The Blowing Rock Planning and Zoning Board met on Thursday, June 20, 2002. Chairman Susie Greene called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Members present were Dennis Quinn, Paul Peterson, Bob Parker, Albert Yount, Ron Oberle, Jim West, Cobb Milner, George Snyder and David Cox.

Mr. Snyder pointed out that he was not present at the last meeting and the minutes indicated he was. He asked this be corrected.

Mr. West made a motion to approve the minutes from the May 2002 meeting with the following corrections. On Page one (1), item two (2), should read lot width not lot depth. Mr. Milner added that the word "damage" should be removed from line four (4) in the motion on page 3. Mr. West accepted the additional item as part of his motion. Mr. Milner seconded the motion. All were in favor of the motion.

Chairman Green stated a new Vice Chairman would need to be appointed. Mr. Peterson nominated Mr. West. Mr. West stated that he was already chairman over several committees and would like to nominate Mr. Peterson as Vice Chairman, seconded by Mr. Milner. Mr. Peterson agreed to serve as Vice Chairman. All were in favor of the nomination.

Mr. Rothrock clarified some of the terms discussed at the Planning Boards May meeting. Also as requested, necessary changes were made in the requirements for the Town Center District and submitted to the Board in draft form as they would appear in the Town Code.

Mr. West suggested that under the term Open Space, "parking areas" be changed to "vehicle accommodation area" to read the same as already used in the Town Code. The Board agreed with this change. The Board asked that all terms be added to the definitions in the Town Code.

Mr. West also discussed the lot depth and how it will be measured if the property line could not be determined. Chairman Greene suggested that "the Town sidewalk" be added as a point of reference. Mr. West suggested that the Town Center committee meet to look at the Lot Depth and how it is measured, and to determine the main line of the sidewalk and the town right of way.

The Board reviewed draft Section 16-184. Mr. Peterson suggested taking 15% of the average dept of the frontage area to determine the required open space on the lot instead of multiplying 15% of the average lot depth. Mr. Parker suggested that the committee bring back samples to the Board of how this would apply.

Mr. Rothrock stated he would make the suggested changes to the draft ordinance and that the Town Center committee would now being to work on the other non residential areas with regards to setbacks.

Mr. Rothrock explained that at the May Planning Board meeting, the Board discussed amending the nonconforming section of the Town Code as it pertained to repair, maintenance, and reconstruction of nonconforming buildings. The Planning Board decided to amend the Town Code so to require and repair, renovation, or reconstruction of nonconforming structure to meet new setbacks or other requirements. This would include structures damaged by fire, natural disaster, or act of God.

The Board discussed in length if the term "appraised valuation" should be used. Mr. Peterson suggested using "assessed value" instead. Mr. Yount asked that someone contact Watauga County Tax office to see what model they use to come up with the appraised value.

Ms. Sue Glenn with Blowing Rock Realty stated the draft ordinance as presented is not what should be approved. Buildings would not be built back, if destroyed, like they exist now. Therefore not keeping the Town of Blowing Rock the way it is.

Since their was much discussion with regards to this draft ordinance, Chairman Greene suggested a committee review this ordinance along with staff in further detail.

Mr. Rothrock asked that it not be changed due to Watauga County using the "appraised value" and that value would be received from Watauga County at the time of the request.

Mr. West made a motion to forward the draft ordinance as presented with the above changes to the Town Council. The motion was seconded by Mr. Snyder. All were in favor of the motion.

Mr. Cox excused himself from the Board for this discussion so that he could speak as an audience participant.

Mr. Rothrock explained that in April of this year, an itinerant merchant requested a zoning permit to open a produce stand on Hwy. 321 by-pass. The merchant requested to extend the permit until December so he could sell seasonal produce and Christmas trees in November and December. He stated that the current Town Code for an itinerant merchant permit is valid for only 90 days and it can not be renewed within the same calendar year. The merchant contends that the language in the town code does not state that an itinerant merchant permits cannot be renewed. Mr. Rothrock read the current language to the Board.

Mr. Rothrock stated that he interprets this section of the Town Code to allow one (1) permit per property per calendar year for the temporary sale of farm products or nursery products by obtaining a zoning permit. He suggested that the language of the code be changed if the intent of this section was to limit itinerant merchants to one (1) permit per calendar year per piece of property. If 90 days is not a long enough time to operate an itinerant business then that could be amended also.

Mr. Earl Horne stated by interperting the language this way, the Town was restricting the property owners use of his land. Mr. Horne asked that the Board make a recommendation to remove the restriction of not more than one (1) itinerant merchant per year from the proposed text. He suggested consider allowing the merchant to renew a permit for if the merchant would like to extend it.

Mr. West pointed out that one of the problems with itinerant merchants is appearance. The 90 days allows the town to see if the merchant abides to the appearance with regards to signage and storage.

Mr. Rothrock stated that the would also like to add some restrictions to the language with regards to allowable signage (size requirements, materials, etc.).

Mr. Peterson suggested allowing as many itinerant merchants as the property owner would like and require the merchant to comply with the Town’s sign ordinance.

Mr. David Cox state that one of the properties in question was his and he didn’t think it was fair to restrict the use of his property. He explained that he has tried to develop his property several times and the plans did not pass the Town’s requirements. By allowing itinerant merchants on his property, he was able to receive some benefits of owing the land.

Mr. Oberle called for question. Mr. Oberle added to his motion that all itinerant merchants must have signage that meets the Town Code. Mr. Milner agreed with the amendment. For the motion were Mr. Oberle and Mr. Milner. Against the motion were Mr. West, Mr. Peterson, Mr. Snyder, Mr. Quinn, Mr. Parker and Mr. Yount. Motion failed.

Mr. Quinn made a motion to recommend two consecutive permits per property per calendar year for 90 days, renewable for 30 days, seconded by Mr. Parker. Mr. West asked that the motion be amended to include that once a permit expires all signs and display units are to be removed and that the signage be limited to 16 square feet. Mr. Milner and Mr. Parker agreed on the amendment. All were in favor of the motion.

Mr. Rothrock reported that at the May Town Council meeting during the discussion of telecommunication towers, it was suggested that the staff should prepare an amendment to the Land Use Code that would require the use of alternative tower structures and stealth technology. Also following a recent installation of Cingular antennas on several BREMCO utility poles, staff would like the Town Code amended to require a Conditional Use Permit for the installation of antennas that are part of the "distribution network of a commercial telecommunications system".

Mr. Rothrock stated that staff was concerned about the appearance of the equipment boxes that must be installed along with each antenna.

The changes to the Telecommunications Tower Ordinance and the Table of Permissible Uses would be 1) to require the use of alternative tower structures and stealth technology; and 2) would require a conditional use permit for antennas that are part of a cellular network.

Mr. Al Rapp was present and stated that he was very much in favor of the changes being made to the existing ordinance and he commended the staff for bringing it to the Planning Board.

With no further discussion, Mr. Oberle made a motion to forward the draft ordinance as presented to the Town Council, seconded by Mr. Milner. All were in favor of the motion.

Mr. Rothrock reported that the current setbacks in the R-15 and R-10 zoning districts is 40 and 30 feet. Section 16-184 (H)(1) and (2) of the Town Code provides relief from the applicable setback requirements due to steep topography. This relief is given in the for of a waiver from the zoning administrator. In no case shall the waiver result in a setback of less than 25 feet This section in the Town Code recognizes a hardship due to topography and is designed to provide setback relief in such situations.

Section 184 (G) is another section that allows a reduction in the street setback when structures on properties adjacent to the subject property are nonconforming and less than the required setback. Mr. Rothrock asked the Board if it wouldn’t be practical to change the setback from 40 feet (R-15) and 30 feet (R-10) to 20 or 25 feet.

Chairman Greene stated that the setbacks were established for a reason and she did not see a problem with the current setbacks especially with the minimal request for a reduction.

Mr. West suggested staff continue to monitor the problem and if the request seem to increase, bring something back to the Planning Board. The Board agreed with this suggestion.

Mr. Oberle had asked staff to submit to the Board a list of the items cut from the Town’s budget so that the Board could see how it would affect the Comprehensive Plan. Chairman Greene suggested that with such a lengthy meeting that this item be moved to next months agenda. The Board agreed.

With no further discussion, Mr. Oberle made a motion to adjourn at 10:00 p.m., seconded by Mr. Milner. All were in favor.

__________________________ ____________________________________

Chairman Susie Greene Administrative Assistant, Sonya Long