Browse
Search
Agenda - 05-20-2003-8i
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2000's
>
2003
>
Agenda - 05-20-2003
>
Agenda - 05-20-2003-8i
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/29/2008 9:11:02 PM
Creation date
8/29/2008 10:46:48 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
5/20/2003
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
8i
Document Relationships
2003 S Planning - Carrboro Extend Annexation Time Limits in the Joint Planning Agreement
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Contracts and Agreements\General Contracts and Agreements\2000's\2003
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
EXCERPT FROM APPROVED MINUTES OF 10-9-02 JPA PUBLIC HEARING s <br />2. Joint Planning Agreement Timeline <br />Orange County Planning Director.Craig Benedict said that this item came about because <br />there were provisions in the overall joint planning agreement that was approved in 1987 that had some <br />expiration dates. The expiration dates only had to do with the annexation provisions of the agreement. <br />Based on the JPA meeting in the spring, it was decided to bring this item to this meeting. He introduced <br />Chris Berndt of the Chapel Hill Planning Department, who has made some revisions to the annexation <br />portion of the agreement. <br />Chris Berndt said that this is a public hearing on a proposal to extend provisions in the joint <br />planning agreement that relate to annexation. The current provision has an expiration date of 20 years. <br />The annexation provisions expire in the year 2006.. She said that the entire joint planning agreement is <br />not up for reconsideration and remains in effect. There are two key provisions of the 20-year term. One <br />is that the cities agree that there is no annexation into the rural buffer. The second provision is that the <br />cities also agree that there is no annexation into each other's transition areas. The purpose of this item <br />is to get public comment on the idea of extending the annexation provisions for 20 years. <br />PUBLIC COMMENT <br />Barry Katz, a resident of the rural buffer, a member of the Orange County Planning Board, a <br />member of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Committee, and a member of the executive committee of <br />the democratic party, said that his views in no way represent the views of the party. He said that the <br />people in the rural buffer support the extension of the anti-annexation provisions of the joint planning <br />agreement. He presented a petition of rural buffer residents who support this extension. They have re- <br />started the Alliance for the Rural Buffer and have extended it to many neighborhoods within the rural <br />buffer, so that they can comment and inform the County regarding future buffer issues. He said that the <br />rural buffer has retained its rural character. He said that if rezoning were considered in the rural buffer, <br />then other areas would be put at risk because of poor drainage in the area. He said that he was <br />surprised to hear at the recent Comprehensive Plan Land Use Committee that Orange County's Planning <br />Director stated that the 35,000 acres of the rural buffer are on their way to becoming 17,500 two-acre <br />home sites. Coincidentally, this is very close to the actual number of the total residences in all of Chapel <br />Hill. He said that this is an exaggeration of the buffer sprawl and he is concerned about this. He is <br />concerned about the term smart growth. He does not object to the principles, but he is concerned <br />because unless you understand exactly what development tools are being proposed for a specific <br />project, then it can leave you hesitant to appear as if you are an advocate for stupid or dumb growth <br />when you question the value of pursuing those tools. He also worries about the acronym that the <br />Planning Department has been using called the GOOD Plan. He said that this can quickly evolve into a <br />doctrine where alternative approaches can be characterized as bad in the course of a meeting. He <br />urged the elected officials to study this issue. <br />A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Brown to refer this <br />proposal to amend the Joint Planning Agreement to extend 20 years, with the annexation time limits <br />specified therein to the Planning Board and return a recommendation back to the Board of County <br />Commissioners no later than February 18, 2003. <br />VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br />A motion was made by Alex Zaffron, seconded by Joal Hall Broun to refer this proposal to amend <br />the Joint Planning Agreement to extend 20 years, with the annexation time limits specified therein to the <br />Carrboro Planning Board and the Planning Board will return a recommendation back to the Board of <br />Aldermen no later than January 21, 2003. <br />VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br />A motion was made by Jim Ward, seconded by Bill Strom to confirm their commitment to the <br />extension of the annexation components of the joint planning agreement and the staff recommendation <br />for the Planning Board and Town Council decision for November 19, 2002 and December 9, 2002. <br />VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.