Agenda - 11-02-1987 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

by two examples. First, some banks may not be willing to make a loan to someone trying to buy into the community if the house shows up in a form indicating that it is "non-conforming. " Second, some intended t uses of the land, such as building an addition, might not be possible because they might be incompatible with the designation of "rural buffer." I tried to better understand this second point by using a specific example in connection with my home. Unfortunately, Mr. Collins was unable to clarify this possible non-conformity problem that might arise by leaving Fox Meadow as part of the rural buffer. Mr. Collins did point out that none of these problems may in fact arise. I asked Mr. Collins about the possibility of changing the definition of "rural buffer" so Fox Meadow would not be a "non-conforming" use. Mr. Collins sort of winced at the suggestion, evidently not really thinking to do so was a practical idea. In the end, when I left the meeting, I was not sure that conformity issues are a compelling reason to not still consider the possibility of leaving Fox Meadow in Orange County, whether as part of the rural buffer or some other designated land use area. The bottom-line reason for not changing the jurisdictional line appears to me to .be "historical" reasons, although with further discussion I might better understand some practical land-use reasons. Nevertheless, is there still not the possibility of redefining the land-use area affecting Fox Meadow so that we are not a "non-conforming" use? It was also pointed out at the Monday morning meeting that there is a provision in the agreement that allows Chapel Hill to annex west of the current jurisdictional line if it is petitioned and Carrboro agrees to let the community go. I maintain that to present this as a real option is unrealistic. First, the present time is the most realistic to make a change, before the agreement is ratified by the respective councils. Once it is implemented, it will be that much harder to get changed. If Carrboro won't let us go now, why would we believe that will change in the future? Second, Mr. Williford indicated that Carrboro considered as one of several options moving only the Fox Meadow subdivision over to Chapel Hill's jurisdiction. He pointed out, and rightly so, that this would create only a sixty-foot wide connection to Chapel Hill's territory on the east side of Roger's Road. If we wait until a later date to try to change, then it is a very real possibility that such an annexation would have to be considered for this sixty-foot connection. It seems to make much more sense to consider either (1) the area north of Tallyho and the southern portion of the Fox Meadow subdivision up to Eubanks Road or (2) the area east of Bolin Creek for inclusion in Chapel Hill's jurisdiction. This has the additional advantage of retaining the Rogers Road community in one jurisdiction. Thus, now is the time to make the change. Fox Meadow realistically loses all chances if something is not done at this point in time. I and the residents of Fox Meadow recognize that the welfare of the community as a whole rather than that of one single community needs to