Minutes - 19870310 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

counties to zone is contained in Chapter 153A of the North Carolina General:~_ Statutes. There are two sections - (1) Grant of Power - which allows the County, for the purpose of promoting health, safety, morals or the general welfare to regulate the height and the number of stories, the percentage of the lot that may be occupied, lot sizes and densities, etc. (2) Purposes - :oning regulations shall be made in accordance with a comprehensive plan ind designed to lessen congestion in the streets, to secure safety from Fire, panic and other dangers, to promote health and the general welfare, to provide adequate light and air, to prevent the overcrowding of land,. to avoid undue concentration of population, and to facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewer, schools, parks and other public requirements. None of these purposes have anything to do with ownership of the property. Therefore any classification of property in regard to ownership would be beyond the authority of the County. The Supreme Court of North Carolina has expressed concern with legislation that would have the same effect as this. proposed exemption for family members in a number of ways. One of the limitations on zoning restrictions is that they cannot create zoning districts which are not consistent with the comprehensive plan. An example of this limitation is known as the prohibition of spot zoning. Spot zoning would be the result of such an exemption and would very probably be invalidated, by the courts. The theory behind the limitation on spot zoning is that the decision to so zone is arbitrary and nat based on the general purposes of the zoning enabling legislation. Gledhill continued that the problem is that there would be no legal reasonable basis for distinguishing between the property that would be owned by the :family members and the property owned by other people. For this reason, he recommended to the Board that they not create this special family exemption. Commissioner Willhait asked about similar prohibition against exempting iinor subdivisions from these provisions since they are exempt from other <::::.ispects of the Ordinance. Gledhill responded that minor subdivisions under the Caunty Subdivision regulations are subject to all the substantive provisions of major subdivisions. The difference between minor and major subdivisions is the process. They are required to meet all the same standards. In answer to a question from Council Member Julie Andresen, Gledhill stated that he did not have enough information or background on the Chesapeake County, Maryland case to comment as to whether or not it would be subject to a federal constitutional attack. The risk is that the people who will complain will not be the family members but those who wish to develop the property in higher density who would complain of unfair treatment. Chair Marshall assured the public that even though a few lots are involved that the Board is concerned and determined to find a solution for those families affected. Planning Director Marvin Collins informed the public of changes which had been implemented to help make the public notices in the newspaper easier to locate such as the logo which has been added to the tap of the notice and the addition of bold print for each topic listed. In addition, ie has been working with the news reporters to have lead stories as well as articles in other areas of the papers concerning the public hearing items. ie indicated that the public hearing notices are placed in the Durham Mornin Herald , The Cha el Hill News a er , the News and Observer and the News of Oran a He noted there was a miscommunication about the mailing