Browse
Search
Agenda - 03-19-2013 - 5a
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2013
>
Agenda - 03-19-2013 - Regular Mtg.
>
Agenda - 03-19-2013 - 5a
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2015 11:03:22 AM
Creation date
3/15/2013 9:42:38 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
3/19/2013
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
5a
Document Relationships
Minutes 03-19-2013
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2013
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
88
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
12 <br /> 1 Craig Benedict said the Town of Hillsborough would have public hearings for everything <br /> 2 in that urban service boundary. <br /> 3 Commissioner Rich asked if there has been any push back from citizens regarding the <br /> 4 map being presented. <br /> 5 Craig Benedict said there has been dialogue and discussion around the need to focus <br /> 6 development in the urban areas, yet to maintain the historic charm. He said that it is understood <br /> 7 that if medium densities were allowed outside of the urban service area, that could create big <br /> 8 populations too. <br /> 9 Commissioner Dorosin said, looking at this map, is the idea that eventually everything <br /> 10 inside the urban service boundary is going to be annexed and Craig Benedict answered, yes. <br /> 11 Commissioner Dorosin said can they clarify the difference for ETJ and blue and orange <br /> 12 and why they are treated differently. <br /> 13 Craig Benedict said ETJs are identified in courts and state law and can impose zoning <br /> 14 and regulations in that area. He said that, instead of turning blue and orange areas into an ETJ, <br /> 15 that they can have joint planning ownership in these areas. This is the same thing that has <br /> 16 been done with the joint planning area in Chapel Hill, Carrboro. In those areas, they will agree <br /> 17 upon the land use and the zoning regulations, that if annexed by Hillsborough, they will be able <br /> 18 to use the regulations agreed to, while still remaining Orange County planning jurisdiction while <br /> 19 ceding authority to Hillsborough. <br /> 20 Commissioner Dorosin asked why these areas and why not all areas be subject to <br /> 21 agreement and/or ETJ. <br /> 22 Commissioner Price said some of the blue and orange areas already have Hillsborough <br /> 23 water but no sewer and is developed and ripe for annexation. She said an ETJ has no water <br /> 24 infrastructure, it is just land in close proximity to Hillsborough but without that connection. <br /> 25 Craig Benedict clarified, if it's an ETJ, there is no divestiture, and with orange and blue <br /> 26 areas, there is some joint planning. <br /> 27 Commissioner Dorosin asked, if that is important in the orange and blue areas, why is it <br /> 28 not important in the areas proposed to become ETJ that are not ETJ now. <br /> 29 Craig Benedict said that they had actually annexed outside their ETJ in some areas and <br /> 30 so there was non-ETJs that was surrounded by corporate limits. In some areas it was very <br /> 31 compact and it was decided to trade ETJs and put it into those areas instead of having blue and <br /> 32 orange areas. <br /> 33 Commissioner Price answered Commissioner Rich's question about pushback and said <br /> 34 there is some pushback. She referenced a development pending on 70 where there was <br /> 35 opposition because of the possibility of five to six story buildings behind ETJ area. She noted <br /> 36 that she happens to live in one of these areas and some of her neighbors are concerned about <br /> 37 being annexed by Hillsborough. It is preferable not to be in the city. <br /> 38 Frank Clifton said a lot of these processes were in place before the annexation <br /> 39 legislation and he said that any decision made on ETJs is fairly significant because annexation <br /> 40 is so limited. When you cede ETJ, direct controlling interest is lost, but not the blame is still <br /> 41 there. He noted that people in an ETJ don't get to vote, but they are told what their zoning <br /> 42 issues and rules are. The second issue relates to the consequences of intensified residential <br /> 43 development. He referenced the role of schools and school demands. <br /> 44 Craig Benedict said about ten years ago they had the discussion on land- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.