|
|
Forest Hills proposes ETJ expansionBy Rose Hooper |
|
Protection or infringement. Sometimes it just depends on which side of the fence you stand.
But if your feet have firmly been planted there since birth, your first, quick drawn-from-the-hip response might be, "This is my land and I'll do with it as I please." The response can be the same whether its ridge top laws, sedimentation and erosion regulations, zoning and subdivision ordinances, land-use planning, extra-territorial jurisdiction or annexation.
Monday night in Forest Hills the issue drawing out the crowd concentrated on ETJ. Completing a final report to the village council, John Adams described the long-range planning committee's recommendations through a PowerPoint visual presentation. In essence, the committee's recommendation is to extend the village's ETJ a mile in some directions, but not all. State law allows a municipality a 1-mile ETJ. The need, Adams said, stems from the anticipated growth of Western Carolina University. In the next four to five years, WCU, targeted as a "growth institution" by the University of North Carolina System, is expected to add 3,000 students. "We'll be facing increased traffic, increased housing needs and increased need for fire and hazard protection," Adams said. "Our charge is to protect the quiet, residential character of Forest Hills." The initiative must come from the village itself since "the county has washed its hands of providing any land-use guidelines," he said. From the Forest Hills entrance, the proposed ETJ travels south on N.C. 107 to Speedwell, down Speedwell Road to Bo Cove Road until that road ends. Then it follows the existing property lines to the Webster/Cullowhee township lines. Following those lines past Gribble Gap, the proposed ETJ picks up the ridge line, following back to N.C. 107 at the intersection directly in front of the administration building. The loudest opposition Monday night came from Bo Cove Road residents who "don't need or want Forest Hills." "I live on a state-maintained road, have my own water and septic system. I don't see any reason to be a part of Forest Hills," said Clark Clayton. A petition signed by 150 residents backed him up. "Now, I'm for Forest Hills, but I don't want it to be at the other man's expense," Forest Hills resident Roy Shuler said. "What if I got a petition with 90 percent of Forest Hills residents who are opposed to this ETJ, would you consider it?" Adams said certainly it would be considered; however, it was pointed out the village council has the final vote. At that, Terry Ashe asked, "What good is a voice if you don't have a vote?" While ETJ residents do not have a vote, they do have representation, Adams said. By law, the planning board would be restructured to include equal representation from the ETJ. Many property owners came to the meeting with the idea that Forest Hills was proposing annexation rather than ETJ. "Annexation is not a possibility for Forest Hills at this time," Adams told the crowd. To qualify, 60 percent of the property would have to be housing or subdivisions of 3 acres of less. Or, using the urban use test, 60 percent of the lots must be in urban use, such as commercial or business. "With annexation you can tax property; with ETJ you cannot," Adams told the crowd. "If you don't want us for your tax base, why do you want us?" asked a Wake Robin Road resident whose property is in the proposed ETJ. "We want to offer you the same opportunity to manage growth and protect your neighborhood. Since the university has been named a growth institution, growth is going to happen whether we want it or not," Adams said. "We can either manage it or become a victim of it." "We wouldn't have this problem of growth if half the people in Forest Hills hadn't moved in here on us," said Clayton. While the anticipated increase of students is 3,000, only one new dorm housing 300 students is currently proposed by the university, Adams pointed out. He added that a bill is currently in the N.C. Legislature for WCU to purchase 400 adjoining acres. Another property owner observed, "If there's going to be so much growth, especially college students needing a place to live, I'd be smart to build an apartment complex now and stupid to vote for your ETJ, which would prevent me from building." Some property owners expressed concern that under ETJ they could not use their land like they are now such as working garages, barns, cow pastures, even hog farms. "No problem," Adams said. "All present use would be grandfathered in. The only problem would come if you changed that present use. The change would have to be approved by the planning board." "I came here tonight thinking that you planned to annex a mile all around Forest Hills... that's what the talk was," said Marvin Adams. "But what I understand now is that it's not annexation you are after - it's ETJ, which won't mean an increase in my taxes. And it's not a mile all around; it's less property than I first thought." "What we need is an education process. I think if more folks understood all the particulars, they'd be with us on this," Board member Larry Kolenbrander said. "And somehow we have to convince people we don't have an ulterior motive. I've been on this board from day one and I can assure everyone there's no hidden agenda or ulterior motive." Following the meeting, which went well into the night, village council members decided to proceed with the planning committee's ETJ recommendation. "You can always go smaller. After the public hearing, if you decide to decrease your ETJ, you can," said Geoff Willets of the Institute of Government. "But you can't increase it after you've made your initial recommendation." The council also agreed to proceed with a written and verbal educational/publicity campaign before the public hearing. |
Back to Archive: 04/06/00. |