Agenda - 04-01-1996 - IX-C - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

E3 � a way to remedy this problem. Collins responded that there is a way to remedy it, but it would require more data. The data for school impact fees included information regarding the number of students per household. Data for payment- in-lieu would need to include the number of people per household. All members !!!(sssUUUU1 of the household should be included rather than just school age children. It would be tied to population rather than one specific segment. Brown continued asking about the relationship between the Master Recreation Plan and payment-in-lieu proposal. Collins responded that the payment-in-lieu proposal presented at public hearing is based on the current adopted Master Recreation and Parks Plan. If that plan is updated,then recalculation of the payment-in-lie would have to be done. Another alternative would be to look at a recreation impact fee. It is the same with the school impact fees. If the technical report is updated based on additional information,then there must be a recalculation of impact fees. Katz asked if there is any way to make adjustments in regard to low income housing. Collins responded yes,but, it would go back to the process of data collection such as the relationship of the cost of the house to the family income. Allison asked if these would be interim figures if the Master Plan is to be updated. Collins responded that if the Board did ask for the update of the Plan,these would be interim figures. Allison continued asking why the service area approach was recommended over the county-wide approach. Collins responded that looking at the system of parks as proposed in the Master Plan,it is basically a system that is to serve the rural residents of the county. Chapel Hill and Carrboro basically meet their own requirements. If a county-wide approach is applied,it would require enabling legislation to collect from those two jurisdictions. The service area approach looks at the number of people being served by the park which will usually be the people living in the specific service area. Katz asked,in regard to affordable housing,if there is any reason the County could not give grants to people building housing or people who meet certain income requirements. Since it is County policy to encourage housing for low and moderate income residents, could the County charge the fee to everyone and give grants in equal amounts to developers who are providing this service to the County. Collins responded that currently,under the school impact fee,the County allows agencies and organizations that are providing affordable housing to apply for reimbursements. They can qualify for reimbursement if they meet the affordable housing thresholds. Something similar could be set up for payments- in-lieu. Katz asked if that could be included in this proposal. Collins responded that it could certainly be a part of the Planning Board's recommendation. Jobsis asked if there is information available regarding what other areas of the state charge for recreation. Collins responded that he was unsure what other counties do but Orange County was the first county to adopt payment-in-lieu provisions. Payments-in-lieu and dedications have historically been municipal standards or requirements. He continued that the Town of Carrboro's requirements would calculate to be approximately$1400 per lot. Prior to adoption of a recreation plan,Carrboro allowed the developers to provide recreation for residents of the development. Jobsis asked if developers in the County's jurisdiction still have the option of providing recreation for small developments. Collins responded that if it is a typical rural subdivision,they could develop recreational areas that met the needs of their residents but they would still have to