Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
John Link said that the money that is going to be spent on the infrastructure is coming <br />from three or four sources. He recommended that the Beard, by budget amendment, set aside in a <br />reserve fund an appropriation equal to the expected cost of the infrastructure, with the intent that the <br />Board would never be called upon to spend it. This would fulfill the requirement far the funding. The <br />Board can endorse the concept in principle and it can come back an the consent agenda at the May <br />15t" meeting. <br />Commissioner Gordon asked why background information was not provided prior to this <br />meeting. John Link said that there are four or five issues that need to be addressed before the final <br />plat is recorded. This particular issue would need the Board's approval and the other issues are part <br />of the normal process of recording a final plat. He was not aware that this was something that would <br />have to be addressed tonight. <br />Craig Benedict said that this has been a special project that the staff has been working on <br />since last August. It is a very complex project for Habitat for Humanity. There are approximately <br />seven issues that are administrative in nature. In this case, HUD was not able to support the bonding <br />far this project. It was not realized until very recently that there could be a budget amendment for a <br />reserve fund to bond the project. <br />Geoffrey Gledhill said that there were two ways to move ahead with the project -build the <br />improvements and then record the final plat, or secure the improvements by putting up the cost of the <br />improvements in a fund that is available only in the event that the construction contracts fail or the <br />developer otherwise fails to complete the project. <br />Commissioner Gordon is concerned that this is setting a precedent far all developers. <br />Jahn Link said that the only reason he is recommending the reserve fund is because this is <br />an affordable housing project. <br />Commissioner Jacobs noted that he supports Habitat for Humanity. He asked that when <br />the budget amendment is placed on the May 15t" agenda that information be provided on the second <br />phase and what will be required. He also asked staff for some criteria in the future for haw the Board <br />might offer a similar kind of support to another affordable housing entity. <br />Commissioner Gordon asked where the money would come from and Jahn Link said that it <br />would come from the general fund -fund balance. This is simply to fulfill the requirement of what the <br />Beard has in their subdivision regulations. He said that the funding would revert back to the general <br />fund as soon as the 24t" house has been completed. <br />A motion was made by Commissioner Brown, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs that the <br />County Manager, the County Attorney, and the Planning Director expedite a budget amendment that <br />would cover the bond requirement far phase I improvements for the Richmond Hills project. This also <br />approves in principle the appropriation of $500,000 and authorizes the County Manager to provide a <br />policy for future projects. The money will be transferred back to the general fund after the completion <br />of the 24t" house. Also, the staff will expedite every step necessary to get the final plat in place as <br />soon as possible. <br />VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br />Commissioner Jacobs said that it was important to note that, despite the importance of this <br />project and the difficulty of working this through, we are still requiring that the government live up to <br />the same standards that we require of everyone else. <br />d. Clarified Amendment to Orange County Private Road Standards <br />The Board considered an unresolved amendment to the Orange County private road <br />standards. <br />Craig Benedict said that on October 10, 2000, amendments were made to the private road <br />standards to reduce the amount of lots from 24 lots to 12 lots on a private road. There were six <br />amendments to the motion that night. After reviewing the documents, it was found that there were <br />four amendments that were adopted outright - 1}there is no right to a private road in any subdivision <br />larger than three lots; 2) three-lot subdivisions will net require engineer certification; (#3 was skipped) <br />4) amendments will be reviewed in two years or less; and 5} no more than 12 lots are permitted on a <br />private road. Item three was that three-lot subdivisions could ask for aone-year time extension for <br />minor subdivision approval after aone-year expiration. This motion was not discussed during the <br />public hearing process. This item has to go to public hearing an May 29t". Item six was the most <br />