ashe

I didn't hear about the loader part but it wouldn't surprise me

That was actually the one I was thinking about. Lol

Didn't they supposedly put him in front end loader bucket and put him up in the air and refuse to let him down too?

Did you ever here the story about the UPS man they followed and beat up because he wouldn't take a check for a COD?

Best thing for anyone is to leave the Radfords alone. Those people are crazy.

Never underestimate the Radfords years ago the town told them they had to build a fence around the quarry on Bamboo Rd or they were going to shut them down. Guess who never built a fence and is still crushing rock.

This is Maymead's problem from the County Ordinance:

Section 2. Conflict with Other Laws. Wherever the provisions or application of this ordinance impose higher standards than are required in any other local ordinance or regulation, the provisions or application of this ordinance shall govern. Wherever the provisions of any other statute or local ordinance or regulation impose higher standards than 15

are required by the provisions or application this ordinance, the provisions of such other statute or local ordinance or regulation shall govern.

Unless they can prove otherwise, the building permit and vested rights time frames have expired. He is not "grandfathered" as he stated in the paper. His rock and gravel is grandfathered but not an asphalt plant. In reality Maymead should be able to get a new permit but they will have to deal on the front and side landscaping.

The guy on Rainbow Trail is not going to get a permit.

I was talking about the one proposed for the junk yard on Rainbow Trail - when I referenced Templeton, it was about the proposed Medical Office on State Farm Road - not heavy construction as an allusion to the county having several ways to say no or "bites at the apple". I was not clear.

Watauga county commissioners have been controlled by "pro business" "conservative" republicans for years now. It seems very obvious that they used the department of planning inspections and a temporary moratorium to keep from having to actually form an opinion and voting on a ruling. The sad part is, from what I've read, Maymead intends for this plant in question to be temporary. It's time frame would be based on the 221 widening plan, and scheduled replaving of 421. Reducing traffic from the point in question, versus trucks traveling from the current location on 105 to any where in deep gap and on north would seem like a plus. The existing 105 asphalt plant location has a very high historical rate of traffic accidents that go back well when Brown Bothers owned it. Combine that with the regular traffic patterns on 105 and 421 in watauga, and it shows the commissioners are cowards. In the end, they will have the same amount of asphalt produced in their county. But they can take a choice in trying to reduce traffic incidents by reducing the number of large trucks that cross through town.

NO

Thanks Joe, I missed that part. Is the proposed plant location even within a direct mile of any of those areas?

Templeton has never been involved in politics and is known in fact for staying neutral (even with his idiot son in law that holds office and his even bigger idiot daughter that took a position with the party). His investments were local. Maymead however has been heavily involved in state controlled construction projects. And with that, I'm sure they have known how to make the right political connections in all states they operate in.

The same argument could have been made about Mr. Templeton.

If he had one hurdle to clear that would be one thing, instead he has three. Moreover his proximity to the Methodist Church, Elementary School, and Market Hills does not work in his favor.

He has deeper pockets than the county. And probably better connections in Raleigh

Where the County seems to have him is under NCGS 153A-344.1 and 358. His "vested right" last just 2 years. The county could have extended him to five but is under no obligation. His building permit, if he had one, was good for six months. If he started work and stopped for a year, the permit lapsed.

Even if he has a "right" to a use, he has to get a site plan approved and get a building permit. So in a sense the county has three bites at the apple. He's going to have tough time financing the fight unless he has very deep pockets. The county could keep this tied up until after the big road projects are bid out and competing plants pop up in Ashe County.

I didn't say 4 wouldn't bill, just that he would use the CCA :)

Permits in NC do not last forever. IIRC, there are statutory tolls 2 of 5 years imbedded in the General Statutes, and each county or city either states the length of time or falls back to the Statute or Common law.

At it's root, the permit for an asphalt plant is an advanced form of a building permit - in many jurisdictions they are good for six months. If you look at this as "use" permit instead of a building permit, most use permits are temporary (like a circus or a street fair).

I would hate to have a house in Market Hills on the market now, but unless the County is totally incompetent, if it's been 4 years they should be in the clear.

I kind of doubt that, he really likes to bill for his time.

It would seem that if the permit had a time limit on it, this wouldn't have been an issue to begin with. Without a time limit on it, how can planning and inspections just decide a permit is expired? That would seem like an easy lawsuit for maymead

I doubt Four would rely on his perusal of the statutes and instead would rely on the County Commissioner's Association legal staff. That's cheaper and does not reinvent the wheel since I'm sure this has been an issue at the bar in other counties.

Sounds like they will be attempting to rely on a common law vested right instead of a specific land used vested right. http://law.onecle.com/north...385.1.html These have a two year minimum and a five year cap.

The above link explains a zoning/development specific vested right.

The common law right threshold relates to whether the owner could reasonably rely on being able to complete something after spending money on the activity or project.

He will not be able to use the common law track if he once was granted a permit by the county, because that's this notice that he would need one again in the future. Then it becomes a fight over permit language. Does it say 2 years or not?

I guarantee that Wiley's attorney is better than that bumbling idiot Four Eggers that watauga uses. I