Weaverville – Hearings on the annexation of two properties on Pleasant Grove Road had some Weaverville Council members concerned, but why? At the February meeting, what was supposed to be a consent agenda item was moved off and placed in the discussion and action items at the request of Councilwoman Michele Wood.
When discussion time came, Town Planner James Eller presented the 9 Pleasant Grove Road property, which is 10.67 acres, where there is a development of 40 townhouse units planned on the property.
Town Attorney Jennifer Jackson told the council, “It’s my understanding there has been some concern about this area having [a] floodplain indicated, so I just wanted to address that in case that’s the question that some of you have. There is a portion of some of this property that is lying in the floodplain of Reems Creek, which means that the developer [Pleasant Grove of WNC, LL] had to obtain a floodplain permit from the county in order to go forward with their development.” She said the town has historically relied on Buncombe County for these types of approvals.
Councilwoman Catherine Cordell interjected that she was going to speak like former Councilman Andrew Nagle used to, and “We get accused of saying everything ‘ok’ and then once it gets built and it’s really ugly, then we get the blame. One of the things that happened is, [Councilman] John [Chase] brought this to my attention today…that means that you have to build two feet above the floodplain…it made me think about the flooding we had 15 years ago in Biltmore, and then they had to rebuild everything…because Biltmore got completely flooded…I know Buncombe County says this is what you have to do.” Her concern was that all that it entails to build in a floodplain might come back to bite the council.
“Vested” rights [the rights the property already has] to this specific project are conveyed with the property. “This is just to set the public hearing,” Jackson said. “You kinda know what the product is.”
“I have some problems,” said Chase, “I know that they’re well within their rights… does Weaverville really want to take on this kinda thing that encourages this type of density in the floodplain, where 50% of the property is affected by it? I just have reservations encouraging this type of development.”
Jackson said this project was renewed after the town added voluntary annexation as a condition for getting water and that the council could forgo the annexation. “This development is likely to go, whether you want it in town or without.”
After further discussion about a hypothetical flood that might undermind a water connection, the developer’s engineer, Warren Suggs, addressed what is planned for mitigating the damage of a 100-year flood event and said he would be happy to bring additional information to the public hearing. The council then voted to hear the annexation on March 25th at 6 pm.
The council then addressed an annexation petition of 6 Pleasant Grove Road, right across from 9 Pleasant Grove, that had just been discussed.
Jackson told them that this was a six-acre track of property to support the development of 50 townhouse units on the property. This request is from the heirs of Terrold Fox. “This does not have vested rights,” said Jackson.
Nothing was mentioned about whether any of the buildings would be in a floodplain on the property, and the council voted to set the hearing on the same day as 9 Pleasant Grove. Also, nothing was mentioned about the increased density of the 50 units on six acres compared to the 40 units on 10-plus acres.