|
kook 4;1;11,;. f f. . '
<br /> , !" '1�' floc,4 ., 'I' 1 ,' f; '' i a I r
<br /> ♦1 6 „
<br /> e_
<br /> , '
<br /> ` f V •'
<br /> .-.N ,L r .err.- - _ _ _ - - - dL .__ . ...�a1k ' } .
<br /> int~ ';
<br /> 1,1 1
<br /> §153A-344 1993 CUMULATIVE SUPPLEk1EN'r §153A-344 I §153A-344.1 COUNTIES §153A-353
<br /> poste, adopts an ordinance placing it Franklin, 1993.r :158,s 15,as to(Jr • • i �'11
<br /> into effect at mach eu111r1 date Adoption urge in addition, by vntue of Session 153A-344.1. Vesting rights. O �i i-�1' ■
<br /> ul vuch ordinance w subject to the pruce lows 1993,c 469,a 3,the local nu1JJi- ,tF';;'"1 l'-
<br /> Jo1al Icquuelnentu of li S II60A J6 ui cut ions for Alexander, Cabunus, CASE NOTES C . 1, `•!
<br /> 1:S 153A 323, as appiupnale,but not Catawba, Bedell, Johnston, Marlin, i:,i' '..
<br /> W any procedural requirement of the Randolph,Wake,and Yadkin should be Cited in Nello L Tees Co.v Orange
<br /> tuning ordinance for adoption of amend all rcken from the mum volume Section
<br /> ��1•inroad to the coning ordinance The olds- 311.1 of c 469 provides that nothing m County, 810 F Supp 679 IM.U.N.C. �ni
<br /> 19921.
<br /> name may provide for different dates of the section affects any ordinance 1 11t•)J.�:3 ,
<br /> applicability based on the dage of the adopted under the authority of any act j rl :
<br /> ' 1r
<br /> g classification actioul out the elite repealed by a 31st prior to the effective �1-
<br /> live date dale ol c 469 153A-348. Statute of limitations.
<br /> -Ike ordinance prevails over some or Effect of Amendments. -
<br /> all of Chapin.455.Session laws of 1987, The 1993 amendment,effective Janu- CASE NOTES ` `'i �' i
<br /> s+ amended by Chapter 271, Session ury I,1994,added the subsection tin des- 1 1 y '.
<br /> I awe of 1993,if the ordinance so pro- Ignstlon, in subsecli la) substituted j -'i), i
<br /> vales" "abstracts"for 'abstracts,provided that Stated in Nello 1..Tees Co.v Orange jj
<br /> • • • County, 810 F Stipp. 679 1/4,11 N.C. ' ' .,' i,; 4
<br /> Sermon Laws 1993,c 469,a anal,et this sentence dues not apply in the case 19921. 7 "a •�I
<br /> lecteve January I,1994,repeals various ore total rezoning of all property within : ,
<br /> ens including the following local muds the bouadarlea of a county unless the i,,
<br /> Ili idiom, to this aeclinu. Seas Laws rec g involves zoning ol parcels of , ���t�` l�
<br /> •
<br /> 199:1 c 101,as to Wilkes 1993,c 139, land to less intense uses or'down zoning' Part 4. Building Inspection. y 4
<br /> so to Stokes. 199:1, c 156, as to in which cost notification to owners of I' 'j',.
<br /> 1
<br /> Wettings, 1993,a 267 as to Davidson those parcels shall be made by mail in 1:i
<br /> 1t�Z5,I �
<br /> § 153A-353. Joint inspection department;
<br /> and Davie; 1993,c 'L71,us W Itockung• accordance with this section",and added P p tment; other aC- '� �Ili 1','`. .ji,
<br /> haul, 1993. c 296, as to Nash and subsection lb) rangements. F .1;,"Ltr.1'.i
<br /> A county may enter into and carry out contracts with one or more {
<br /> CASE NOTES other counties or cities under which the parties agree to create and I'- ` ,` p
<br /> support a joint inspection department for enforcing those State and
<br /> Cited in Ericcclle v Ilamen County, Comity, 810 F Supp 679 IM U N.C. I local laws and local ordinances and regulations specified in the i'
<br /> 1116 N 1; App 234, 416 S K 2il 421 199'll {I agreement. The governing bodies of the contracting units may 'r 1 -1 •' lI
<br /> 19992x, Nello I. 'Peer Co v Orange make any necessary appropriations for this purpose. ��' '.' "'
<br /> �'t In lieu of a joint inspection department,a county may designate ..+ s,
<br /> 153A 344. Planning agency; zoning plan; certifi- an inspector from another county or from m-
<br /> bee of the county inspection department, with the approval of the J ' '1' '^'
<br /> cation to board of commissioners; governing body of the other county or city,or may contract with an I 1i +i l •'
<br /> amendments. Individual who is not a city or county employee but who holds one of h, •
<br /> '1" iq�' 1
<br /> . the applicable certificates as provided in GS. 153A-351 1 or G.S. ';k j', �''k •
<br /> 160A-411 1 The inspector, if designated from another county or ' "` •
<br /> CASE NOTES city under this section,while exercising the duties of the position,is i 1 1`
<br /> a county employee.The county shall have the same potential liabil-
<br /> Amendment Dell Not Applicable chiding operation of a quarry on Such ity,if any,for inspections conducted by an individual who is not an �
<br /> iu Defendants.- Where the uncuntia- propo11y would not apply to defendants employee of the county as it does for an individual who is an em- 'f� �,
<br /> + i
<br /> do led forecast of evidence established us cal dwell v Sloth, 106 N C App 187, ployce of the county The individual with whom the county con- is '' t ` '
<br /> a lowlier of law that defendants made 415 S E 2d 770,colt denied. 3:12 N C tracts shall have errors and omissions and other insurance coverage •
<br /> soiatantial expenditures For like opera. 146, 419 S l 2.1 `569(1992) • acceptable to the county (1937, c. 57, 1941, c. 105, 1947, c. 719; ' ,', ij, .i
<br /> to
<br /> •t of a quarry on the propelly in clues- Cited in Friccelle v Harnett County, • 1951,c.651, 1959,c.940; 1963,c.639; 1965,c.371; 1967,c.495,s. f
<br /> lion in good faith alai in reliance upon 1(16 N C App 2)4, 416 S E 2d 421 1, 1969,c. 918;c. 1010,a. 4;c. 1064,as. 1,5;c. 1066,a. 1; 1973,c. i,
<br /> the special use permit previously 119921, Nello I. 'Peer Co v Orange ,
<br /> 8
<br /> granted by the lo g Board, a later County, 810 F Supp 679 tM II N C `12, a. 1, 1993, C. 232, tl. 1.)
<br /> amendment by the Luring Board pie 19921 .
<br /> Effect of Amendments.-The 1993
<br /> ameudnaenl,effective June 28,1993,re- 1'
<br /> wrote the second paragraph :1,444.
<br /> 100 • • 101
<br />
|