BC 2009 01 20 Regular - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

January 20, 2009 (Regular Meeting) Page 1159 CHARLOTTE OBSERVER which discussed the idea of sprawling growth becoming the downfall of a community. He concluded by stating this plan is something that the county should continue to use this plan as a guide for future development. Commissioner Carruth made the following comments: controlling growth and taxes are two issues the Board faces regularly; the most effective what to control growth is through the zoning process; the Board must be judicious regarding how growth in the County takes place; he had previous concerns regarding zoning classifications of property located along Highway 49 and property divided by extraterritorial jurisdictions (ETJ); the importance of property rights; etc. He then reviewed similarities between the AO and CR zoning designations and the idea of allowing property owners affected by the rezoning to file an appeal within sixty days. He stated the following: the Interlocal Agreement between the County and the City of Concord prohibits involuntary annexation; the agreement provides a five-year review process and the ability to logically manage growth to help slow impact on community and future development; etc. He then suggested the Board approve the following modifications to the plan presented: property currently zoned industrial should retain its current zoning designation; property divided by an ETJ boundary retain its current zoning designation; and land owners affected by the rezoning have sixty days to file an appeal at no cost. Commission Privette asked the audience to indicate their approval or opposition to the mass rezoning by a show of hands. He stated he would like to see a final proposal before the issue is brought to a vote by the Board. He then made the following comments: the County was told during its planning stage that the Cabarrus Arenaand Events Center would not be profitable until the surrounding area is developed; citizens have made an investment in property and now it will be down-zoned; etc. Commissioner Poole stated that she has met with County staff regarding the Land Use Plan. She then asked Mr. Paul Moose if his piece of property, which is currently zoned as industrial, were to retain its current zoning classification as proposed, would this resolve his issues with the Land Use Plan. Mr. Moose responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Poole then asked Mr. John Lentz if his property, which is currently divided by an ETJ, were to retain its current zoning classification, would this resolve his issues with the Land Use Plan. Mr. Lentz also responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Poole made the following comments: Mr. Lentz's property was one that was noted by staff as an unusual situation; concerns related to conditional use permits for industrial property already in use; waiving the filing fee for a property owner wishing to appeal the rezone is an interesting proposal; she received emails from people who have attended all the meetings regarding the Land Use Plan; and she is most concerned with areas zoned as industrial and areas that contain an ETJ. Chairman White asked if there is a motion to adopt the plan as presented with the following modifications: 1) the industrial zoned property remain the same, 2) the property divided by an ETJ remain the same, and 3) allow property owners with property that has been rezoned as of tonight to file a petition for rezoning back to the 2005 zoning conditions without paying a fee and for that to occur within sixty days, which would be March 19, 2009, again, without having to paying a fee. Commissioner Carruth addressed a question Mr. Davis brought up regarding property on Highway 99 with the water and sewer capacity. He asked if a proposal is brought before the Board to extend water and sewer service to an area beyond the Utility Service Boundary (USB), will the County and the City join in an agreement to develop that service with the majority of the cost born by the property owner. John Day, County Manager, responded that an opportunity to extend water and sewer service to that area would exist. Further, he said the Concord City Manager has made it clear that they do not intend to pay for the improvements. Chairman White asked if there was a motion to adopt the plan with the three conditions previously stated. UPON MOTION of Commissioner Carruth, seconded by Commissioner Poole with Chairman White and Commissioners Carruth and Poole voting for, Commissioner Privette voting against and Vice Chairman Mynatt recused, the Board approved Rezoning Case C2008-9-R Central Area Plan Implementation as presented with the following exceptions: 1) property proposed to be zoned as light industrial should retain its current zoning designation; 2) property