TOWN OF MAGGIE VALLEY

TOWN OF MAGGIE VALLEY

REGULARLY SCHEDULED PLANNING BOARD MEETING

FEBRUARY 3, 2006

MINUTES

Members Present: Vice-Chairman Billy Brede, Jerry Zerbock, Richard Pierce, and Brenda O’Keefe

Staff Present: Planning Director Nathan Clark and Town Clerk Vickie Best

Others Present: Owner of Smoky Falls Motel

Meeting Called to Order

Chairman Brede called the meeting to order at 3:10 p.m. in the Maggie Valley Boardroom.

Approval or Correction of Minutes: December 29, 2005, January 4, 2006, January 10, 2006

MR. ZERBOCK MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF DECEMBER 29, 2005. MR. PIERCE SECONDED THE MOTION.

MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

MR. PIERCE MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JANUARY 4, 2006. MS. O’KEEFE SECONDED THE MOTION.

MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

MS. O’KEEFE MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JANUARY 10, 2006. MR. ZERBOCK SECONDED THE MOTION.

MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

Proposed Text Amendment: Political Signs

Mr. Clark received several complaints from business owners and residents regarding political signs lining Soco Road and Moody Farm Road. The signs lining the highway during color season had a negative impact on tourism. The Planning Director was asked to address the issue, thus the reason for the text amendment. There is not a local election in 2006 therefore; future political candidates have the opportunity to familiarize themselves with any amendments.

Political Sign (Current Definition): is a sign erected for the purpose of advertising a candidate or stating a position regarding an issue upon which the voters of the town may vote.

Political Sign (Proposed Definition) is a temporary sign of a candidate, party or group supporting the candidacy of an individual for office or expressing or soliciting public support of, or opposition to, any public issue(s).

Article V. Signs Requiring a Permit

8. Political sign. (Current Ordinance) Such signs shall not be attached to utility poles, shall not be displayed more than thirty (30) days prior to the election, and shall be removed within five (5) days after the issue to which the signs refer has occurred, and shall have the written permission of the property owner on which the sign is placed. Political signs shall not exceed sixteen (16) square feet in area. No political sign shall be permitted in the corporate limits or extraterritorial jurisdiction of the Town of Maggie Valley unless the candidate, or the candidate's designee, first deposits $100.00 with the Town of Maggie Valley to insure the removal of such signs. Five days after the election, the $100.00 deposit will be refunded to the candidate or the candidate's designee, provided all signs have been removed, however if the candidate is contacted over twice by the Code Enforcement Officer in regards to his/her sign not being in conformance with the Towns code such sign shall be removed and the $100.00 deposit will be forfeited to the Town of Maggie Valley.

The board members felt the $100 fee works exceptionally well for local elections but is more difficult with statewide elections. Although there were complaints about signs lining the highways, the signs were removed in a timely manner.

Article IV. Signs Not Requiring a Permit

I. Political Signs (Proposed Text)

One (1) sign shall be permitted per individual lot or parcel for each candidate for office or side of a ballot measure or issue; for a lot or parcel with frontage on a second street, one additional sign for each candidate for office or side of a ballot measure or issue shall be permitted.

Such signs shall not be located on or within the public right-of-way or affixed to any improvement within such right-of-way (median, utility pole, traffic control device, bridge, guardrail, or other safety barrier), within a required sight distance triangle, or on Town property or buildings, except within specified proximity of polling places on Election Day, under rules established by the Haywood County Board of Elections.

Such signs shall be located on private property with the owner's permission or consent. It shall be presumed the property owner has given permission or consents to the sign's placement unless the property owner notifies the Town otherwise. The failure of a candidate, candidates designee or property owner to remove a sign shall result in the sign being removed by the town at the property owners expense which shall not be less than ten dollars ($10.00) per sign.

All such signs may not be erected prior to 30 days before the appropriate primary election or 45 days before the appropriate general election or run-off election or referendum and must be removed within five days after the primary, general or run-off election or referendum.

All such signs shall not exceed twelve (12) square feet in area.

The consensuses was that the political signs should be no large than 2’ X 3’.

Erecting signs 30 prior to the election should apply to both the general and primary elections.

Several members were uncomfortable with the property owner being charged a fee for signs located on the property when the property owner may not be aware that signs are on the property. This is particularly true in Maggie Valley, where businesses close and residents leave for the winter months.

Wording for “sight distance triangle” will be simplified.

Mr. Clark will e-mail the political sign revisions to the board members.

Scheduling of Workshop & Special Called Meeting

Because several members will be out of town during the month of March, there will not be a regularly scheduled March Planning Board Meeting. The Planning Board will conduct a Special Called Meeting on February 15, 2006 at 9:00 a.m. A workshop will be conducted April 27, 2006 at 9:00 a.m.

Mr. Karen Smith, with Community Assistance, spoke with the Planning Board during their retreat regarding Land Use Plans. The Board directed Mr. Clark to attempt to get an outline of the proposed steps in creating a land use plan.

Proposed Text Amendment: Travel Trailer/ RV Site Requirements

The proposed text amendment is a reactionary amendment. A request has been made to allow only self-contained RVs in a proposed RV Park to avoid the cost of constructing restrooms.

Current Text: The ratio of toilet, lavatory, urinals and bathing facilities for occupants of organized travel camps for private tents, non-self-contained travel trailers, non-self-contained tent campers shall be as follows and shall be provided in a service building or buildings located on the property.

Proposed Text: The ratio of toilet, lavatory, urinals and bathing facilities for occupants of organized travel camps for private tents, self-contained travel trailers, non-self-contained travel trailers, self-contained tent campers, non-self-contained tent campers, self-contained motor homes and non-self contained motor homes shall be as follows and shall be provided in a service building or buildings located on the property.

MR. PIERCE MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT FOR TRAVEL TRAILERS.

MS. O’KEEFE SECONDED THE MOTION.

MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

Proposed Text: Wireless Communication Tower Ordinance

A consultant recently contacted Mr. Clark about locating a cell tower on the valley floor. Maggie Valley does not have an ordinance in place. In reviewing past minutes, the Town was under the impression that towers would be located in the mountains rather than the valley floor. Haywood County has an ordinance in place but it does not address Maggie Valley’s needs.

During the retreat, Mr. Clark distributed a handout from the Los Angeles Times regarding a recent Federal Appeals Court ruling on cell towers. Cell towers cannot be barred on appearance only. Mr. Clark asked that the members keep this in mind during the review of the proposed ordinance.

Proposed Text:

In recognition of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, it is the intent of the Town of Maggie Valley to allow communication providers the opportunity to locate towers and related facilities within its jurisdiction in order to provide an adequate level of service to its customers while protecting the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Maggie Valley and its ETJ. Wireless towers may be considered undesirable with other types of uses, most notably residential, therefore special regulations are necessary to ensure than any adverse affects to existing and future development are mitigated

Telecommunication Towers and Facilities, provided the following conditions are met in addition to any applicable requirements set forth for this district:

1. All telecommunication towers must be of a monopole design and construction. Towers of the lattice variety may be used if documentation is provided by the applicant that demonstrates that a monopole tower cannot adequately serve the area.

2. It is the intent of the Town to encourage providers to co-locate facilities in an effort to reduce the number of towers in Maggie Valley's jurisdiction. Providers shall exhaust all potential co-location possibilities and provide documentation to such effect before the Town considers any application. The Town encourages providers to construct telecommunication towers such that additional telecommunication providers may be afforded the opportunity to co-locate facilities on the tower. The owners of the towers with co-location space shall negotiate in good faith with other provider's space at a reasonable lease cost, and publicize the fact that space is available on a lease basis. The Town further reserves the right to make co-location a condition of any tower permitted as a conditional use under the guidelines listed above. No tower may be located within 1,500 linear feet of an existing tower unless the applicant can prove that co-location is not a viable option.

3. The maximum height of any tower located in all Residential (R) districts is 125 feet unless documentation is provided to show a taller tower is required to meet minimal service levels (i.e. cannot meet reasonable service coverage area). Towers located in both Commercial (C) districts have a maximum height limitation of 199.9 feet unless documentation is provided to demonstrate a taller tower is required for a minimal level of service and need.

4. Where a telecommunication tower is located on a lot with an existing non-residential principal use, the tower must be located in the rear or side yards. If the principal use is residential, the tower must be located in the rear yard only.

5. The Town of Maggie Valley recognizes that a tower cannot be prohibited nor can a conditional use permit be denied on the basis of environmental or health concerns relating to radio emissions if the tower complies with the Federal Radio Frequency Emission Standards. The Town requires that the applicant must provide documentation proving that the proposed tower does comply with the Federal Radio Frequency Emission Standards.

6. A minimum lot size as listed in the underlying zoning district is required, provided all setbacks required herein are met.

7. In all districts, a minimum setback requirement, on all sides of the property, shall be 150 feet or two feet for every one (1) foot of actual tower height (i.e. a 150 foot tower would require a 300 foot setback), whichever is greater. If the applicant can document a reduced collapse area, then the setback shall be the greater of that distance or 150 feet.

8. Wherever feasible, all accessory structures on the ground which contain switching equipment or other related equipment must be designed to closely resemble the neighborhood's basic architecture, or the architecture and style of the principal use on the property. Every effort should be made to conceal a tower within Residential (R) Districts.

9. Vegetative screening is required along all sides of the perimeter of the tower site. It will be the responsibility of the provider and/or the property owner to keep all landscaping material free from disease and properly maintained in order to fulfill the purpose for which it was established. The owners of the property, and any tenant on the property where screening is required, shall be jointly and severally responsible for the maintenance of all screen materials. Such maintenance shall include all actions necessary to keep the screened area free of litter and debris, to keep plantings healthy, and to keep planting areas neat in appearance. Any vegetation that constitutes part of the screening shall be replaced in the event it dies. In addition, an eight (8) foot high fence must be placed around the structure (before the screening) to avoid creating an attractive nuisance.

10. Free-standing signs are prohibited. Wall signs limited to identification are allowed on equipment structures or fences surrounding the telecommunication tower provided it does not exceed nine square feet in size. Any signage must be specifically addressed in the conditional use permit.

11. All towers shall be illuminated only as required by the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and such illuminations in any district shall be directed toward the tower and/or equipment shelters to reduce the affect of glare.

12. Towers and related facilities must be removed if abandoned (no longer used for its original Intent) for a period greater than ninety (90) consecutive days.

13. Any replacement or improvement to an existing telecommunication tower, including if the tower is blown over or considered inoperable, requires the provider to apply for a new review and approval process by the Planning Board and Town Board of Aldermen. Normal maintenance and repair of the structure can be completed without the issuance of a new permit at the discretion of the Zoning Officer

14. The provider must show proof of adequate insurance coverage for any potential damage caused by or to the telecommunication tower prior to the issuance of a conditional use permit.

15. Outdoor storage of equipment or other related items is prohibited on a telecommunication tower site.

16. Provider must notify the Town of sale or lease of structure.

17. All applications for a conditional use permit for a telecommunication tower must include the following information:

(a) Identification of intended provider(s);

(b) Documentation by a registered engineer that the tower has sufficient structural integrity to accommodate more than one user;

(d) Evidence that the property owners of residentially zoned property within 300 feet of the site have been notified by the applicant of the proposed tower height and design;

e) Documentation that the telecommunication tower complies with the Federal Radio Frequency Emission Standards;

(f) Documentation that towers over 125 feet in Residential Zones (or 199.9 feet in Commercial Zones) are necessary for a minimal level of service;

g) Screening must be shown on the site plan detailing the type, amount of plantings, and location; and

h) Documentation of collapse zones

18. Conditional Use Permit Application Process:

a) The Town Planning Director determines completion of the application.

b) The Planning Board reviews application and forwards a recommendation to the Town Board of Aldermen.

c) The Town Board of Aldermen reviews the application, receives public comment on the issues and is the grantor of the Conditional Use Permit needed to erect a Wireless Communication Tower.

A tower located on the valley floor would feed off the taller towers and “microwave” the signal throughout the valley.

Mr. Pierce was very concerned about a tower being an eyesore within the commercial district.

If certified documentation were provided that a signal could only go out from one specific area, and all other requirements were met, the town would have to allow the location.

The following revisions were made:

The limit all towers to 125 feet with an exception clause.

The towers should only be located to the rear of the property.

Change requiring an 8- foot fence to a required 12-foot fence.

Both residential and commercial property owners within 300 feet of the proposed location should be notified of a proposed cell tower.

Most municipalities charge a fee for conditional use permits. The highest fee in the surrounding area is $250. Due to the amount of time needed to review and issue a conditional use permit, the Board felt $250 would be adequate.

The board will review the final draft at the February 15, 2006 meeting.

Planning Director’s Report

In the past, the Planning Board has requested an amendment to require pins showing the setbacks. Town Council did not approve the proposal. There continues to be problems with setbacks. Mr. Mercier, Mr. Bage and Mr. Clark will meet to discuss the issue the following week.

THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO DISCUSS, THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 5:04 P.M. ON MOTION OF MS. O’KEEFE.

_________________________________

Vice-Chairman Billy Brede

_________________________________

Vickie Best, CMC Town Clerk