Browse
Search
Agenda - 03-07-2017 - 6-a - Minutes
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2017
>
Agenda - 03-07-2017 - Regular Mtg.
>
Agenda - 03-07-2017 - 6-a - Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/3/2017 11:42:20 AM
Creation date
3/3/2017 12:10:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
3/7/2017
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
6a
Document Relationships
Minutes 03-07-2017
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2017
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
67
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
11 <br /> 1 <br /> 2 Questions/Feedback <br /> 3 • Town of Carrboro Board of Aldermen received information as a Consent Agenda item on <br /> 4 February 7 <br /> 5 • Town of Chapel Hill staff determining process/date to inform Town Council <br /> 6 • If jurisdictions wish to proceed, earliest joint public hearing date would be October 26, <br /> 7 2017 <br /> 8 • Normal process mandated by State statutes would be required for Towns to extend <br /> 9 ETJs <br /> 10 • Questions and feedback for staff by BOCC <br /> 11 <br /> 12 Commissioner Price asked if the Town of Carrboro had this report on their consent <br /> 13 agenda. <br /> 14 Perdita Holtz said the Aldermen received the information and asked questions. <br /> 15 Commissioner Price clarified that the Alderman just received the information and made <br /> 16 no decisions. <br /> 17 Perdita Holtz said yes, the Board of Alderman just received the information. <br /> 18 Commissioner Rich asked if clarification could be provided regarding potential <br /> 19 complications with the fire zone in the southern portion of the map. <br /> 20 Commissioner McKee said with these maps, it is unclear whether changing the zoning <br /> 21 will remove water from the fire zones. <br /> 22 Commissioner Rich asked if this area of the map is solely residential. <br /> 23 Perdita Holtz said mostly residential. <br /> 24 Commissioner Rich said Chatham County is building right up to this area. She said this <br /> 25 is a triangle of land that seems to be hanging out there, and she does not understand why it <br /> 26 became the rural buffer. <br /> 27 Commissioner Marcoplos said he totally agreed with Commissioner Rich, and asked if <br /> 28 there is value in the triangle of the rural buffer. He said it is a unique land section, different from <br /> 29 the rest of the rural buffer, and he would like to know more about it. <br /> 30 Commissioner Jacobs said people in Chapel Hill wanted to preserve open spaces, and <br /> 31 this piece of land may have served that purpose in anticipation of greater development. <br /> 32 Chair Dorosin asked if staff could follow up on all these questions. <br /> 33 Commissioner Rich clarified that it would be helpful to know the Town of Carrboro's land <br /> 34 use plan for the aforementioned areas. <br /> 35 <br /> 36 2. Introduction to Potential Amendments to the Water and Sewer Management, Planning, <br /> 37 and Boundary Agreement—To receive a presentation on possible amendments to the <br /> 38 Water and Sewer Management, Planning, and Boundary Agreement. <br /> 39 <br /> 40 BACKGROUND: Planning staffs of the three local government jurisdictions that are party to the <br /> 41 "Joint Planning Agreement," as it is commonly called, have been discussing possible <br /> 42 amendments to the Land Use Plan to better align with various local government goals and <br /> 43 policies (this is a separate agenda item) and accompanying modifications to the Water and <br /> 44 Sewer Management, Planning, and Boundary Agreement (WASMPBA) map. Additionally, <br /> 45 during discussions regarding the Hillsborough Economic Development District (EDD) that <br /> 46 occurred in the fall of 2016, it was mentioned that it could be advantageous to the EDD to <br /> 47 designate additional WASMPBA primary service area immediately south of the EDD to the <br /> 48 Rural Buffer boundary. <br /> 49 <br /> 50 These potential amendments would change the designation from `long term interest area' to <br /> 51 `primary service area' which would permit development in the short term. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.