Orange County NC Website
?~ <br />S EPHEN CRA,$TREE, a landowner in the University Lake Watershed area, stated <br />--._ that he was opposed to the 5 acre minimum. He feels that this is penalizing County Y _ <br />residents for owning land in the County. He also stated that the county residents are ~:. <br />being asked to clean up the water system without getting the benefit of that system. <br />He asked that the Town be charged for these services. He suggested that the GAC <br />filtration system be purchased or a more reasonable alternative to this be proposed. <br />WDRTH JOHNSON stated that he believed the proposed regulations are too <br />restrictive, He mentioned that his mother-in-law has property which has been in the <br />family for years, and she can't give it to her grandchildren, He suggested that <br />outside consultants not be used to help make these decisions, <br />EVERETT SQUIRES spoke in opposition to these interim standards. He stated <br />that he did not want other people telling him what he could do with his land, He also <br />mentioned that he believed that the county should hire local consultants. <br />TED LATTA stated that he was opposed to these interim development standards <br />mainly because interim standards tend to remain in place once initiated. He asked the <br />Commissioners to check some of the major subdivision applications which have .been made <br />of late. The trend is to go for larger lots rather than smaller lots. He also <br />mentioned that the first time homebuyer will be eliminated from purchasing a home in <br />Orange County if these regulations go into effect. He stated he believes that the <br />North Carolina Constitution, in Article 1, Section 19 defines this situation as a <br />"taking without compensation". <br />PETE THORN, a Chapel Hill homebuilder and immediate past President o£ the <br />,, Hamebuilder's Association stated that Craig Morrison, the current President, asked <br />him to deliver the Homebuilder's position. That position states that "a temporary <br />moratorium is the worst possible of all choices. The contrived shortage will cause <br />the price of any available lot to jump artificially upward. The effect will be to <br />immediately increase the cast of already subdivided land, and subsequently new homes <br />in Orange County. After the ban is relaxed there may be an extraordinary rush to <br />subdivide more land. Since the time it takes to get a subdivision approved in Orange <br />County is already sa great now, probably no one could get a subdivision approved <br />before the expiration of the proposed ban anyway, kiausing costs far young people <br />seeking their first home in Orange County are already prohibitively high for most of <br />the population. An increased minimum lot size will also prohibit many landowners from <br />deeding legacy land to perpetuate family traditions of homeownership when children are <br />ready to move out and form new Orange County households," he emphasized. xt is within <br />their power as elected officials to create an increased threshold of wealth necessary <br />to obtain"homeownership. As contemplated, the Camp, Dresser and McKee study would add <br />$3,000 per acre to the cost of a lot. Such additional cost would not be absorbed <br />easily by most new'home buyers. He asked that the $oard consider the negative <br />consequence carefully. In much of the watershed the quality of the soil imposes a <br />growth management effect of its own. Much of the land in the watershed is unsuitable <br />for septic tanks. The moratorium will increase the chances that the little amount of <br />suitable land will not be allowed to be used to provide homes for people who want to <br />live in Orange Gounty, This right was available for the current citizens of Orange <br />County, iricluding many of those who want to restrict the rights of others to use their <br />land. The Homebuilders Association is not opposed in any way to the assurance of high <br />water quality standards for all citizens of Orange County. However, they believe the <br />real issue is one of equity and fairness and not public health. The elected officials <br />must find a fair and equitable method to spread the cost of maintaining high water <br />quality standards to all citizens of the county who benefit from such standards. <br />