BC 2009 12 07 Work Session - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

December 7, 2009 (Work Session) Page 1710 builders in today's economic environment; the company is involved in a lawsuit against the County; the company desires the Board to allow the company, and as a rule for any developer, to pay fees at building permitting as opposed to plat recording; this request is for the 22 lots; most approved Consent Agreement projects are behind schedule; census data revealed 550-600 homes in the county will be permitted this year which is about 20 percent less from two years ago; the permit level in this county is about 43 percent of what it was in 1996; home building is not going to come back to the level it was a few years ago any time soon; the projections made by County staff and developers were grossly optimistic; the unemployment rate in the county is 11 to 12 percent and unemployment in the building industry is 60 to 65 percent; a few projects are moving forward; new homes are needed in Cabarrus County; and the company would appreciate the same consideration the Board has granted to two (2) other developers who have been allowed to pay fees at the time of building permitting. Chairman White clarified the differences between the two aforementioned instances and the current instance is that the two prior projects were in the beginning of the Consent agreement process and the current project is in the middle or near the end of the process. Mr. Niblock informed the Ordinance does not explicitly designate plat approval as the time frame when fees are to be paid; the Ordinance says the fee is to be paid no later than issuance of building permit; the County evidently has made it a practice that payments are paid at final platting; and it is the company's hope, for the benefit of developers and the good of the county, that the Board will consider changing the policy and collect fees at building permitting. Chairman White stated the issue needs to be addressed as a whole, including how the County can address complicated issues as it relates to developers and realistic build-out schedules in today's economy. He further stated the whole issue cannot be addressed in a short period of time. Mr. Niblock stated he agrees with Chairman White's aforementioned comments and that he has talked to the Board .and County staff for over a year regarding the situation to no avail. He mentioned he is aware the Board discussed the situation at a May meeting; however, he noted he does not know the outcome of the discussions. He stated, in today's challenging economy, he agrees 100 percent that the building industry situation needs to be reviewed and that he has been urging the County in this regard for a long time. Vice Chairman Mynatt stated the fees should be paid at building permitting and noted the unemployment rate in this county is an exorbitant 15.7 percent. She said the previous rationale for requiring payment at platting was necessary to keep up with the rapid growth the county was experiencing. For example, schools had to be built quickly and funds had to be accumulated quickly to build the schools. However, she noted the county is not currently experiencing such growth and the schools are catching up. In addition, she reported Cabarrus County Schools plans to investigate the entire school districting to determine how to alleviate some of the overcrowding problems. She advised that the current figures being used are no longer applicable because many subdivisions are currently defunct. She acknowledged the right to develop the subdivisions conveys with the land, but said it doesn't mean the land will be developed any time soon. She commented on developers waiting in the cue that have paid fees for schools that may or may not have the same problem. In order to help the county's building industry, she advocated the County should consider changing the policy at this time and if the county experiences rapid growth again, then the previous rationale can apply. She reiterated, as a rule for all developers, fees should be paid at building permitting. Commissioner Carruth elaborated on an illustration outlining Cabarrus Single Family Permits from 1996 through 2008. He advised the graph shows there was a peak in permits issued in 2005-2007. A discussion ensued regarding the length of time developers may currently carry adequacy contributions before construction can commence. Chairman White advised if the County pursues the option of changing the policy and moving it to building permitting or to a different period of time than what it is currently, the County needs to look at build-out schedules. A discussion ensued regarding scenarios of various build-out time frames and the possible consequences of changing the build-out schedules. Mr. Niblock advised there is little activity taking place in residential development and