Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
12 <br /> regarding the TJCOG data, TJCOG coordinated the outreach, but planners from local <br /> governments were all part of the model showing the growth that will come into communities. <br /> She said that Chapel Hill and Carrboro were very involved in this process. <br /> Chair Price said that over the years she has come to understand more of what TJCOG <br /> does and while it is hard to estimate, looking at census data and economic development here <br /> and surrounding counties, more and more people are coming to NC. She asked if heavy rains <br /> really replenish the water tables and aquifers. She suggested OWASA also engage the <br /> Chinese School and the Interfaith Food Council, in addition to El Centro and NAACP, regarding <br /> the open positions on the OWASA Board of Directors. <br /> Commissioner Hamilton asked what percentage of Chapel Hill/Carrboro residences <br /> have well water and septic. She asked what would happen if everyone had OWASA water and <br /> if that went into the models. <br /> Ruth Rouse said the model assumed that the service area would not change. She said <br /> that if service areas changed then it would change those models. <br /> Todd Taylor said the model is accounting for this as best it can based on zoning for <br /> future areas. He said that it is not a huge additional demand. <br /> Commissioner Hamilton said it came to mind thinking about potential future flooding and <br /> wells becoming unsafe. <br /> Chair Price said if there is a significant recharge then some people may need to join the <br /> OWASA system. <br /> Ruth Rouse said single residential units would not put a huge strain on the system, but <br /> larger developments would. <br /> Chair Price said they will work to get information out about the available payment plans <br /> and thanked OWASA staff for their presentation. <br /> 5. Public Hearings <br /> None. <br /> 6. Regular Agenda <br /> None. <br /> 7. Reports <br /> a. Development Fiscal Impact Study <br /> The Board received information on a study and hear a presentation from the consultant <br /> TischlerBise, Inc. <br /> BACKGROUND: Orange County has informally understood the fiscal impacts of new <br /> development and what general land uses provided a net positive or negative revenue and <br /> expenditure (cost of services). <br /> Studies from over ten years ago made some generalizations that the combined categories of <br /> residential (different densities), non-residential (combined office, industrial retail) and <br /> agricultural. Results of that generalized study showed residential development cost more in <br /> government services than monies received in Tax and other revenue sources, and <br /> contrastingly, non-residential and agricultural were net positive in the revenue/expenditure <br /> balance. <br /> However, this type of study had its limitations because it did not analyze the varied land use <br /> types with varying density or intensity, so a new study was commissioned through Tischler- <br /> Bise, a national firm with expertise in this research area. This new study provides a higher <br />