Orange County NC Website
type and rate of growth in the County. She also supports a moratorium on approval of future <br />developments until the County can update the Comprehensive Plan and update the demographic <br />projection template. <br />Maria Tadd of Chapel Hill faxed a letter dated November 27, 2000 stating that she is <br />in favor of the Schools APFO. She also supports a moratorium on approval of new developments <br />until the Comprehensive Plan is completed. She is concerned about the environmental impact of <br />the development in Orange County. <br />Nick Tennyson, Executive Vice President of the Hamebuilders Association of <br />Durham and Orange Counties, said that the concern that is uppermost is the skepticism about the <br />likelihood of public investment absent a crisis. He said that the APFO theory has to do with <br />anticipating the need, having a capital improvements plan, being willing to spend the money, and <br />making the public investment necessary to build the public facilities that it takes to keep up with the <br />growth and population that occurs. There is a question of how the population growth and how the <br />new structures really affect the long-term population of the schools. He said that it was <br />problematic to get the public pressure that it takes to make the investments to keep the system <br />rolling. The HBA has not been supportive of the Schools APFO concept. The other question that <br />tames up is about how this transition happens. The concept is that the owner of the properly is <br />the person whose land value ar opportunity to sell is regulated. He said that the Schools APFO <br />would farce more detail, more expensive planning upfront, and greater mitigation measures for <br />environmental concerns, all of which would lead to a larger scale project. The Homebuilders <br />Association has not taken a position toward this proposal. <br />Richard Cubic is a small builder and does mostly renovation work. He said that the <br />ripple affect of this ordinance could be catastrophic or minimal depending on how it is <br />administered. He does not like the fact that a school board could put a moratorium on building ar <br />on subdivisions. He does not think it is the school board's position to do this. He questioned how <br />long this ordinance would prolong the permit process. <br />Chair Carey asked Craig Benedict to clarify the application of the ordinance to <br />renovations and expansions to existing homes. Craig Benedict said that there would be no affect <br />an additions to homes. <br />Pam Alexander, co-owner of a subcontracting company and a property owner in <br />Orange County, said that she was against this ordinance. She is concerned about what the <br />Schools APFO would do to the property values. She said that the economy was geared towards <br />growth. She said that in order for the tax base to increase there would have to be an increase in <br />single family housing. She spoke about how the school systems get approval for construction and <br />then change the plans to accommodate less students. She said that her business would go under <br />if growth were stopped by this kind of ordinance. She would like more information on the <br />ordinance. <br />Keith Dixon said that it seems like there should be more communication between <br />the developers and the school systems versus the school systems just having the authority to say <br />no to development. <br />Dave Ferguson, landowner of a large farm, said that it bothers him that we are going <br />to limit the building in this County so that the tax burden falls on those who own land in the County. <br />He cautioned the Commissioners about putting the process into another regulatory board because <br />regulation of development was not the function of the school boards. <br />A motion was made by Commissioner Halkiatis, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs <br />to refer the School Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance to the Planning Board for review and <br />recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners no sooner than January 16, 2001. <br />VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br />Commissioner Jacobs said that there was a courtesy review with Hillsborough on <br />developments in the EDD and the new entranceway district. This public hearing is tomorrow night, <br />November 28th. He requested that there be a report on this at the work session on November 30th <br />so that comments can be forwarded to the Hillsborough Planning Board and the Town Board. <br />