Town of Maggie
Valley
Regularly
Scheduled Planning Board Meeting
October 6, 2004
MINUTES
Members Present: Chairman Pat Tilley, Joann Lyons (left at 4:45), Billy Brede, Jerry Zerbock, Billy Case (3:40) Richard Pierce (4:04)
Staff Present: Planning Director Kevin Byrd, Building Inspector George Bage, Manager Bob Shepherd, and Town Clerk Vickie Best
Meeting Called to Order
Chairman Tilley called the meeting to order at 3:13 p.m. on Wednesday October 6, 2004 in the Town Hall Boardroom.
Approval or Correction of Minutes: July
29, 2004 & August 4, 2004
MS. LYONS MADE A
MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS PRESENTED.
MR. BREDE SECONDED
THE MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED.
Removal of Debris and Fine Grading Prior to the
Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
Mr. Bage explained that asking for fine grading does not mean landscaping. Fine grading and seeding is needed for new construction. Fine grading means smoothing out the surface and moving rock and construction debris. During the winter months, seeding could be difficult. Mr. Brede suggested placing landscaping fabric on slopes. Mr. Bage would review these issues on a case-by-case basis.
Enforcement would be easier if an ordinance was in place. Mr. Bage has had problems getting contractors to clean up after issuing the certificate-of-occupancy.
The planning board members were in full agreement especially with the recent discussions on erosion control. Mr. Brede suggested requiring seeding at least twelve to fifteen feet around the foundation of the structure. Mr. Zerbock added that grass or rye would help with erosion. Ms. Lyons suggested asking for mud mats on driveways.
Mr. Bage currently requires gravel mats at the front of the structure.
Mr. Byrd felt it wise to get developers involved by asking them what issues they would like addressed. Chairman Tilley agreed adding that some developers felt they were not involved in the comprehensive plan.
The clear cutting of trees should be addressed in the landscape requirements. Mr. Byrd would need to research the different options and terminology.
Mr. Bage felt it imperative to move forward with the fine grading and debris removal ordinance.
Ms. Lyons suggested giving builders a handout sheet informing them of the town’s expectations, so the cost can be added to the final draw of funds.
Mr. Zerbock felt asking for the minimum regulations would cause the least amount of resistance; then landscaping requirements can be addressed later.
The landscaping requirements can be incorporated in the erosion control plan.
Asking for the minimum requirements would currently improve the situation.
MS. LYONS MADE A
MOTION TO AMEND THE TOWN ORDINANCE STATING THAT A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WILL
BE ISSUED AFTER FINE GRADING IS APPLIED, THE AREA IS SEEDED, MULCHED OR
LANDSCAPED AND THE SITE IS FREE OF DEBRIS.
ADDING THAT
PROPERTY OWNERS BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MEETING STATE STANDARDS FOR EROSION CONTROL
AND THAT EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SUCH AS SILT FENCING BE REMOVED WITHIN NINETY
DAYS UPON STABILIZATION OF ALL SOIL CONDITIONS.
MR. BREDE SECONDED
THE MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED.
The planning board desires the proposed amendment to go to public hearing at the Board of Aldermen regularly scheduled meeting October 19, 2004.
Illegal Sign Removal Ordinance Amendment
Mr. Byrd proposes the following sign ordinance amendment:
Prior to the issuance of a civil penalty, the Code Enforcement Officer may remove an illegal sign, which is temporary in construction, installment, and/or in a publicly deeded right of way contingent upon the following the prescribed notification procedure. The Code Enforcement Officer must first issue a violation notice attached to the sign indicating five (5) business days remove the non-conforming sign. Second, the Code Enforcement Officer shall place a warning sticker on the sign granting three (3) business days prior to removal of the non-conforming sign. If the non-conforming sign is not removed following the two notifications, equating to eight (8) business days, the Code Enforcement Officer may remove the sign and make it available for retrieval at Town Hall for an additional ten (10) business days. This ordinance pertains to, but not limited to signs without a temporary sign permit, illegally posted signs at intersections, off-premise real estate signs, signs in a publicly deeded right of way, and signs advertising businesses and events.
MR. CASE MADE A
MOTION TO APPROVE THE PROPOSAL AS PRESENTED.
MS. LYONS SECONDED
THE MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED.
The Planning Board members recessed from 4:04 until 4:08 p.m.
Linson Ridge Approval of Phase II
Due to Ms. Lyons’ involvement in the Linson Ridge project the following motion was made:
MR. PIERCE MADE A
MOTION TO EXCUSE MS. LYONS FROM VOTING.
MR. BREDE SECONDED
THE MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED.
Four lots were approved inappropriately due to the project being a major subdivision. A variance would be required for the road grade.
Normally subdivisions are not approved contingent on a variance being granted. The four lots were approved because another developer was allowed to get four lots approved. The four lots should have been in phase 1, but due to the road grade the lots were not included.
Approving a few lots at a time creates problems for the sewer department. The proper procedure would be the planning board approving the subdivision, and then any changes requiring a variance would go before the zoning board of adjustment.
The county would approve the lots as a minor within a major subdivision.
Mr. Byrd felt the issue should be addressed as soon as possible. The entire subdivision should come before the planning board for approval even if the subdivision is going to be developed in phases.
The planning board members had concerns about road grade in light of recent mud slides. The developers should not be cutting in roads until the plat has been approved. Roadways are an enormous contributor to sedimentation.
Mr. Byrd agreed but added that subdivisions should not come to the planning board until after staff review. Ms. Lyons suggested having a check off list for both the staff level and the planning board review. This would eliminate any omissions. Chairman Tilley agreed stating that the county planning board does not see the preliminary plans; they receive a sheet of facts. Maggie Valley needs a more defined system.
Mr. Byrd will develop a check list.
MR. BREDE MADE A
MOTION TO WAIT UNTIL AFTER THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT EITHER GRANTS OR
DENIES THE VARIANCE BEFORE MOVING FORWARD WITH APPROVAL.
MR. PIERCE
SECONDED THE MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED.
Erosion Control Plan
The proposed erosion control plan was developed from State guidelines.
Mr. Byrd spoke with land resources and found the process for a municipality to adopt and enforce erosion control must go to Raleigh for approval through the Sedimentation Control Commission.
Mr. Bage is getting involved in some erosion control as the building inspector although administration would be handled through the planning/code enforcement department. In-house administration would bring some funds into town through erosion control permits.
MR. BREDE MADE A
MOTION TO ACCEPT HAYWOOD COUNTY’S EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL CHAPTER 154 TO
BE ADOPTED AND ENFORCED UNDER THE TOWN OF MAGGIE VALLEY’S CODE ENFORCEMENT AND
BUILDING INSPECTION DEPARTMENTS.
MR. CASE SECONDED
THE MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED.
Mr. Byrd will do a presentation for the Board of Aldermen on Monday October 11, 2004 on safety and health.
Chairman Tilley asked that the proposed erosion control ordinance and the sign ordinance amendment be placed on the Board of Aldermen’s October 19, 2004 agenda.
Other Business
Mr. Byrd explained that the sample recreation dedication/impact fee comes from an area that has similar topography as Maggie Valley. As for off-premise parking, there are no reliable sources of information and it would be difficult to enforce. The best way to handle the clearance of traffic flow is to make certain roads are built to eighteen feet.
Chairman Tilley was under the impression that the zoning of Campbell Creek and the green space ordinance would go before the aldermen hand- in- hand or the green space (recreation dedication/impact fee) would go first. If the green space were not adopted, the zoning of area 01-B would be viewed in a different light.
Mr. Byrd explained that these are independent issues. Any proposed subdivisions in Campbell Creek have not been reviewed to date.
The board then discussed Mr. Byrd’s recommendation being different than the planning boards’. After completing a land analysis Mr. Byrd felt the higher density should be on flat land where the least amount of grading is needed. The property is below the raw water in-take.
The board felt they had compromised their ethics as a board due to agreeing on Residential 2 zoning.
Chairman Tilley felt that two recommendations would take the validity from the planning board’s recommendations.
The board then discussed the role of the planner, and the understanding that the board and planner worked as a team. Chairman Tilley informed Mr. Byrd that the county planner does not make recommendations without the planning board.
Other than environmental concerns, the board felt that Campbell Creek Road would not accommodate the traffic from high density housing.
A workshop was scheduled for October 19, 2004 at 12:00 noon to review the green space ordinance and the erosion control plan.
There being no further business to discuss, on motion by Mr. Pierce, seconded by Chairman Tilley the meeting adjourned at 6:15 p.m.
___________________________________
Patricia Tilley, Chairman
____________________________________
Vickie Best, CMC
Town Clerk