Agenda - 05-08-2014 - 6a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

13 1 2 Margaret Hauth noted that the ETJ has town zoning category, and this does not 3 line up 100 percent with the County. She said AR in the town and AR in the County may not 4 mean the same thing. She said the town has R-10 and R-40, and the County has R-1 and R-2. 5 She said this requires a formal re-zoning process. 6 Margaret Hauth said before the move forward on this public process staff wanted to ask 7 the boards is this something they want to do. She said it is important to note that if the town re- 8 zones the properties coming into their ETJ consistent with the future land use map this will 9 involve pre-zoning a fair amount of property and putting in districts that will subject it to fairly 10 intense development. She said this takes away the town's tool of negotiating with property 11 owners through the special use zoning process. 12 She said the point of ETJ's is to prep areas for annexation to bring them more in line 13 with municipal regulations. She said a lot of the areas being added are already developed. 14 She noted that the Wildwood subdivision is actually developed at a smaller minimum lot size 15 than the town currently has in its unified development ordinance. 16 She said the lines of communication are open, and all projects of 5 acres or 20 dwelling 17 units or more that come within the town's planning jurisdiction are shared with the County 18 planning department for comments. She said when the County gets a request for a project that 19 wants water and sewer service in the urban service but outside of the planning area, this is sent 20 to the town for comments. 21 22 Margaret Hauth reviewed the following from the handouts: 23 24 Have we achieved what we wanted to achieve? 25 • The lines of communication are open between the two planning department staffs during 26 the development review process. 27 • The amended Water and Sewer Boundary Agreement memorializes the Urban Services 28 Boundary and documents the commitment to the boundary. 29 • Unlike twenty or more years ago, the town rarely approves utility extension agreements 30 without annexation due to the equity issues regarding paying for the town services used 31 and to minimize customers that must pay higher out of town utility rates. 32 • Due to local preferences and amendments to the state annexation laws, the town rarely 33 annexes using the involuntary process (once in the last 22 years). 34 35 Does the full implementation of the Inter local Agreement achieve substantially more? 36 ETJ is intended to ensure that new development in areas that are likely to be annexed is 37 consistent with the development regulation of the annexing community. Recent changes to 38 the annexation laws reduce the likelihood of the proposed ETJ areas being annexed, 39 except in the case of major redevelopment. Moving developed neighborhoods into the ETJ 40 after they are developed provides no protection to the residents of the neighborhood and 41 adds permitting steps to any project current residents take on (zoning permit from the town 42 followed by building permit from Orange County—2 locations, 2 fees). 43 44 If the intent of adding areas to the town's ETJ is to ease annexation for neighborhoods 45 already being served by town utilities (and lowing their utility bills), this will not be effective. 46 The changes in the state's annexation laws are a much bigger obstacle than the ETJ 47 location. The town has historically not pursued annexation of neighborhoods under the 48 involuntary process. The town remains willing to discuss annexation with any 49 neighborhood or group of property owners interested. The town has also studied the