela S. Beeker, County Attorney Don H. Elkins, and Clerk to the Board Elizabeth W. Corn.
Also present were: Staff Attorney Jennifer O. Jackson, Interim Planning Director Karen Smith, County Engineer Gary Tweed, and Planner Suzanne Vernon.
CALL TO ORDER/WELCOME
Chairman Hawkins called the meeting to order and welcomed all in attendance. He also welcomed those who will be watching this meeting on cable television, since this will be the first meeting televised.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Commissioner Gordon led the Pledge of Allegiance to the American Flag.
Bryan Davis of First Baptist Church, East Flat Rock gave the invocation.
DISCUSSION/ADJUSTMENT OF AGENDA
Commissioner Kumor requested that one item be added as Item #4 under Nominations - Juvenile Crime Prevention Council.
Chairman Hawkins requested one item be added as Item #5 under Nominations - Cane Creek Water and Sewer Advisory Committee. He requested that Staff Reports, Item AA@ be pulled, as Tax Assessor Robert Baird will be unable to attend. He also requested that one item be added as Item #5 under Pending Issues - Joint School Facilities Meeting update, the Hendersonville Water/Flat Rock project, and jail financing.
Commissioner Moyer requested that one item be added as Item #4 under Pending Issues - Cable Franchise.
Clerk to the Board Elizabeth Corn requested that under Consent Agenda, Notification of Vacancies, Item AG3" - Youth Services Advisory Committee be deleted, as it is now part of the Juvenile Crime Prevention Council.
Commissioner Moyer requested that Consent Agenda Item #C, Henderson County Financial Report be pulled for discussion. David Nicholson explained that the Budget appeared to be in order, based on his experience with previous budgets. He also noted that any money in a capitol project fund will roll into that fund for the next fiscal year.
Commissioner Hawkins made the motion to approve the consent agenda. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The CONSENT AGENDA consisted of the following:
Minutes were presented for the Boards= review and approval of the following meetings:
March 30, 1999, special called meeting
Henderson County Public Schools Financial Report - March 1999
The March 1999 Public Schools Financial Report was provided to the Board for information and consent approval.
Henderson County Financial Report - March 1999
The March 1999 Financial Report was provided to the Board for information and consent approval.
Proclamation - EMS Week
A proclamation was submitted for the Board=s adoption designating the week of May 16-22, 1999, as Emergency Medical Services Week.
Tax Collector=s Report
Terry F. Lyda, Henderson County Tax Collector, submitted the tax report for the period through April 26, 1999 for the Board=s review.
Disposition of Lightbars
At the Board of Commissioners meeting on April 5, 1999, the Board considered the disposition of ten (10) Federal Jetsonic Lightbars to Madison County. Staff was directed to inquire as to whether any of the volunteer fire departments could use the lights. There were two requests: one from Bat Cave Fire Department for one (1) lightbar, and one from Gerton Fire Department for two (2) lightbars.
A draft resolution had been prepared for the Board=s consideration allowing the disposition of the lightbars to Bat Cave Fire Department (1), Gerton Fire Department (2), and Madison County (7).
Notifications of Vacancies:
The Board was notified of the following vacancies which will appear under Anominations@ on the next agenda:
1. Social Services Board Members - 1 vac.
2. Henderson County Regional Water Forum - 1 vac.
3. Youth Services Advisory Committee - 4 vac.
4. Blue Ridge Community College Board of Trustees - 2 vac.
5. EMS Council - 1 vac.
6. Henderson County Board of Health - 2 vac.
7. Library Board of Trustees - 2 vac.
8. Mountain Area Workforce Development Board - 3 vac.
9. Jury Commission - 1 vac.
10. Henderson County Juvenile Crime Prevention Council - 1 vac.
11. Hendersonville City Zoning Board of Adjustment - 1 vac. (alternate)
Chairman Hawkins reminded the Board of the following vacancies and opened the floor to nominations:
Nursing/Adult Care Home Community Advisory Committee - 10 vac.
Chairman Hawkins nominated Aubrey Carruth. Renee Kumor nominated Claire Boo, David Dennison, Alan Brown, Sarah Jones, Bonnie Stewart, Lois Hoots, Calvin Titus, Carol Shuffstall and Jerry Chandler.
Following discussion, these names were left as nominations, and rolled to the next meeting for a vote.
Henderson County Planning Board - 2 vac.
Commissioner Moyer nominated Bill Blalock and Michael Case. There are no other nominations. Commissioner Ward called the question on the motion. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Solid Waste Advisory Committee (SWAC) - 3 vac.
Commissioner Ward nominated Frank Drake. Commissioner Kumor nominated Emily Anderson. Chairman Hawkins nominated Jim Crafton. Commissioner Kumor made the motion to suspend the rules and appoint Mr. Drake, Ms. Anderson and Mr. Crafton. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Juvenile Crime Prevention Council - 1 vac.
One of the members of this board must be an individual who is under the age of 21. Commissioner Kumor has been in contact with Blue Ridge Community College regarding this vacancy. They have recommended April Bane. Commissioner Kumor nominated April Bane for the vacancy. Chairman Hawkins made the motion that Ms. Bane be accepted by acclimation. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Cane Creek Water and Sewer Advisory Committee - 3 vac.
There were no nominations at this time so this item was rolled to the next meeting.
Request to Present a Reappraisal Update
This item had been pulled from the agenda.
Henderson County Juvenile Crime Prevention Council Annual Plan for FY 1999-2000
Larry Harmon was present to update the Board. The Annual Plan for Juvenile Crime Prevention is required to be submitted to the State Office of Juvenile Justice. The plan requires the approval of the Board of Commissioners and the signature of the Chairman. This plan is required in order to receive State funding for Juvenile Services.
Chairman Hawkins asked where some of the data came from. There was concern that Henderson County=s rate for delinquent juveniles was higher than the prior year, higher than the regional rate and higher than the state rate. Mr. Harmon indicated that it was collected from the juvenile court records. He also noted that while those figures were higher, they were not alarmingly higher.
Commissioner Moyer made a motion to approve the plan, and authorize the Chairman to sign it. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Extension for Improvement Guarantee for Hearthstone, Phase II
As allowed by Section 170-39 of the Henderson County Code, the Board of Commissioners on May 20, 1998, approved the posting of a letter of credit as an improvement guarantee for Hearthstone, Phase II. The Performance Agreement required that the road and water improvements be completed by May 15, 1999. Some, but not all, of the road and water improvements were completed by that date.
William G. Lapsley submitted a letter and an amended application for a subdivision improvement guarantee requesting to extend the project completion date. The application requested that the Board extend the improvement completion date until December 31, 1999. A new letter of credit would be posted in the amount of $145,000 to cover the cost estimate plus 25%, and to reflect the change in the completion date and the expiration date.
Chairman Hawkins made a motion to accept the letter of credit as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Jackson Park Ballfield Lights
Angela Beeker was pleased to report to the Board that their mission to address the Jackson Park ballfield lighting project, was accomplished successfully. Following discussion with N.B. Haynes at the April 20, 1999 meeting regarding concerns about the light poles on ballfields in Jackson Park, the Board authorized the light fixtures be taken down on all fields except #1 and #4.
On April 22nd, Haynes Electric had removed fixtures on all fields except #4 and #8. Field #8 was not a high priority because it is not used, and can be gated. Regarding field #4, lights and crossbars from the fixtures that were taken down were used to rework those fixtures. The current cost estimate was originally quoted at approximately $7,000. A follow-up quote estimated the cost at between $9,000 and $10,000, closer to $10,000.
Commissioner Ward commented that GE had some volunteers come out and help aim the lights at no charge. GE has really helped with this situation, and their assistance is appreciated. He also thanked the Henderson County Maintenance Department, and Les Capps and Alvin Barnwell in particular. He stated that it would be appropriate for Mr. Nicholson to write a letter commending the Maintenance Department for their team effort on this project.
David Nicholson noted that the cost for the repairs had been included in this years budget. He also thanked the Recreation and Maintenance Departments, Mrs. Beeker, and the Youth Baseball programs for changing their schedule.
DuPont State Forest
Commissioner Moyer reminded the Board that there is an effort underway to try to preserve some additional land that is adjacent to the Dupont State Forest. The State is considering purchasing the land, and Commissioner Moyer felt it would be a nice addition to our recreational area. If the State purchased the land it would serve Henderson and Transylvania Counties. He requested that the Board go on record in support of the State effort to maintain the land in its natural state. Chairman Hawkins stated that a letter could be drafted to the Governor indicating the Board=s support, with copies being sent to our Representatives. Commissioner Gordon agreed that it was important to go on record in support of the State purchase because it will take a community show of support to keep the State on track in securing this property.
Elimination of State Reimbursements
Mr. Nicholson commented that he had received a memo from the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners regarding the AElimination of State Reimbursements@. Over the last 20 years, the State has done away with a lot of the taxing power of the Board of Commissioners, both in the property tax, and intangibles tax areas. The State has always said they would reimburse the Counties for the cutbacks on their taxing power. Since this is a lean year, there has been discussion that the State may withhold the reimbursement.
Mr. Nicholson stated that the Board may want to go on record saying AGeneral Assembly, the deal was, you took it out of our tax base, but you would reimburse us. And that should apply to good years and to lean years at the State.@
Chairman Hawkins suggested that a letter be drafted for Commissioner Kumor to take to our Representatives indicating our concern over the possible loss of revenue.
Commissioner Moyer updated the Board on a conversation he had with Mayor Niehoff concerning the Cable TV franchise. The City of Hendersonville had scheduled a meeting with Mediacom. Commissioner Moyer received a call from the City saying they would actually prefer to negotiate with the county, and would like to have a consultant look into what needs to be done. They would prefer to go ahead on a joint basis if we were interested in doing that.
Angela Beeker stated that she had been in contact with a firm that would do the consultation, and was anticipating receiving their proposal at any time. She requested first that they cost out presenting to the Board of Commissioners the advantages and disadvantages of renegotiating a cable franchise. Secondly, a compliance audit because the Board has indicated that they would wish to ensure that they were in compliance with the current franchise before they would be willing to discuss a renegotiation of the franchise. Thirdly, a proposal on representing the Board through a renegotiation process.
Chairman Hawkins stated that upon receipt on that proposal, he would notify the other municipalities of the cost involved and the particulars of what we have requested.
Joint School Facilities Meeting
Chairman Hawkins reminded the Board that at their last meeting, a letter was drafted to the Board of Education. A response was received back from Superintendent Yeager stating that they are interested in getting together as soon as possible. A tentative date has been set for May 12, 1999, from 9:00am-12:00pm. The main area that should be looked at is the feasibility of using a prototype school and the associated costs, particularly in light of the pending Fletcher and Balfour school projects.
Following discussion, it was agreed that the first meeting would deal with the cost savings prototypes, and the second meeting would deal with the land purchase.
Hendersonville Water/Flat Rock project
Chairman Hawkins reminded the board that he and Commissioner Moyer have been trying to collect the information necessary to work on the Flat Rock Sewer Issue and the Hendersonville Water Agreement. The information has now been received, and work will begin on it shortly.
Chairman Hawkins noted that he will be working with Staff in the next few days on Jail Financing, and will report back to the Board on those meetings.
The Board set a Secondary Road Public Hearing for May 18, 1999 at 9:00am. This Public Hearing is at the request of the NC Department of Transportation.
Chairman Hawkins informed the Board that a Town Hall meeting will be held on May 12, 1999, and they would appreciate some Board of Commissioner representation.
David Nicholson reminded the Board that dates for budget workshops will need to be set soon. He requested that Board let him know any dates that they will not be available from the middle of May, through June. He will do the preliminary leg work for all meetings that need to held in conjunction with other agencies.
Mr. Nicholson noted for the Board that May 21, 1999 at 2:30 will be the Grand Opening and ribbon cutting of the EMS Station at Mills River. He also reminded the Board that there is a tentative Joint Facilities Meeting scheduled for May 12, 1999 between 9:00 am and 11:00 am.
French Board River Regulations
Mr. Nicholson informed the Board per their direction from the previous meeting, Staff had done some research on defining the rules and regulations for the French Broad River. NCGS 75A-15 states that AAny subdivision of this State may, but only after public notice, make formal application to the Wildlife Resources Commission for rules on waters within the subdivision=s territorial limits as to the matters listed in subsection (a) of this section.@ There are currently a number of administrative rules that the Wild Life Commission has put into effect across the entire State.
Following discussion, Chairman Hawkins suggested having the Commission investigate the recreation and safety needs on the water in question. They would be in a position to see what rules are required, and if a public hearing is needed, one can be set at that time. He recommended taking care of the safety issues first, and then look at the noise issues.
Staff was directed to give public notice that the Board will request to have the Wildlife Resources Commission begin their investigation on safety rules. Mr. Nicholson will be in touch with Buncombe County to inform them of this action.
Petition to Abandon Portion of Old Asheville Road (SR #1533)
The County had received a petition from Dawjoncourt, Inc. asking that the County request NCDOT to abandon and remove from the State maintenance system a portion of Old Asheville Road (SR 1533). NCGS 136-63 requires that the Board find that with the abandonment of the road, Athe best interest of the citizens of the County will be served thereby.@ The Planning Department had conducted an impact study which indicated that the portion of the road which is subject to the petition is entirely contained on property owned by Dawjoncourt, Inc. and access to the remaining portion of the road would not be impeded.
Following discussion, the Board decided to hold a public input session on May 19, 1999 at 9:00am.
PUBLIC HEARING - Proposed Zoning Districts for The Hoopers Creek Community
Commissioner Kumor made the motion for the Board to go into Public Hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Jake Gilmer reminded the Board that they had scheduled for this date a public hearing on proposed zoning districts for the Hoopers Creek Community. In October of 1998, citizens from the Hoopers Creek area formed the Hoopers Creek Planning Committee in order to organize an effort to establish zoning in their community. On December 7, 1998 the Committee submitted an application to the Planning Department for new zoning in Hoopers Creek.
At their January 5, 1999 meeting, the Henderson County Planning Board considered the zoning application and appointed a subcommittee to (1) conduct a zoning study of the proposed area and (2) make a zoning recommendation to the full Planning Board. The study area size is approximately 6.7 square miles, the number of properties in the area are about 734. There are about 550 property owners in the area. The land use characteristics show approximately 39% residential land use, 35% open space or undeveloped, and 26% agricultural. These comprise the three major land use categories. Two drop-in sessions were also held to meet with the public on the basics of zoning.
The Subcommittee presented the results of the study and their zoning recommendations at the March 30, 1999 regular Planning Board meeting and the Board voted unanimously (8-0) to recommend three main zoning districts for the area. RC Rural Conservation District, R-30 Low-Density Residential District, and R-20 Low-Density Residential District. These recommendations were based on environmental constraints, land use characteristics, and individual requests of property owners.
Chairman Hawkins requested that Karen Smith respond to some questions that the Board had received regarding the zoning proposal. The questions had been generated by James Russell and others who had submitted a counter petition. Ms. Smith defined the differences between R-20, R-30 and RC districts, and how these districts would affect property uses, but stressed that any existing uses would be grandfathered. She noted that the zoning ordinance does exempt agricultural uses, and bonafide farm uses. She also noted that the zoning ordinance does not restrict noise, though certain uses may have a condition listed.
1. Jack Bonner - Mr. Bonner stated that he runs a low key auto dealership, and was concerned that he would be able to continue the business that he has built. He was guaranteed by the Planning Department that his business would be grandfathered in to any proposed zoning district.
2. Amy Case - Ms. Case was concerned that she had signed the petition which stated she was undecided about the proposed zoning. She signed the petition without realizing what it really was, and wished to have her name removed, and added to the petition which is against zoning.
3. Francis Wilder - Mr. Wilder stated that he and his immediate neighbors were in favor of the proposed zoning.
4. Jim Clayton - Mr. Clayton thanked the Planning Department and staff for the work they have put into the project. He stated that of the people surveyed, 70% are in favor of zoning. He discussed how the project has been publicized, and stated that it should have come as no surprise to anyone living in the area. He explained that there were two petitions that were circulated, one dealt with a moratorium, and one was a zoning petition
5. Suzanne Tiller - Ms. Tiller noted that the process of zoning came about because of the threat of large mobile home parks. The committee was organized so citizens could take a proactive approach to further development, as well as to put the Planning Department application together. She too explained how the project has been publicized. She emphasized how much time and effort has gone into the application, and urged the Commissioners to take action on it at tonight=s meeting.
6. James Russell - Mr. Russell had submitted the questions which were answered by Karen Smith at the beginning of the Public Hearing. He spoke in opposition to the proposed zoning. He stated that he had only seen one petition, and that petition was for the zoning. He spoke about how mobile homes could be integrated into zoning in such a way that restricts mobile home parks, but allows people more uses for their land.
7. Lane Godsey - Mr. Godsey spoke in favor of zoning. He stressed that there is no perfect solution, but that the proposed zoning is the best proactive answer.
8. Richard Stennett - Mr. Stennett spoke in favor of zoning. He stated that the property restrictions do not outweigh the protection they would be given. He hopes to maintain the rural character of the community, and stated that zoning in other areas has proven to be a positive when it has been used properly.
9. Doug Lassiter - Mr. Lassiter wished to go on record as being in favor of the zoning application. He was in favor of a long term plan, rather than acting on each problem as it arises.
10. John Davis - Mr. Davis echoed the previous sentiments, stating that he too is in favor of zoning. Long range planning is essential to maintain the rural community.
11. Sara Weary - Ms. Weary is not against zoning, but is against spot zoning. She felt that she would only be protected from herself, but not anyone else.
12. Gerald Stevenson - Mr. Stephenson stated that he owned five acres, and was in favor of zoning to a certain extent. He was concerned that his children would not be able to live in affordable housing.
13. James Rohn - Mr. Rohn lives in Hooper=s Creek and operates a mobile home park. Many people in the park have lived there for many years. He stated that it is hard for people on limited incomes to find affordable housing, and the tenants in his park are model citizens.
14. Louise Crook - Ms. Crook questioned why land on one side of the road is zoned, while land on the other side is not. She also stated that her name appeared on a petition, but that she had never signed any petition.
After hearing the concerns about the lot sizes, Suzanne Tiller asked the people who are concerned to take into account the opinions of the people who own the other 93% of the area.
Commissioner Gordon stated that she appreciated the input that had been given. There were very valid points made, and there were a lot of considerations to be taken in. She recommended that a workshop be set to take a good look at all the possibilities.
Commissioner Moyer also requested that they hold a workshop.
Commissioner Ward expressed his preference for county wide safety net zoning, as opposed to zoning certain areas requested by citizens. He stated that the Commissioners should take the leadership role, and not have zoning put in place as a reaction to a specific event.
Following discussion, Commissioner Kumor made the motion that the Board go out of Public Hearing to consider the proposed zoning districts for Hooper=s Creek. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
PUBLIC HEARING - To Consider Adoption of the Proposed Subdivision Ordinance
Commissioner Kumor made the motion for the Board to go into Public Hearing on the consideration for the adoption of a proposed subdivision ordinance. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Jennifer Jackson reminded the Board that at their April 5th meeting, a public hearing was scheduled for this evening concerning the proposed subdivision ordinance and amendments to the land development ordinance that this subdivision ordinance will encompass. Luther Smith has done some work for the Board developing figures that correspond with the ordinance. The first figure is a sample site analysis sketch. Figures two and three portray minimum curve radius and site triangles. Figure four is not referenced in the ordinance, but it takes the site analysis sketch (Figure 1), and overlays a proposed subdivision onto that site analysis sketch. Staff believes this will be a great tool in explaining certain provisions of the ordinance to the public.
Ms. Jackson discussed staff recommended changes to other sections of the ordinance. Appendix 9 and 10 pertain to improvement guarantees. Staff is requesting that these items be removed as they are now outdated. Appendix 9 is a sample letter of credit, and appendix 10 which is a improvement performance guarantee agreement. If these changes are approved, the existing figure and appendix numbers will be updated to reflect changes.
Appendix 12 deals with degrees of kinship in a family subdivision. The Board previously requested this number be reduced to three degrees of kinship. Currently, Appendix 12 contains a typographical error noting this as four degrees of kinship.
Chairman Hawkins requested that any additional changes in text or changes to typographical errors be communicated to the Board.
The definitions of sewage disposal system and water system were discussed. The most current set of definitions came out of the Manufactured Home Park Ordinance. For consistency, staff requested they be allowed to mimic those definitions from the Manufactured Home Park Ordinance. It was the consensus of the Board that that would be the best idea.
There was discussion concerning phasing of a minor subdivision. Staff requested clarification for the issue of when an applicant is approved for a minor subdivision, and has a residual lot that is not large enough to kick them into a major review. The question is how the Board wishes to treat a subsequent application for a second phase when that phase was not originally outlined. Following discussion, it was decided that a subdivision is considered minor as long as additional phases do not cause it to equal or exceed ten lots.
In major applications, a master plan and a development plan are required. The master plan requirement was intended to have the developer map out a rough plan of the entire subdivision, while the development plan is very detail specific. All the information contained on the master plan is included in the development plan. The Board wished to keep the requirement that both of these plans be submitted.
Commissioner Moyer questioned the requirements for private roads in a family subdivision. The intent in the original draft was that driveways or private roads in a family subdivision would not be subject to the regulations for private roads. It was the consensus of the Board to add a provision that would specifically exclude family subdivisions to ensure that this item was clear.
The fee schedule was discussed. Commissioner Ward stated that he had been in communication with other counties and municipalities that have growth problems similar to ours. He proposed the following fees: Minor subdivision - $100 per plan plus $10 per lot, Major subdivision - $200 per plan plus $15 per lot. Commissioner Gordon was concerned that this was higher than our current fee, and much higher than any surrounding County or municipality. Commissioner Ward further suggested flat fees of $25 for plat review, $200 for Improvement Guarantees, $100 for variances, $100 for reinspection, and $250 for extension fees. Following discussion, it was decided that this fee schedule should be considered at the upcoming budget hearings. Commissioner Kumor made the motion that the Board go out of Public Hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Commissioner Moyer made the motion to adopt the Proposed Subdivision Ordinance with the amendments that were suggested and agreed upon by the Board, and make the effective date of it midnight on May 20, 1999. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
INFORMAL PUBLIC COMMENTS
1. Sarah Bumgarner - Ms. Bumgarner thanked the Board for their decision to consult with the Wildlife Commission regarding the ordinances on the French Broad River. She has three concerns as a resident on the French Broad. First, the wildlife and their personal quiet that is being affected by the noise of the air boats. Second is the environmental concern. The air boats are causing waves and therefore erosion. Third is the concern of safety. She stated that the river is rather narrow, the air boat is rather wide, and other boats and canoes use the river as well.
2. David Donnell - Mr. Donnell stated that the safety issues are a real concern, and will be compounded if the river is used by additional air boats, jets skis, or other personal water craft. He questioned who would be liable if there was an accident on the river.
In regards to the noise, Mr. Donnell stated that this is a real problem. Mr. Bumgarner has been trying to quiet the noise, however the noise is still very loud. He reminded the Board that the Noise Ordinance has a sound level limit of 80 decibels. They have monitored the level of noise the boat emits based on 10 minutes before you can see the boat, and when it passes in front of you. Those readings are 98 and 104 respectively. OSHA standards states that at 90 decibels individuals start to incur hearing loss.
He reminded the Board that approximately 40,000 people per year use the French Broad River, and that many of them are concerned about safety, noise and pollution. He hopes that a solution can be found which will be to the good of everyone involved, and for the future of the river.
3. Jack Bonner - Mr. Bonner was not present when his name was called.
4. Mike Bumgarner - Mr. Bumgarner is the owner and president of Airboat Express. He stated that his boat has been inspected by North Carolina Wildlife, and it passed every requirement. He takes every precaution for his passengers, most of whom can not access the river by canoe or raft. He is working on quieting the propellor and the engine noise. He stated that the Noise Ordinance exempts commercial businesses, and he fits that criteria.
He ensured the Board that he respects the river, and everyone who uses it. He asked that everyone respect his right to operate his business on public waters, as others are allowed to operate their business. He thanked the Commissioners for their time and invited them to come take a ride and see the operation.
Chairman Hawkins asked what type of engine is used on the boat. Mr. Bumgarner stated that it is a 454, the smallest engine available for a boat that size. It is carbureted, with one four barrel. He runs headers on it, as well as using collector baffles in the collector, and uses mufflers. The propellor is a fixed pitch, with eight blades, and the gear reduction is 2.08:1.
Issues Regarding the Manufactured Home Park Ordinance
Jennifer Jackson stated that several questions have arisen with the administration of the Manufactured Home Park Ordinance. One concern regards the definition of space and what permits must be in place to qualify as a connection in the definition. Another concern is about the phasing of units. Parks are defined as five or more units, and there is the issue of the initial park requesting to develop four units, but then applying for additional phases. Finally, Appendix A lists contour intervals which were to have been based on USGS maps. Information has come to light which states that these might not be the most appropriate maps to refer to, as they are old and the scale is very small.
Commissioner Ward stated concern that the small park owners were being hurt by the regulations. Examples of this are the park owner who has six units down a mile long drive, who must now put a stone drive down to the park, or an owner who would have to widen an existing road from 12' to 18' to add a second phase. He stated that there is no gray area in the ordinance to allow for common sense exemptions.
Following much discussion about the provisions in the ordinance, it was decided that the Planning Board has an adequate amount of authority to address variances for any special considerations. The problems Commissioner Ward addressed are transitional problems for any new ordinance. If the Planning Board sees that they are receiving variance requests for the same issue many times, they can request from the Board an ordinance amendment.
Landfill Gas Recovery Projects
Jeff Knapp, Facilities Manager with Enerdyne Power Systems, Inc. was present to request the Board=s support for some legislation exempting counties and municipalities that are engaged in landfill gas recovery projects from regulation by the North Carolina Utilities Commission. Currently, they are limited to one end user, and that one user only uses approximately 50% of that gas. If they could use two users, the gas could be used rather than being flared.
Enerdyne, by virtue of an agreement with Henderson County, has the right to any gas generated by the Henderson County Landfill. They are currently pumping gas to Northland and have had requests from other companies such as Printpack. The legislation that Enerdyne is requesting the Board to support will better enable such projects to be accomplished by essentially excluding such activity from being considered a Apublic utility@. A proposed Resolution had been drafted for the meeting if the Board wished to consider it.
Angela Beeker explained that in 1995 the County had authorized Enerdyne to harvest all landfill gas (methane) which can be used for beneficial purposes. The contract with Enerdyne has saved the county a substantial amount of money, in that they harvest the gas at no cost to the county.
Following discussion, Chairman Hawkins made a motion to accept the resolution. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Commissioner Kumor made the motion for the Board to go into Closed Session pursuant to NCGS 143-318.11 for the following reasons:
1. (a)(1) To prevent disclosure of information that is privileged or confidential pursuant to the law of this State or of the United States, or not considered a public record within the meaning of Chapter 132 of the General Statutes, in accordance with and pursuant to NCGS 143-3218.10(e) and Article II of Chapter 11 of the Henderson County Code.
2. (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.
3. (a)(3) To consult with an attorney employed or retained by the public body in order
to consider and give instructions to the attorney with respect to the following claim:
Multimedia Publishing of North Carolina v. Henderson County and
Henderson County Board of Commissioners Henderson County File No. 98-CVS-1630
4. (a)(4) To discuss matters relating to the location or expansion of industries or other
businesses in the area served by the public body.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Following Closed Session, Commissioner Kumor made the motion to approve the Closed Session minutes from March 17, 1999 and April 5, 1999. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Commissioner Kumor made the motion to unseal Item #4 from the Closed Session minutes for March 17, which is the Partners for Health Condominium discussion, and to unseal Item #1 from the Closed Session minutes for April 5, which discussed personnel issues for Cooperative Extension. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
There being no further business to come before the Board, Chairman Hawkins adjourned the meeting at approximately 10:16 p.m..
Elizabeth W. Corn, Clerk Grady Hawkins, Chairman