JACKSON COUNTY PLANNING BOARD  MINUTES  Date: June 10, 2024 Time Begin: 6:04 p.m. Time End: 7:30 p.m.  Location: Department on Aging, Heritage Room  Members Emily Moss Brian Barwatt Adam Holt Ken Brown Staff Present:  Present Absent X X X  Present Absent X X X  Present Absent  Nathan Shepherd. Ollin Dunford Joyce Cooper X Beverly Crespo X  Elmer Rhodie Humbert Vacant Vacant  X  Michael Poston- Planning Director John. Jeleniewski- Senior Planner Anna Harkins- Plannerl Allison Kelley- Administrative Assistant III Others Present:  Mark Letson, Jackson County Board of Commissioners Chairman  Kevin King, Jackson County Manager Hunter Rogers, Planning Intern Call to Order and Quorum Check Approval of the Agenda carried unanimously. Approval of the Minutes and it carried unanimously. Public Comment There were no public comments. Old Business  Chairman Nathan Shepherd called the meeting to order at 6:04 p.m. and a quorum was present.  Joyce Cooper made a motion to approve the agenda as written. Adam Holt seconded the motion, and it  Brian Barwatt made a motion to approve May 13, 2024 minutes. Ollin Dunford seconded the motion,  a) General Ordinance Discussion  Mr. Poston stated he was aware that the Board had some things identified at the last meeting and they have also had some feedback from the Board of Commissioners about a couple of things they would like for us to prioritize. Some of those things relate to some of the work with soil, erosion control, floodplain and water quality issues. In addition, he stated Dr. Bill    Horton from Cashiers gave a presentation on conservation planning work that they are doing in the southern end of the county to the Board and he has also been to the Board of Commissioners. Mr. Poston stated he believes they were really interested in some principles that that Dr. Horton was talking about, especially around water quality. He stated talking with the chairman and Mr. Shepherd, others on the board, and the manager they asked us if the Planning Board would not mind to start to take a look at our water recharge regulations. Mr. Poston stated the Water Recharge Ordinance was adopted in 2013, and the idea behind that was to improve the water's ability to recharge and it is very similar to what our watershed regulations are. The state back in the early 90s gave counties and municipalities a set of regulations to enforce on their behalf, sometimes called an unfunded mandate to protect water supply watersheds, and our biggest water supply watershed starts at the continental divide and heads north until the dam at Western Carolina University where Tuckaseigee Water and Sewer Authority (TWSA) and the university both do the water intake the public water systems. In addition, he stated that watershed is all protected with certain rules and regulations about maximum pervious surfaces, stream buffers, and other things that impact water quality because that is where the drinking supply is coming from. In the early 2000s, 2010/2012/2013 timeframe the Planning Director at that time Gerald Green worked on the water recharge regulations, and they are in a lot of ways similar to the Watershed Protection Ordinance regulations. He stated there are a couple of things that we can look to start to address that will help improve the water recharge, and these regulations are for the whole county outside of Mr. Poston stated the Water Recharge Ordinance applies to commercial, industrial, multifamily developments, and major subdivisions. He stated the ordinance exempts agricultural uses and one of the reasons why is that any type of regulation that you are applying that is found int the zoning enabling statutes, counties are not allowed to enforce on bona fide farms or agricultural uses. In addition, he stated that is not dissimilar from soil erosion control and a lot of other type of regulatory frameworks that do not apply to agricultural uses, we do not apply them to single family residential construction. He stated we also do not apply them to minor subdivisions (eight or fewer lots), mainly because iti is only going to require an unpaved ten-foot- wide access road in our regulations, and there is not al lot of imperviousness that gets put on the ground because you do not have to pave it and there is al lot more ability for that water recharge to happen in minor subdivisions. Developments on the campus of Western Carolina University Unified Development Ordinance Article V, Section! 5.5.4 Limitations on Impervious Surfaces (a) In an effort to promote the absorption of stormwater into the earth's surface and thence into the water table, limitations on a pervious surface are hereby  every municipal jurisdiction or their Extra-Territorial Jurisdictions (ETJ)'s.  were exempted in the original ordinance. Mr. Poston read off the following:  established.  Table 5.2 Maximum Allowable Impervious Surface  2    Table 5.2: Maximum Allowable Impervious Surface  Land Use Multi-f familyr residential Multi-f family residential Industrial Commercial Opens space  Lots Size <1.0a acres >1.0a acres Alls sizes Alls sizes Alls sizes  Maximum Allowable Impervious: Surface  75% 70% 70% 70% 12%( (for roads, parking areas)  He stated depending on the type of use that we have, there is the amount of maximum allowable impervious surface, which are rooftops, asphalt, concrete, anything that does not allow water to absorb. In addition, he stated it has been debated al lot over the last decade or SO DEQ and the state does not actually consider certain types of gravel to be impervious, but some gravel they consider pervious which is a bit of an outlier in this conversation. Mr. Poston stated this was designed to put some density caps on the maximum allowable impervious surface. Mr. Poston stated the ordinance also discusses what would happen if you exceed those limits and the: standards that you would have to put in place in your development to help absorb Unified Development Ordinance Article V, Section 5.5.5 Exceeding Limitations on Impervious  that as follows: Surfaces  (a) The amount ofi impervious surface on a lot may exceed that which is allowed by the Table 5.2: Maximum Allowable Impervious Surface, provided that stormwater retention measures that collect and retain for percolation the runoff from the (b) The permitted increase in impervious surfaces shall be on a direct ratio basis. For example, if ten percent of the total stormwater generated by the development's impervious surfaces is retained, at ten percent increase in the permitted impervious surfaces shall be allowed; if 60 percent of the total stormwater generated by the development's impervious surfaces is retained, a 60 percent increase in the (c) Stormwater retention systems shall be designed by a registered professional engineer or landscape architect and their installation and construction certified by (d) Standing water and installations that allow for water to collect and stagnate sO as to provide a suitable habitat for mosquitoes should be prohibited. (e) Development plans meeting these standards shall be approved for compliance with Mr. Poston stated the following section is more of preservation of vegetation to help also prevent forest fires. He stated he guessed at the time they thought this was going to be an issue they need to address and they decided inside the Water Recharge Ordinance will be a place to tell you about clearing limits around houses and the reduction of dead plant and fire materials. In addition, he stated he thinks it is kind of misplaced in this ordinance and it does not really talk much about the water recharge except for that we acknowledge that the grass shrubs and trees help with the water recharge process, and then after that, we just talked about how to Unified Development Ordinance Article V, Section 5.5.7 Preservation of Vegetation  impervious areas are installed.  permitted impervious surfaces shall be permitted.  the designer.  the impervious surface standards.  make sure that we can prevent forest fires.  3    (a) Preserving existing vegetation on a site can enhance the water recharge capacity oft the (b) Grass, shrubs, and trees all contribute to the ability of a property to provide water (c) While the wholesale removal of existing trees and shrubs is discouraged, some vegetation removal and pruning is recommended to create a "firewise" home. (d) Existing vegetation within 30 feet of the home should be pruned and/or thinned to (e) All dead plant material, including leaves, should be removed in this 30-foot zone. Plants that can contain resins and oils that burn readily (ornamental junipers, hollies, and (f) For more information regarding creating a "firewise" home, contact Firewise (g) Removal of vegetation on property with a slope of 30 percent or more is regulated (h) Standards for preservation of vegetation on property with a slope of 30 percent or more Mr. Poston stated in the Watershed Protection Ordinance, we have to have a 301 foot buffer from perennial streams that is required but that is only within that district and anything outside of that Watershed District we have never actually put in a riparian buffer rule for those perennial streams. He stated we think this would be a good opportunity for the county to revisit that as we have trout waters, and we have perennial streams and this would help us catch any gaps between our regulations that exists today and make sure that all perennial streams would have a mandatory buffer around them. He stated there are some parts of the streams that do not always qualify as trout streams, and sO there would not be an automatic protection in this part of the state and we want to make sure there is kind of a catch all statement that allows us to enforce and code enforcement to enforce a continuous stream buffer between all of our streams. In addition, he stated we have got al lot of perennial streams in this county and al large Ms. Crespo stated last time and on our list was erosion control and that includes floodplain regulation, erosion, sedimentation control, and stormwater control, which will be water recharge. She stated if we are going to address water recharge, can that not be all in one. Mr. Poston stated we can look at all those, and the problem with erosion control and floodplain is we do not have a lot of local choice in those two, we have already exercised our local choice. He stated this is a local ordinance that we that we administer locally, it is not a federal or state program, we have to comply with state law, but there is not a prescribed program like the Sedimentation Erosion Control Act, and the floodplain regulations are fairly well prescribed about what we can and cannot do. Within this document, we do have al lot more freedom to address impervious limits and things oft that nature, whereas a watershed we cannot go in and amend the watershed beyond what they already have. This ordinance is where this body can have the most influence in making some changes that we think would be beneficial as long as it does not get too far afield as we cannot make 100-foot stream buffers because the state only allows most of the time 25 to 30. Therefore, we have to stay within some regulation but there is a lot of discussion that we can do about these types of uses, and how impervious surface would trigger some additional stormwater, some additional best management practices Mr. Poston stated we can use the Water Recharge Ordinance to help address not everything that soil and water, erosion control, floodplain or Watershed Protection does. The thresholds  property. recharge.  reduce the amount of fuel available for a fire. young pines) should not be planted in this area. Communities at www.firewise.org.  Section 5.5.  can bei found in of Sections 5.8.4 and 5.8.6.  majority of them end upi in the Tuckasegee River through the watershed.  and things like that which do note exist today.  4    that we have identified for folks to start working on best management practices for stormwater and/or retention, we do not get anywhere close to those. Mr. Jeleniewski stated wel have never had one where it has crossed over where we had to go back and say you are at 72 and you have to come down. Mr. Poston stated or you would have to do something more robust. He stated nobody comes to us with impervious surfaces this high, we will allow you to go up to 70% but we are not even seeing anybody get close to 70%. In addition, he stated Mr. Jeleniewski and he have discussed that there may be some space in here for us to suggest to the Commissioners that we lower those numbers a little bit sO that we can start to trigger these best management practices. For example, one of the things that we see out in more rural parts of the county are for commercial such as Dollar Generals and things, and right now they are not putting this much impervious surface on that lot sO we are not triggering any great stormwater, but they are still generating stormwater. In addition, he stated they do not meet the threshold for Mr. Jeleniewski to say that they have to implement these standards, and he thinks that is where we can make some good headway. Mr. Poston stated the right sizing of this is just figuring out where the number should be to trigger of some of these types of best management practices Mr. Poston stated at the next meeting Mr. Jeleniewski will give some real-world examples of where we are seeing these percentages hit, and then we can: start talking about where does that percentage need to be in order to better protect our streams and stormwater and talk about these concepts. In addition, he stated I think where in the past they have had these higher numbers and thresholds is when Jackson County started first started doing these types of ordinances, a lot of times it was what happens to the mom and pop stores is we want them to be able to thrive, but we do not want to put a whole lot of extra cost. He stated It think what we are seeingi is al lot more of these Dollar General type, Country Store type of deals where they are not really harming the mom and pop stores, because they are not the ones trying to build in Jackson County and they are not the ones that are doing this on the larger scale like some of these others. Mr. Poston stated we really think that we need to right size this ordinance to better reflect what we are actually see on the ground. He stated. staff would come back with some percentage ranges to give an idea of what each percentage looks like to give some understanding SO we can make an educated recommendation to the Commissioners. Ms. Crespo inquired if multifamily residential includes manufactured housing. Mr. Poston stated it does not, but we can take a look at different types of uses. Manufactured housing is going to be a little bit more closely kin to a subdivision because we are talking about lots and/or units. In addition, he stated the other thing that we have done since this time with multifamily residential is we have created a multifamily residential regulation specific to these uses, and this one is a little bit tighter here for these two uses because we have a stormwater requirement already, because we adopted those three or two years ago and those stormwater requirements are very similar to some of our zoned districts. He stated with this rewrite, we will look at the impervious surfaces and we may also look at some stormwater regulatory techniques that can also be incorporated to help get better designs. Mr. Poston stated staff would send out the Water Recharge Ordinance to have a more robust conversation, where we can pull up some actual plans that we have received, and maybe Mr. Jeleniewski will be able to work on a couple mock ups of what that might look like with his background in engineering to give an idea of what makes some sense about what numbers we are looking at. He stated the impervious surfaces, stormwater, stream buffers, those are the three that staff thought off the top of our heads that we could really make some inroads in and kind of meet that desire to see our waterways have a little bit more developed protected and anything that you have developed that's stormwater  and it there would be some discussion that we would bring back to you.  eventually is going to end upi in ai in a creek andi in our water: systems.  5    Mr. Poston provided an update where we are on housing in general. He stated we talked about the Development Finance Initiative (DFI) coming in and they have done their work and was at the last Commissioners meeting in May. The DFI gave a full presentation on types of properties that may be of interest to help see some new multifamily, potentially some single- family component type housing, and the Commissioners have directed staff to start working a little bit on that. The other thing of getting some direction from the Board is that within this next budget year, we have budgeted some funding to actually create a comprehensive housing strategy for the County that will look at everything from housing typology and also include our regulatory framework for the impact housing. Mr. Poston stated our zoning ordinance requirements are single family zoning districts where we allow certain types of housing units, manufactured homes. He stated he thinks it will go through all of our policy making, and it is going to give some recommendations about where they see policy gaps, meaning we have some gaps that we need to fill with regulations or we expect they may come back and say, here are some policies that are barriers to housing. In addition, he stated the direction staff is getting from the management and from the Board is that on housing they really want to look at this comprehensively. Mr. Poston stated I think the Board would ask the Planning Board to let us work to get this housing strategy in this next budget year, and handle housing regulation in a more comprehensive manner, SO that they are not making recommendations on these things without understanding how they all kind of piece together. In addition, he stated I think the Board is interested in housing policy and types of things that we want to get done, but Ithink they also want to look at this from a larger perspective about how all these different housing components interlock to each of our regulations, our land use typologies, our type of housing that we have to housing that we need, how do we find partnerships, and how we do all of those Mr. Poston provided an update that they are looking to finish up the Cashiers Ordinance rewrite and it is getting to the point where our consultant, myself, and the attorneys are meeting tomorrow to start discussing the wording of that section and that does have to come before this Board in a review function. He stated as we moved through the ordinance, we have had to make some recommended changes to some process and procedure sections, which are within the Planning Board's purview. We are adding conditional zoning to the Cashiers area and we need to put a policy or procedure in place that falls under one of the articles that this Board does and we found some new language that we are going to clean up with vested rights from the state. He stated the state is continually changing or modifying some of their 160D sections and it did not just stop in 2019, they have been updating, and we are going to go back and update a couple of things in there while we are inside the document. In addition, the document isg going to have a new look given to it as they are going to restyle and reformat it that is going to make it easier for staff to make changes and that is going to fit within this project budget. Mr. Poston stated we will have the Board look at that and make a recommendation on all those things. He stated typically, formatting would not be something you would have to hold the Public Hearing on, but since we are going to hold a Public hearing on it anyways we wanted to talk to the Board about that. He stated once that happens, we are also going to make the recommendations for Outdoor Lighting that are consistent with the ones that we are fixing in Cashiers because those are also going to be following dark sky practice. Ina addition, he stated we are hopeful to have that back to the Board by the end of summer that way all those things kind  things.  of dovetail together.  6    b) Subdivision Regulation Amendments  Mr.. Jeleniewski stated last year the County Campground Ordinance was adopted by the Commissioners, and what we have found in the past year is that we have had probably a dozen or SO campgrounds that have all Level 1 which is below 15 units. He stated one of the unintended consequences of that ordinance was that we were directing people from the campground ordinance for a Level 1 to follow the minor residential subdivision road size, which isa 14 foot wide, two foot shoulders and a right-of-way. Mr. Jeleniewski stated one of the amendments in this ordinance is under the section for street design, under a table that breaks down the road types depending on the number of units served. He stated we have added a note there that "Level 1 Campgrounds are not required to be paved unless the grade is in excess of 15%." In addition, there are some text inconsistencies that have been crossed out because of the Table 4.6 Private and Subdivision Road Construction Standards as it is pretty specific as it gives you the breakdown of the base course and a breakdown of the paved surface for the road types. Mr. Jeleniewski stated the only road type in here is a shared drive that is not required to be paved unless it was greater than 15% and everything else is required to be paved in a subdivision. He stated subsection 11 states "The grade of residential. roads and major residential roads may be increased up to a grade of 20 percent upon approval of the Planning Board in order to minimize grading and/or vegetation removal. The section of road with a grade in excess of 15 percent shell-be-paved, shall not exceed 300 feet in length, and a leveling area shall be provided at each end of the road segment with a grade exceeding 15 percent. The grade of the leveling areas shall not exceed: 12 percent and it shall be at least 100j feet in length." Subsection 12 states "The grade of collector roads may be increase up to a grade of 18 percent upon approval of the Planning Board in order to minimize grading and/or vegetation removal. The section of road with a grade in excess of 15 percent shellbe-peved, shall note exceed 300j feet in length, and a leveling area: shall be provided at each end of the road. segment with a grade exceeding 15 percent. The grade of the leveling area shall not exceed 12 percent and it Mr. Jeleniewski stated there is some inconsistency in the text and we are striping that because we want subdivision roads to be paved especially if we are serving multiple units, and of course, anything that is over 15% will be regardless. He stated that is being cleaned up, that  shall be at least: 100j feet in length." -  text and those inconsistencies.  Table 4.6: Private and Subdivision Road Construction Standards  Road Type Shared Drive Minor Residential Residential Major Residential Collector 1ABC Aggregate Base Course and Structures TBCSalpetseCaume  Base Course 4"ABC'OFSTBG 6"A ABC€ OFSTBC 6" ABC OFSTBE 8"A ABC OFSTBG Or 6" ABC€ eFSTBE 8"/ ABC OF-STBE  Pavement Surface Not required unless grade: > 15% AST3 1%" SF9.5A*or: S9.5B5 1%" SF9.5A or $9.5B 2" SF9.5 or S9.5B 2"S SF9.5A or $9.5B  2 AIIE Base Course and Pavement Surface materials shall bei ina accordance with the latest edition oft the NCDOT Standard Specification for Roads  3AST Asphalt Surface etmemwretaw +SF9.5AA Asphalt Concrete Surface Course Surface-Treatment, Type SF9.5A  7    $59.5B Asphalt Concrete Surface Course, Type $9.5B  SThist tablei isi intended top provide minimum standards. Theses minimums standards may or may not bes suitable for all conditions. Itis recommended thata a qualified NCI Professional Engineer be consulted for site specific Base Course and Pavement Surface recommendations  Mr.. Jeleniewski stated the above table there are some strike throughs and that is more of housekeeping as this ordinance was adopted originally back in 2007 and there has been some industry changes or some standards that have been more common over the last 15 plus years. He stated we are basically bringing this up to speed from what was originally adopted and we are getting rid of the soil type base course (STBC). In other words, when you build a road, it is pretty standard that you do a six-inch or eight-inch base course of gravel, and that is rolled and compacted. There was an option in here for an engineered sort of base course which would just be soil that is compacted and that is not really desirable, sO we are scratching that altogether because nobody uses that anyway because it would have to be engineered and it would be quite involved to have some specific load-bearing soil-based courses below the road. In addition, he stated we are updating the language in the footnotes. Number two in the footnotes means that we would go back to that for the material list and if DOT is changing that periodically it is coming into this ordinance automatically. Number six in the footnotes and in our ordinance we already require to have a registered engineer designing a road system and your stormwater system. Every site is created differently and it is not uncommon in the mountains that we have poor soils and if one side is getting developed and it has poor soils, that engineer of record may have to recommend something over and above what is in this table, and that is what we are Mr. Jeleniewski stated subsection 23 states "The right-of-way widths and construction standards specified above are for private roads. NCDOT will not assume maintenance of these roads. In order for NCDOT to assume maintenance of roads, they must meet NCDOT standards as set forth in the publication NCDOT Subdivision Roads Minimum Construction Standards." Base and subsoil shall be compacted to a minimum rating of 95% standard proctor density. precter "He stated this is some housekeeping, they are going from 95% proctor to the 95% standard proctor density, which is the industry term for that compaction measurement. In addition, he stated those are the simple amendments that were recommending for subdivisions and the roadway standards that kind of ties to the Campground Ordinance to bring that down to not require paving for small campgrounds. Mr. Jeleneiwski stated the majority of the campgrounds we have had probably have been two to five campsites, and the intention was not to not allow somebody to do camping on their property where they reside, and then have to pave a whole part of their property. just for campsites. The campsites can be RV: sites, tent sites, itcould be rustic off the grid camping, SO obviously you are not going to pave the way for those Ms. Crespo inquired does this apply to existing communities like Balsam Mountain. Mr. Jeleniewski stated Balsam Mountain has existed prior to the adoption sO we would not be in there enforcing this, this would only be for new subdivisions Level 1 and Level 2 and ever since 2007 in some form or fashion, the road standards have applied to that and anything that he is reviewing or that comes before the Board these roadway standard would apply. Mr. Dunford inquired if they were state roads. Mr. Jeleniewski stated no, this would be private roads, private property, sO subdivision roads, state roads is not our jurisdiction and that isgoing to be DOT. The County does not own or operate road systems or manage rights-of-way. He stated it is either going to be a public road and the municipalities will have some town roads that they manage and other public works department and then anything else for the most part is private and what we are talking about for these roadway standards is going to be specific to  encouraging.  types.  8    new development on a property where somebody is cutting in roads and cul-de-sacs and SO Mr. Poston stated the only time that we get really into DOT roads is if a subdivision is greater than 100 lots or more, our ordinance tells them that they have to start building state- maintained roads because that is a large impact and a large development, and there are some caveats. Mr. Jeleniewski stated when they build to the state's standards, the state is not Mr. Poston stated if the Board is comfortable with the proposed language and the thought process, we would just want to call for a public hearing and we could do that in July if we can get a quorum available to: start moving these amendments through the system. Beverly Crespo made a motion to callj for a public hearing, for the text amendments to Article IV Subdivisions, Section 4.3.5 Street. Standards for the Board's regular scheduled meeting on. July 8, 2024 at 6:00 p.m. Brian Barwatt: seconded the motion, and it passed unanimously.  forth.  required to take them over.  New Business  a) Planning Board Roles and Duties (c) POWERS & DUTIES  Mr. Poston presented the following Planning Board roles and duties listed in the (i) The Planning Board shall have the power to perform the following duties at the direction  following Unified Development Ordinance Article II, Section 2.3.1:  of the Board of Commissioners:  1) Make studies oft the county and the surrounding areas; 2) Determine objectives to be sought in the development of the study area; 3) Prepare and adopt plans for achieving these objectives; 4) Develop and recommend policies, ordinances, administrative procedures, and other means for carrying out plans in a coordinated and efficient 5) Advise the Board of Commissioners concerning the use and amendment of 6) Exercise any functions in the administration and enforcement of various means for carrying out plans that the Board of Commissioners may direct; 7) Perform any other related duties that the Board of Commissioners may  manner;  means for carrying out plans;  direct.  8) Performs the duties of the Watershed Review Board. 9) The powers and duties of the Board of Adjustment.  Mr. Poston stated the reason why we did those two boards is he has been here for eight years and neither of those boards have had to meet and trying to fill and maintain a board that just did not meet did not make much sense. The reason why we do not have many meetings for those two boards is the Watershed Review Board comes in with high density developments in the watershed and most of what we see in the Canada watershed is more single-family development and non-residential that already has rules in place about how it gets built. The Board of Adjustment is because we have three Planning Councils and they act as their own Boards of Adjustment for those small areas and there are very few regulations that require an appeal to a Board of Adjustment and we have not had anybody seek an appeal to like our Water Recharge Ordinance fori instance. In addition, he stated he believed we had an appeal in 2014 or 2015 with Manufactured Home Park Ordinance and that was last time the Board of Adjustment  met wasi in 2014 for that one specific issue.  9    Mr. Poston stated make studies of the county and the surrounding areas they do that in varying fashions and sometimes we come in with actual plan documents, like land use plan updates or redoing those documents, and we come to the Board with small area plans that we have commissioned to have done for us in various areas. In addition, he stated we do studies on as smaller level for example when we came back and talked about manufactured home parks and things of that nature, we kind of compiled a small study list of what we have in the County. These studies also kind of comes down into when we are asked to do research on different types of ordinances and structures, which happens from time to time that the Board may ask staff to accomplish. He stated the second duty is to determine objectives to be sought is what actions should be taken based on those development study areas based on those results and what recommendations and are they policy related, and do they need further action from the Board of Commissioners. Prepare and adopt plans for achieving these objectives are set out as individual tasks most of the time and kind of happen in and around the same time within the same process, especially when we do our land use planning process. We include the study of the oft the areas, we talk about all the different determinants of development and we set objectives and goals to meet and every one of our plans that we have done since 2016 have included an implementation component including who's responsible fori it and what timeframe do we want In addition, he stated carrying out the plans, how do we get from a written plan to an action item and what vehicle are we using usually it is a regulatory framework, regulations of some sort. Exercise any functions in the administration and enforcement of various means for carrying out plans is more when the board may administer an ordinance for example this Board reviews the Subdivision Ordinance as an administrative function and you have to follow the same rules staff has to follow in evaluating those and they are a larger development that comes before this Board. Then the catchall is performing the other related duties that the Board of Commissioners (BOC) may direct and ask. Mr. Poston I think one thing that we would like to reestablish and he has spoken to the manager about this and the chair prior to COVID about once a quarter, we would have our Planning Board chair give a report to the BOC to create a more formalized feedback and reporting mechanism for the Board and the BOC could give any directions they would like to give to the Planning Board. However, since COVID our meeting structure just changed a little bit and we just never got back into that practice and he is recommending that we can restart that process of having the Planning Board chair appear before the BOC quarterly just to give an update about the work the Planning Board is doing. Mr. Poston stated feedback that he has received is that the BOC want to make sure that when we are addressing housing with housing being such a need right now and when we address any housing policy they would like to see that more comprehensive, because it is not just one policy such as manufactured homes out there on its own operating. In addition, iti is not just unsafe buildings or our ability to implement a minimum housing code as our housing needs right now are more complex than just standalone sections. Mr. Poston stated he has been in housing seminars for the last three or four years and it is a lot more complex than just do we have architectural standards for manufactured housing or do we have a minimum housing code. He stated it is how do we create a plan of attack for this housing issue that we have, and how can we maybe use some of these to help us get to what we what the BOCI really want. However, we have not gone through enough to understand this issue totally, and the BOC has not gone through enough in the community to understand what our end goal really is with housing in this community, other than we would like to have a place to have people housed. He stated the DFI isv working with us and that is one avenue, but the idea is to create a comprehensive housing strategy that addresses all of our housing needs and gives us and helps us a better  tol have done.  10    understanding as we do not have a housing expert that is specialized in housing policy in. Jackson County. We have to fill that gap: sO we can understand what we are trying to do sO the BOC can ultimately make recommendations or take recommendations about where we need to go as a community to positively impact our housing shortfalls and they are all over the place. We have need for those that are unhoused, we have need for those that are in transitional situations, we have needs for those in the low moderate, for the working professional, and for families. He stated the two that he can identify that we do not have a whole lot of need for or gaps to filli is student housing and our second home market seemed to be really strong right now. The County isl looking for as a comprehensive approach to this discussion to understand how these policies work with each other to get us what we need at the end of the day and the types of housing Mr. Shepherd recommended the Board look at the PowerPoints and watch the presentations that was recorded from the BOC meetings that were sent out by the clerk to the Mr. Jeleniewski stated in today's market in our area, with the labor force and the lack thereof, iti is not what you think it is and Id do not want the Board to lose sight of is that ify you are talking about minimum housing, or you are talking about housing standards or any ordinance that we have, that is going to put additional requirements on somebody, it kicks that can down the road even further where they cannot afford it. He stated if there is a minimum housing or minimum standards on a type of build that is going to cost more dollars and that is not really Mr. Poston stated the DFI is going to help us identify ways that the County can participate and help us then what they are going to do is if we identify a property they can help us in what is called a phase two and help us send out some bids, and we can prepare a bid package for folks to come in and partner with the County. However, the first part is we got to get to that point and we have a pipeline set up now for us to try to get some affordable housing on the ground. He stated while we are working on that, the County is supportive of this Webster Village project, which is also looking to build senior housing, some single-family products through Mountain Projects and those projects are moving forward and you will see those things happening concurrently. The County has been doing a lot of work, some that you do not see every day, through economic development, through planning and through some other services Mr. Letson stated we are working towards all of this, but we cannot eliminate one sector just because it is unappealing to some. He stated we need HUD housing, we need LIHTC housing, we need single family houses, we need apartments for someone to live in, a teacher that just graduated, a single female, she needs a house and she cannot afford to live at $2,000a month. Jn addition, he stated there is University Housing even though it is there and it is available, there is just a lot of different facets, and we are working on them and a lot ofiti is behind the scenes. We talk about it quite a bit, especially in the work sessions and when DFI comes and presents we are having conversations, we are trying to find properties. He stated there is a lot of families here that only have one vehicle and they have two working individuals; two working parents and one parent may need to drive to Cashiers or how is the other person supposed to start working ift they have no transportation. Mr. Letson stated we are trying to find areas where transportation is already available through the County or sidewalk or bicycle, etc. In addition, he stated even though it may not bei in Tuckasegee or it may not bei in Whittier we are trying to identify the most impactful property that we can put our dollars behind and say this is going to be a project that impacts 60 people or 80 people or whatever it is. He stated it is in an area that that is impactful and unfortunately for those who have to work in Cashiers or those  that we want to see preferably.  Board regarding affordable housing by DFI.  where we wantt to be ini is what we are talking about.  and trying to get more units online.  11    that have to work in Whittier and live in Sylva, it is further than they want to be, but we would get most of our hub of businesses in Sylva sO let's focus on that and let's try and get that that area established. He stated this is an unfortunate side effect with Highway 107 being plowed over but you are going to have an opportunity to design a streetscape for the future and he sees that as a positive because some of the places were unsightly, did not fit a character of what you wanted. He stated however, some of these bad elements already leaving and those properties are turning into commercially zoned properties with adjacent properties behind them that can be redeveloped if the people want to sale. We are really getting into the nitty gritty of what we need and where our dollars are going to be best utilized and that is where planning with these open discussions, we are seeing what people really need in different parts of the County. In Cashiers $1,200 a square foot is breaking in the door and that is why these electricians there isa line of them every morning going up there. In addition, he stated unfortunately that is where Ms. Crespo stated what they are doing in Cashiers that affects the entire County, because that is sort ofa a measuring stick that people go by and what we have to do is we have to work against that measuring stick and use all the skills that we put together to not let that be Mr. Poston stated July gth we are going to do the public hearing for the subdivision edits, and staff is going to do some work and bring back some Water Recharge  the demand is and hopefully that stops soon.  our measuring stick for the remainder of Jackson County.  information to begin further discussions.  Adjournment  With no further business, Adam Holt made a motion to adjourn. Emily Moss seconded the motion, and  the meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m.  Submitted by:  Approved by:  /  cillaye  Allison Kelley  Nathan Shepherd Planning Board Chairman  Administrative Assistant - Planning  12