Minutes - 19840529 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

1~W 3 Willhoit noted this was still in an outline stage and a lot of text and information needs to be completed. He continued that if there is a Special Use Permit application and Chapel Hill indicates there are certain stipulations to be followed in the special use permit, but that the County in its review did not believe all those stipulations were appropriate, the County could deny or could add stipulations. However, the more restrictive form of the recommendation would prevail. It was not to "bounce back and forth" in an effort to reach a compromise. Kizer questioned if the County would bear the entire cost of implementation and enforcement and passible litigation of suits --' even if it (the County) did not impose the most stringent conditions. He was concerned that the County would possibly be bearing the entire cost and perhaps be caught in de€ending conditions that it did not impose or agree Geoff Gledhill, County Attorney, stated that, under the agreement, if such instances occurred, the County would be bearing the total cost plus possibly defending a condition they did not impose. He did not not know of costs being discussed, but the administration process, as he heard it being discussed, was a joint effort. There would be dependence on the Towns' staffs to enforce the ordinance. There have been no formal discussions about cost sharing, but it may not be an issue because of the .sharing of the administration of planning in the joint planning area. Planning Board member Pilkey inquired how far beyond the one mile zoning jurisdiction of the town limits does joint planning extend. Collins responded 2 1/2 to 3 miles. Gledhill noted that most of this was in the rural buffer area and under courtesy review. Commissioner Y7alker asked for clarification of the difference __ between joint planning and extra-teritorrial courtesy review. Collins .explained that the County would have the same rights in the extra-territorial jurisdictions as the towns now have in the rural buffer area for courtesy review. Planning Board member Shanklin questioned the real need of a joint planning agreement. He felt there was room for disagreement which would not occur with a definite line of responsibility. Do we stand to gain that much from the Joint Planning Agreement, he asked. Chair Willhoit noted that the Towns of Mebane and Hillsborough exercise a one mile extraterritorial jurisdiction. Chapel Hill and Carrboro have annexed areas since joint planning discussions began and come right up to the transition area. Joint planning is an effort to develop a coordinated plan For the entire area and an effort at long-range planning. Shanklin responded he would prefer to see it handled as extraterritorial jurisdictions and one meeting a year. Whitted noted that the joint planning process began when we had a request from Chapel Hill to exercise extra-territorial zoning jurisdiction to what would amount to the extent of the rural buffer. Some Board members felt this would not bring the County and Towns together for joint planning. There was a lot of discussion on this and it was felt that joint planning would be better than going out three miles with extraterritorial planning jurisdiction. Mayor Porto stressed that the very heart of joint planning is the zoning map and standards. Commissioner Walker questioned if the zoning designations were the same for Carrboro and Chapel Hi11 as the County. Collins responded they had different district designations. Commissioner Whitted noted there would be a jointly approved zoning map. The transition areas would have the standards for whichever area it was (Chapel Hill or Carrboro) and the rural buffer has County standards.