Minutes 03-21-2013 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

temporarily, it becomes permanent; because the political will to return to thoughtful growth planning never arises. He said the second concern is a more recent piece of legislation that continues to handicap the ability of towns to plan for their future by proposing elimination of ETJ altogether. He said this is a short bill currently before the general assembly, and coupled with other legislation, it would greatly limit the Town's ability to design standards. He said there needs to be thoughtful long term planning for the community. He said the impact of these bills needs to considered, and efforts should be made not to plan for creation of urban areas outside of the town limits. He said another option is to require, when changes occur in their planning areas or zoning, there is a condition of petition for voluntary annexation into the city. Council Member Harrison said it would help if counties made it clear to the General Assembly that this bill is not supported. Chair Jacobs said Orange County is different, partially because the county was able to come up with a joint planning agreement with the municipalities without the "wars" that often occur between elected bodies and citizens. He said the Task force should move forward as planned, regardless of possible legislation. He said there should be more discussions about ETJs and how to plan for these areas. He said the question should be asked, if it is in the best interest of municipalities to incorporate these areas into the urban town limits. He said that, because of the joint planning area, there is more authority to say where water and sewer will and will not go. He noted that the Rogers Road group is not going to report back to the Board of County Commissioners until September, so there is time for future discussion in light of the consequences of the legislation. He suggested more joint planning, especially in light of the Rogers Road process. Council Member Jim Ward said the task force has incorporated OWASA into its discussions. He said the latest plan for that now encompasses more area than just the Historic Rogers Road area. He said this was done to reduce the cost per household. He said there is some pushback, but the intent of the group is to move forward with this kind of design. He said he hopes there will be support for finding a way to fund the water and sewer for Rogers Road and the extended areas. He said that efforts are being made to get some figures for the cost of this. Commissioner Rich said it may be a good idea for staff to share the new map with all elected bodies. She said that the discussion was originally about just the historic area, and now the conversation is about a utility district and includes more homes than proposed before. This does make it more cost efficient. She said there was some push back during the meeting yesterday, so more estimates and a diagram will be presented at the next meeting. Commissioner Price said a lot of this has to do with costs, which is why there was a request for estimates and a diagram. She said that the goals will not be accomplished if the utilities are installed and then people cannot get the service. Council Member Jim Ward said another piece of the puzzle is that the figure of$6 million was for water and sewer to Historic Rogers Road only. He said including the other areas will double the cost, but will triple the coverage. This is where the savings comes in. He said all of the boards need to have this discussion, because this infrastructure is put on the landscape so that most of it is with the Chapel Hill town limits. He said the other parts are in the Orange County and Chapel Hill joint planning area and he questioned what this means for funding. He proposed that the portion that is in Carrboro should be paid for fully by Carrboro; and the portion in Chapel Hill and Orange County needs to be discussed by these two entities. He said the normal population equation will not work for this. He said that this is an issue for the Town and the Board of Commissioners.