Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
15 <br />1 Geof Gledhill said that indexing the impact fee is more complicated than it appears, and <br />2 he would recommend against this without getting the consultant to weigh in on the process. He <br />3 said that the impact fee amounts are not linear, but variable. <br />4 Commissioner Nelson said that his goal is to sunset this in two years so that it has to be <br />5 redone. <br />6 Commissioner Gordon said that this should convey to the public that there was a study <br />7 done and the County wants to know what the public thinks. She suggested having a table that <br />8 shows what is actually being considered. <br />9 Chair Jacobs said that this should point out that the cap is created by "residential" <br />10 growth. He also thought that the Board had discussed adding how much the cost of school <br />11 construction has gone up since 2001 as part of this advertisement because it is a huge <br />12 difference. He pointed out that the average sale price of a home in the CHCCS system is listed <br />13 as $805,770 per unit and the median is listed as $764,000. This puts the impact fee in a <br />14 different perspective than for normal people. <br />15 A motion was made by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Foushee to <br />16 approve the public hearing legal advertisement and have staff work up the notice and circulate <br />17 it to the County Commissioners for additional comments. <br />18 VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br />19 <br />20 5. Public Hearings <br />21 a. CDBG Scattered Site Housing Rehabilitation Program <br />22 The Board conducted a public hearing to receive citizen comments regarding a change <br />23 in the dwelling units targeted for repair under the County's Community Development Scattered <br />24 Site Housing Rehabilitation Program and considered authorizing the staff to proceed with grant <br />25 implementation. <br />26 Housing and Community Development Director Tara Fikes summarized the information <br />27 in the abstract. The cost of rehabilitating these homes has gone up to about $40,000 per home, <br />28 so the amount of homes will have to be reduced from 12 to 10. <br />29 No public comment. <br />30 A motion was made by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Carey to <br />31 close the public hearing. <br />32 VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br />33 <br />34 A motion was made by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Carey to <br />35 approve a change in the dwelling units targeted for repair under the County's Community <br />36 Development Scattered Site Housing Rehabilitation Program and authorize the staff to proceed <br />37 with grant implementation. <br />38 VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br />39 <br />40 6. Regular Agenda <br />41 a. Proposed Animal Ordinance Amendment Restricting the Tethering of Dogs <br />42 The Board considered adopting the proposed amendment to the Orange County Animal <br />43 Ordinance restricting the tethering of dogs. <br />44 Animal Services Director Bob Marotto said that the current draft amendment <br />45 incorporated the changes the Board of County Commissioners requested. <br />46 <br />47 PUBLIC COMMENT: <br />48 Melissa Fee said that she is against restricting tethering and she and her family have a <br />49 dog that is tethered. She said that her dog is definitely not an inside dog and has a 2,000- <br />