Agenda - 03-22-2016 - 6-a - Minutes

Browse Search

12 1 Agreement will have to be amended, requiring approval of all participating entities (i.e. 2 Orange County, Chapel Hill, and Carrboro) after a joint public hearing. 3 • While this may promote development of `affordable housing' these issues represent only 4 1 small component of housing costs. This issue transcends Planning and will not be 5 resolved solely through altering existing land use regulations. 6 7 Recommendation 8 The Manager recommends that the Board receive the information and provide 9 comments/direction on potential subdivision amendment(s). 10 11 Chair McKee said he appreciated the presentation, but he is not sure that the changes 12 being discussed will affect the affordability of the lots. He said he understands that affordable 13 housing will not be developed in the northern part of the County as it is away from water and 14 sewer. 15 Michael Harvey said this is just one aspect of a global issue that warrants discussion. 16 He said if there is significant reduction in lots sizes with the implementation of innovative, off-site 17 septic with increased density allowances and with incentives for developers, there may be an 18 improvement with respect to the cost of the lot. He said the value of land in a protected area 19 versus an unprotected area versus the rural buffer will all be different. 20 Commissioner Pelissier said this has been a great presentation and it was done in 21 response to her petition. She said the original intent of her petition was not so much affordable 22 housing but rather preservation of rural character. She said the hope of an affordable housing 23 byproduct was secondary. 24 Commissioner Pelissier asked if there are any successful examples of the options 25 outlined this evening from other locations. 26 Craig Benedict said several examples have been received that included a variety of the 27 options. 28 Commissioner Pelissier asked if there is anything that could be developed to 29 differentiate the size of a development. 30 Michael Harvey said there is some viability with this idea. He said further discussion is 31 needed regarding incentivizing developers. 32 Commissioner Pelissier said in her tenure on the BOCC, every major subdivision has 33 been high-end housing. She asked if mixed housing could be incentivized to allow for greater 34 diversity of price points. She asked if this idea is even realistic. 35 Michael Harvey said there is probably no incentive that can be offered unless the County 36 is purchasing the property. He said the value of land is the value of land. 37 Commissioner Jacobs asked if permanent protected open space is valued by Orange 38 County, could the BOCC direct the appraiser to appraise at a reduced value for permanently 39 protected open space in a subdivision. 40 Commissioner Price said conservation easements could perhaps reduce costs. She 41 said the Community Home Trust has several homes that are mixed into the high-end 42 subdivisions. She said she does not promote the idea but noted it points to an example. 43 Commissioner Dorosin referred to Commissioner Jacobs' point about incentivizing. He 44 said it is important to determine what the County wants to incentivize. He said he would like to 45 address the question of affordable housing. He said if the main concern is environmental 46 preservation then it is not practically possible to have affordable housing in these areas. He 47 said it may be worth exploring how development in the environmentally sensitive areas can 48 subsidize the building of affordable housing elsewhere. He said it may be an impact fee or a 49 cost in exchange for the incentives. He said he is very excited about the concept of off-site 50 septic. 51 Craig Benedict said there is currently a multi-department effort on affordable housing.