Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
20 <br /> • 164 LAND USE AND ENVIRONMENT [20] <br /> the poor in any way that it chose, he said, but the council could <br /> not just tax developers and home builders. <br /> As a result of the controversy over the builders' profits, the <br /> professor and the city attorney proposed a fourth rule, which <br /> they said they had overlooked when they came down with the <br /> first three rules. The fourth rule is: <br /> (4) In assessing the value of the benefit incurred, the con- <br /> cern should be with immediate land-value-for-resale- <br /> purposes-only using an appraiser. Value to a particular <br /> person, builders' profits, or users' profits should not be a <br /> concern. Appraisals should be very conservative since it <br /> has been impossible to ascertain what market perceptions <br /> are regarding the existence of the inclusionary units and <br /> what builders' perceptions are about what the costs and <br /> hassles connected with the inclusionary units will do to <br /> residual market values. Although landowners and builders <br /> may not be able to prove the costs associated with these <br /> factors, the courts will probably be persuaded that these <br /> factors will result in some diminution in residual value. It <br /> is therefore now recommended that the benefit will result <br /> in all cases in an incremental land value greater than <br /> projected cost. <br /> The city council and the planning board also carefully exam- <br /> ined all parcels tentatively identified as suitable for, the new <br /> zoning and each was judged acceptable. Fairhaven had sufficient <br /> road frontage on a public road with enough capacity to accept <br /> safely the traffic projected for 1.000 housing units. The site was <br /> served by all utilities required and the city engineer verified that <br /> increasing the density would not affect any existing systems. <br /> Every projected impact was analyzed and found acceptable. <br /> With the blessing of both the professor and the city attorney <br /> the city council enacted the ordinance as originally proposed. <br /> Thus far, it has worked perfectly in Utopia. <br /> The out-of-town owner of Fairhaven, who turned out not to be <br /> a builder,sold the land to a builder at a price surprisingly close to <br /> the projected $6 million shortly after the ordinance was passed. <br /> The builder has built I,000 units on the land, including the 200 <br /> required inclusionary units. These units were built and occupied <br /> by lower-income families. who, although they complain some- <br /> times that the deed restrictions and price controls deprive them <br /> of the right that every other Utopian enjoys of substantial ap- <br /> At <br />