Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 10-04-1977 SOME COMIONLY SOUGHT INFORMATION ABOUT l/ CHAPEL HILL'S REQUEST TO EXTEND ITS PLANNING AREA The Poll wing information has been prepared by the Town of Chapel Hill. The Hoard of Aldermen of the Town of Chapel Hill has requested that the Orange County Board Of Commissioners extend the Town's extraterritorial jurisdiction to _ include areas as shown on the attached map. Below are some of the questions most frequently as ed about this request, along with their answers. QUESTION: T IS STATE POLICY C0110ERNING A TOWN IS PLANNING AREA? Answer: St to policy is included in North Carolina General Statutes Section 16(A-360. This law allows Towns to include areas of critical concern in their extraterritorial jurisdictions (planning areas) . For towns of 25,000 population or over this area may be extended up to three miles from the corporate limits, upon approval by the Board of County Commissioners. QUESTION: BO s THE TO CURRENTLY HAVE A PLANNING AREA? Answer: Th Town's current planning area was established 22 years ago in 1955. Of the 19.8 square miles included in the planning area, 10 square miles are currently in the corporate limits, leaving 9.8 square miles in the unincorporated portion of the planning area (see attached map) . it is estimated that approximately 1,600 people live in the unincorporated Portion of the planning area and approximately 36,000 people live in the entire planning area. QUESTION: W11Y IS THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL REQUESTING AN EXPANSION OF ITS PLANNING A ? Answer". The areas in question are usually characterized as rural. However, the facts show that rapid development is occurring in the areas without ade uate protection of critical rural, features and without adequate control of the quantity and quality of development. The following hou§ing projects have recently been approved by the County Co issioners in these areas. PROJECT LOTS Sedgefield Farms 174 Carol woods 230 Timberline 62 Northwood, Phases I and II 150 Cedar Bills 72 Bunter's Ridge, Phases I and II 95 TOTAL 783 Bee use it appears likely that other developments will be proposed for the e areas, the Town believes that it is necessary to have the ability to ".ice a final decision on development in these areas which would aff ct the Chapel Hill. community. Also, it is necessary for the Town to cuide development in areas affected by its thoroughfare plan to ens re that proper alignment and dedication of land is made at the time of plan approval. It Is significant that of the 783 units listed above only 134 were approved in the "Transition' area as designated in the County's new Land Classification System with 649 of the units being developed in what the County has classified as "?rural. Transition". In other words approximately 83% of newly approved housing units are in the "Rural Transition" area. The County's adopted Land Classification System stat.3s that these are "lands which are rural in character and should be eicouraged to remain rural". The Sand Classification System further star s that as development occurs in these areas, special design star aids should be met. Such standards currently do not exist. Only 17$ >f the new units have been approved in the "Transition"- area., which is t e area calculated to accommodate the projected population increase over a ten year period. QUESTION: WHAT WO D OCCUR IF CHAPEL HILL'S PLANNING ARnA WERE EXTENDED m_ Answer: If the Hoard of County Commissioners approves the request, the Town of Chapel Hill would assume responsibility for issuing building permits and administering zoning, subdivision and state building code controls in the affected areas. This action is not annexation. The residents would not pay Town taxes for these services. QUESTION: WILL MOBILE HOrMS NO LONGER BE ALLOWED IN THESE AREAS WERE THE REQUEST TO HE APPROVED? Answer: Not necessarily. Chapel Hill's current zoning ordinance allows mobile homes on individual lots in R-7 districts and mobile home courts or parks as special uses in hgxicultural districts. The Town would be required to zone the affected areas within 6D days of extension and the Town would hold at least one public hearing to hear from affected citizens before it zoned the area. QUESTION; WHAT REPRESENTATION WOULD RESIDENTS OF THE AFFECTED AREAS HAVE IN CHAPEL HILL GOVERNMENT? Answer: Five members of Chapel. Hill's ten member Planning Board live in the Town's planning area and are appointed by the board of County Commissioners. Any residents of the affected area would be eligible for appointment to the Planning Board.. The Planning Board has asked that a current vacancy not be filled at this time, in order to allow someone from the added areas to be appointed if the planning area is extended. QUESTION: HILL,T'HWHY RECENT BE GIVEN FACILITIES IN CHAPEL PLANNING AREA? Answer: The Town has no direct control over the extension policies of the Orange Water and Sewer Authority (OWASA) . The Town is working closely with 01-JASA to ensure that development in areas for which it is or might in the future be responsible does not exceed oCaASA's ability to provide services. The extension of the planning area would enable the Town to consider OWASA's. abilities to provide services when considering development requests in the areas affected. MGedfF+E ` X1:1 .. JJr � �{^"F ♦ fcrn rrr :Jai a:, it _ �� ,I e• r9 INS '4•(Jccr �.�. -ra 3 RO .. L , Y HILLSB �UG Free Inu trta c .i 1 s Misn £hand u� Mf W.r � n., VAT E5 RD G ! V _ f p lid 1`CWi-a...,J,-q U r r 1 �rlf E,1',I 3 n n Oda iu Fi r6r $rfCj a iit.r f n m ph.tT RO k7"" C JJtd !Jr] G - 110 at/7 Grlpatldort f LEGEND Ile r ,:,. IapJ We,,CORPORATE LIMITS (fO sq mi j EXISTING PLANNING AREA (196sq.mi.) iherhnm Hillk MT flip r•'�� :anl,y u'• °� �__..,.. REQUESTED EXTENSION {I6.4sq mi ) 1J� fa N � iJ:a py �rooA c 5rf .�Iw lift I " 1 I•r n � a[ait 1 iJ � 41F0 � f6 eF Iti. R e.v C fQ"[fri P" O Church Hd I71A I el eVe 'l ,aar �{ a � 4 Fag i1o,w DFrKE Ills, 111r `/^1 OF I i c. rf0 4 6 •� I nu „rw „'M1' iiiiir it �'at'� r � 5, ryr f1I/ CYK 3117 ePC�J.00d Q FF 0 0 1nr lard S+aiia. •r.iocxndpu� ]03 ncEL m sJ1nUn,.F..; p0 N ins IJ,d Qra•.P. dt Gime r,FK� i,ra J17J fd fu Iris 51 ht,a . 31 rJ i171 EL 76d" r!! Y f.lki LJ! as 1 R I 1177 ♦,.'aG f1a9'OnLi �1, MChMph^h PICt[E TT / fur -11ti., e lsndhlf „d Ge Oak M h ,3aa �"• d Wc4 fsa6rrm prY ■ IJJo Fa1.fF 177r •f d abf YWad 1731 �frJ� s■ � � ��s cra,nd aa , � tw, p lee, s�oYe Vt Irrf -� HIt frar � 033 r73, �W G Irbl OaW dlo, 4 Q R A N G E I�JC A U N T Y aMMrxch F[ 197P 11aa 1101 A0I1;nQ-..d .rr)J r.n y, J 31a, s10.Jer,rcno 0_4 K ,,µ wAa ly .7 siOJ'(�olrond.r Harare :ilium ��pgr, ''af �!?'�. :lF' x OI� 1 a f .Ff MORHOw6 WO. Crss GA °C W J s, 9e 1e Gw, Fl Inglon wh; a7 J F'; ano alooa \ plii x: W / Wmd y� C 5fonryarPOV �•.. O ¢ ` n [�♦ ,.1 'A ilia Ir•T .. 6.; Th6 11.1 O 1'-/ 0.O YcCJldl in '�1Ti• _ �+ ,JJ9 rfs. p ir.f eE�3t LAKE ` �' "d1 rY y. O r Ian , . 1 ,ROff THIS MAP PREPARED SY TOWN a 1 OF��.CCHAPEL HILL FROM CCR /) � gal.,e z ¢ -°-,•__. BASE MAP.. .. »i /S��G tl'.Rld 113.Carm as o i0•. !?d. Cau�n,u1n �.,...,...,�.. ` ^ Y Church p S ff drd Fidk w[N+C ry gfA.a �......,.,,...,,�...„'rs. „— _ Jila e + PROPOSED PI-'7i p, L� C ._l ,J.J r:�� IJ•a Tnrrl-5 0 ii:n: QRAt+1GE CD.�:, , a N ff a Cedar E'r s ! • �• "���� N� Gra.n s.p of y' CHATHAM 00' rn yA kr aJ• �� 97 1J,t n, lsia IJ"" t 1 Y� J (jlprfum �•�Lua Eli- Min `tl r]JJ /1�r �iOai P.W.tasnd3n � I �- list T 1r,1;p ch. saw 3 T ttomn.wn 1 1 C fli ice' ML 71ao,anl g PL SaJ i" a 6d7 4 af`R pg Tm Ili Cal. FvMr3nptpn ~' i MA fir` •,F, 1ssJ i.J�t s1amlCh .J +'�Melrittl iP3i �• �«•• / 1y Ij •� L>'ap.l Ch.\rl ..0 .i �'�^'-._yrk� RiYer Fpraa� �✓,. ._ /Iv ``,')���� , Fnrae.alon 1 1 `_ PUBLIC HEARING, CHAPEL. HILL, N. C. - OCTOBER , 1977 FROM: JANE T. GAEDE, M. D. and a group of Concerned Citizens TO: ORANGE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD MEMAERS SUBJECT: 0 SCRIMINATION, MOBILE HOMES My rem irks tonight are confined only to individual mobile homes on individual ly owned lots. The town of.-Chapel Hit is currently res onsible anning and zoning area measuring roughly twenty square miles. Chapel Hill is asking the County ommissione -or an a-C"dFf 1ona1 sixteen s Q u r mile_ ^ n�ng jurisdiction. The pr sent C el Hill Zoning Ordinance, originally passed in March of _L9.55-witi amendments in 1974, i_�_blatantI discriminatory in regard to individual obile homes on individually wn d lots. eordinance_six_s- cri _j� ng in ivi ua mo i e homes to . � and then on top of at does not even provic�o uare inc�of . rict R-7 for individual obile homes in the whole ten uare aver urisdit.ion. Thus Cha el 7H 11 has a �ve�ar-banned ape�1 —_ _•- indivi„dual obile homes in its entire twen ile tannin area. Yet in the ear 6 mobile homes ceoune o f th e building permits issued in Chapel Hill Townshi . That's almost half' of the new home starts in Chapel Hi l Township in 1976. So let's face it: what the town of Chapel dill actually is doing is di s i a �e�'ami 1 i es This, is a key issue. Chapel Hill is saying: "Let's keep Chapel Hill the little elite community that it is. ” — --�- Now what does Oran e County allow in its planning area? Orange County trea . _individual mobile homes i e any other single-family res' nce. The Coon oes no iscrimina e, e n o —~ egre ate. The County r re �n zes t at�ind�ividual mobile o re si7n"�"�1� _�_e-family dwellings. It's as simp a as at, And the County is right. Als t e r Offi e, with its expertise in matters of a g sal , recd nizes that individual mobile homes individual—lots lots are the Sam as site built homes and they-t ere ore assess�an a_ x Wiese individual mobile homes the same as site built homes. They are taxed as r_Qj e, o ire omen situated on rent-e -lMoU`sin mobile home parks in Orange C unty are taxed as personal property and depreciated annually just like automobiles . How mar ° dividual mobile homy owners are in the den square s of extended zoning area that Chapel Hill wants tq acq_uire? One survey indicates that there are over 500 mobile home owners with a CII42RI Hill Eai address. This is only the Chapel Hill Post Office and does notinclude those in the extended area being served by the Durham Post Office. If the resent Chapel Hill Ton_ Ordi the three mile p oposed zoning area all the mobile homes therein would became nQn-conforming and future mobile hones would be effectively banner) ,•"_"__�._. ---�--.......�_ -� ` 2 - 3 Furthermore, even if there WE�s�.district to which in ' uval mobile mes would be restricts this would itself be blatant dicrim' ion .and curtailment of liberties now en -a ed of People urrently i vi ng under' Oran e Coin `� Y ^b -°usands g Y P ann�ng. The North Carolina Manufactured Housing Institute advises since April of 1,976 all mobile homes have been built to standards develaped .b the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HOD). E We have als been advised by the 'N. C. Manufactured that cities and towns cannot discriminate against kUD-aping Institute without the danger of losing their Federal ssistance. PProved housing On in effectus atesl�th Vermont a which uses must b allowed in any district of the staterthatepermitsecai�venY banal .site built sin le-family uses. r- -�-�-- Another important precedent handed down is the case brought against the City of onney Lake, ton, in which the Su2eriar Court. of nst Pierce Count ruled that "discrimination against those types of single- abuse dwellings denom7,__�inated 'mobile homes cons u es an un awIu�"- abuse of the olice owes and that the ordinances so enacted are unconstituti n Still a other point is the proposed zoning ordinance in A in which g area homes on individual fats will be allowed a i'ere within the zoning area. r- Courts and legislatures around the country are recognizing discrimi- nation against mobile homes and are taking steps to eliminate it. Rev. WiI iam i _d3w the Well-known be Orange County, has authorized us to make the Pa follow eblack statement community behalf: "PEOPLE SHOULD BE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO LIVE WHERE THEY WANT TO y LIVE WHETHER N A MOBILE HOME OR IN A SITE BUILT HOME. THIS IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION. "YOU CAN'T 'TELL PEOPLE THAT THEY CAN'T LIVE WHERE THEY WANT TO LIVE- THAT'S DISCRI INATION. "TOO, PEO LE JUST STARTING OUT CAN'T AFFORD A $50,000 HOME. " ' And Reverend Richardson concludes: "YOU JUST HAVE TO KEEP ON FIGHTING DISCRIMINATION ALL THE TIME. " People. in Orange County and throughout the United States are being Priced out of he site-built home market. The Secretary of HUD recently stated that by 1982, in 5 short $78,000. ,years, the average new home will cost Since Chu_61_1_i_11 has dip rimina_ted against- by effectively anning them from its entir n individual�aud P �h�f_blaes s ea, we ask th t the ' sinners re"ect Ci��pe�j��{ -�s: -an until Or n e County receives an absolute iron -guarantee from -� of Ch�1 Hill hat all individual mobile homes on indivi ua ots in the n 3 extended zoning area will continue to be treated as confor ' famil dwel in and that. all future individual mobile homes located an individua owned lots, will be a d in all the extended districts that will permit sjje-bjLU e--family residences, ) In other w©rds, the�'_�!il7 b t �e uals. . .as the county treats them now We ask that the County Commissioners not turn over ONE—SQ_UARr TN(-.0 of planning responsibili to t l until this uarantee as been iv,en. To do oth_ erwise would be a step backward and an infringe- ment upon t e liberties now en 'o 'ed b t e eo a 7n a sixteen sq re _ miles -of . the Prd'P-6-­s­e-d extended zoning area. Tn this day and age, discrimination and segregation, whether by race, creed, or mobile home life-st 7e cannot revail . �° s �,.� �� `., ����L� .�� � � ��, f, J ��..��. � _����. -�- � ��. c:� --