STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA                                                   BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

COUNTY OF HENDERSON                                                                                  OCTOBER 5, 2004


The Henderson County Board of Commissioners met for a special called meeting at 6:00 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-Chairman Larry Young, Commissioner Bill Moyer, Commissioner Charlie Messer, County Manager David E. Nicholson, County Attorney Angela S. Beeker, Planning Director Karen C. Smith, Planner Autumn Radcliff, County Engineer Gary Tweed, Utilities Director Jim Erwin and Deputy Clerk to the Board Amy Brantley.


Absent was: Commissioner Shannon Baldwin who had previously been recused from the proceedings.



Chairman Hawkins called the meeting to order.


Chairman Hawkins – “I make the motion to go into public hearing. All those in favor of the motion say aye.”


In unison – “Aye.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay Ladies and Gentlemen, we are here today to continue the quasi-judicial proceeding on the following application: Vested Rights Application #VR-03-01 submitted by Glade Land Fund for a development vested rights for the development to be known as Fox Glen.  This is a continuation of the hearing originally convened on January 14, 2004.  I want to remind everyone that the proceeding will be conducted under the Henderson County Board of Commissioners Rules of Procedures for Quasi-judicial Proceedings.  Unless otherwise decided by the Board, only persons previously made a party will be allowed to participate as a party in today’s continuation of the hearing.  Those persons include:  Karen Smith, Planning Director, Gaston Campano and Glade Land Fund, LLC, Applicant, uh, Kenny Long, Skip Brewer, Vickie Edmonds, Donna Riley, Bruce Thompson, Jane Berry, Kathy Cheekos, Ron Raiola, Jeff Klutz, and Steven Moore.


Okay, before we begin, I want to point out for the record that one of our Board members, Shannon Baldwin, recused himself from the proceedings, and will therefore not be present.


I also want to ask the Board members whether they have received any information concerning this application since January 14, 2004, and if so, what information has been received so that the information can become part of the record today. Anyone received any?”


Commissioner Moyer – “Well we got a copy of the uh, transcript, but uh.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay I, I, think that’s a copy of uh.”


Angela Beeker – “Yes, and all the parties got that too.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Very well then. Uh, just a brief overview of the procedure for today. All persons who speak and participate, including any witnesses that will be called, will be placed under oath if they have not already taken one previously.  I want to remind everyone placed under oath previously that they are still under oath.  Unless otherwise decided by the Board, we will begin tonight’s hearing by asking the Applicant, Gaston Campano, if there is any additional evidence that he wishes to present as a part of his principal case.  After the applicant is finished, staff and the other parties will be allowed to proceed with their evidence.  All parties will be given an opportunity to ask questions of all witnesses testifying in the proceedings.  The Board will be given an opportunity to ask questions also. After the evidence is presented the Board will discuss the issues raised and will make a decision.  The Board must make a decision on the application within 30 days of the close of this hearing.  The Board’s decision must be made in writing within 45 days of the close of the hearing.


Uh, we need to identify all parties to the proceeding. As I stated, the Board acknowledges the following persons as parties.  As I call your name, please answer so that we will know you are present. Uh, Karen Smith.”


Karen Smith – “Here.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Present. Gaston Campano, is here. And Glade Land, uh okay, Fund LLC. Kenny Long? Skip Brewer?  Vickie Edmonds? Donna Riley? Okay, thank you. Uh, Bruce Thompson?”


Bruce Thompson – “Here.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Jane Berry? Kathy Cheekos?


Kathy Cheekos – “Here.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay, thank you. Ron Raiola? Jeff Klutz? And Steve, Steven Moore? Mrs. Beeker in a, in a proceeding, uh one of these is continued, uh did we need to address the absence of these people to both parties to see if we want to proceed or.”


Note: The parties to the proceeding present were Karen Smith, Gaston Campano, Donna Riley, Bruce Thompson, and Kathy Cheekos.


Angela Beeker – “I don’t believe so. I just believe these parties lose their right to part, you know, to participate. To, to finish their participation in the proceeding.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay. Will all parties to the proceeding not previously sworn, and all witnesses that, that you intend to call which were not previously sworn, come forward to be sworn. We have any of those?”


Bruce Thompson – “Yeah.”


Chairman Hawkins  – “Okay. You were previously sworn were you not?”


Bruce Thompson – “Yeah. But I need to …” Mr. Thompson was speaking from the back of the room.


Chairman Hawkins – “As a, as a witness?”


Bruce Thompson – “As a witness….”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay I think then only she needs to come up to be sworn. Any, any other?”


Commissioner Moyer – “Grady? Can I ask Mr. Campano? Is uh Mr. Hernandez gonna give testimony?”


Gaston Campano – “No.”


Angela Beeker – “I believe he took an oath anyway.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Well he was a part of the uh, Glade Land Fund LLC, applicant. I think.”

Angela Beeker – “He took an oath last time.”


Chairman Hawkins – “I think that was under the, the uh, Glade Land.”


Karen Smith – “Uh, Mr. Chairman I was gonna ask um, I think you had wanted some of the folks from um, Utilities and the County Engineer to be here, in case you had questions. And so those folks are here and were not sworn last time.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay Mr. Tweed and Mr. Erwin. If you wanna come up with uh. I don’t know who else is out there…”


Karen Smith – “Mr. Chairman, sorry, also to interrupt, if the parties want to raise their hands I can give them the materials that you have in front of you.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay.”


Karen Smith – “They’re from last time but I can…”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay. The parties that are here, if you don’t have all the materials Mrs. uh, Mrs. Smith will give them to you if you’d raise your hand. And if the rest of you would just give uh, the Clerk your uh, your name and address, I think we know the Staff, uh, and we, we’ll proceed with swearing um in.”


Amy Brantley – “If you’d put your left hand on the Bible and raise your right hand please. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you shall give to the Board of County Commissioners shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God?”


In unison – “I do.”


Chairman Hawkins – “And again, let me remind everyone who was already sworn that uh, that you’re still under oath uh, also. Okay, the completion of the applicant’s evidence. Uh, Mr. Campano is there any additional evidence that you wish to present, uh, as part of your principal case?”


Gaston Campano – “Yes, what I’d like to do is call up to the front here Luther Smith uh, who can give you an update on, uh, the activity that’s occurred and some minor changes that have occurred on the site plan since the last, uh, public hearing.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay.”


Luther Smith – “Mr. Chairman, Members of the Board, my name is Luther Smith. I’m here to speak or add additional uh, evidence, information on behalf of the uh, applicant, Glade Holding. I had a …”


Commissioner Moyer – “Luther, while you’re doing that is the latest one we have dated January 12, 04?”


Luther Smith – “Uh, the last one you have, yes sir. But I would like to give the Board a copy of this plan, which was updated as of today to show you all that had occurred as far as the property…”


Chairman Hawkins – “We need everybody to get a copy of that?”

Angela Beeker – “All the parties.”


Luther Smith – “Yes I have copies for …”


Chairman Hawkins – “And the, the, uh, Karen would you him hand those out to the other parties please? Thank you.”


Luther Smith – “Also for your information we’ve updated, you have, given an original progress summary at the first hearing. Again we simply updated that to indicate the information I’ll be giving you here.”


Angela Beeker – “If you’ve got enough. Thanks.”


Commissioner Moyer – “Grady do we have to mark this new diagram as an exhibit number?”


Angela Beeker – “I’d be a good idea to. Um, Amy needs to be able to identify which ones were handed out this evening.”


Chairman Hawkins – “But we don’t have, do we have any other exhibits, or new exhibits?”


Angela Beeker – “So far we have these two. Ac, actually these are um, I guess updates to your application, to the application?”


Luther Smith – “They’re updates to the application and uh, each of those, a former copy of each was entered as an exhibit during the original uh, meeting and then these are just updates.”

Chairman Hawkins – “So we just enter it maybe as updates to the original exhibits.”


Angela Beeker – “I think as long as, um, Amy notates, um, if she wants to assign a number system, but typically if it’s approved that would be attached as part of the decision. The, the, the actual map that is approved is attached.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Yeah, okay. And that’s the one we’re looking at so we need to identify it somehow.”


Commissioner Moyer – “I don’t believe there’s a date on it, that’s what gave. Is there a date on this Luther?”


Luther Smith – “On what?”


Commissioner Moyer – “This latest print that you, uh.”


Luther Smith – “Yes it is. It’s very, very small, you can read it on this one.”


Commissioner Moyer – “Well that’s embarrassing, you’re saying I’m too old to read this.”


Luther Smith – “…dated it for today. It’s 10/5/2004 is the plan.”


Chairman Hawkins – “You, you can just note that I think, just.”


Commissioner Moyer – “Where is that?”


Luther Smith – “I believe we added that date on the write up also…”


Angela Beeker – “It’s down here, beside the name block.”


Commissioner Moyer – “It is?”


Several people in unison – “Yeah.”

Commissioner Moyer – “Take your word for it.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Right above the M in S 32 on the.”


Commissioner Moyer – “Oh yeah.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay everybody square with that? Everybody got a copy of these, uh, witnesses and other parties? Okay, go ahead Luther.”


Luther Smith – “Okay. Uh, if I may I’ll just run down very quickly some uh, changes and things that have occurred uh, since this meeting or this proceeding was initiated. Uh, we did, uh, continue to work on the project and, and get a variety of things done. Uh, at the time of the original application the property was owned by an estate I guess. Mr. Tate can clarify that, but, and Glade Land Fund was the applicant and the agent. Uh, it’s my understanding Glade Land Fund now owns the property. Uh, so the ownership has changed, has transferred to Glade Land Fund. Again since uh, January, uh, the following permits, in terms of moving forward with construction on this project are in place. We have received from NCDOT uh, the drive permits both for uh, the road entering off of Howard Gap Road at the intersection with the school entrance. And also the road entering off of Patty’s Chapel Road. Our original plan, uh, drawing and information indicated that at the Howard Gap entrance we were proposing a left turn lane so you could turn into the project as you came from, as you came from, uh, Fletcher, I believe it is.”


Commissioner Moyer – “Um hum. Yea, that’s right. You’re right.”


Chairman Hawkins – “From the north.”


Luther Smith – “Um, and also an acceleration and deceleration lane as you entered and came out of the project. When we submitted the, the, the permit request to DOT we were informed that they are in the process of re-planning that entire Howard Gap corridor out to Park Ridge Hospital and asked us to drop the acceleration deceleration lanes at this time. They approved it simply as, our three lane entrance coming out. After they complete their work we’ll then talk to them about … probably if, if they felt the need for it and we felt the need for it add the, those other lanes. But at this point in time they asked us to drop that from the permit. Um, but both of those permits are in place. Uh, the Corp of Engineers has signed off on the stream crossing that we have. Uh, and also the wetland delineation in the, in the project. Uh, NCDENR has approved erosion plans uh, with their, uh, all of the details and so forth for all of the elements of the project with, with the exception of the townhouse area. We have not submitted that area yet. Uh, the City of Hendersonville has approved the water plans both for the main service line coming in off of Howard Gap Road into the project as well as the plans for, the distribution plans for the villa area. Henderson County, uh we have submitted uh, subdivision uh, plans to Henderson County. All portions of the project again except the townhome section have approved under the subdivision ordinance. And the Public Service gas company, uh, which has a major line crossing the property, although they don’t necessarily require a permit we have been in contact with them. We have provided them with plans and they have approved, uh, the revised plans that we have in that area in terms of their right-of-way and any potential impact to it. Um, excuse me, on the drawings, uh, we talked about just general open space in the project would be about 48% of the project as I recall. Uh since we have actually put together the development plans and defined the limits of these different areas, uh, we’ve broken the open space up. We have common open space which is land throughout the project that is available to anybody living there to use. That amount is approximately 40% of the land area within the project. And we also have what would be limited common space, uh, which is an area for example in the apartment area the land area around those units and the land areas around the townhouse units which are not necessarily available to everyone in the, in the uh, property. But that limited, limited open space is somewhere around 4-5%. So we’re still very close to what we had initially anticipated was going to be the open space on the project. The other item that has changed is in the process of detail planning, and in our permitting, uh, processes to the Planning Board. Uh, the unit summaries and the numbers of units have changed a little bit. We are still, we were asking initially for 198 units, we’re still requesting 198 units. Uh, initially the apartments, we had 100 apartments, we still plan for 100 apartments. The villa homes we had initially anticipated 40, uh, that has been revised to 34 in the approved plans. The cottage homes initially we had planned for 36, we have revised that to 40 in the final approved plan. The townhomes were initially planned for 22, we’re planning to have 24 uh, in the final plans. And again those plan have not been approved for the townhomes. But we are still at the same unit count of 198. Now I’ll be happy answer any additional questions the Board may have with regards to the, the changes that I’ve discussed.”


Angela Beeker – “Which um, part did you don’t have the sedimentation and erosion control plan for? You said there.”          


Luther Smith – “Town, the townhouse section we have not submitted for any permitting on that section, the townhome section in other words.”


Angela Beeker – “And as far as your calculation of open space you still exclude the roads?”


Luther Smith – “No. We are not, that does not include the road. That is just land, land area exclusive of the roads.”


Angela Beeker – “Okay.”


Luther Smith – “Uh, I really don’t know what the road right-of-way is but, according to the zoning ordinance would include the roads yes, but we haven’t, no.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Any, any member of the Board have questions for uh, Luther? Does of the uh, additional parties, uh, or witnesses?”


Angela Beeker – “Just parties.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Just parties, have any question, any of the parties have questions for Luther. Uh Karen, do you have some?”


Karen Smith – “This is just really for clarification. Um, you had mentioned 40% of the land area in the project is common open space?”


Luther Smith – “That’s correct.”


Karen Smith – “Okay, okay. And then to follow up on Mrs. Beeker’s question, the open space does not include roads does the limited common space include roads?”


Luther Smith – “No. But the limited common space is an estimate number because the town house area has not actually been surveyed out yet. That’s why I said about 4½, 5 acres limited common area.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Any, any other questions?”


Angela Beeker – “Does the common space include, when you say limited common space are you referring to open space or are you referring to like the, any buildings or amenities or anything like that.”


Luther Smith – “Uh, limited, what I’m referring to as limited common areas for example in the apartment area is all of the land area that is built upon either by roads or building within the property boundary of that apartment block.”


Angela Beeker – “Okay.”


Luther Smith – “The same down in the townhome area so it is, it is just land area that is limited common space. Again it’s defined as limited simply because it’s primarily for the residents of those units as opposed to everybody in the development.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Any, any other questions? Karen did that cover what you needed? Okay.”


Luther Smith – “And, I also have uh, in addition to the handouts there are two, a total of three full size copies of the drawing for the Commissioners, the Board.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay thank, thank you Luther. Uh, we’ll take uh, staff evidence. Ms. Smith do you any evidence you wish to offer?”


Karen Smith – “I may need to take a little bit of time to um, compare the former plan with, with the current plan because my, my comments were based on the prior plan. You have a handout…”


Chairman Hawkins – “Do you want to take a minute? Do you need a minute to look?”


Karen Smith – “I may need a minute just to compare some things where there just may be some um.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay.”


Karen Smith – “In, incorrect conclusions I draw. I do have a copy of my comments though. They are from, what was to be the February 16th meeting I think. So I’ll go ahead and pass those out now and um. Or if you want the other parties to go I can try to do this while, while they go.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Why don’t you just take a minute to do that cause you probably need to listen to the other parties also in case you have some questions.”


Karen Smith – “I do just want to let the Board know, um, for the, for tonight’s hearing because we has to uh, start uh, with the fresh date, we didn’t continue it from a prior date to time, to time, date and time specific, we did advertise tonight’s hearing in accordance with the provisions of the vested rights ordinance as well as the uh, Board of Commissioners Rules of Procedure for uh. Quasi-Judicial Proceedings. And so, we did have the notices, uh require notices in the Times-News. We sent the applicant a certified letter of the notice. And then, um, as a courtesy we sent notices of the hearing to the adjoining owners and then um, not to testify for Mrs. Beeker but Mrs. Beeker actually notified the parties, uh and sent those minutes out.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay.”


Commissioner Moyer – “Grady would it be, would it be easier Karen if you just gave them your comments and they may just say that’s been taken care of or that’s resolved and save you going all through that, uh, they’ll know right off, Luther’ll know right off the bat whether they’ve been taken care of.”

Karen Smith – “…could do that. I’ll do that.”


Commissioner Moyer – “Good comments.”


Karen Smith – “Mr. Chairman I’m ready to give it a try here.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Everybody had a chance to look through at least the first four pages?”


Karen Smith – “I’m sorry. I thought you were waiting for me, if you need more time.”


Chairman Hawkins – “No, that.”


Commissioner Moyer – “No we were waiting for you.”


Chairman Hawkins – “We, we’ll, we’ll go along with you as you go through.”


Karen Smith – “Okay. Um, first of all I was gonna just see if the Board needed for me to go over any of the vicinity information. I do have some maps that were not in your packet – things such as the um, an aerial view of the property, USGS um, map with topography although they have shown contours. Um, I also have some photographs and um, the, uh, a excerpt from our Comprehensive Plan Growth Management Strategy and the US 25 North Study area boundary. And I. I’m not sure how comfortable the Board is uh, with the project location and such and I just want to gauge that before I spent a lot of time on it.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Any, anybody need any of that? Uh I think, I know, I think most of us including Charlie is very familiar with where it is.”


Karen Smith – “I have it if you need it later.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay, if, if we need it we, we’ll just call for it.”


Karen Smith – “Okay. Um, I’ve reviewed the application for the vested rights, um, under Chapter 189 of the Henderson County Code and I do have the following comments. It looks like the revised, revised master plan when reviewed along with the revised project summary uh does generally meet the definition of a site specific development plan. Um there were a couple items that I did want to see, the applicant should address in more detail. And again, that will be up to the Board and Attorney if you have enough information on a site specific development plan.


The first has to do with building and structure locations. Um, they’re supposed to show the approximate location of buildings, structures and other improvements. The, um, they’ve got the general locations for the apartments and town, townhouses shown. Um, as is the minimum proposed separation between the buildings and you also have a general layout of the villas and cottages and actually the layout as approved uh, conditionally by the Planning Board. Um, we, I just wanted to see if the Board wanted to consider making the proposed minimum distances that they’ve shown on the plan between structures as well as the proposed minimum lot set backs a condition of the development vested right if approved. So that’d be something to take into consideration um, if, if they’re um, okay with that being a fixed condition. Okay?”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay.”


Karen Smith – “The um, second point had to do with rec, the location of recreation uses. Um, they are supposed to show the approximate location um, of the recreation area and they have done that but I don’t believe the building and structures were actually shown within that recreation area at this point.”


Luther Smith – “Yeah they should be shown …”


Karen Smith – “Okay I’m seeing a community building now. Okay. This one may be satisfied then. Um, as, as far as those buildings are concerned um, I don’t know that the applicant had provided for any um, type of minimum setbacks from roads or property lines or distances between recreation buildings and that sort of thing. Um, course North Carolina building codes will apply, but if the Board wanted uh, the applicant to propose a minimum standard in that regard, um, you may, I wanted to see if you’d be willing to do that. Or if the applicant would be willing and then making those part of the vested right ordinance if so. Otherwise you can just specify that North Carolina building code applies. The location of the commercial area, um, which if you see it is um, at the main entrance um, I don’t think that those sites have been surveyed yet, as far as their exact location. Um, and I, I would expect that the applicant may need to move lot lines or delete some lot lines or buildings on the plan and so I wanted to um, ask the Board to consider granting the applicant some flexibility in final placement of the buildings. Um, you did that a few years ago on a special use permit for Charlestown Place, provided the overall layout. Uh, the project elements was generally the same as shown on the master plan, total number of units of each housing type didn’t change or exceed um, what they proposed. And then again with the setbacks and separations and such um, be established in the um, vested rights ordinance. Um, also the application materials didn’t indicated any accessory structures and I think from prior conversations with the applicant I don’t think that they were going to allow, um, sheds and such in the yards for the villas and cottages but we might just wanna clarify that. If they are allowed, um, again we probably need to talk about a, a setback or u, from property lines.


Next point has to do with building and structure dimensions. Um, the ordinance requires the approximate dimensions including height be shown for proposed buildings and other structures. Um, we do have the average lot size for the townhomes, the villa and cottage lots. Um, while the approximate building sizes aren’t shown we, we expect that the dwellings will be single family on the villa and cottage lots and that they’ll have to fit within the proposed setback shown on the plan. Um, the revised master plan I believe this one still does, shows ten apartment buildings, yeah ten apartment buildings and four unit townhome buildings. Um, there is a two unit townhome building. Actually, no that’s, I guess that’s been changed, they’re all four unit. Okay, alright. Um, so we don’t need to address any deviation from the four unit standard. Um, application materials also do not address whether there may be more or less than ten apartments in each building, and we may want to again have the applicant address this and if they need the flexibility to alter that number to build that into the permit.


Uh, building height, um, cottages and villas homes have a maximum building height of 35 feet for each but that’s been designated. Um, the project summary also defines how the applicant measures building height. The revised master plan also shows a building height of 35 feet for the townhomes and, let me see, it’s still 50 feet for the apartment. The um, I guess the applicant ha, has not addressed the maximum building height for the recreation structures and uh, other buildings and that is something they wanna consider proposing we could make a condition of the vested right. Um, getting back to the, the other buildings, um, the R-10 district is what I’ve used as a comparison for a lot of my comments. Uh, just because that is sort of the density that this project um, will be built under. And the, the 50 foot um would exceed an R-10 requirement. 35 feet being uh, the maximum height in our R-10 district. I’m not saying there’s anything necessarily wrong with 50 feet but just to note that, that it does exceed um, some of our residential districts in our zoning ordinance.


Uh, lets see, size of the recreational buildings, um, they had suggested 1,000, a minimum of 1,000 square foot, um, heated space, but there is no other indication about the size of the building as far as I can see. And for, may the applicant to address this. Um, commercial uses, you have a, a layout of the proposed commercial building, and again the size doesn’t appear to be shown on the, on the plan. Um, again ask the, the applicant to perhaps address this with the Board. And the Board may want to discuss whether or not to limit that size um, in terms of building footprint or the gross floor area of the building since it will be multistoried or something like that. We do in the Zoning Ordinance define gross floor area um, if that’s something you want to take a look at. Uh, and as for building height on the commercial uses um, it doesn’t specify a maximum building height for the commercial building. Um, they’ve said it will be two stories. They want to propose a height, and you may want to consider it as a condition.           


Uh, the application materials don’t address the size of the proposed signage, um particularly the entrance features and signs and that for the commercial building if any. Um, ask that the applicant address if there’s any other information that they wanna present to the Board about signs. Um, and if there are any standards that they would want incorporated into the vested right, vested rights ordinance. Um, you may also want to look at uh, establishing a condition that would require a future compliance if the signs are later uh, with any uh, zoning ordinance requirements or, or, um, outdoor advertising ordinance and that sort of thing.

Um, the Board of Commissioners under the Vested Rights Ordinance can appro, approve or disapprove a plan based on the need to protect public health, safety and welfare. Uh, is, uh, very broad uh, thing to look at and you can also require terms and conditions on the Vested Rights Ordinance that are necessary to protect health, safety and welfare. Uh, some of the other items that the applicant might want to address with the Board, and the Board may want to consider have to do with the uh, density of development and open space. Um, again this, this, uh is in the Open Use District currently. Um, they’re proposing a gross residential density of 4.2 units per acre. Um, again our R-10 without getting into doing 4 unit apartment buildings and such would allow 4.3 units per acre. So it’s roughly an R-10 density.


Um, under the planned unit development standards of the zoning ordinance which one can do in a, in a, um, R-10 District the applicant can proposed the placement um, of the allowable number of units anywhere on the property provided the overall density doesn’t exceed the number of units that are allowed. Um, the applicant has shown um, the, the change in the open space and the limited common areas. Um, and also the amount that’s in new streets and parking. And again he said something about the common, limited common area being sort of a flexible number and so the Board will need to consider whether or not it wants to make that an absolute standard or, or build some flexibility in on the totals. Uh, total amounts of required open space and common, limited common areas. Um, until the proposed buildings and lots and roads are located on the property again that open space um, number may, may fluctuate a little bit.


Uh, perimeter setbacks and buffering, um, applicant has proposed setbacks from the perimeter of the property of 30 feet from the northern and southern property lines. 30 feet from what appears to be the edge of the right-of-way of Patty’s Chapel Road and 50 feet from what appears to be the edge of, um, right-of-way of Howard Gap Road. Um, it looks like the only element shown within that setback are road and sidewalk crossings, open space easements, entrance features and signs, a lift station, which I’m not sure if that’s still on the plan, and parking. Um, for individual residential lots these would, uh, these standards would exceed what would be required in an R-10 district, so nothing wrong with that. Um, in a, in a planned unit development you typically look at the perimeter boundary and see if there will be, is anything on the perimeter, um, that would require the developer to consider privacy of adjoining um, owners and you can require setbacks from property lines and rights-of-way uh, based on the zoning. You can also require screening for non, uh single family residential structures and require that structures on the perimeter be located so they’re not detrimental to the neighborhood. And again that’s under the zoning ordinance but I’m just trying to make the Board aware that in looking at this project you may want to take some of these things into consideration.


The only buffering, um, that I have noted on the plan are the 30 buffers that are proposed on both sides of the streams that run through and any protection that will provided to the wetland areas um, and the, let’s see the 30 foot protected buffer zone on each side, um, is shown on the plan. We do require a minimum 30 foot setback for building or structures from perennial streams under the subdivision ordinance but we do not require or specify how you treat that setback, um, whether it has to be vegetated in a certain way or anything like that. So um, prior to your January 14th meeting I had talked to representatives of the applicant about whether any buffering or screening would be provided on the perimeter. At that time they had said that they were probably gonna maintain some of the existing vegetation. But during the um, January 14th hearing the applicant indicated that Glade, uh, would be willing to install a landscape buffer or fence. And so I think the Board probably needs to discuss that further with the applicant as to the specifics of those items. Um, and whether or not you want to require it and uh, under what basis you want them to maintain it.


Um, application materials don’t appear to address lighting within the project. Again I’ve spoken with representatives of the applicant about whether it will be provided, particularly in that commercial area  um, and the parking areas and recreation areas. Uh, while it appears there will be lighting there were no specifics plans for such. If the applicant wants to address that, um, to the Board, um, I would just ask that the Board consider that, um, a condition where they wouldn’t be allowed to have the lights shine um, so as to disturb adjacent roads or residential dwellings. 

And the hours of operation on the commercial uses, um, again we’re in open use right now so this really isn’t regulated but under the Vested Rights Ordinance um, the Board might want to consider, um, and the applicant may want to propose uh, some hours of operation or at least give us some idea of, of how that might work.


I did also look at um, how this plan complied with other ordinances and you heard Mr. Smith talk about the Henderson County Subdivision Ordinance. Um, I have, Autumn is gonna pass out, just so you have it for the record. Copies of two letters of approval, conditional approval, excuse me, for a master plan and development plan for Phase I, which was the villas and then approval of a revised master plan and a development plan for the cottage section. Um, Planning Board conditionally approved Phase I and the original master plan and then staff appro, conditionally approved Phase II and the revised master plan. Um, we’re allowed to do that under the uh, provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance. And so I wanted the Board to have, and the other parties to have copies of what conditions the Planning Board uh, has imposed and staff, based on the Subdivision Ordinance has imposed on the subdivision aspects of this, um, project.


Mr. Smith did address some of the, the approvals that they have since gained and so it may address some of the items on those lists from the Planning Board and Planning Staff. Um, one of the standards or one of the requirements from that has to do with, um, getting a letter of capacity for sewer from the Cane Creek Water and Sewer Department and then also getting a um, getting a final approval of water and sewer plans, uh, before they could record a final plat. And so that is one issue that I wanted to bring up this evening. It was an issue with the Planning Board level and um, one of the reasons I, the County Engineer and Utilities Director are here and the applicant will probably need to talk about that, um, at some point about how that’s going to be provided.


Um, as far as the Zoning Ordinance, um, it’s open use and right now they’re not required to meet, um, any specific standards for this project. Um, it is in the area that’s being studied uh, by the US 25 North uh, zoning study. Uh, we still haven’t totally settled on a district at this point but, um, it will likely be residential it just may not be a district that would allow the project at this density.


Um, there, you may wanna look at some condition that has to do with compliance with the Subdivision Ordinance. There may be some things in the Subdivision Ordinance that require a little bit of alteration from the plans you have in front of you, particularly for that townhouse section which we haven’t reviewed yet. And so again, maybe some flexibility needs to be built in as to how to address those issues.


Um, I mentioned utilities, um as far as the sewer um, and I’ll probably as, call I guess Gary up here um, to address that, that issue um, in a minute. And then overall, just as far as the site development you may wanna consider an overall condition that subjects, um, development of Fox Glen, um, the application materials as revised, statements and agreements between the applicant and the Board made during the hearing and any applicable local, state and federal laws, ordinances, etc, be a condition of the, of the permit. Um, I think we had a few little items on plan details which they may have taken care of, the actual parcel size. Um, and I would, I guess for the sake of the Vested Rights Ordinance if approved it might be proper to say approximately 47 acres. I think that’s been a question, is it 47.13, is it 47.19. So that, that would be one item. Um, the Board I believe has been asked to grant the vested right for um, five years. You will have to determine whether you grant it for that long. Two years is, is sort of the standard and then they have to demonstrate why um, they should be allowed to go beyond two years, or the need to go beyond two years. Um, we have also, I guess on previous vested rights applications, had a condition that allows um, the Zoning Administrator access to the property during normal business hours to determine that the property is being developed in accordance with the Vested Rights Ordinance. And you have also required in the past on these vested rights applications um, an annual report from the applicant, um, usually on the anniversary date of any issuance of a vested right. And so I would again suggest a similar condition. You want me to have Gary speak to this now or would you like the?”


Chairman Hawkins – “Let me uh, let me ask first if uh, uh, if anyone has any questions for you and then uh, from uh, either the uh, applicant or other parties or the Board. Anybody have any questions for Karen at this point? Okay, Gary let us, uh, if you would, uh, give us an update on the uh, sewer situation.”


Gary Tweed – “There’s not a whole lot to tell you about on the sewer at this point in time. Uh, sewer for this project has not been worked out. Uh, the issue has been around on how this project can gain access to the Cane Creek Water and Sewer District which is some distance away going north on Howard Gap Road. The applicant at, at your January hearing indicated that he’d planned to put in a lift station and tie to the force main which serves the Fletcher Elementary School. Um, we had advised them at that time that that force main is not a part of the Cane Creek District and in fact it belongs to the School Board and that would not be available to them. Um, we have since also um, learned from the North Carolina Department of Transportation that they will not allow private projects to make use of NCDOT right-of-ways, only public facilities. So we’re at a, at a dilemma as to how this could be served. And DOT finally agreed that a public utility, formed and operated under the State Utilities Commission could make use of that right-of-way. We had informed the applicant that this appeared to be his best option, would be to either form a utility or to seek an existing utility to come and provide the sewer system for this and to apply under those bases. To this point that has not been done. Um, last week I had a call from um, their consultant and he indicated that uh, the contacts they had made with existing public utilities they had not been able to interest anyone in the project and, and at this point that’s, that’s kind of where we are. Uh, so right now sewer hasn’t been worked out for the project. Now they may want to comment on where, where they think they are with it, um, but at this time that’s about all, all that I know.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Does any of the Board or parties have questions for Mr. Tweed?”


Commissioner Moyer – “I do for Gary. I’m not sure I quite understand, the uh, sewer that’s there is now owned by the school system?”


Gary Tweed – “Correct.”     


Commissioner Moyer – “Can that not be transferred to the Cane Creek Water and Sewer District so it will become in a government entity and then this problem would go away?”


Gary Tweed – “We, if the school district would transfer that line to us then it would be considered a public sewer and could be used to its limit of what that capacity is. We have asked the School Board in the past, they’ve indicated that they would be willing to transfer it to us, provided that we also take their lift station that serves the school. We went back to them and said that that would be considered if they would upgrade their lift station to our standards. Their current station they have is not built to the Cane Creek standards, and they refused to do so. So that’s kind of where that was left with the School Board.”


Commissioner Moyer – “But is it possible that the developer would agree to do that if we, as part of working this out?”


Gary Tweed – “That would be a question for the developer.”


Chairman Hawkins – “You have any other questions? Anybody else have a question for Mr. Tweed? Thank you Gary. Okay, uh at this time we’ll take the other parties evidence, uh, Mrs. Riley, uh, Thompson or Cheekos I think’s all we have here. Do ya’ll have any evidence to offer?”


Bruce Thompson – “On what’s been said so far?”


Chairman Hawkins – “Just, just the evidence that you wanna present to the Board.”


Commissioner Moyer – “Grady, excuse me, at what point are we gonna get, the um, applicant’s response to this. Cause a lot of these were questions that maybe, they’ll foresee that’s no problem, we we’ll mark that, or we have no problem with this.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Well I, I was gonna give um a little chance to look those over because eventually we need to go through those and, and ask him which of those he’s able to respond to. If that’s the question from the Board we can do that now.”


Commissioner Moyer – “I would like, while it’s still fresh in my mind, but.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Yeah.”


Commissioner Moyer – “But I think Angie may have an issue.”


Angela Beeker – “I have a suggestion. Um, it, because it’s so detailed and this is so, this is probably the most complex vested rights application that’s been before the Board, um, I don’t know that it’s reasonable to ask the applicant tonight to come up with all the sudden setbacks and things like that. Uh, my suggestion would be to take all the evidence and hold the hearing open and let myself and Karen and the applicant sit down to talk about or, or come up with some propo, a proposed set of these standards and responses to these questions back to the Board, that we could distribute back to the parties too at the same time so when you put, brought it back together, everyone could respond to those. Um, because I know that you’re gonna work out that level of detail tonight.”


Chairman Hawkins – “I, I wouldn’t think so not with ten pages of uh, things. I, I almost thought that the, that they had had privy to that prior to the meeting but apparently not. Is that cre, is that cre Mr., uh, true Mr. Campano?”


Gaston Campano – “Yeah. If I could address the issue. The uh, yeah as far as I’m aware we didn’t but as we went through and as Luther was just explaining to me uh, the majority of these items are already addressed in this latest plan. There are a few minor things such as the setback and the uh, commercial area which we don’t have actually shown on the plan. But none of them are any issues, it’s just a matter of, you know, seeing what the dimensions are cause they are designed it’s just a matter of putting the dimensions on there.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Would you be comfortable with working with Mrs. Beeker’s suggestion that uh, we, we take the rest of the evidence and give the, the, the three of you time to look at those in detail, make response so we can share that with the other parties uh, and hold the, hold the meeting open until you’ve had time to do that and distribute it?”

Gaston Campano – “Yes, we’re we’re fine doing that and we’d be agreeable uh, to make sure the details are in general compliance with the plan that’s being shown there.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay. Will that work for you Bill?”


Commissioner Moyer – “Yeah. I was hoping we could get it wrapped up tonight but.”


Gaston Campano – “Yeah, we were too.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Well I, I, I was…”


Gaston Campano – “…some simple way to do that.”


Chairman Hawkins – “…with as many uh, as many things here plus we’ve got to integrate that with what came out of the Planning Board to some extent I would think, and uh, and I think that could be time consuming.”


Angela Beeker – “I think the Board can come to a sen, con, consensus at the end as whether you’re leaning towards granting the vested right or not so you have some indication. Then it would just be a matter of if that’s the Board’s, the direction the Board’s leaning that, of working out those details. Um, I do, I would like to um, after, at the close of the evidence um, talk to the Board in Closed Session about the sewer issue.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay. We’ll have to I guess amend our agenda for that.”


Angela Beeker – “I think that you can make that motion any time to do that.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay, okay, thank you Mr. Campano.”


Commissioner Moyer – “Well can I ask Mr. Campano”


Chairman Hawkins – “Oh sure.”


Commissioner Moyer – “to comment on the sewer. Well he or Luther, who ever is gonna do that cause I’d like what.”


Chairman Hawkins – “What your plan is.”


Gaston Campano – “…I could go ahead and give you uh, comments on the sewer and where we are with the sewer right now. Uh, number one we have spoken with some utility companies, uh and we do think there is possibilities. We understand that we’re gonna need sewer to make this happen. Uh, we do think there are some possibilities to deal with the uh, sewer companies and, and though we have looked at that route we actually have that on hold. We have prepared a schematic and a sketch plan of connecting the school into a brand new lift station that would eliminate the school’s lift station completely and we have already contacted the engineer for the school system and he has a copy of the plan as of this morning and is arranging a meeting. Uh, effectively what we’re trying to do is even if we can get a private utility company, before we start signing agreements that are difficult to undo we wanna make sure we get the best solution for everybody involved including the school cause our discussions with the school have been that they do not wanna be in the sewer business, that’s not what they do. And that this is the opportunity to eliminate their lift station, put in a fully upgraded lift station that meets all public standards, use the same force main, and effectively eliminate the maintenance of that system. Uh, I know understand the school is technically a private entity, but, you know it would be a matter of finding a way to make that work. And we wanna explore that possibility before we proceed any further with any private utility companies.”


Commissioner Moyer – “And you would transfer that? You would then transfer that to the County, it would become part a.”


Gaston Campano – “If we can get the County, that we would negotiate with the County but yes our intent would be to take that uh, design a system that the County is also fully and completely satisfied with both for our needs and any other needs that they feel we’ll have in that area. And, and to transfer that to the County and make it a full public utility. Uh, and again we do feel we have other options we just don’t wanna go full force with these other options and end up with two parallel systems running next to each other, one with a private utility, the other with the schools.”


Commissioner Moyer – “Can I ask Gary if.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Sure.”


Commissioner Moyer – “If that would satisfy what he is mentioning if, if that was to work.”


Gary Tweed – “It, it, it gets back to your policy of taking over lift stations. Um, it’s been your past policy not to take over lift stations from projects. So, and in this case if it remains a private lift station, and say you did take the force main, then you would have the school, which is another entity tied into a private system which under your current ordinance is not allowed. So, you know there’s some policy things here that would have to be looked at if you wanted to pursue that approach.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Does that answer your question?”


Commissioner Moyer – “Yeah but I think this…”


Chairman Hawkins – “I mean it doesn’t answer the problem but it answers your question.”


Gaston Campano – “Uh, if, if I can add, we do understand that, and we’re, we’re aware of that issue. Uh, again we do feel there is likely a way that we can work two parallel systems but we just think in one form or another it is just simply, in a large way, uh, I don’t wanna say foolish, but I guess it seems foolish to have two systems parallel to each other and before we do anything of that sort we wanna try to explore all the possibilities to eliminate the school system. We know the County doesn’t normally wanna take on a lift station largely due to the maintenance of the lift station but the reality of the matter in this particular case, you have some very unique circumstances in that the County, through the school system, is paying for the maintenance of the lift station. Whether it’s one department or the other, you can pull the money out of your right pocket or your left pocket, but it is a count, it is a lift station the County does pay for. Uh, so we wanna explore those possibilities and see are there some circumstances where it makes sense to get a better lift station that the one you’re paying for that has a much higher, uh, standard, to meet the public standards of a lift station in lieu of having two systems. And, and again we have actually started some initial meetings and we do recognize that getting the ability to deal with the sewer of this property is necessary for this plan to actually take place.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay then, in that uh, in that event then we’ll uh, we’ll proceed down that way. We’ll go ahead and take the evidence uh, from the other parties if they have any to offer and then we’ll have your discussion on the.”


Angela Beeker – “Okay.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Uh, for any other parties that are here do you have any evidence that you want to present? Are you a party or a witness?”


Commissioner Moyer – “Witness.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay, who’s calling you for a witness?”


Bruce Thompson – “Oh I, I am.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay. Alright if you wanna.”


Angela Beeker – “I, identify yourself sir.”


Bruce Thompson – “I’m Bruce Thompson.”


Angela Beeker – “Okay.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Mrs. Thompson.”


Susan Morgan – “Hi, I’m Susan Morgan. And um, I have a question that goes back to the very beginning of the meeting. On, how this meeting was called. I guess I’m a little confused because I was here on January 14th and when we, uh, ended that meeting at 7:00 p.m. on January 14th we were sent I believe two to three certified letters and those meetings kept being cancelled. And I think one of the times it was due to weather. And now it is October 5th and we did not receive, uh, an announcement about this meeting certified mail, and I’m a little concerned that there aren’t more people from Beth, from my, um, potentially subdivision. Um, and I’m wondering if everybody got the letter. But then I’m thinking it just might not make any difference because now since then they have bought the property and uh, it looks like this is going to go through. From what I can tell it’s just a sew, sewer issue. And I, I guess my question is, is there any, do the um, the neighbors of the surrounding area have any say so in this thing. And if they do I’m concerned that not everybody was aware of the meeting. That’s my question.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Uh, I’ll ask uh, either Mrs. Smith or, or Mrs. Beeker to answer the notification procedures. Uh, we, we assume that everything was notified properly and I.”


Susan Morgan – “My, my question again, this meeting was not, uh, certified mail. Before I had to go to the post office, sign, get the letter. This time it just came to my house.”


Chairman Hawkins – “What, I, I.”


Susan Morgan – “My question is I’m concerned that not everyone was aware of the meeting.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Karen did you send out meeting notices or was it advertised in the paper as a, uh, as a new meeting or what.”


Karen Smith – “I didn’t do the notices to the parties. I did the notices to the adjoining owners and to the applicant. And we did have four notices in the paper, and I, I can’t speak for the notice that went to the parties, I’m not sure. Mine was hand delivered, I’m right across the street…”


Susan Morgan – “And again, if it’s not an issue it appears to me that this is gonna go through. I was under the impression back in January that the people were here to try to stop the development because it was such high density. But if there’s no, I mean if we don’t have a say so on getting this stopped then...”


Chairman Hawkins – “Well you, you, you certain have a say so, that’s the reason you’re a party to the hearing.”


Angela Beeker – “Well she’s not a party, that, that’s the first thing.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Or a witness. Uh, but the, the people that are party to the uh, that were made part of the hearing, that, that is exactly…”


Angela Beeker – “Did you, did you request to be a party at the last.”


Susan Morgan – “I was, I didn’t get here in time.”


Angela Beeker – “Okay.”


Susan Morgan – “But I am involved.”


Angela Beeker – “Um, I’m not uh, uh, under oath but I can submit the notification that went out to all the parties. I got one of those back as undeliverable, to Mr. Moore, and he is not here. Um, actually it wasn’t the notification of the um, hearing that came back it was the um, minutes that came, that came, that came back. When I sent out the minutes for everybody. Um, I’m not aware of any legal requirement to send em certified.”


Susan Morgan – “Okay well I was, they all came certified before.”


Angela Beeker – “Um, and none of them cam back, except that one to Mr. Moore. So um, I, I frankly don’t see a problem or an issue with it. Um, I don’t know if people had personal conflicts or whatever. Um, certainly if parties um, are approved by the Board they can call and check and find out what the status of things are. Um, but I feel like we’ve done everything reasonable and legally required to notify them of the hearing. Because it was advertised in the paper. Karen can you repeat what, what you did? She sent it to all or the adjacent property owners in addition to what I sent out and most of the parties identified themselves as being adjacent property owners. So those people would have gotten actually three mailings as a part of this. Um, it, there were two parties if memory serves that were in the vicinity that were allowed to participate so they would have only gotten my two mailings, but most of the parties should have gotten three. So.”


Karen Smith – “My mailing was not certified because it was, now that we’re in the process of the hearing they’re not parties necessarily and so mine was just a, a courtesy notice to let them know. Um, but I did send those to the adjacent owners, certified to Mr. Campano under your, um, Rules of Procedure for Quasi-Judicial Proceedings, and then um, it was in the paper. You have to do four notices, two twice a week for the two weeks prior to the hearing week and so we had legal notices September 22nd, September 25th, September 29th and October 2nd.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay.”


Susan Morgan – “I’m not questioning the legality of the notice of the meeting, I, I, my interest is sparked that we got three certified letters back in January and February and then we got a message on our phone that in my mind, I thought it was a dead done deal that it was not going forward. And now, I get the letter to the people that were here that were actually parties at the January 14th meeting with the minutes and, you know, now I feel like this is, you know, it’s gone a lot further. My, my question is why, you know, they were going certified and then it was stopped and then nobody’s here so it’s just, I not…”


Chairman Hawkins – “Well I can’t question why nobody’s here”


Susan Morgan – “I can.”


Chairman Hawkins – “but apparently the uh, the procedure’s been followed. So I would ask as a witness do you have any evidence to present?”


Susan Morgan – “No.”


Angela Beeker – “And I would tell the Board at this point I would recommend the Board complete the hearing. I a party wishes to challenge it on the back end due to this issue they certainly could do that, Um, but at this point I would recommend the Board proceed.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay. Okay then uh, was there any other evidence uh, from any of the parties? Yes mam, please come up.”


Donna Riley - “…last time I came here I didn’t get a notice. Excuse me, Donna Riley. I did not get a notice that it was cancelled and I came here and there were parties from the Board of Education that were at this meeting and I see they were not notified this time.”


Chairman Hawkins – “We received a letter from the Board of Education that was turned in to evidence.”


Donna Riley – “But Mr. Jones was here last time because he and I had a conversation as we were leaving the cancelled meeting. And he did state that they would be a party of the hearing.”


Chairman Hawkins – “I, I.”


Angela Beeker - “I can make a suggestion to the Board. Um, I have, the Board has indicated that if you’re going to approve the, that you’re gonna hold the hearing open I have no problem sending out a certified letter to all the parties so that they have one last opportunity to come in and, you know I’ll send them the same thing that gets sent out to the parties that are here, and they would have an opportunity at that time to come in and comment. I mean, I, I’d be perfectly willing to do that.”


Chairman Hawkins – “I, I was curious as to why the Board of Ed. Didn’t make it over. I was looking at the.”


Karen Smith – “The Board of Edu, I sent, they were on my um, list for adjacent owners and uh, this time it went to Dr. Page, who replaced Dr. Burnham. Um, Bo Caldwell called me yesterday and they had decided that they were not going to come and participate, that they had given you the letter. Now last time I think they had notified the Principal at the school. Um, I don’t think that was…”


Chairman Hawkins – “Yeah I remember that.”


Donna Riley – “Well I had talked to Shirley McGee and also David Jones and they had stated.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Well if we’re gonna hold the hearing open I don’t think the Board has any uh, problem with sending out letters uh, Angie as you submitted, as you suggested.”


Angela Beeker – “Okay.”


Chairman Hawkins – “That tell you when we’re gonna reconvene.”


Donna Riley – “Like I said I didn’t get a notice several times that it was cancelled so I did.”


Karen Smith – “I, well I was gonna notice that, I, I have a copy of a returned mail to you, if you’re Donna Riley, that was undelivered. So I don’t know if it was from that particular hearing but I can pull it out and...”


Angela Beeker – “Karen. I, I will do that.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay. Okay do, do.”


Donna Riley – “That was just my point that the Board had, and I had talked with the, Shirley McGee, the Principal and she was interested in.”


Angela Beeker – “Um hum. Well the, the Board of Education was not made a party. Therefore they would not have gotten this notice that I sent out because I only sent it to the parties because only parties at this point, you know, have a right to fully participate in the hearing.”


Donna Riley – “Well but they could certainly could have been called as a witness.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Yeah.”


Angela Beeker – “And any party could do that.”


Donna Riley – “Right, and like I say I think…”

Chairman Hawkins – “But apparently the Board of Ed. chose not to be here this evening.”


Donna Riley – “…talking about their sewer system…involving.”


Angela Beeker – “Do you have any evidence Mrs. Riley?”


Donna Riley – “Um, no, not at this point.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay. Is.”


Angela Beeker – “This’ll be your only opportunity to offer any.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Any, any other questions uh, by any of the other parties for Mrs. Riley?”


Kathy Cheekos – “My name is Kathy Cheekos and I was here at the January 14th meeting. I just wanna support these two uh, women that I also did not receive, unless it was buried in that packet. I got the minutes from the January 14th meeting,  did get phone calls about the cancellations. I got a phone call that indicated that the request had been um, revoked or.”


Angela Beeker – “Tabled.”


Kathy Cheekos – “Tabled or something, right. And so, sort of forgot about this meeting. Along came the, the minutes, I read through those. I do not recall seeing, unless it was buried somewhere in that cover letter that came with the minutes, about tonight. So I got a call last evening, about 9:00 from my next door neighbor saying ‘are you coming?’ and I didn’t know what he was talking about. He said he received his notice on Saturday. And I know I’ve not received anything recently at all.”


Angela Beeker – “Okay.”


Kathy Cheekos – “I just wanted to substantiate that it’s not just um, their mail.”


Angela Beeker – “You did, when did you receive the, as I’m reading it um, I may have misspoke on me sending out two. It looks like I sent out one but on September 13th I sent a letter to all the parties notifying them of the meeting and enclosing the minutes, on September 13. When did you receive that?”


Kathy Cheekos – “I, it was probably several weeks ago yes, that I received the minutes.”


Angela Beeker – “And that also in the cover letter had the.”


Kathy Cheekos – “Okay.”


Angela Beeker – “’I write to inform you that on Tuesday’ it was the very first sentence, ‘that on Tuesday, September 7, 2004 the Board of Commissioners set a date to resume the Quasi-Judicial proceeding for Tuesday, October 5th at 6:00 p.m. to proceed with the vested rights application. I’m enclosing a copy of the minutes and’.”


Kathy Cheekos – “Okay I missed that.”


Angela Beeker – “Okay.”


Kathy Cheekos – “That’s my oversight.”


Angela Beeker – “Okay.


Kathy Cheekos – “Thank you very much.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay. Any, any question uh, for Mrs. uh, Cheekos?”

Angela Beeker – “Did you have any evidence about the plan?”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay. Any, so we’ve got uh, all the questions uh, that we wanted to ask.”


Bruce Thompson – “I have one. Uh, Bruce Thompson. It says um, your name was?”

Karen Smith – “Karen.”


Bruce Thompson – “Karen, Uh, she had pointed out some uh, things for you to uh, consider. And what I think is the uh, most important thing that should be considered is the safety of the children since you’re putting in 198 units right directly across from a school. Uh, I don’t have kids so I don’t know the ages, what, 12 and younger? That um, let’s figure 198, figure 10% of those are retirees which is about the average there in uh, Fletcher area. Um, so that’s gonna, and you figure two adults per household, although this is America so probably only one nowadays. That you’re still gonna have 70 to 100 people at school time getting out on Howard Gap trying to get to work. Kids walking across the street, granted there’ll be a signal but, hey, people run lights. Uh, there’s gonna be a lot of activity and the safety of the children I would think would be the most important thing in considering this. And unless you have a five lane road going through there on Howard Gap, that personally I don’t think the DOT should pay for but developers should pay for if they wanna put this much density in an area, just to keep my taxes lower is what I’m looking at. Um, then that would be fine but on a two lane road with just a turn uh, lane in there, that doesn’t make sense for, you have, you know people going, and Howard Gap is quite busy I travel it all the time in my job. Um, safety would be a major, major issue on that for the children. I mean you’re adding a lot more cars, and people going to, to and from work cause there’s really only one. Unless you go out Patty’s Chapel over to Jackson Road, but then you’re gonna dump on onto Howard Gap there and that’s gonna create problems too of um, parents taking their kids to work or school buses, you know, creating more traffic jams on that, so you’re gonna have to put another signal there possibly. And who’s gonna pay for that? So I mena you have all these things that, you know, are gonna cost quote me money in, as far as taxes which right now things are working smoothly there. If you wanna do a development that Glade has quite a few, I know they have one out in Etowah, that uh, there’s not uh, that high of a density compared to like what they have at the Glens of Aberdeen or the other one on uh, off of Blythe Street here in Hendersonville. I think it’s Third Avenue or whatever over there. Um, you don’t, you know, the Glens of Aberdeen is so far south of that school. And, it’s a 55 mile an hour zone right up until you get to Glens of Aberdeen and then it cuts down to 35 cause you’ve got the wind going up there so the school’s not affected that way. Here you have, right across form the school, over 200 people living, or 200 units, approximately 198, units, and you can have at least 90 to 120 people going to work at that time of the morning. You know, think about the kids. Especially on a two lane road. You know, Fletcher police is good, but they’re not, you know, they can’t be out there 24/7 because they have uh, other things to do and not traffic control. Although that’s pretty much all they do. But that’s a whole other story.”


Chairman Hawkins – “I’m not, not sure that’s down Fletcher’s jurisdiction but it may be.”


Bruce Thompson – “Uh.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Is it.”


Unknown – “Yeah.”


Bruce Thompson – “Yeah it is cause uh, doesn’t uh, city police have like two miles outside city limits to uh, to be uh, yeah.”


Commissioner Messer – “…they control that intersection.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Then why aren’t they doing the zoning?”


Commissioner Young – “Did um.”


Bruce Thompson – “And, as far as the sewer goes, yeah I agree I don’t want the County to get into the uh, lift pump, uh, maintenance end of it too cause wasn’t it just a couple years ago Cane Creek uh, Sewer System was in such, uh, arrears on some debt or whatever that the rates were jacked up, you know, higher that any place in the County. Cause I’m a Fletcher resident, and we were paying that off and now that it’s been paid off our rates really didn’t go down all that much quote unquote. So, you know, I don’t wanna see my water bill, I’m tired of doing that you know, it’s expensive to go to the toilet. And uh, you know, so, yeah I don’t want you to get in the uh, sewer business either. If they wanna build that lift station and pay for it, or and have the residents of Fox Glen pay for it you know, for the 150 years down the road that’d be fine but I don’t wanna see my taxes going to pay for another lift station when it’s not needed. When everything else around there is basically septic. Cause I know there in Beth Eden we are zoned for septic and we’ve been approved for septic. So I’m not gonna have, you know, it’s gonna, I paid my one time cost of the toilet and of my water on well, you know, I don’t wanna have to be paying double for somebody else’s water and sewer also which is what my taxes go to. So, but the main thing is you gotta think about safety for the kids, cause that’s an awful lot of traffic on a two lane road. Thank you.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Any, any questions for uh, Mr. Thompson from anyone? Okay.”


Commissioner Young – “Did we not get a letter from the School Board that they concern about the safety of the…”


Chairman Hawkins – “It’s part of your packet. Uh, if you’re gonna send out notices are you suggesting then that we keep it open to, to take um, uh, evidence or are you suggesting that we go ahead and do the closing remarks at this time, as far as proceeding.”


Angela Beeker – “I think if you send out certified letters to address the concern that’s been raised that you would have to hold it open for them to have additional evidence. But they could also comment on the proposed order at that time as well. They’d have something specific in their hands to respond to which is more than they usually have.”

Chairman Hawkins – “Well then I quess at this point if we’re going to proceed with uh, your, your meeting with the developer to address the questions that we got then, that we’d need to uh, uh, discontinue the meeting at this point and let you do that and bring it back and send you letter.”


Angela Beeker – “Except that I would like to talk to you about the sewer in”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay.”


Angela Beeker – “in closed session.”


Chairman Hawkins – “You have a, a, statute for me to.”


Angela Beeker – “I do. I, I will word it and then you can say you make that motion but I need a motion for you to go into closed session pursuant to 143-318.11(a)(3) to consult with an attorney employed or retained by the public body in order to preserve the attorney-client privilege between the attorney and the public body, which privilege is hereby acknowledged.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay, I’ll make that motion. All those.


Commissioner Moyer – “Before you do that can we continue this before we do that so the people can leave and?”


Angela Beeker – “I think you can say that no other action is gonna be taken and, when you come out but I don’t think you can continue it till you have come back out of closed session. You can’t actually make the motion to do that. You could tell them when you’re gonna continue it to, but you can’t actually make that motion.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Do we have a con, a date, do, do you know a date that Karen, that ya’ll have taken a chance to work this out? Uh, for those of you that are parties that, basically if, if we have to closed session, um, we can’t terminate or, or set our continuation till we come back out. If we’re anticipating not taking any further action and, and tell you, you don’t have to sit here till, till we come back out to find out we’re not gonna take any further action is, is…”


Angela Beeker – “I don’t anticipate it taking more than five or ten minutes in closed session.”


Chairman Hawkins – “So it won’t be uh, the attorney doesn’t think we’ll be back there very long so uh, uh, I, why don’t we just go ahead and go in, Bill, into closed session if it’s gonna be that short and that’ll give maybe Karen and uh, and ya’ll to find out a date that you can find out before you leave here that we’re gonna continue the hearing.”


Angela Beeker – “Okay.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay, the motion on the floor, all those in favor of that motion say ‘aye’.”


In unison – “Aye.”


Chairman Hawkins – “Okay we’ll be back very shortly.”


Following closed session, Chairman Hawkins called the meeting back to order. October 20th was recommended as a possible date for continuation of the hearing. Chairman Hawkins made the motion to keep the Quasi-Judicial hearing open to October 20, 2004 at 6:00 p.m. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Mrs. Beeker will notify the parties of that new hearing date.







Amy Brantley, Deputy Clerk to the Board                    Grady Hawkins, Chairman