HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 09-30-1999 - 4ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
WORK SESSION ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: September 30, 1999
1
Action Agenda
Item No. ~.
SUBJECT: Update on Mebane/Orange County Planning Coordination
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections
PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No
ATTACHMENT(S):
Summary (i)
See attached (ii)
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Craig N. Benedict, ext. 2592
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough 732-8181
Chapel Hill 968-4501
Durham 688-7331
Mebane (336)227-2031
PURPOSE: To receive report on progress of discussions with Mebane regarding joint planning and
annexation issues.
BACKGROUND: Recent annexations by Mebane has raised concerns by adjacent unincorporated
communities such as Hebron that there is need for more communication and coordination
concerning land use/zoning decisions. The Hebron community began an incorporation process to
protect their lifestyle but rule changes at the state level made the prospect difficult.
The goal of interlocal cooperation could be achieved through joint planning so administrative staff
have begun a dialogue on the various elements of planning. The meeting dates are noted on the
attachment.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None at this time.
RECOMMENDATION(S): To receive as a report and suggest priorities in the elements of joint
planning.
O
SUMMARY
CITY OF MEBANE/ORANGE COUNTY
Intergovernmental Coordination Issues
Orange County administration has begun a dialogue with the City of Mebane concerning
issues of mutual interest. There have been a few meetings as noted below in Section I.
At this point planning staffs are developing a comprehensive list of joint planning issues
and a draft of a prioritization schedule to outline a sequence of future events.
The ideas listed under Section II 'Elements of Joint Planning' have been generated by
Craig Benedict, Planning Director and will serve as a basis of future discussion but are
not intended to be on all-inclusive list at this juncture.
Sections III'and IV note the creation of a state legislatively approved Blue Ribbon
Growth Management commission as proposed by Senator Howard Lee with some
inclusion of Rep. Joe Hackney's bill.. Craig Benedict has offered his experience in
growth management systems to .assist in the research and findings of the commission. He
has offered his name through the North Carolina Association of County and Mr. Aycock,
Executive Director after discussion with the County Manager.
The scenario posed in Section IV could help in issues similar to the MebanelHillsborough
annexation/incorporation situation.
I.
CITY OF MEBANE/ORANGE COUNTY
Intergovernmental Coordination Issues
Correspondence and meetings
ii
3
A. Draft "Resolution of Agreement Regarding Satellite Annexations" (not acted upon)
B. Draft "Resolution of Intent to Pursue Elements of Joint Planning" (not acted upon)
C. 4/19/99... Orange County Letter to Mebane
D. 4/20/99.... Mebane Letter to Orange County
E. 4/21/99... John Link to BOCC re: Mebane Meetings
F. 4/30/99; 4/29/99... Orange County Letter to Mebane/Hebron Area
G. 6/14/99... "Resolution of Agreement Regarding Satellite Annexations" (revised. by
Mebane)
H. 7/20/99... Manager's and Planning Director's meeting to discuss framework of future
cooperative planning (no attachment)
I. 8/4/99... Planning Director's meeting regarding subdivision/building information
exchange (no attachment)
J. 8/1$/99.... Planning Director's meeting to discuss joint planning prioritization system
(no attachment)
K. 9/1/99... Planning Director's meeting to discuss Annexation/Urban Growth
Boundaries and Water and Sewer Areas (no attachment)
5/28/99... Manager Memo re: "Mebane Resolutions on Joint Planning"
II. Elements of Joint Planning to be Pursued
A.
B.
Annexation
1. Satellite annexations by the City would not be effectuated unless there was
_ an approval by the County or a joint planning agreement between the
' parties was in effect regarding this issue.
2. Contiguous annexations by the city within the County portion of the ETJ
would include a notice provision and a fmding of land use compatibility
pursuant to a jointly adopted land use plan.
Water and Sewer Service Plans
1. The collaboration of both parties on water and sewer infrastructure plans
would provide a basis of the density and intensity of future land use plans.
2. The Joint Planning Agreement (JPA) would address the projected
boundaries of the service area, the schematic location of existing and.
proposed utility lines and a capital improvement program funding and
schedule.
C. Economic Development Programs
1. An economic development district is noted on the County land use plan
within the four quadrants of the intersection of Buckhorn Road and I-85/I-
40. The JPA could address the following issues:
a. Economic Development District Design Guidelines
b. Compatibility of residential and non-residential uses and rural
transition areas
c. Joint mazketing of the azea
d. Economic Development Incentives
D. Transportation Planning
1. Transportation plans and initiatives in the City-County area aze part of a
regional program. of traffic control and enhancement.
2. The JPA would address the following issues:
a. Regional representation on transportation committees on the
I85/I40 corridor
b. Transportation nodes for Park and Ride lots
c. Appropriate location of high traffic generation uses
d. State road planning and interconnectivity in the subregion
E. Natural Resource Preservation
1. Natural resources aze intrinsic to the environment that supports the high
quality of living standards expected in the City and County.
2. The JPA would address:
a. Watershed preservation
b. Conservation Areas
F. Public Services
1. The provision of public services can be greatly impacted by growth and
development.. Sharing information, projecting needs, and gauging the
impacts upon services will assist in providing cost and efficient and timely
services by both City and County governments to residents and
businesses.
a. Schools
b. Police, Fire and EMS
c. Pazks and Recreation
2 of 4
G. Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) ~
The TDR concept is employed to shift residential density or non-
residential intensity away from areas with environmental constraints or
where rural character preservation is sought to TDR receiving areas where
adequate infrastructure is available to land relatively unconstrained by
natural resources.
2. The 'Buckhorn' Economic Development District (EDD) may be an
appropriate area to act as a TDR receiving area and further planning
should be considered towards an implementation program.
H. Development Process Coordination
1. A flow chart of development processing including generalized review and
action timeframes and what types of projects would undergo what level of
review should be developed.
2. Afterwhich a process implementation program would be approved. A
joint developmentreview team may be considered.
I. JPA and Amendment Implementation Timeframe
1. The Resolution of Intent and its issue sections may not be approved in one
comprehensive JPA, although both parties will pursue the concept in good
faith.
2. The basic JPA should be approved within 90 days of the last signature to
the Resolution of Intent. Certain specific JPA aspects should be approved
. within 180 days of the last signature.
3. A process of JPA amendments will also be included in the JPA.
III.
Blue Ribbon Growth Management/Smart Growth Commission
The Blue Ribbon Growth Management/Smart Growth Commission strengthens the
ability of county governments to coordinate and develop. growth plans to manage growth
in a region in a comprehensive manner.
A. Promote efficient infrastructure provision;
B. Preserve natural and cultural resources;
C. Foster economic development;
D. Ensure compatible land-use patterns;
E. Develop walkable communities; and
F. Enhance the quality of life for the citizens of North Carolina.
3 of 4
IV. Impact of Potential NC Growth Management Legislation on County-Municipal ~'
Jurisdiction Planning
The intent of the study commission and the recommendations forthcoming is to create a
planning framework that addresses regional cooperation and land use consistency
between various jurisdictions. Environment and transportation issues are primary
regional effects. Annexation and comprehensive land use compatibility affect the
boundaries between local governments.
Under some hypothetical legislation, a pattern of future land use would be set by the
county with the input from nearby municipalities. These new ETJ areas would be jointly
planned and be the 'pool' of future annexations into unincorporated areas of the county.
Even after annexation the previous land use pattern would be the dominant pattern until
an amendment, if any, was requested showing a proposed change that meta series of
compatibility requirements.
Growth management and 'smart growth initiatives focus a great amount of review on
regional issues as well as the urban growth boundaries (i.e. county-city interface).
Legislation that promotes cooperative planning can become a major facilitator to
enhanced communication between local governments and the corresponding.planned
progress goal of the area. .
4 of 4
RESOLUTION OF AGREEMENT
REGARDING SATELLITE ANNEXATIONS
The Resolution of Agreement is entered into the day of , 1999, by and
between the City of Mebane (City) and Orange County (County).
WHEREAS, The City of Mebane is located primarily within Alamance County but
does have the eastern portion of its jurisdiction and extra-temtorial
jurisdiction (ETA within Orange County; and
WHEREAS, The City of Mebane and Orange County herein acknowledge that joint
planning and communication are important facets of quality
development and effective government; and
WHEREAS,_ _ Satellite annexations within Orange County by the City of Mebane are
a concern of the Board of County Commissioners and their residents;
and
WHEREAS, The passage of this resolution is in the best interests of the citizens of
the City and County.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the aforementioned parties do agree to
the following element of joint planning and interest.
Section L Satellite Annexation
Satellite annexations by the City will not be effectuated unless there is
written approval by Orange County.
Process
Section 2. A resolution from the City regarding a satellite annexation request will
be forwarded to the County for action by the County Commissioners
within 60 days. An approval or denial will be in the form of a County
resolution and a certified copy will be sent to the City within 5 days of
County action.
Section 3. Effective Date.
The effective date of this Resolution of Agreement shall be the date
whereby both signatures are finally affixed.
Attested to by the undersigned:
Alice M. Gordon, Chair
Orange County Board of Commissioners
Glendel Stephenson, Mayor
City of Mebane
C:\windows\temp\res5-14b.doc
Page 1 of 1
~.
8
RESOLUTION OF INTENT
TO PURSUE
ELEMENTS OF JOINT PLANNING
WHEREAS, Planning and development that occurs within Orange County has
an effect on various public services; and
WHEREAS, The City of Mebane and Orange County herein acknowledge that
joint planning and communication are important facets of quality
development and effective government; and
WHEREAS, Joint planning and analysis are becoming increasingly important in
Orange County because the impacts of growth can negatively
affect the quality of life for residents; and
WHEREAS, This resolution of intent is a prerequisite document to a joint
planning agreement and sets forth our mutual effort to understand
and address each other's interests and challenges in a constructive
and coherent process; and
WHEREAS, The City Manager and County Manager and their respective
Planning Directors are instructed to work towards developing an
_ agreement on which elements would be incorporated in a future
Joint Planning Agreement. The timeframe suggested herein to
identify specific element topics is 90 days.
WHEREAS, The passage of this resolution is in the best interests of the citizens
of the City and County.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the aforementioned parties do attest to,
in good faith, the following elements of joint planning, cooperation
and interest which may include the following:
G:\CRAIG\RESS-14.DOC
Page 1 of 2
a..
q
Various Elements
1. Contiguous/Satellite Annexations
2. Water and Sewer Service Plans
3. Economic Development
4. Transportation Planning
5. Natural Resource Preservation
6. Public Services
7. Transfer of Development Rights (TDR)
8. Development Process Coordination
9. Cooperative Planning Agreement (CPA) and (CPA)
Amendment Implementation
a). Cooperative Planning Area (CPA)
b). Transition Areas
c). Non-urban
10. Land Use Planning
a). Rural .Character Preservation
b). Impact Fee Participation
c). Data Sharing; (Socio- Economic, Construction etc.)
Effective Date
The effective date of this Resolution of Intent shall be the date whereby both signatures
are finally affixed.
Attested to by the undersigned:
Alice M. Gordon, Chair
Orange County Board of Commissioners
Glendel Stephenson, Mayor
City of Mebane
G:\CRAIG\RESS- I4.DOC
Page 2 of 2
o.
-o
~~
April 1999
Mayor Glendel Stephenson
City Manager Robert Wilson
RE: Annexation/Incorporation Issues
Dear Mayor Stephenson:
Dear Robert Wilson:
We have common interests; to promote the orderly development of lands while
preserving those with historical or environmental character. The Hebron incorporation
request has brought to light the many sensitive issues concerning annexation and
incorporation. We believe the issues surrounding growth and annexation into
unincorporated areas can be resolved through joint planning.
A joint planning agreement would foster enhanced cooperation, coordination and analysis
regarding the annexation reserve areas and their transition into the jurisdiction of a town.
.Land use compatibility and the impact of growth on public service provision and
facilities is of paramount importance because it literally and figuratively taxes the quality
of life of county and town residents.
We have noted below some options that can address the needs of town, county and
citizens and lead to quality comprehensive planning.
TOWN/COUNTY JOINT PLANNING OF
ANNEXATION AREAS
1. A Joint Planning Agreement is signed between the town and county for a specific
planning area where annexation is anticipated.
A. Urban Transition Area
1. Higher Density Residential
2. Non-Residential Primary
B. Rural Transition Area
1. Lower Density Residential 2-5 du/ac
2. Community Scale Non-Residential
Annex.doc
~2e
~~
2. Transition Area can be extended if one of two scenarios occur:
A. Town accepts land use plan of county until town develops a land use plan
B. Town has developed a land use plan within the Transition Area with public
hearing process to permit input from the county and affected
citizens/businesses.
3. Voluntary Annexations
A. Within ETJ - Zoning that is in effect or requested to be consistent with the
land use plan.
B. Outside ETJ -Zoning must be consistent with land use plan of county for a
period of two years at which time a land use plan developed through a joint
planning agreement wold go into effect for the area between the town limits
and an area 1000' around the voluntary annexation.
4. Involuntary Annexations
Must be within ETJ and in accordance with an agreed upon joint land use plan.
5. State Legislative Action
Additional rules would be promulgated concerning annexation that would be
directed to promote orderly and consistent growth patterns with that of the county.
6. Town boundary is temporarily fixed.
Let's continue our discussions and come to a resolution about joint planning so we can
notify interested parties of our jointly shared goals and the direction to achieve said goals.
The State Legislature may assist us in come manner.
We welcome the opportunity to discuss these issues and begin a process that will
augment communication and bolster cooperation. We are anxious to meet, so please
contact our offices for a meeting at your earliest convenience.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Alice Gordon, Chair Orange County Board of Commissioners
John M. Link, Jr., Orange County Manager
Annex.doc
~
. ~ ~ i~
CLyAlarq~-
tt
i~ ~~
~~ ~ ~
y
~ 1~'.~lryC&rb?~wr~ ~~'lnr
J~ Momow
~
~
J TwrCoAedcr
f3lmdd Sgp6enoa
ddgnr
106 E. Washington Street
c~
saaodo,,u~.Pror.. Mebane, N.C. 27302 Pi8"` ~°"~' ~
~„~
T~°' a"~'
sou ~ ~ (g19) 563-5901 w~. nbaea.
~9 ~°
CIi~VYipdnm ~ ay
R~apOan ~ PoibDksc~cr
Mrs. Alice M. Gordon, -Chair ~
~ ~ :
- Z ~ i~r ` '
~ fi
Orange County Commissioners ~ ~
, .
_; ~ t
P. O. Box 8181 3 3
;,i
.:
200 South Cameron Street
Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278
DISTRIBUTED
Dear Mrs. Gordon: ,~ =.5v~c
/-
Reference is to your letter of April 19,1999 regarding the desirability of joint planning _ ~ ~~ ~/~/,~,
discussions, and poss~le written agreement, between the City of Mebane and Orange ~ c'~ ~ .
County.. You refer directly to the Hebron community incorporation request that has
apparently initiated your letter and suggestions. We have had an opportunity to read
Senate Bill DRSA591-LB125(3.23) sponsored by Senator Kinnaird that would restrict
the City of Mebane from a~ annexation action in Cheeks Township of Orange County .
for a period of five years (until June 30, 2004), and ties the act directly to "a joint
planning agreement with Orange County .. ", to be evidenced by adoption of ordinances
covering such as agreement. As has been expressed to you, John Link and Senator
Kinnaird, the City of Mebane would not react favorably to such legislation: we feel such
action would be virtually an insuh to the City and certainly would not encourage a
quickened improvement in our working/conversational relationship.
A quick final word about the proposed legislation and then I will speak to the possibility
of a joint planning activity. Since the action of the Mebane City Council to annex two
areas of Orange County through satellite annexation seems to have been the catalyst for
this legislation, we would propose that Mebane will not enter into any additional satellite
annexations affecting Orange County without the written consent of the Orange County
Commissioners. I-believe the Council will approve this action; this would be much better
for our future relationship than some type of legislative action "aimed at" the City of
Mebane. Let's not destroy the relationship that has ah~eady begun to improve through
the several discussions we have enjoyed over the past months.
About joint planning: the City of Mebane would welcome. any opporuunty to begin
discussions about some agreements with Orange County ... as soon as we can arrange.
mutually satisfactory dates. Would you like to begin those discussions prior to budget
Planning? Probably not. I suspect both bodies will be involved with budgeting from very
soon well into June. However, perhaps we can set as initial meeting to get our thoughts
in order prior to our budget studies, and then continue them after our budgets are
completed and in place. I would invite you to have John Link and Robert Wilson work
out that date.
13
From statements offered by John in our conversation on Apn719~', the indication is that
Putting together a joint planning agreement would take some time and perhaps several
meetings. It is my personal opinion that legislative action descn'bed above. will be
counterproductive to the successful initiation and successful delivery of a joint planning
. agreement that both Orange County and the City of Mebane can be proud of and feel
good about.. Your points were well made and understood concerning the problems faced
by any county when an adjoining city took action contrary to the county. Comprehensive
Land Plan.. we respect your position we sincerely ask that you respect our position,
and that you consider the potential adverse effects should. the above legislative action
become law as we move Orange County and the City of Mebane into a more harmonious
relationship. ~ .
I thank you for the two most recent meetings we have enjoyed together. I trust we will
ffiove very quickly to expand our conversations to inchide the matters of this letter.
Thank you for your courtesies as you presented your thoughts. we look: forward to your
.early response.
`Cordially,
f
Glendel Stephenson
Mayor
Cc: Administration and Council
-City of Mebane
Senator Ellie Kinnaird
ORANGE COUNTY
Frrr.r.agOROU(IH
NORTH CAROLINA
./~a~~
MEMORANDUM
TO: Orange County Boazd of Commissioners
FROM: .John M. Link, Jr., County Manager
DATE: April 21, 1999
RE: Report on Meeting with Mebane Officials
lased >76.s
Chair Gordo ' '~ ~ w~w - ~tter approved
by the BOCC e ~ j .Mebane.
point was made that satellite annexations, such as the one close to Hebron, were most
aggravating to citizens living in the affected azea since the existing land use plan was
changed by government officials for whom they could not vote..
As discussion proceeded, there were expressions by .all of us indicating a deeper
understanding of the issues faced by the other party. Mebane officials indicated a
willingness to pursue the concept of joint planning with Orange County. With regazd to a
moratorium, Mebane officials agreed to look at the proposed legislation; and there were
expressions made that a moratorium o_._Y on satellite annexations and only until joint
planning was in place may be more acceptable than their-understanding of the present
drafted legislation.- -
Discussion was concluded with the agreement that Mebane would respond to the
County letter within a week.
AREA-CODE (919) 732-8181 • 968-4501 • 688-7331 • 227-2031 • FAX (919) 6443004
1-1T"l~tn~ers~ 'f -
!~
c~
~~.
Alice M. Gordon, Chair
Stephen H. Halkiotis, Vice Chair
Margaret W. Brown
Moses Carey, Jr.
Barry Jacobs
Orange County Commissioners
P. O. Box 8181
200 S Cameron Street
Hillsborough, NC 27278
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jnterested Citizens -
FROM:: Alice M. Cordon, Chair
Orange County Board of Commissioners
SUBJECT: Joint Planning with Mebane
DATE: April 30, 1999
~pntP o/\
~ ~°y
~ ,~ .
0
IT 5.?
~orrh ~ a ~ °~~~Q
The attached letter to Lynne Holtkamp outlines the steps that .
Orange County is taking with respect to joint planning with the City of Mebane.
An identical letter was sent to James Randy Kinley, who also spoke at a recent
County Commissioners meeting about a proposal for incorporation of Hebron
and related land use considerations.
We are sending you a copy of this letter because we are aware of
your interest concerning land use issues in your. area. If you would like more
information on this general topic or you know anyone else who would like to
receive information, please contact Beverly A. Blythe, .Clerk to the County
Commissioners at 732-8181, ext. 2130.
You Count In Orange County
AREA CODE (919) 732-8181: 968-4501: 688-7331: 227.2031: FAX (919) 644-3004
Ext. 2130
~Q
re
Orange County Commissioners
P.O. Box 8181
200 S. Cameron Street
I~illsborough, N. C. 27278
Alice 11L Gordon, Grab
Stephen A. Xalkiotls, !?ce Chair
Margaret W. Brown
Moses Carey, h
Barry Jacobs.
Apri129, 1999
Ms. Lynne Holtlcamp
2004 Ben Wilson Road
Mebane, NC 27302
Dear Ms. Holtkamp: -
6 a"~~
~~
Knowing of your concerns as expressed in the past regarding a satellite annexation by Mebane in the
vicinity of the Hebron Community, the Commissioners wanted you to be aware of productive outcomes
in recent discussions with the City of Mebane. Based on these discussions, the City of Mebane and
Orange County are in the process of committing to a joint Resolution of Intent to Pursue Joint Planning
to be signed within the next thirty days.. This resolution would articulate principles of joint planning to
be followed by both jurisdictions.
A point of agreement that we believe is of great interest to you is the stated intent by the City of Mebane
that it does not plan to enter into any additional satellite annexations affecting Orange County without
written consent of the Orange County Commissioners. Other elements that could be included in the joint
planning process are:
• a process for contiguous annexations, to be discussed
• collaboration on water and sewer extension plans
• collaboration on efforts within the Economic Development District (EDD) in the I-85/I-40
Buckhorn area
• protection of natural resources including watershed preservation
• coordination of transportation initiatives, particularly related to the I-40/I-85 Corridor
• shared information as to the impacts of development in areas of mutual interest, to include
impacts of service requirements; i.e. fire, law enforcement, schools, recreation, and so forth.
You Count In Orange County
AREA CODE (919) 73T,-8181: 968-4501: 68&7331: 227-1031: FAX (919) 6~300~
F.xx 2130
Lynne Holtkamp
Apri129,1999
Page 2
We are encouraged by the discussions with Mebane officials and believe that it is in our mutual interest
to pursue this course of action. We appreciate your expression of concern and we frost that this proposal
will help us all plan for the future in a collaborative and productive manner. Thank you for your
continued interest in this matter.
Sincerely,
! ' `'
Alice M. Gordon
Chair
3•
i~
Sep 23 99 03:31p Buck Tredway 19191 644-0246 p•1~
~~ca~,~ .
srep4ae n: aau~e, vise ~
Mesa Caren h.
~/•sais
Orange County Cotnmissinners
P. O. Box 8Z$Y
200 S Cameron Street
I3'a7Zsboraugh, NC 27278
April 29,1999
Tito Honora6lo C~lcadrl Stephenson
Mayor, City of Mebane
I06 E Washington Street
Mebane, NC 27302
Dear blaym~ Smphwdoa
ov
1$
We appreciaDe~yout April 2U ktGet responding to the desirability of l?~$ the
City of Mebauc and Orange County,
•.
We agree with your pecspectfve that a stlpasaful oatcome for,~oint Planning our tttat<1a1
~EffOrt t4 Ua ~d 1~d'LCSB CaGh Othar'a intelzsts and ChaIICOgCS 711 a ConSt111CtiYC~ COhCS1YC
process. Consistent with that perspective, we a1^c advising the OtangC Cottaty legislative
delegation that the Orange County Hoard of Cottlmissiotlers would ~eapectfilliy guest that any
lacall~cgisldtion pla~wg a moiatar3t11a on annexation by Mebane into Otange Coanty be
widldrav~m. Barbee. we would pROposC that we mutually pursue tha adoption of a joint planning
We are very appreciative of your willingr~as to purnle joint planning and can stain right now that
we woWd like to accept the proposal in your Apri120 Iemer that Mebane w,'ll nee eater into any
additional satellita sanexations affecting Ora~age County witlioat the wcittett consent of the
4razlge County Co~mmisssotlaa. You mdicated that it was yoti~ belief that your Cound'1 would
approve this action, and we bdicve such as actieel would ba mlltttally bwcf ciaL
Wo would I17oe to pose that the next steps in our Joint planning pmass, consistent with our
recant can+espondence should be as #atlva-s;
1. That the Mayor and Cautu~ of du City of Mebane and the Orange County Hoard of
Commissione,cs would sign a Reaolud~on oP Infant to Pursue Joint Planning that would
articulate the ptiluiples of joist planning to be followed by bout jurisdictions.
(a) As examples, tbi$ reseltttion could inrdudc talc following elements:
• a procxsa for. satellite antl,~cationa ss indicstrrl above:
• a process for coatigilous awaatations, bo be diactlased;
Yore Court ~ Orange Caua~
ARJ£A CDD1;' (919) 73Z-4181: 968-4501: 6$8.7331: ffir-2031: FA%(919) 64¢3004.
s~ 213@
.Sep 23 99 03:31p Huck Tredway [9191 644-0246 p. 19
~/S
19
• collaboratiw~ en water and sewer extension plans:
• collaboration oa efforts within the Economic Dcvclogm~ent Disoriet (EDD) izi rho t-
85/I.40 Buckharn area;
• protcctiae~ of nawtal resources including watershed preservation;
• eoordinatidn of craasportatiaa initiatives, pat~icularly rr.Iated m tlu h0/I 85
Corridor, .
• shared information as to the impacts of dcvelopmGnt is areas of mutual interest, to
include impacts of servicx requirements: i.e. fire, taw cafesmeat. s¢bods,
recreation, and so forth.
These eltmeats eeYtainly era nqr iateaded zo be an inclusive Iist as~d we would e~ncvurage
. , . your suggesaiaas for additional elenAanta to bC included
(b) W® would suggest asking our zespcctive naaua~ee~ to cellabazaioe t+o develop a final
Resolutiorf of latest to Pursue Joint planning that outlines the elements of joint planning
to be pursued. and that both boards offics'ally approve the resolution within.the next 3Q
days. .
2 That after the resolution is sigrud, the rCSpective managers and staffs arould develop a
specific time table and methadoiogy taaddress the olements in a systematic iaaaaer.
We are looking forward to wanking whit Mebane on joint planning. We sincerely tretieva the
process will strengthen our workIug relationship in addressing manor importaru'tp our cidzeas.
Sincerely,
~~
Alice M. Gordon
.Chair
Attachments; L.ctter from Chair Gordon to Mebane Mayor Stephenson dated 4/19!99
Lgrcr' from Mebane Mayor Stephenson to Chair Gordon dated4120/99
oc; Mebane Town CounaY
Orange Cauntlr Commissioneas
. Senator Ekaaor Kinaaird
senator Howaz+a Leh
Representative Joe kla~aney
wave Veda Yoslm
Jahn Lint, orange Counry Manager
ittobext Wilson, Mebane City Manager
_ ,i
1 ~' .. ~~~
~'
~~,
~~
RESOLUTION OF AGREEMENT
REGARDING SATELLITE ANNEXATIONS
The Resolution of Agreement is entered into the ~_ day of ms's,,, ~ ,
1999, by and between the City of Mebane (City) and Orange County (County).
WHEREAS, the City of Mebane is located primarily within Alamance County but
does have the eastern portion of its. jurisdiction and extra-territorial jurisdiction (ETJ~
within. Orange County; and
WHEREAS, the City of Mebane and Orange County herein acknowledge that
joint planning and communication are important facets of quality development and
effective government; and
WHEREAS, satellite annexations within Orange- County by the City of Mebane
are a concern of the Board. of County Commissioners and their residents; and
WHEREAS, the passage of this resolution is in the best interests of the citizens of
the City and County.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the aforementioned parties do
agree to the following element of joint planning and interest.
Section 1. Satellite Annexation
The General Assembly of North Carolina has determined that
.under certain narrotivly defined circumstances, cities in North
Carolina may exercise the power of annexation as to satellite areas
not located contiguous to a City's primary corporate limits.
Nothing contained herein shall be construed or interpreted to limit
the ability of the City of Mebane to exercise these powers granted
to cities by the Legislature.. -Recognizing. that Orange County
currently exercises zoning control throughout the County in azeas
not regulated by cities, the City of Mebane acknowledges that
legitimate interests of Orange County require that the County have
an input in the decision making process when Mebane considers
satellite annexations within Orange County.
Section 2. Process
Upon receipt of a request for satellite annexation, the City will.
forwazd such request to the County prior to taking any action on
said request. The City will not take further action on said request
until the County has had an opportunity to review the- proposed
satellite annexation and forwazd its comments with respect to same
to the City. If no comments are received within sixty (60) days,
the City may proceed without further consulting with the County.
• ~ .2,
The City will take the comments of the County into consideration
when exercising its legislative functions with respect to a request
for satellite annexation.
Section 3. Effective Date
The effective date of. this Resolution of Agz'eement shall be the
date whereby both signatures are finally affixed and it shall remain
in full force and effect until modified or terminated by either party.
Attested to by the undersigned:
• .,~~.-
Alice M. Gordon, Chair G endel Stephens ,Mayor
Orange County Board of Commissioners City of Mebane
Sep 23 99 03:32p Huck Tredway
[9191 644-0246 p. 22
22
./~avea~ye.~,~ '
ORANGE COUNTY'
TiYLLSB0120UGI~
ivoR~rx Cnl2orrIN~
MEMORANDCTIVI
TO: Orange County Board of Commissioners
FROM: John Link, County Manager
DATE: May 28.1999
RE: Periodic Updates on Significant Topics
I have several updates for you as swttrnarized below and in the enclosed attachments:
1.
I am collaborating directly with Robert Wilson, City Mager of Mebane, ozt
are giving first priority to a Reso]tt•. on of .1_?~greement on~~,~~ellitc Annexa~io~
hopefully agree to before the ~ r. ,~~,;~l+ v~~:copy: i~,~o~.d M,
get this on his Caat-cil's a endsq •~ ~~ . ~; - ~ ~ ~.~,.:,:=`"' ~.~'=',..;:~,._ :mss'
y.~fi^~r, •7r!1~'~"~'.' r;*~i~,,., "':;~ '~:~..t ,•,.lcar.~"=."r`7~:r.. ~;,K~ra
"~ C • 'ky'R;^y'~. ~~4r yitiwussf'•"'R^,v'~',_nC,•~.'~d~.,Y i+aJlT.'fr,+'~~
I have also discussed the other~~~y~l'®tn,,.~~°~,~~I~~t!'e.~ny~;iuy7o~e~~tt 1~~.~c~
believes, and I agree. that this: ,, ~• ~~ci't~i,~.•,.~rk on~y~he•a
during the course of the ~~ ~ r> • rh,1 •~} .. Y,.'
believe that would be a s~g~•stgprr,,'''~.", ,•~c;;-•~-~ 'r~'"~.'°''. `"~, '"~•. j_: ~; "';~
y F~ V
:C.•:u* ,,~".;i~'~."a.+~F.>.r~.`'{....k-.....-v-•:;_.... _.:: +-c:m`ta,a_,r~'.tt~t~.:oJI4w~.~.t~-
.~.r. s~i ~ FJ _: '^'3~th".a:'s"r:-+isLF7.•_°:-- ~-wM•.r."i'.:ly'~' `~ • ~ • ~,~'• ,~ticGM1~
2. Solid_Waste Financing Alterna -t''~' cs'T ' '~" ' ''' "~i
1'asAz61 1y6.8
~s for joint planning. We
governing bodies would
-t 1 a. Robert is trying to
ith Robert. He
planning directors
the next few weeks, I
The Solid Waste Alternative Financing Committee met a number of times earlier this fiscal year to consider
options to generate additional revenue to support the new facilities and programs that will be necessary to meet
our solid waste reduction goals.. One idea that has been suggested is a sct of srrvic:C distriew in which ad
valorem taxes could be levied at different rates as necessary to support the specific level of solid waste services
that might be provided in those individual districts.
"Fhe materials at Attachment ~ were provided to the Chapel Hill 'town Council as an analysis of the feasibility
of solid waste service districts. We are passing this along now, as it seems that with the County's penda~~g
assumption of solid waste management responsibility, it is unlikely that the Alternative Financing Committee
will meet again and likely that the Board of Commissioners will make the ultir~nate decisions on solid waste
financing mechanisms.
AREA CODE (919) 732.8181 • 968-4501 •688-7331 • 227.2031 + FAX (919) 644-30Q4
c..- n~nn