Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
11 <br /> 1 redevelopment projects of existing housing units do not pay additional impact fees unless the <br /> 2 number of new units exceeds the number of existing units, in which case impact fees are due <br /> 3 only on the number of new units that exceeds the existing number (e.g., 200 housing units <br /> 4 being <br /> 5 redeveloped into a project that contains 250 new units would pay impact fees only on the 50 <br /> 6 additional units). <br /> 7 <br /> 8 The Board of County Commissioners has extensively discussed the results of the 2016 studies <br /> 9 and possible fee updates at four meetings since September. Meeting materials and videos of <br /> 10 the meetings are posted at: <br /> 11 http://www.oranpecountync.pov/departments/board of county commissioners/index.php <br /> 12 Meeting dates were: <br /> 13 • September 6, 2016 <br /> 14 • September 29, 2016 <br /> 15 • October 4, 2016 <br /> 16 • October 18, 2016 <br /> 17 <br /> 18 At the October 18 meeting, the Board voted (5-2) on the preference for charging school impact <br /> 19 fees based on bedroom counts, when applicable. The Board also deferred an adoption decision <br /> 20 to give staff time to meet with representatives of three interested groups (the Homebuilders <br /> 21 Association of Durham, Orange, and Chatham Counties; the Triangle Apartment Association; <br /> 22 and the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce) who spoke at the meeting and also to <br /> 23 conduct an additional breakeven analysis based on different assumptions from the analysis that <br /> 24 was completed for the October 18 meeting. <br /> 25 <br /> 26 County staff met with representatives of various organizations on October 26 and the group <br /> 27 sent an email with their comments on November 1. The e-mail and staff responses are included <br /> 28 in Attachment 4. Some of the ideas presented by the stakeholders have been incorporated into <br /> 29 the potential ordinances in Attachments 2 and 3. <br /> 30 <br /> 31 Details of the breakeven analyses are included in Attachment 1. The analyses differ in the <br /> 32 multi-family bedroom split projections as follows: <br /> 33 • A 50/50 multi-family bedroom split (0-2 bedrooms/3+ bedrooms) yields a breakeven <br /> 34 point of 37% of the MSIF. Note that some stakeholders who attended the meeting on <br /> 35 October 26 have indicated this bedroom split is not likely, particularly in the Chapel Hill — <br /> 36 Carrboro district; expectation that more 0-2 bedroom units will be constructed than 3+ <br /> 37 bedroom units. <br /> 38 • A 75/25 multi-family bedroom split (0-2 bedrooms/3+ bedrooms) yields a breakeven <br /> 39 point of 43% of the MSIF. Note that some stakeholders have indicated this bedroom <br /> 40 split may still be on the high side for 3+ bedroom units. Staff notes that if this indication <br /> 41 is correct, the starting point of the MSIF would need to be higher if the County wishes to <br /> 42 "breakeven" on school impact fee collections the first year. <br /> 43 <br /> 44 The breakeven analyses are based on the construction assumptions included in Attachment 1. <br /> 45 If actual construction differs significantly from assumptions, actual impact fee amounts collected <br /> 46 would be different (either higher or lower, depending on actual construction activity). <br /> 47 <br /> 48 When updated impact fees were last adopted in 2008, the initial fee amount was set at a level <br /> 49 (32% of the 2008 MSIF) expected to collect $1.6 million in the Chapel Hill — Carrboro district in <br /> 50 order to reach the amount budgeted for debt service in that district. The "breakeven point" was <br />