BC 2009 12 07 Work Session - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

December 7, 2009 (Work Session) In calendar year 2009, no more than unit occupancy permits issued; In calendar year 2010, no more than unit occupancy permits issued; In calendar year 2011, no more than unit occupancy permits issued; 1 multi-family apartment 11 multi-family apartment 11 multi-family apartment Page 1709 In calendar year 2012, no more than 11 multi-family apartment unit occupancy permits issued; In calendar year 2013, no more than 10 multi-family apartment unit occupancy permits issued. 2. Mitigation of the pro-rata share of the cost of the planned capacity, which equals $4,153.00 per multi-family residential apartment unit, payable prior to the issuance of building permitting. Option 3 Consider alternate approval determined by the Board of Commissioners Mr. Koch advised he and Ms. Scogin worked together on a similar age- restricted project (Villas at Forest Park) that the Board approved a year ago; restricted covenants were placed on the property that restricted the occupancy to persons over the age of 55; and the developer gave the County permission to monitor the situation through receipt of annual tenant reports and verification of records. He advised if a child registered for school is found living on the property, the developer is required to pay the voluntary mitigation payment in effect. He reported Ms. Scogin is available to provide information regarding the City of Concord's and the Federal government's involvement with the project. He advised a condition of the funding is that the project is age restricted and the aforementioned method was put in place to protect the County's interest and serve the purposes of the APFO. Ms. Scogin reported the project is under Federal restrictions to be operated strictly as a dwelling for elderly citizens and it is also the intent of the financing. She advised the property is owned by the City of Concord; a ground lease will be entered with the City of Concord to lease the property long term with the City's agreement that the property be operated as elderly housing restricted to age 55 and older; and if children are found residing on the property, payments will be required under the restrictive covenants as .previously mentioned. Mr. Koch added he has conferred with Albert Benshoff, Concord City Attorney, about the City's role in the project. He advised the difference between the proposed project and the Villas at Forest Park is that developers own the real estate at the Villas at Forest Park and the City of Concord owns the proposed project property subject to the ground lease. He reported the City is willing to allow the restrictions to be placed on the property as discussed. Ms. Morris responded to questions from the Board. UPON MOTION of Vice Chairman Mynatt, seconded by Commissioner Poole and unanimously carried, the Board voted to place the Reservation of Capacity Certificate for the Villas at Logan Gardens on the December 21, 2009 Agenda as a New Business item. Commerce - Request for Revision of Consent Agreement for Waterford on the Rocky River Subdivision (Tabled from November) Susie Morris, Planning and Zoning Manager, advised this item was tabled last month and is being presented to the Board again. She noted it is an existing Consent Agreement and that William Niblock, President of Niblock Development Corporation, has requested to make payment at the time of building permitting instead of paying at or prior to final platting. Mr. Niblock provided the following information: the company developed around fifty-one (51) 90-feet wide lots two years ago on one side of the Rocky River in the $450,000 - $500,000 price range; the company is currently developing 22 lots on another side of the Rocky River in an effort to build more affordable housing due to the economy; the company has paid fees on 51 currently installed lots at $4,034.00 per lot which amounts to over $200,000; only 15 homes have been built in that phase; according to the original projected build-out schedule, all of the 266 homes potentially could have been built by this point in time; however, the project is nowhere near the original build-out projection; the fee is a barrier for the company and other