Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda - 04-01-1992
I AppROVED 5�q�92 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY SSEMBL O F GOVERNMENTS APRIL 1, The Orange County Assembly of Governments meeting was held on Wednesday, April 1► 1992 at 6.00 p -m- at the Homestead Community Center in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Moses Carey, Jr., and Gordon, Verla C. Insko and Don Willhoit. Commissioners Alice M. Stephen H. Halkiotis P COUNTY COMMISSIONER ABSENT. or Eleanor G. Kinnaird and BOARD OF ALDERMEHil PRESENT: ad Caldwell, Jacquelyn M- Gist, Aldermen Jay Bryan, an Gurganus and Frances Shetley- Mayor Kenneth ChiBtonn Joe CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL PRESENT PRESENT: Brown, and Roosevelt 11 Council Members Julie MRimedresArthur S. Werner Herzenberg, Alan E. Wilkerson, Jr. Allen A. Lloyd, HILLSBOROUGH BOARD OF- � Robert M Rose NT: Evelyn Lloyd, Carol Lorenz INTRODUCTION Jr. made introductory remarks. Mayors Chair Moses Carey, Braun and Kinnaird welcomed everyone to the meeting- and Community Development for AFFORDABLE HOUSING �DectotSof Housing very Tara Fikes, r°viding affordable housing is which Orange County stated that p The different group important to everyone in the County. the need to work have been discussing ed by provide affordable housing has been develop Chapel Hill represented together to further this efforTara F� es strategy Orange County represented b by by James Harris, Hillsborough by Judy Russell, Carrboro rep Dyer representing the Orange Planning Department and Donna Community Housing Corporation. presentation on the 'report entitled Donna Dyer made a p Strategy (CHAS) for orange ��Comprehensive Housing Affordability North Carolina ". She made reference to the document lies County, has left many n market or sent them to surrounding counties to stated that the high cost of home ownership For families needing out of the housing buy homes and commute into Orange e housing exists- Development a working group with a three or more bedrooms, was undertaken by plus staff from of this countywide ating jurisdiction P s non -p representative from each par Corporation, the County' specific Orange Community Housing development corporation. This document identified need and housing Section I, needs and prioritized them based on severity availability of resources to is a description of the housing •need and market Community Profile, 2 Section II is a five -year approach to addressing in orange County• ear strategy, describing and Section III is a one -y ear, October 1, 1991 these needs, the Federal fiscal y opportunities actions to be taken during through September 30, 1992• She listed some of the developing projects which e County which provide affordable for in Orange County There are many programs ra osed that all these groups work together in housing and it is p P Ms. Dyer presented ro rams and the new federal a total effort showing the existing Humanity objectives of the a transparency owls and 7 programs being offered. She listed the g qualifies as a CAS, She pointed out that local ai consortium formed federal entitlement. reement. with another county. This would require an interlocal ago population She feels the matching funds would be 25�. Based on P P and this would mean allocations of $100,000 from Orange County Chapel Hill, $30,000 from Carrboro and $20,000 from Hillsborough. this P can be used as a match. No matching Other than money public hearing is scheduled for be required the first year. A P The April 22 to inform the citizene ho r ng inrorange County. at is P affordable June 30, 1992• proposed for providing agreement by local jurisdictions must enter into an ag In answer to a question from Mayor Kinnaird, Ms. Dyer indicated that having staff or board members interested �n affordable housing would be suffic g B to enter be restructured nto Also, the orange Community Housing urisdiction. limit the number of representatives from each j housing costs are Hillsborough Commission rr t causerofzwhy pressed a concern that no one is getting to the osed on housing by so high. There are a lot of added cst 1She feels that local local governments because of regulations. government has the power to reduce the cost of housing. basic Aldermen Hilliard Calid� �o would like for r OWASA to join in this utilities is prohibitive• effort to provide affordable housing. private Ms. Dyer noted that the prop to is flexible. housing, it can developer comes up with a proposal P be considered and app or factor in It was pointed out that the University is a major the high cost of housing and that there should be some coordination They have a large amount of acreage which with the University- could be used for this purpose. that this It was the consensus of the elected and thatftheatime s hedule collaboration is a great step forward should keep everyone moving toward a decision. M OWASA CHATHAM COIINTY WATER SALE 1• CiFICATION OF RE IIEST x,AR Lois Herring, Chair of the OWASA Berard indicated they re leased to receive Chatham's request for water. OWASA has an and we P unused water source that could accommodate needs of Hillsborough needs OWASA meet the emergency also, if necessary, generated from the sale of od neighbor could use the extra income g Chatham County- She noted that Chatham has been a g which they would like to repay. Henry Dunlap, Chair of the Chatham County Board gave Commissioners, introduced County Manager Ben Shivar. He g brief history of how their water system is laid out ave three (3) lies. They are doing to secure future water supplies. stems which are not interconnected.fThe ewt developmenttare being systems plans a moratorium which means that p as scrutinized. According to the state standards, Chatham Coun y Tread approved development that will ill n th be built available out water for use already supply. Many of these subdivisions the pittsboro several years. In terms of new sources of water, and will water plant is being expanded and will be fihaveealso developed new provide 365,000 gpd add sup 11 ooftwateThey They also purchase water wells to augment their supply In order to supply the from Sanford and Siler City when necessary• north Chatham area, they need to secure an additional A in the long contacting water and lantoac their ctea Plant on Lake Jordan. A proposal will run they plan as late summer. go to the Board as early distributed a Mark Ashley, Chatham County Engineer, customers with an handout which indicated that they serve 1,417 vacant daily demand of 288,403 gallons. There are 1►a3standard average royal for water. By using a 400 gp lots with state app potential supply per vacant lot this totals 412,800 gpd. The p a maximum daily gpd in 2002 of agreement with OWASA is detailed in the handout with a minimum g d of 25,000 in 1993 to row and daily qP to g 600,000 gpd- He noted that the area is continuing mill gallon storage tank on there are a significant number i 1 ml ant lots- Chatham County is in the process of building a eration this fall an Edwards Mountain. This tank will e interconnect with OWASA will will be used in an emergency• for maintenance. A ten year provide a way to shut down one system to build a P agreement will allow Chatham the time necessary on Lake Jordan. In answer to a question from Council Member Julie ndresen, Mr. Ashley stated that it is their intentiond to have the funds to construct this p 10 A plant on Lake Jordan by years. He noted that the water system in the Governor's club 4 They are ment is owned and maintained by Chatham County. develop water to 40 homes in this area. The total cost currently providing to expand the plant at pittsbor is $costmlin million. The for Ve1, 000 P 800,000 of Club is paying $ connections. 21 R90— OF TOWNS AND COIINTY noted that although this discussion can the group would probably not be able for c reaching n Chair Carey a continue, The process needs to be develop consensus. pursue- Mayor on the direction to p Mr Mayor Kenneth Broun asked about u ca n be reached bents lt r' Shivar stated that the sooner a decision in answer to a question from Council Member Joe Mr. Shivar stated that the population for northern Herzerberg, _ projected population by the Chatham County in 1991 was have 1300 war r customers. year 2000 is 12,500. They Mr. Shivar clarified ththevstatewhen will notexpansion at lift these pittsboro plant is completed, t o roved all vacant constraints because they count as if they are occupied. subdivisions or other development IN IN 3. PROCESS FOR TOWNS CO�TfromRCarrboro Aldermen Jacqueline in answer to a quests roving the sale Gist about the necessity of all elected boards aPP Lois Herring stated that there are other i water to Chatham, and zoning that need to be addressed. issues such as planning Chair Carey noted that all the elected entd able slanduld ha a an opportunity to list and address any or concerns. He suggested that this c could be accomhlished. through a work group made up of elected of Commissioner Znsko stated that oard. Information on potential know the concerns of each elected � each elected body. problems or concerns he importance of working w th by on this issue. She emphasize it was decided that each pose of d bdeterm would place life there pare on their agenda for the purpose problems. The Chairs and Mayors will then determine identifiable p jurisdictions and if a if there are problems which to f continue. 3 The subcommittee will subcommittee is the best way along with a consensus - reaching then meet and their findings, their rocess, will be resubmitted d to thatethe mmoddat d Marchr26 from P group decided consideration. The g P point of reference to Marvin Collins and Roger Walden would be the begin the discussion. OWASA ISSIIES OTHER LxST OF OTHER ISSUES WHICH SHOULD BE ADDRESSED 1. (1) (2) (3) (4) 5 whether or not an elected official from each juris- diction should be on the OWASA Board, role clarification rle is and how they relate to each other, the towns identify what is expected or provide guidelines for the respective representatives on the OWASA Board, identify ways for better communication between the elected boards and the OWASA Board, (5) identify what is or should be OWASA's long range role in providing water to orange County assisting Hillsborough and the remainder of the County, (6) identify a process to address the concerns of citizens on the relationship between the elected officials and OWASA, (7) determine if an OWASA Board is necessary look at the original charter, (8) determine the obligation of the elected officials to the people who elected them, (g) pursue the question of the 16" line that Hills- borough wants to purchase from OWASA, (10) discuss the issues of serving existing communities which are on wells and septic tanks in town at a reasonable Cost including the rural buffer both to the north and south, (11) identify the duties of the OWASA Director including the financial responsibility, (12 ) determine if OWASA is permitted to give "tapons" for low cost housing and if not, why not. r 6 2, PROCESS AND TIMING FOR ADDRESSING THESE ISSUES It was agreed that a process for addressing these questions and issues needs to be developed. These are complex issues and many are policy issues- it was decided that (1) the managers will take the list of questions /issues and discuss ect a d compl governmental board managers to determine if the list is corn jurisdictions may have a will then determine which 1(u)e thisllist will then be submitted mutual interest in pursuing, to the elected boards for refineemena for the next Assembly Of (4) this refined list will be topic Governments meeting. It was pointed out that time is of the essence. NOTE: Julie Andresen asked that a a service map be provided to the staffs of Chapel Hill and Moses Carey, Jr. Chair Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk 5 :00 - 6:00 6 :15 7:15 8:15 AGENDA ASSEMBLY OF GOVERNMENTS MEETING APRIL 1, 1992 Sandwiches, snacks and drinks available Introductions Affordable Housing Discussion 1. The Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ro osed HOME 2. Information on the State's p p program 3. Information on the State's Consortium Program 4. Discussion OWASA /Chatham County Water Sale I. Clarification of Request 2. Role of Towns and County ation in 3. Process for Towns /county participation decision OWASA Issues: Other 1. Listing other issues which should be addressed and by whom for addressing these issues 2. Process and timing ORANGE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS P.O. Box 8181 HILLSBOROUGH, N.C. 27278 Moses Carey, Jr. Alice M. Gordon Stephen H. Halkiotis Verla C. Insko SPECIAL MEETING NOTICE Don Willhoit ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA 732 -8181 968 -4501 688 -7331 227 -2031 644 -3004 (Fax) A Special Meeting is scheduled for March 10, 1992 at 6:00 p.m. in meeting room #1 of the Agricultural and Planning Building in Hillsborough, North Carolina. The purpose of this meeting will be to hold a work session on the 1992 -93 Commissioner Goals and Objectives. A Special Meeting is scheduled for April 1, 1992 at 5:30 p.m. at the Homestead Community Center in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. The Orange County Assembly of Local Governments will meet at this time. The purpose of this meeting will be to discuss those items which are of mutual concern to the Orange County Board of Commissioners, the Carrboro Board of Aldermen, the Chapel Hill Town Council and the Hillsborough Board of Commissioners. The agenda will be sent out under separate cover. 2/24/92 Moses Carey, Jr., it Board of Commissi ers YOU COUNT IN ORANGE COUNTY! (D 8 March 1992 �.�.. 10 ORANGE COUNTY MEETING SCHEDULE SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI 1 2 3 4 5 6 30 r CH Council 7:00pm ,:CCCA 10:0Cam -EP.PC 00pa, 7 :3Opm R &PAC :00pm A6A6 Domiciliary UNC Spring Break :^0pm C'boro 7 : ?Opm Fire 6:30am H'boro Aldermen Ch, i efs Adv c6 NAL "o Conf. 7 :30pm OPC- Council ? :30pm C'boro Srd -Aoino Mentai FE Heal try rH Council UNC Spring Break Aldermen NACo Conf . 8 9 10 11 12 7:30om HRC 10:00am ABC. 6:36pm H'boro 9:30am Adu SOpm H'boro ,Commi55ion Board BroAci Srd -Aoino ' :30pm C'ocrc. rH Council 5:00pm EDC 7:30pm 0/C 6. Aldermen 7:30pm 014ASA Adj OC B/C 7 :30pm Comm 7 :30pm Arts Workshop *or Women i:30pm CH Council ?.30pm E•. /C (H) 15 16 17 18 ACC Tournament 7 :15pm HSAC 7:30pm C'boro 12 :60pm EMS 7 :30pm CH Aldermen Wdvisory Council 2:00pm 7:..Opm 0/C Nursing Home Planning Ads, Board 3:30pm OSS 23 24 -._ 25 7:30pm'• CH =- 7:30pm C'boro 7:00pm HPC . . a Council - Aldermen 7o30pm S/C - OWASA 4 SAT 7 13 I14 ACC Tournament ACC Tournament 19 I20 7:e.Opm C'boro PB 26 - 27 7:30pm DWASA 7:30pm DC- Health 21 NOTE: no reservation is guaranteed without a written request having an / s' approval signature from the Director, or her designee.'— 9 Thank you for your request to use the Homestead Community Center. Attached please find a copy of your request with my signature of approval, which means that: (1) Recreation and Parks staff will issue you the center's key 24 -hours prior to your meeting (2) With 5 working day's notice, Recreation and Parks staff will set up the tables and chairs you requested, in the configuration you requested. Less than 5 day's notice will necessitate note number of cha�rs�d tables availableu Public Works to assist you. (Please (3) your group is responsible for: ** picking up the key from the Recreation and Parks Department's main office (located at 300 W. Tryon Street, Hillsborough, 732 -8181 ext. 2660) One key will fit the building, and one key will fit the trash dumpster. *+ parking your car and ensuring that the other cars in Your group are parked in graveled parking spaces at the Homestead Center ** no smoking or alcohol in the Center ++ using the phone for only local calls to Chapel HiWCarrboro (or to Hillsborough by dialing a 99" before your number) Center Telephone # =868-2048 +* wiping the tops of all tables and chairs with a moist towel at the conclusion of your meeting ** removing all trash can liners from the trash cans and putting your bags of trash in the dumpster (Don't forget the trash cans in the restrooms.) +* mop up any spills and sweep entire floor (brooms and mop are located in the Janitor's closet off the small classroom.) ** turning both the thermostats to 60 degrees * * closing all interior blinds to block sunlight or prying eyes * * turning off all interior lights ++ tag on all exterior flood lights on the sides, front and back of the Center. Please leave off the lights on the front porch (the two on either side of the front door and those under the porch roof.) *•locking all doors when you le t� e�g,tst t g� have pushed and pulled on all of them that ensuring locked ** returning the key the following workday to the Recreation and Parks Department's main office (located at 300 W. Tryon Street, Hillsborough+ 732 -8181 ext.2660) CIO HOMESTEAD COMMUNITY BUILDING LOCATED 0,$ MILES EAST OF THE CALVANDER CROSSROADS ON HOMESTEAD ROAD IVNED- OPERATED BY: ORANGE COUNTY RECREATION & PARKS DEPARTMEI PHONE: (919) 732 -8181 968 -4501 E %T. 2660 HILLSBOROUGH - Vri.f'�NC=� l�U � lti 11 �;UNiM15� P.O. Box 8181 HILLSBOROUGH, N.C. 27278 Moses Carey, )r• Alice M. Gordon Stephen H. Halkiotis Verla C. InskO Don Willhoit 5:00 - 6:00 6: 15 7:15 $:15 AGENDA ASSEMBLY OF GOVERNMENTS MEETING APRIL 1, Sandwiches, snacks, coffee and tea available Introductions 732 -8181 966 -4501 688 -7331 227 -2031 644 -3004 (Fay) Affordable Housing Discussion 1. The Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ro osed HOME 2. Information on the State's p P program 3. Information on the State's Consortium Program 4. Discussion OWASA /Chatham County Water Sale I. Clarification of Request 2. Role of Towns and County artici ation in 3. Process for Towns /County p P decision OWASA Issues: Other 1. Listing other issues which should be addressed and by whom essing these issues 2, Process and timing for addr The meeting will be held at the Homestead Community Center on Homestead Road at Hogan Lake Road. yoL COUNT ir' ORkNGE COUNTY 1 (1 MEMORANDUM TO: Attendees - April 1st Assembly of Governments Meeting FROM: Roger Waldon, Chapel Hill Planning Director Marvin Collins, Orange County Planning Director DATE: March 26, 1992 RE: CHATHAM COUNTY REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF OWASA WATER The Orange County Assembly of Governments is meeting on April 1, 1992. On the agenda for that evening is a request from Chatham County to purchase water from OWASA. We understand that the request is for a 10 -year contractual arrangement whereby, OWASA would sell water to Chatham County in quantities that would increase over the term of the contract. At the beginning, the quantity would range from 25,000 gallons per day to 200,000 gallons per day. In the tenth year, the quantity would range from 75,000 gallons per day to 600,000 gallons per day. Part of the reason for the request is an existing inventory of 900+ vacant lots in northern Chatham already permitted for public water supply. Copies of information supplied by Chatham County are attached. We suggest that several policy -level questions are involved here, and the April 1 meeting may be a good forum for discussion. These include: 1) To what extent will growth in northern Chatham County impact roads in southern Orange County? 2) Will the sale of water accelerate and /or increase the level of growth in northern Chatham? 3) What commitments are incurred for the period beyond ten years? In the event that Chatham is not in a position at the end of ten years to supply water on its own, can the sale of water still be terminated? 4) Does the sale of 600,000 gallons per day have any impact on service to existing and future OWASA customers in orange County? What are the "high -end" projections for Orange County water demands ten years from now, and how do those compare with existing supply? Would the proposed agreement have any impact on the ability to sell water on an emergency basis to Hillsborough? We do not have answers at this time, but offer these questions as possible topics of discussion or further study. Z d 1 COUNTY OF CHATHAM mt"I GUNLAP. A., CaHnrrMMr1 IM*FIV NAVIS M"WSS I�AAL Q TM OMPOON Go$ MURC*80M 2, T, 14APM0 • P. o• Box 67 AITT9e0A0, N. C. V312 oRGANIZED 1770 Tar SOUARK MIL AS March 10, 1992 Mrs. L419 T. Herring, Chair OVA oogd of DLrectors P.Q. 4&w 366 Corrrrc, [forth Carolina 27510 M78296616 %- II, PEN smiv^^ county man"w RQSERT L. GUNN eow-v Ano-gy Phone (919)'542.6200 Dear Lois: In response to your request I am providing additional information concerning our request for a supplemental water supply from ONA". Effective this summer, Chatham County will have a total daily supply availability of 865,000 gallons, 5Q0,000ev fro m wells in water plant and the remaining 365,000 gpd s en the North Chatham area. our current average day demand is 294,975 gallons, While the peak day event is 4800410 gallons. In addition to the supply and demand conditions, Chatham County expects to have a 1.1 million gallon storage tank operational by the fall of 1992. The overflow elevation on this tank will be + -740.0 once co:apletely filled. The size of this tank provides over three days storage, based upon normal demand. The North ChatWo system has a factor of safety of 1.8 between the peak day event and supply availability. However, based upon an additional goo+ vacant lots in the North Chatham system already permitted for public water supply, the State Water Supply section has taken a more restrictive posture. Based upon their interpretation of the 400 gpd /250 gpd Per dwelling and vacant lot rule, Chatham County currently needs over 900,000 gpd supply availability. If a mid term supply agreement can be achieved, it is Chatham County's desire to.have a water plant near Lake Jordan 900BZ96616 L 'd w NO . Lots T. Herring !larch Or 1992 operational within 10 years. Thus the desired length of mid -term supply agreement is tan years. our draft feasibility study indicates a peak day demand of 1.2 mgd by the year 2000. Extra - pvlating the growth until 2003 provides a peak day demand of 1.35 mgd. Taking into account an existing supply of 0.83 mgd and a continued decline in well production, a proposed supply eupple- meat is as follows: 1993 1994 1995 1916 1997 19,90 1999 2000 2001 2002 minimum Dail GPD $5,000 25,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 Maximum Daily GPD 200,000 200,000 300,000 300,000 400,000 400,000 500,000 500,000 600,000 600,000 A minimum daily demand is recommended in order to provide OWASA a base source of revenue and to insure a constant yrnover of water in the interconnection line. The fact that Chatm County will have a 1.1 million gallon storage tank at an elevation that water can be forwarded back to OWASA during an emergency may Interest to you. -The proposed interconnection location would be near the orange /Chatham county line at 15 -501. Chatham County would extend a 12" line from the existing system to this location. i would appreciate an opportunity for our staff to make a presen- tation to the oWASA Board and the elected boards for Orange county, Chapel Bill and Carrboro. We want to be suave that you understand fully the nature of our problem. please let as know if you have questions or desire further inxorMation. Sin erely, 10 etu'y Dunla Chais�n !la rd of Commissioners woad asnsa 3 Ms. Lois T. g*rrinq GD March 10, 1992 HD %b cc: Chairmen Mores Carey Mayor Eleanor xinna►lyd M&Vor Kenneth Broun Chatham Board of Commissioners Chatham County Water Committee Everette Billingsly, Executive Director OWASA ®erg Shivar, Chatham County Manager 90beL96616 WOSA a3nI333a , I 3 CRTli CHATHAM SYSTEM Data Peak Day Avg. Day Ratio gep -90 439550 352599 1.25 Oat -90 343825 251603 1.37 14Dv -90 369510 265601 1.39 DOC -90 286070 237062 1.22 Jan -91 313706 247475 1.27 reb -91 244+428 227850 1.07 Mar -91 453966 320567 1.42 Apr -91 424403 290147 1.46 May -91 480420 337295 1.42 JIID -91 459720 348653 1.32 1 Jul 91 474730 323590 1.47 Aug-91 425500 308374 1.38 Sap -91 430980 323859 1.33 ;astio of Peak Day to Average Day for the Year ;Avg. day for year$ 294,975 Peak day: 480,4aQ GFD Oak Factor: 1.63 3 W M JI 7 x a a ■ x ia1 E+ N 4 w N .Q F V 90481966T6 W021j canla 7 w a a r r J 1 tW a r I A r �9'•d° - W M JI 7 x a a ■ x ia1 E+ N 4 w N .Q F V 90481966T6 W021j canla 7 w a a r r J 1 tW a r I A r TO: John Link, C untyn�ager� FROM: Marvin Collins, Planning Director SUBJECT: March 24, 1992 DATE: Assembly of Governments Meeting - April 1, 1992 OWASA /Chatham County Water Sale COPIES: Geoffrey Gledhill, County Attorney Gene Bell, Planner III, Comprehensive Planning Attached is the memorandum I received today from Roger Walden, the Chapel Hill Planning Director. I think the questions that Roger has outlined should be included for discussion at the above mentioned meeting. In addition, I would suggest the following: 1. Goal 3.A.2. of the Orange County Water & Sewer Policy states that "Joint planning should be developed and implemented among the County, its municipalities, surrounding jurisdictions, and utility providers responsible for water and sewer service to guide the extension of lines in accordance with joint land use plans and water /sewer service boundary agreements." The issue of joint planning has been brought up before with Chatham County. Should it be brought up again or should Orange County, Chapel Hill, and Carrboro simply review the Chatham County Land Use Plan, and, if acceptable, support a water sale agreement whereby Chatham County agrees to extend water service to development only in accordance with its Land Use Plan? 2. Related to #1 above, should the provisions of Goal 3.A.1 be invoked, whereby public water and sewer facilities will be encouraged, where they are available, to Urban and Transition areas, and will be discouraged in Rural and Agricultural areas, except where their provision will enhance the rural character and provide for open space by allowing clustered development. I have attached a copy of Goal 3 of the Water and Sewer Policy. You may wish to refer to it, particularly as related to the connection and /or expansion policies outlined in Section B. Since I will be leaving for the LESA Conference in Kansas City at 11:00 AM on Wednesday, March 25, further assistance can be provided by Gene Bell. I will be available for questions prior to 11:00 AM and will FAX Roger a copy of these comments for review. s 14, MEMORAMN TO: Attendees - April 1st Assembly of Governments Meeting FROM: Roger Waldon, Chapel Hill Planning Director Marvin Collins, Orange County Planning Director DATE: March 26, 1992 RE: CHATHAM COUNTY REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF OWASA WATER The orange County Assembly of Governments is meeting on April 1, 1992. on the agenda for that evening is a request from Chatham County to purchase water from OWASA. We understand that the request is for a 10 -year contractual arrangement whereby, OWASA would sell water to Chatham County in quantities that would increase over the term of the contract. At the beginning, the quantity would range from 25,000 gallons per day to 200,000 gallons per day. In the tenth year, the quantity would range from 75,000 gallons per day to 600,000 gallons per day. Part of the reason for the request is an existing inventory of 900+ vacant lots in northern Chatham already permitted for public water supply. Copies of information supplied by Chatham County are attached. We suggest that several policy -level questions are involved here, and the April 1 meeting may be a good forum for discussion. These include: 1) To what extent will growth in northern Chatham County impact roads in southern Orange County? 2) Will the sale of water accelerate and /or increase the level of growth in northern Chatham? 3) What commitments are incurred for the period beyond ten years? In the event that Chatham is not in a position at the end of ten years to supply water on its own, can the sale of water still be terminated? 4) Does the sale of 600,000 gallons per day have any impact on service to existing and future OWASA customers in Orange County? What are the "high -end" projections for orange County water demands ten years from now, and how do those.compare with existing supply? Would the proposed agreement have any impact on the ability to sell water on an emergency basis to Hillsborough? We do not have answers at this time, but offer these questions as possible topics of discussion or further study. w fstpM�i tM�M i11JN4AN, IA.. GywnM� MI►AV r1AV0+/O�MN SARA O TMOMPNON Gus MUMCMiON M. T. WANPAA 0 COUNTY OF CHATHAM P. O• Box 47 flTTeaON0. N. C. 27312 oR"NL=D 1770 ro7 sou,%ma Mouas March 10, 1992 Mrs. Dols T. Herring, Chair owANA Board of Directors P.O. ,36v 366 Carrj�orc, Korth Dear LOW Carolina 27510 %- I-1, DEN SHIVAA county mane► ROBERT L. GUM' County ARo►nWy Phone (414) 542 -02 In response to your request I am providing additional information concerning our request for a supplemental water supply from aVASA • Effective this summer, Chatham County will have a total daily supply availability of 8650000 gallons, 500,000 aeen vf( wells in the water plant and the remaining 365,000 gpd from the North Chatham area. Our current average day demand is 294,975 gallons, while the peak day event is 480,410 gallons. In addition to the supply and demand conditions, Chatham County expects to have a 1.1 million gallon storage tank operational by the fall of 1992. The overflow elevation on this tank will be + -740.0 once completely filled. The size of this tank provides over three days storage, based upon normal demand. The North Chatham, system has a factor of safety of 1.8 between the peak day event and supply availability. However, based upon an additional 900+ vacant lots in the North Chatham system already permitted for public water supply, the State water Supply section has taken a more restrictive posture. Based upon their interpretation Of the 400 gpd /350 gpd per dwelling and vacant lot rule, Chatham County currently needs over 900,000 gpd supply availability. If a mid-term supply agreement can be achieved, it is Chatham County's desire to.have a water plant near Lake Jordan i C Me. Lola T. Marring Mareh 10, 1992 7r 0 operstional within 10 years. Thus the desired length of aid-term supply agreement is ton years. our draft feasibility study Indicates a peak day demand of 1.2 mqd by the year 2000. Extra- polating the growth until 2003 provides a peak day demand of 1.35 mqd. Taking into account an existing supply of 0.85 mqd and a continued decline in well production, a proposed supply supple- ment is as follows: minimum DailX GPD Maximum Dailx GPD 1993 35,000 200400 1994 25000 200400 300,000 1995 1996 90,000 500000 300000 1997 50,000 400,000 19,98 50,000 400,000 500,000 1958 2000 50,000 75,000 500,000 2001 75,000 600,000 2002 75,000 6000000 A minimum daily demand is recommended in order to provide OWASA a base source of revenue and to insure a constant rnever of water in the interconnection line. The fact that Chat County will have a 1.1 million gallon storage tank at an elevation that water can be forwarded back to OWASA during an emergency may be of interest to you. The proposed interconnection location would be near the OraAfe /Chathan, county line at 15 -501. Chatham County would extend a 1211 line from the existing system to this location. i would appreciate an endnths elected boardstfora0range egen- tation to the OVASA Board County, Chapel Hill and Carrboro. We want to be sure that you understand fully the nature of our problem. Please let so know if. you have questions or desire further Information. SIR *rely* f Z Dunl a Chairman rd of Commissioners Me. Loie T NAVring GD Match 10, 1992 HD: b cc: Chain an Moses Carey Mayor Eleanor Kinnaird Mayor Kenneth Broun Chatham Board of Ccmm:issioners Chatham County dater Committee Everette Billingsly, Executive Director OWA" Ben shivar, Chatham County Manager 4 1 0 S W M' MAIM MTO NORTH CHATHAM SYSTEM Data Peak Day Avg. Day Ratio Sep -90 439550 35259.9 1.25 Oct -90 343825 251603 1.37 NOV-90 369510 265601 1.39 DOC -90 288070 237062 1.22 Jae -91 313706 247475 1.27 Feb -91 244428 227850 1.07 mar -91 453966 320567 1.42 Apr-91 424403 290147 1.46 May -91 480420 337295 1.42 Jon -91 459720 346653 1.32 Jul -91 474730 323590 1.47 Auq -91 425500 308374 1.38 Sep -91 430980 323859 1.33 Lo of leak Day to Average Day for the rear . day for year: 294,975 GPD k day: 480,420 GPD k !actor: 1..63 3 i 1 w H H dc M r 4 x u x F 0 x i 4 1 \ 1 O 9@VBZ96616 worm C3AI3 a w •r OM J ti AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRESENTATION April 1, 9 I Brief Introduction to Existing Housing Initiatives in Orange County (Attachment I -A) and National Affordable Housing Act of 1990 (Attachment 1.13). Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) II. The Comp Attachment II). Goals of the Orange County CHAS III. Description of the State's proposed HOME program. m categories (Attachment III -A) and eligible activities (Attachment III -B). State progra 9 IV. The State's Consortiumrforre expenditure of (Attachment IV -A). A. Proposed pr o 9 B. Consortium agreement and authorizing resolution (Attachment IV-13). V. The Next Steps roval of the HOME program A. Schedule of activities and actions toward app application by the State (Attachment V). B. Public involvement. VI. Discussion •a._ o O d c d m G x a'x y' on n p Q m ygm v b =c o �; 00 ° r "_ ° P- m 'p m3 e g�y 9 , v = @ �a » � » x p ax p O N4 'm a Fv V p`� � n 'm .3 wm v S m al Pm rm c Op 4 > 0 n n ��x2 zm c � o nr2 z 7. Cm 1 y z nm � ° � °mm rFT ma 3 m Ol y. c 0 �g 7° °°vg �m CO m �p33 2 =v A e .co 0 ° mg ❑ nr �in� p2 Vow ni �j= a� 'm m 3 mnc ¢g2` � x,- o� m -40-4 rnm m� n0, 0r; °1 d q NNE C C fmN C N p �. m m O S O W - -1 9d .� C m +/ 3 O j ? J p w Ni7� �+ 2 T N� m m C N� Z p C p 0 ' O O O N p 2 OS c A -� N O x °� m Ol 2 CC m _- om ` Y -o l � m� $a D z a z 0r- xd o C in n❑d z a z❑mz �r S p z0 Z n m t7 C .n =,C TZ C z -•. C C in C1C C am �- no '�-- vm 5 ❑, 3.2NUN � o m� (n ain i° ❑ N » = Om zm p? 83 CL air r9- a-na ama m r ti bn 7 W c z arc m❑ n p m.. a.2 0 � 3 �a 5'3 Q m A ❑ m C ° 3 3 3 3 Z A m❑ 2 2 2 CU S O ❑ O O 0. Z m � C 3 3 3 a �m x sa = �a eg-4 y� v0C� m mv ^ m e m A . mc .m em.. i m a mm' 3A s O 3 am a a ° a o • 3° ° � a a 1 1 o § o 3? ? m �0 a� oQ • c �nv � ma�C 2 c° ^ mo m mooa o-a m3 0-m3 a " tr 00 m p d ° " a c o ° �� cx CL m 3 mG a o m a a s a 'K •' P- n O n o O Q ° Er O m ° C O m >; O 2 n f a 3 r � ' go O m � 1 � m m to a 3 m m m o m 3 m CL S A?� x o g a CL Q S 2 v n o a m o a N a m^ a m C ca a p d 25 y� �+ ,z = G o ZS Oa tl❑u p m y m m y w ' m' pv O O c _ D _ a am 20 0 o 3? �_ ° d V u 0 m o v v a S m qq r e 7 p, ? m n _ W m' �' w _ 3 a P `, S W m A C N o b b N W m m 4 �' m m m a p m m ?� m S V G 0 G m a' .°. i m m @73 n e 7 C a x_ W M CM °. m O. n .' m m�' C m 'O m C a? C Q o 7 q a ° m ° Ei 6 mC 7 CL ab to 4 Q a. e cp m x Cl) 1 z O C N z N rn a ^z 0 m 0 O a 0 a m 0 O C z C ATTACHMENT I -B NATIONAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING ACT OF 1990 Summary of Provisions The National Affordable Housing Act of 1990 (NAHA) is significant change in the way the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) will operate housing assistance programs. All HUD programs will be governed by the provisions of NAHA, including public housing, Section 8 rental assistance, and Community Development Block Grants. The HOME program is only one part of this new federal housing initiative. The old Housing Assistance Plan (HAP) requirement has been replaced by a Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS), a strategic planning document that includes both a 5 -year projected strategy and a 1 -year action plan. All programs funded under NAHA require that the applying jurisdiction be governed by an approved CHAS. The other major new emphasis of NAHA is preferen sponsors and applicants for funds under new programs. ce for non - profit NAHA has nine titles, each for a different type of program: Title I ....... Pur ses and Definitions Title II ....... Investment in Affordable Housin - -HOME Program -- Community Housing Development Organizations (CHDO's) defined Title III ...... National Homeownershi Trust (not funded) -also FHA Single Family Mortgage Program Changes Title IV ...... Homeownershi and urtfor Peo e EvO iciri,yhe re HOP - -HOPE I for sale of Public Housing units to tenants - -HOPE II for sale of foreclosed Multifamily Properties (owned by FHA, RTC, FmHA, or NCHFA) to tenants - -HOPE III for sale of single family properties owned by FHA, RTC, VA, or local housing authorities to low income families through non - profit organizations Title V ... Housing Assistance -- Public Housing - erection 8 Rental Assistance Title VI ...... Preservation of Affordable Rental Housin -- Provisions for prepayment of mortgages issued under Section 221 3 and Section 236• These mortgages are coming due and units are being converted dfrom low -cost to market -rate rents. Title VII Aural Housina " -- Farmers Home Administration (FmHA) Programs Title VIII ..... Housing, for Persons with S ial Needs -Section 202 Housing for Elderly - Section 811 Housing for Persons with Disabilities -- McKinney Act Programs for Homeless Persons - Sheller Plus Care for Homeless Persons with Special Needs -- Housing for Persons with AIDS Title IX ...... Commun f Develo meat Block Grants ATTACHMENT II GOALS AND OBJECTIVES CONSOLIDATED COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING AFFORDABILITY STRATEGY (CHAS) FOR ORANGE COUNTY, N.C. Submitted to U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development December 20, 1991 1. Construct up to 50 units of affordable rental housing each year. 2. Provide homeownership opportunities by constructing or substantially rehabilitating housing that would be affordable to families with income below 80% of the area median, with mortgage payments (principal and interest) below $700. 3. Create a county -wide homeowner rehabilitation program for very low income homeowners (incomes below 60% of the area median family income). 4. Reduce the number of housing units without indoor plumbing. 5. Reduce the cost of development and land costs in areas outside utilities service areas. 6. Increase awareness and participation of consumers of affordable housing in the planning and program design aspects of local housing programs. 7. Continue to support the operation of the Shelter for the Homeless. v 8. Create transitional housing units for shelter residents who can live independently. 9. Assist local non - profit human services agencies to provide a continuum of housing options for special populations, including older adults, disabled, mentally ill, and persons with AIDS. ATTACHMENT III -A HOME PROGRAM 1992 PROPOSED FUNDING CATEGORIES 1. COMMUNITY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION (CHDO) CATEGORY This category of funding is designed to meet the statutory requirement that at least 15% (S3.3 million) of the State's HOME program funds be available to CHDOs. The category will be competitive and will only be open to non -profit agencies that meet the HUD definition of a CHDO. The Division will work with potential non - profit housing development agencies to assist them in becoming qualified as CHDOs so they will be eligible to receive funds under this category. Applicants will be required to submit eligible project requests and demonstrate that firm financial commitments exist for a project before an agreement is executed. Non - profit agencies that have demonstrated a capacity for carrying -out housing activities and a history of providing affordable housing in their community will be in an excellent position to become CHDOs. In all cases, the non - profit organizations must be community -based and have significant and active representation of low- income persons on the governing board. In urban .areas the community may be defined as the city, county, or the metropolitan area; in rural areas the community may be the town, county, or. multi- county areas, but not the entire state. CHDOs may not be controlled by either for - profit entities or public agencies. Non - profit organizations that become CHDOs will also be eligible to receive project - specific technical assistance and site development loans to facilitate their efforts in effectively using HOME fiends. 2. STATE CONSORTIA PROGRAM CATEGORY This category is designed to award funds to applicants that have agreed to participate with other local governments, non - profit housing organizations, and other affordable housing providers in the administration of a regionally designed HOME program. The category requires the development of affordable housing on a regional basis and multi - agency cooperation for project design and siting. The funds will be awarded on a competitive basis. Participants in the Consortia Category will be required to select a unit of general local government to represent the consortium for administrative purposes. Non - profit housing development organizations, for - profit housing development organizations, and other public agencies would be eligible to be consortia participants. Any member of the consortium could play a central role in developing housing projects. Consortium members will be required to enter into cooperation agreements with each other to implement projects. A block grant of HOME .funds will be provided to the consortium to develop projects tailored to these needs. Enough funds would be available under one grant to enable the consortium to address several projects in a comprehensive manner, This category would also allow the State to distribute funds quickly to projects that are locally designed by housing agencies working in cooperation with one another. In addition, the consortium would be better able to collectively raise matching funds when this becomes a federal program requirement. 3, AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT DEVELOPMENT CATEGORY This category is designed to allow units of general local government that are unable to enter into consortia agreements, non - profit housing development agencies (CHDO or not), and other non - profit, affordable housing providers, to participate in the HOME program. The category will competitively fund eligible projects that have firm financial commitments and that otherwise would not receive HOME funds under one of the other categories. Recipients under this category will have to demonstrate capacity to carry -out the project and that firm financial commitments of other funds are in place. M� ATTACHMENT III —B HOME Resource uidebooL E: .. In general, HOME funds can be used for three types of housing programs: Homeownership (for first -time homebuyers and single family rehabilitation), Rental Housing, and Tenant -Based Rental Assistance. Under these three categories, participating jurisdictions may use HOME funds to develop and support affordable rental and homeownership projects through (Sec. 92.250): • Acquisition of property (including assistance to first -time homebuyers) • New construction (by some participating jurisdictions only) • Reconstruction • Conversion • Moderate Rehabilitation (less than $25,000 per unit) of non -luxury housing with suitable amenities • Substantial Rehabilitation ( more than $25,000 per unit) of non - luxury housing with suitable amenities • Tenant based rental assistance • Relocation of any displaced persons, families, businesses, or organizations • Site improvement, acquisition of vacant land and demolition (under special conditions) • Project soft costs Forms of Assistance These activities may be supported through: • Equity investment • Interest- bearing loans or advances • Non - interest - bearing loans or advances • Interest or principal reduction subsidies • Deferre"ayment loans, grants •_ �• • •1 •I • •• -I1 •- I• •I Eligible Construction Costs ( Sec. 92.206) HOME funds may be used to pay the following eligible costs: Development hard costs - which include costs to meet applicable new construction or rehabilitation standards, energy - related repairs or im- provements, lead -based paint abatement, handicapped accessibility, and incipient or general property improvements of a non -luxury nature. In addition, for new construktion, the cost of funding an initial operating NATIONAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION Page 9 HOME Resource Guidebook deficit reserve to meet any shortfall in project income during the period of project rent -up. • Acquisition of property - Costs of acquiring improved or unimproved real property. • Related soft costs - Other reasonable and necessary costs incurred by the owner (not [lie participating jurisdiction) associated with the financing, or development of new construction, rehabilitation or acquisition. These costs include architectural and engineering fees, financing fees, project audit costs, affirmative marketing and fair housing information service, as long as they are a part of the project. • Relocation costs - Costs of relocation payments and other costs for per- manent or temporary relocation. • Costs related to tenant -based rental assistance Prohibited Activities under HOME In general, HOME funds cannot be used for the following activities (Sec. 92.214): • Administrative costs - HOME funds cannot be used for administrative costs of the participating jurisdiction or a subrecipient. HUD will permit, however, an amount equal to 7 percent of HOME funds to go towards meeting the match requirement. • Public Housing Modernization - Comprehensive Improvement Assistance Program (CIAP) • Tenant subsidies for special mandated purposes under Section 8 • Rental Rehabilitation Program supplemental assistance • Project -based rental assistance • Matching funds for any other federal program • Annual Contributions Contracts • Activities under the Low - Income Housing Preservation Acts of 1987 and 1990 • Project reserve accounts for replacements and unanticipated increases in operating costs, or operating subsidies for rental housing (except within certain situations in new construction projects) • Provide assistance to a project previously assisted with HOME funds be- fore the period of affordability ends (For homeownership programs, subse- quent sales of such units previously assisted with HOME funds may be provided with additional HOME resourcesas long asthe additional resources make the units affordable to new low- income homebuyers.) (assumes ACTIVITIES I. Land Acquisition ATTACHMENT IV -A COUNTY HOME PROGRAM DESIGN STAFF PROPOSAL 04/01/92 1 million dollar allocation) $ 50,000 -for identified affordable housing projects - eligible projects must benefit low income families /those below 50% of median income 2. Nov Housing Construction $ 300,000 Orange Community Housing Corporation: funds would assist in the development of the Erwin Village project. Funds to be used for land acquisition, development soft costs, site improvements, and /or second mortgage financing. 3. Homeownership Opportunities $ 200,000 Funding for existing projects /programs designed to assist first -time homebuyers purchase homes. Specifically, these funds could provide the additional subsidy needed to enable public housing residents take advantage of existing affordable housing projects. 3. Moderate Rehabilitation $ 450,000 - rehabilitate 30 houses @ $15,000 60% owner - occupied 140% rental dwellings -all dwellings must be substandard - homeowners must have income below 60% median - rental property owners with incomes below 50% median; must lease property to.low /moderate income families - deferred loar; program design; 10 years recapture 5 year recapture for elderly homeowners. Priority to the following: --- houses lacking indoor plumbing -- houses with inadequate plumbing (failing septic systems, contaminated wells) * *to include costs of connections and associated utility fees. -- elderly (over 62) homeowners HOMEPROG: Attachment IV -B KEY ELEMENTS OF A HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM CONSORTIUM AGREEMENT I. All Participating Jurisdictions must execute the Consortium Agreement. The Staff Working Group (Tara Fikes, Orange County; Tina Vaughn, Judy Russell, and Chris Berndt, Chapel Hill; James Harris, Carrboro; Joff Coe, Hillsborough; Donna Dyer, OCHC) has considered the issues that must be addressed in the agreement and has made some suggestions for discussion. Here are some of the key provisions that must be included in the Agreement. A. Term of the Agreement. 1. Term .must be a minimum of that amount of time necessary to carry out all activities that will be funded for three federal fiscal years (approximately five years). 2. All members must use their best efforts to continue to keep projects in compliance for the necessary compliance period (up to 20 years). 3. Lead Entity must execute a separate agreement with HUD and the State to continue to be responsible for compliance for the full compliance period. B. Designation of _a Lead Entity. 1. Consortium members must select one unit of local government to be the Lead Entity. The Lead Entity receives no administrative funds from the HOME Program; however, staff funded with CDBG administrative funds can work on HOME adminstration with no additional compensation from HUD. Based on their previous experience with the State through the Small Cities Community Development Block Grant Program and the existence of an ongoing housing rehabilitation program, the Staff Working Group has proposed that Orange County be designated the Lead Entity, through its Housing and Community Development Department. 2. Lead Entity must: a. agree to assume overall responsibility for the HOME program and assure that all activities are carried out in compliance with regulations and establish necessary accounting procedure required by the Act; b. have a demonstrated capacity to administer the program; c. be willing to enter into an agreement with HUD and the State for a period of time longer than the Consortium Agreement; d. obtain a legal opinion that the Consortium Agreement conveys full legal authority for the Lead Entity to act on behalf of the Consortium. C. Matching funds and repayment of any costs or penalties. 1. Program does not require matching funds for this year's funds (FY 91 -92 funds); however, the Act does authorize matching funds to be required and future years may require some matching of HOME funds. 2. Based on information we have received from HUD and natinnA housing organizations, the proposed future matching requirement will probably be equal to 25% of the amount of funds requested from the HOME program. Matching funds must generally be in the form of cash, land, or improvements contributed to the project that are not from any federal source. For example, CDBG funds or any other form of HUD funding cannot be used as. local matching funds. 3. Consortium members must agree on a formula for payment of the matching funds, if they are required in the future. 4. Consortium members must also agree on a formula for payment of any penalties, costs, repayments, or other funds that may be required to be paid to the State or HUD. The Staff Working Group has suggested a formula for discussion that would be based generally on relative population: Orange County, 40 %; Chapel Hill, 40 %; Carrboro, 12 %; Hillsborough, 8 %. Other criteria could be considered in the determination of this formula, such as relative annual budgets. D. Creation of a group to desi n the Program each year. 1. Must authorize a staff working group to prepare the HOME program design and application to the State for funds and to update and revise the CHAS as needed. For this year, the Staff Working Group listed above prepared the initial CHAS and proposed program design. 2. All local governments must approve the CHAS update and program design each year. 3. Must provide for a public participation mechanism. 4. Must direct the working group to design the program in a way that will address housing needs in all participating jurisdictions. E. Other Provisions. 1. Must affirmatively further fair housing. 2. Must assure that all housing projects funded will be consistent with the CHAS. 3. May not contain a provision for termination or withdrawal by any party to the agreement for at least the initial term specified (three to five years). II. Each Participating Jurisdiction must adopt an Authorizing Resolution that: A. Approves participation in the consortium. B. Authorizes the Manager to execute the consortium agreement. C. Authorizes the Manager of the Lead Entity to submit a funding application under the State Consortium Program. ATTACHMENT V SCHEDULE OF ACTIVITIES APRIL 22, 1992 Public Information Meeting MAY 1 - JUNE 30, 1992 Local Elected Officials review and approve the following: 1. Proposed Program Design 2. Consortium Agreement and Authorizing Resolution JULY /AUGUST 1992 Staff prepares State HOME Application according to Prescribed guidelines. SEPTEMBER /OCTOBER 1992 Begin HOME Program Activities 4 NORTH CHATHAM SYSTEM DEMAND I. NUMBER OF CUSTOMERS 1357 Residence 60 Non -Residence 1417 TOTAL 11. AVERAGE DAILY DEMAND 258,403 gallons III. PEAK DAY OVER THE PAST 18 MONTHS 480,420 gallons 10 OF PEAK DAY TO AVERAGE DAY IV. RAT 1.67 Pi to F u � C � r 1 � b xn .1+1 O w C � N .`tea A Q N 7 4 o- N -A g� x O :17 H n H � y K fr'1 H - . NORTH CHATHAM SYSTEM SUPPLY I. EXISTING WELLS (12 HOURS /DAY) 3659040 gpd II. TOWN OF PITTSBORO (JULY 1992) 500,000 gpd Ill. TOTAL SUPPLY AVAILABLE 8559040 gpd w Y . NORTH CHATHAM SYSTEM FUTURE DEMAND PROJECTIONS YEAR AVERAGE DAY PEAK DAY 1993 320,000 6009000 1995 4303000 7509000 2000 650,000 1,200, 000 2003 775,000 113509000 U J X F ul O M L) �r 0 1� E e� V 0 T d 61 0. M 0 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 N 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 I 1 I O 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 N I 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I 1 1 1 A 1 I I 1 1 1 1 I I 1 N 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 I I 1 1 1 I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I r l 1 1 I 1 p C3 N 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 t 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I I I I 1 I I I 1 I 1 1 I T I 1 I I I I I T t 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 00 Q� I 1 1 r 1 1 1 T 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 I 1 r 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 ■ I 1 � � I 1 1 1 I 1 1 T d 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I 1 7 C 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 I T 1 1 I 1 1 1 I I 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 T 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 I I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 T 1 1 t 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 M a � N T d 61 0. PERMITTING PROBLEMS WITH THE STATE SUBDIVISION Birchwood Carolina Meadows, 1 -I1IA Fearrington, I - VII Fearrington Woods Forrest Creek, 1-111 Governors Club, I - IX Herndon Woods, 1 -11 NUMBER OF LOTS VACANT WITHOUT SERVICE 15 Hudson Hills Kentview Turtle Pond Farm TOTAL VACANT LOTS WITH STATE APPROVAL FOR WATER SUPPLY UTILIZING A 400 gpd STANDARD PER VACANT LOT 7 216 74 31 605 21 41 17 5 1,032 4129800 gpd POTENTIAL SUPPLY AGREEMENT WITH O.W.A.S.A. MIMIMUM DAILY GPD MAXIMUM DAILY GPD ( 5 /, k , 'Z' 1993 259000 Y s,�-1--) 2009000 1994 259000 2009000 1995 50,000 3009000 1996 509000 3009000 1997 507000 4009000 1998 509000 4009000 1999 509000 5009000 2000 759000 5009000 2001 75,000 600,000 2002 759000 6009000 , ■ Mp 1 1 1 1 1 4 N I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 t 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 I N O t I 1 I■ I' I 1 N 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 I I 1 I 1 I I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 ■ I 1 1 N 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I I 1 I 1 1 I I 1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 I I I 1 1 i 1 I I 1 1 ■ 1 I 14 1 I 1 1 1 1 t I Q C I I 1 1 I al N I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 A I 1 1 I I 1 1 1 fx 7 1 I a 1 y I 1 1 I I 1 1 I I I 1 E-1 � c^ X a 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 m N I 1 L 1 ( r t 1 ON � cr I 1 I 1 1 I 1 r ■ C 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 � ■ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I � Iii N I 1 1 1 I I 1 r Kill J 1 I 1 1 I 1 I x G I 1 I 1 1 1 1 a co C I 1 1 1 1 1 m H I 1 Im C ? I 1 I 1 I I 1 v 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 6 ++ 1 1 1 1 I ■ 1 1 � . 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 I r 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 ■I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 I I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 t 1 1 1 d 1 1 ■ 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 11 1' 1 I 1 I M ■ 0% O% O r - r o c c c J C •� (D v+ � r 4 er a 1716 ~ ;1753 J .27 V �5 t7oo l .70...a 1749 . 1750 1716 1751 2.1 \ .¢ 4 A 1 1764 179 1. ■ Pe l f 4T ::,� U R H A � I VL•y{r t� o� qv i I I r A° TES V-r ,4D 501 1531 Creek 1727 •S 1615 •� 17 a ~' 505 11 1 N. v. 726 1728 p 1724 1008 Gib ' �1► d N 1726 1725, 1727 [3, • 1723- 1721. b ��°•¢ 1722 ._.. Lysira OL 1762 1008 1 �� a. Mt. rm Ch 1714 1721 up e 1529 .7 / $ .5 1717 � ,•2_ / (7 \\ .a. � •6 1717 l� ` 1717 a 528 1720 1717 1Q4$ .4 a 1716 ~ ;1753 J .27 V �5 t7oo l .70...a 1749 . 1750 1716 1751 2.1 \ .¢ 4 A 1 1764 179 1. ■ INTERCONNECTION AND SUPPLY BENEFITS * THE PHYSICAL INTERCONNECTION IS AN ASSET TO BOTH UTILITIES FROM THE STANDPOINT OF EMERGENCY USE EVEN AFTER THE CONTRACT EXPIRES. * A 10 YEAR AGREEMENT WITH O.W.A.S.A. WILL ENABLE CHATHAM COUNTY TO RESERVE NECESSARY FUNDS FOR AN OPERATIONAL WATER SUPPLY PLANT BY 2003. * THE 1.1 MILLION GALLON STORAGE TANK CAN BE AVAILABLE AS A BACKUP SUPPLY SOURCE TO O.W.A.S.A. DURING SEVERE EMERGENCIES. * CHATHAM COUNTY, BY PURCHASING AT LEAST A MINIMUM DAILY AMOUNT FROM O.W.A.S.A. PROVIDES O.W.A.S.A. WITH AN ADDITIONAL REVENUE SOURCE. Ic 1 4l0y' (0);1,:1"',1IIIlvi TO: Attendees - April 1st Assembly of Governments Meeting FROM: Roger Waldon, Chapel Hill Planning Director Marvin Collins, Orange County Planning Director DATE: March 26, 1992 RE: CHATHAM COUNTY REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF OWASA WATER The Orange County Assembly of Governments is meeting on April 1, 1992. On the agenda for that evening is a request from Chatham County to purchase water from OWASA. We understand that the request is for a 10 -year contractual arrangement whereby, OWASA would sell water to Chatham County in quantities that would increase over the term of the contract. At the beginning, the quantity would range from 25,000 gallons per day to 200,000 gallons per day. In the tenth year, the quantity would range from 75,000 gallons per day to 600,000 gallons per day. Part of the reason for the request is an existing inventory of 900+ vacant lots in northern Chatham already permitted for public water supply. Copies of information supplied by Chatham County are attached. We suggest that several policy -level questions are involved here, and the April 1 meeting may be a good forum for discussion. These include: 1) To what extent will growth in northern Chatham County impact roads in southern Orange County? 2) Will the sale of water accelerate and /or increase the level of growth in northern Chatham? 3) What commitments are incurred for the period beyond ten years? In the event that Chatham is not in a position at the end of ten years to supply water on its own, can the sale of water still be terminated? 4) Does the sale of 600,000 gallons per day have any impact on service to existing and future OWASA customers in orange County? What are the "high -end" projections for orange County water demands ten years from now, and how do those compare with existing supply? Would the proposed agreement have any impact on the ability to sell water on an emergency basis to Hillsborough? We do not have answers at this time, but offer these questions as possible topics of discussion or further study. r 'd 'Wmzoa," •u ►�..s.. CW4W r, MMAr 01AM0 *46LM" RAAL C TNCMftDN ova MId11l NOON ■. T. MANM 0 0 COUNTY OF CHATHAM P- O. sox $7 " TSAOAQ, N. C. 27212 oAaANizMo 17470 707 SQUAR6 MILA$ March 10, 1992 Nis. Lots T. Herring, Chair 0 Aoattd of Directors$ P.O. is" 366 Car3*09 0, Korth Carolina 27510 Dear Lola: 9048696616 WONj 031303 V lz WIN SHIVAA Caunq. RA&MD W R061114T L. GUNN Cow%ty Afforngy Phones (010) W-620 In response to your request I am providing additional information concQrning our request for a supplemental water supply from Effective this summer, Chatham County will have a total daily supply availability of 865,000 gallons, 500,000 gpd from the water plant and the remaining 365,000 gpd from seven (7) wells in the North Chatham area. Our current average day demand is 294,975 gallons, while the peak day event is 480,420 gallons. In addition to the Supply and demand conditions, Chatham County expects to have a 1.1 million gallon storage tank operational by the fall of 1992. The overflow elevation on this tank will be + -740.0 once Completely filled. The size of this tank provides over three days storage, based upon normal demand. The North Chatham system has a factor of safety of 1.8 between the peak day event and supply availability. However, based upon an additional 900+ vacant lots in the North Chatham system already permitted for public water supply, the State water Supply section has taken a more restrictive posture. Based upon their interpretation of the 400 gpd /350 gpd per dwelling and vacant lot rule, Chatham County currently needs over 900,000 gpd supply availability. If a mid -term supply agreement can be achieved, it is Chatham County's desire to have a water plant near Lake Jordan L 'd 9008296616 WOU a Z Me* Lots T. Herring Marsh Or 1992 operational within 10 years. Thus the desired length of mid -term supply agreement is ten years. Our draft feasibility study indioates a peak day demand of 1.2 mgd by the year 2000. Extra- polating the growth until 7003 provides a peak day demand of 1.35 mgd. Taking into account an existing supply of 0.65 mgd and a continued decline in well production, a proposed supply supple_ Mont is as follows: M nimum Daily GPD Maximum DailX GPD 1993 1994 25,000 300,000 1995 25,000 50,000 300,400 1994 1997 500000 300,000 30Q,OQ0 1999 50,000 50,000 440,000 1999 2000 50,000 400,040 SOO,OQQ 2041 750000 75,000 SpQ,OQO 2002 75,00* 600,000 6000400 A minimum daily demand is recommended in order to provide OWASA a base Source of revenue and to insure a constant ttq�uurnover of water in the interconnection line. The fact that Chatham County will have a 1.1 million gallon storage tank at an elevation that water can be forwarded back to OWASA during an emergency may be of interest to you. The proposed interconnection location would be near the Orahge /Chatham county line at 13 -501. Chatham County would extend a 12" line from the existing system to this location. I would appreciate an opportunity for our staff to make a presen- tation to the OWASA Board and the elected boards for Orange County, Chapel Hilt and Carrboro. We want to be sure that you understand fully the nature of our problem. Pleas* let me Information. Sin *rely, 't "l m Chaixti on a rd know if you have questions or desire further Of Commissioners 90V8?96616 a MS - Lays T. ![wing 0 March 10, 199a RD :b cc: Chsir"n loses Carey Mayor Eleanor Kinnaird [Mayor Kenneth eroun Chatham Boazd of Commissioners Chatham County water Committee Everette B"lingsly, Executive Director OwASA Ben shivar, Chatham County Manager I 1 Data Sep -90 Oct -90 Nvv -90 Dee -90 � Jan -91 Feb- 91 Mar -91 Apr -91 Hay -91 Jun -91 Jul -91 A"-91 Sep -91 Il�tll' d�}�IY !1lTpl NORTH CHATHAH SYSTEM Peak Day Avg. Day Ratio 439550 35259.9 1.25 343825 251603 1.37 369510 265601 1.39 288070 137062 1.22 313705 247475 1.27 244438 227850 1.p7 453966 320567 1.42 424403 290147 1.46 480420 337295 1.42 459720 348653 1.33 474730 323590 1.47 425500 308374 1.38 430980 323859 1.33 1 Rat'* of Peak Day tD Average pay for the xaaar 4n. day for year; 294,975 GPD Peak day: 480,420 GPD Peak raetgr: 1.63 3 90bBZ966i6 WOa.4 03 A13- v ri w r K a I � Q H w N 4 w H u r F O x 900eZ966T6 WOa.1 can, azi a w a s a r r F e 1 v ri w r K a I � Q H w N 4 w H u r F O x 900eZ966T6 WOa.1 can, azi a w a s a r r F ORANGE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS P.O. Box 8181 - HILLSBOROUGH, N.C. 27278 Moses Carey, Jr. 732.8181 Alice M. Gordon 968 -4501 Stephen H. Halkiotis 688 -7331 Verla 1. Insko 227 -2031 Don Willhoit 644 -3004 (Fax) MEMORANDUM TO: Mayors Ken Brown, Eli Kinnaird and Horace Johnson FROM: Moses Carey, Jr. DATE: February 27, 1992 RE: ASSEMBLY OF GOVERNMENTS MEETING OF APRIL It 1992 Although we have planned to discuss the agenda for the next Assembly of Governments meeting when we next meet on March 13th, I thought I would share this proposed agenda with you at this time. It appears that we will need to discuss affordable housing issues, plans and opportunities in order to take timely advantage of certain Federal and State funds which will be available to us. It will be important to insure that all affected boards are equally aware of steps required.to access these funds. Additionally the issue of OWASA water_ sales to Chatham County will undoubtedly require our attention. Therefore, I propose that we focus only on the issues of whether and how the three elected boards should discuss and resolve this issue prior to OWASA moving forward with discussions with Chatham County. I am certain other issues related to OWASA will arise when we meet.. However, time will not permit us to address them. Therefore, I propose that we also agree to list these additional issues and decide how and when we wish to address them. Some,.of them may include OWASA structure, Hillsborough purchase /lease of transmission line for local service, and OWASA sale of water to Hillsborough. Since a community -wide effort on affordable housing will be our focus, I have taken the liberty of writing interested board members of the Public /Private Partnership. They are interested in an initiative in this area. The OWASA Board is also being invited to this meeting. Attached is a draft agenda for your review. it with you to our March 13th meeting. You may wish boards aware of this if you think it is reasonable t direction. cc: Managers Lois Herring Board of County Commissioners YOU COUNT IN ORANGE COUNTY! Please bring to make your o pursue this PROPOSED AGENDA ASSEMBLY OF GOVERNMENTS MEETING APRIL 1, 1992 5:00 - 6:00 Sandwiches, snacks and drinks available 6:00 Introductions 6:15 Affordable Housing Discussion I. The Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) 2. Information on the State's proposed HOME program 3. Information on the State's Consortium Program 4. Discussion 7:15 OWASA /Chatham County Water Sale 1. Clarification of Request 2. Role of Towns and County 3. Process for Towns /County participation in decision 8:15 OWASA Issues: Other 1. Listing other issues which should be addressed and by whom 2. Process and timing for addressing these issues r COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING AFFORDABILITY STRATEGY FOR ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA Including the Towns of Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and Hillsborough December, 1991 Staff Contacts: ORANGE COUNTY: Tara Fikes, Orange County Housing and Community Development, P.O. Box 8181, Hillsborough, North Carolina, 27278, 919 -732 -8181, ext. 2490. CHAPEL HILL: Judy Russell, Chapel Hill Housing and Community Development, 317 Caldwell Street Extension, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, 27516, 919 -968 -2850. CARRBORO: James Harris, Carrboro Planning Department, 301 W. Main Street, P.O. Box 337, Carrboro, North Carolina, 27510, 919 -968 -7712. HILLSBOROUGH: Hillsborough Planning Department, 101 E. Orange Street, P.O. Box 429, Hillsborough, North Carolina, 27278, 919 -732 -2104. Donna Dyer, Orange Community Housing Corporation, 1168 West Main Street, Post Office Box 307, Carrboro, North Carolina, 27510, 919 - 967 -1545. a IF COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING AFFORDABILITY STRATEGY FOR ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA Including the Towns of Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and Hillsborough Table of Contents Transmittal Letters and Resolutions ............................... i -iv Introduction and Summary of CHAS Development Process ............... 1 Section 1. Community Profile A. Needs Assessment .......... ............................... 3 1. Current Estimates ........ ............................... 3 2. Five -Year Projections ...... ............................... 4 3. Supportive Housing Needs of Homeless Persons ................ 4 4. Supportive Housing Needs for Others with Special Needs ......... 6 TABLE I-A ............ ............................... 7 -9 B. Market and Inventory Conditions .............................. 10 1. Housing Conditions ...... ............................... 10 2. Inventory of Facilities and Services for Homeless Persons ......... 15 3. Facilities and Services for Persons with Other Special Needs ...... 15 TABLE 2 -A ......... ............................... 17 -18 TABLE 2 -13 ......... ............................... 19 -20 TABLE 2 -C ......... ............................... 21 -22 Section II. Five Year Strategy A. Priorities for Allocating Investment ............................. 23 1. Assigning Priorities ...... ............................... 23 TABLE3 ........... ............................... 26 -27 B. Relevant Public Policies ...... ............................... 28 C. Programs, Services, and Special Initiative Strategies ................ 29 1. Affordable Housing ...... ............................... 29 a. Rental Housing ........ .............................29 b. Homeownership Opportunities .......................... 30 c. Public Improvements .. ............................... 32 d. Community Education and Participation ................... 32 e. Supportive Housing for Homeless Persons ................. 33 f. Supportive Housing for Other Persons with Special Needs ..... 34 2. Institutional Structure ..... ............................... 34 3. Coordination of Resources . ............................... 35 Section 1111. One -Year Action Plan, October, 1991 through September 1992 A. Resources ................. .............................37 TABLE 4/5A ........... ............................... 39 -44 B. Implementation ............ ............................... 45 1. One -Year Action Plan ..... ............................... 45 2.' Monitoring Plans ........ ............................... 45 3. Supportive Housing Action Plan ............................ 46 TABLE 513 .................. .............................47 Certifications from Participating Jurisdictions COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING AFFORDABILITY STRATEGY FOR ORANGE COUNTY INTRODUCTION The affordable housing needs of Orange County have been studied from many points of view and reported in these documents: Orange County Low and Moderate Income Housing Task Force Report (September, 1987), Public Private Partnership Affordable Housing Task Force (May, 1989), Chapel Hill Comprehensive Plan (June, 1989), and Carrboro Housing Report (May, 1990). These reports were the basis for this Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS). The important issues in Orange County have not changed. The high cost of homeownership has left many families out of the housing market or sent them to surrounding counties to buy homes and commute into Orange County. The rental market, inflated by the ability of UNC students to pay higher rents, is beyond the means of families with incomes below 60% of the area median. For families needing three or more bedrooms, very little stock exists. Clients at the homeless shelter continue to increase dramatically, and transition from the shelter into permanent housing in Orange County is nearly impossible. With this CHAS, staff from Orange County, Chapel Hill, Carrboro, Hillsborough, and the newly- formed Orange Community Housing Corporation have identified these specific needs and prioritized them based on severity of need and availability of resources to address the need. Section I, Community Profile, is a description of the housing need and market in Orange County. Section II is a five -year approach to addressing these needs. Section III is a one -year strategy, describing actions to be taken during the Federal fiscal year, October 1, 1991 through September 30, 1992. SUMMARY OF CHAS DEVELOPMENT AND CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS Development of this countywide CHAS was undertaken by a staff working group with a representative from each participating jurisdiction plus staff from Orange Community Housing Corporation, the county's non - profit housing development corporation. This working group developed a draft CHAS, which was then reviewed by other staff members and presented to the public in two major ways. The first draft of the CHAS was completed in early September, 1991, and copies were available to the public at the Chapel Hill Town Hall, Carrboro Town Hall, Orange County Department of Housing and Community Development, and Hillsborough Town Hall. An advertisement describing the CHAS in the Chal2el Hill Newsl2aper on September 15, 1991 began the public comment period. The public comment period ended when each local jurisdiction approved the submission of the CHAS as follows: Chapel Hill, November 25, 1991; Orange County, December 2, 1991; Hillsborough, December 9; Carrboro, December 10. During the public comment period, each jurisdiction advertised the CHAS public hearing and locations of the CHAS document. Several citizens called for copies of the CHAS. On September 25, 1991, the staff working group held a briefing for members of community -based non - profit organizations and other interested parties, in which the CHAS was described in detail and comments received. This briefing was especially helpful in the development of strategies for special populations such as battered women and elderly persons. In addition to the community briefing, each jurisdiction held a formal public hearing to Present the CHAS to the elected officials and receive citizen comments. The Chapel Hill Town Council held a public hearing on September 30,1991; Carrboro Board of Aldermen held a public hearing on October 1, 1991; Orange County Board of Commissioners held a public hearing on October 2, 1991; and the Hillsborough Town Board held a public hearing on October 22,1991. Comments were received at the Chapel Hill public hearing. Mrs. Adele Thomas recommended that subsidies awarded through programs governed by the CHAS be targeted to very low income families. Ms. Donna Dyer, Executive Director of Orange Community Housing Corporation, submitted written comments supporting the consolidated CHAS and encouraging the Town to adopt the consolidated document. The Town Council did not alter the consolidated CHAS after the public hearing, commenting that the dramatic lack of housing affordable to very low, lower, and moderate income families was an important need to be included in the CHAS. No comments were received at the Carrboro, Orange County, or Hillsborough public hearings. After the public hearings, the staff working group reconvened to make final changes to the document. The plan that follows is the result of that process. 2 I. COMMUNITY PROFILE A. NEEDS ASSESSMENT 1. Current Estimates. Current estimates of countywide need are unavailable, but the Town of Chapel Hill has provided an estimated rental need of 2,234 very low- and low- income families (below 80% of the area median family income). The Town of Carrboro estimates 3,483 very low - and low- income renters, for a total in southern Orange County of 5,700 low- and moderate- income renters. The 1980 Census estimated that 37% of all renters paid more than 35% of their family income for housing.' Applying that percentage to the 1990 estimate of 16,156 renter - occupied units would yield nearly 6,000 families that pay more than 35% of their family income for housing. Countywide, only 1,190 total units of rental assistance are available, including project -based and tenant -based assistance, meeting less than 20% of the need expressed by these estimates. No information is available for families who meet Federal preferences for rental assistance except to note the waiting lists for existing units. The Section 8 waiting list is approximately 600 families and individuals countywide, and the Public Housing waiting list is approximately 250 families. The Town of Chapel Hill recently received funds to construct an additional 24 units of public housing, but that will serve only 10% of the current waiting list. The public housing waiting list shows very slow turnover, as many families cannot move from public housing into unassisted housing even when they are paying the full fair market rent for public housing units, since units are not available in the private market at rents affordable to very low income families. In addition to public housing and Section 8 units, public - private assisted apartments, such as Adelaide Walters, Elliot Woods, Chase Park, Gateway, and Coachwood also have waiting lists, pointing to the need for additional assisted rental units. In addition, Residential Services, Inc., the major provider of assisted housing for developmentally disabled, handicapped, and mentally ill residents also maintains a waiting list of persons with special housing needs. Another serious need in Orange County is that of affordable homeownership opportunities, which is described below in the 'In this CHAS, income expended for "housing" includes not only rent payment but also basic, utilities (electricity, gas, water and sewer service). A family is said to have a housing need if more than 30% of family income is spent on housing. Utilities are not included in calculations made by financial institutions to determine mortgage qualification. 3 Market and Inventory Conditions. While some families are experiencing the cost burden associated with homeownership, most very low- and low - income families have not been able to become homeowners in Orange County. A family of four with income of 60% of the area median, or approximately $26,000, can afford a mortgage payment of approximately $505, which can support a mortgage of $61,500.2 Very few homeownership opportunities exist for such families in Orange County. Data on the actual number of very low- and low- income homeowners are unavailable. 2. Five -year Projections. No formal projections have been made by local governments in Orange County, but over the next five years, rising housing costs will continue to outpace income growth, creating a growing cost burden on low- income families. Nearby rural counties are now absorbing the families that cannot afford to live in Orange County, and as the housing markets in those counties "catches up" with Orange County over the next five years, fewer and fewer opportunities will be available for low- income families. While the Triangle area has experienced very low unemployment and a very stable economy throughout the 1980's, the majority of Orange County employment opportunities are in the service sector, usually lower wage and low skill employment. Recent budget cuts by the State threaten the main employer in the county, the University of North Carolina. At the least, income growth in the service and government sector will not increase and may slow down, as annual cost of living increases are reduced or eliminated. No proportional slowing of real estate appreciation has been experienced in the southern part of Orange County, indicating that the affordability gap will continue to grow, and the number of families paying disproportionate amounts of income for housing will continue to increase. 3. Sul2portive Housing Needs of Homeless Persons. Data on homeless persons in Orange County come directly from the homeless shelter. A recent report from the Inter -Faith Council Homeless Shelter indicates 2Mortgage amounts are calculated using the following methodology: Monthly Income X.40 (Total Debt Ratio) = Total Monthly Debt. Total Monthly Debt - Estimated Taxes and Insurance ($125) and Estimated Other Debt ($250 to $350) = Total Available for Mortgage.- Assumed Mortgage Term of 30 years and Assumed Interest Rate of 9.25%. While this methodology is more subject to variation based on Estimated Other Debt, it presents a more realistic view of mortgage qualification. 4 a dramatic increase in the housing need of homeless persons in Orange County. For the entire calendar year 1990, the shelter served 468 clients for a total of 10,605 nights of shelter. From January through June, 1991, the shelter served 460 homeless persons for a total of approximately 9,000 nights of shelter, indicating nearly double the previous year's service. Most nights, the shelter is operating at capacity. A substantial number of clients for the shelter are persons who came to the Triangle area seeking employment without adequate funds -to get reestablished. The Inter -Faith Council estimates that nearly $1,000 is needed to pay all the up -front costs needed to move into a standard rental unit in southern Orange County. With the rapid rise in clients at the homeless shelter has come a dramatic increase in the number of women, children, and families housed there. With only one homeless facility, meeting the different needs of single men, single women, pregnant women, mothers with infants and small children, and families becomes a difficult task for the shelter staff. Special needs populations, such as persons recovering from substance abuse or persons discharged from hospital care also provide service challenges to the shelter's current operation. No public or private single -room occupancy facilities exist in Orange County to provide transition for shelter residents who have jobs but still cannot afford to enter the housing market. Boarding houses, rooming houses, or other historic transitional facilities have suffered from economic displacement, as the large residences needed for such operations have been purchased by investors and converted to student housing or purchased by families for private residences. Further, only one halfway house exists for women recovering from substance abuse, and none are available for men, leaving the homeless shelter to serve this population. The battered women's shelter for Orange and Durham counties is located in Durham, so women who want to maintain their children's attendance in Chapel Hill - Carrboro Schools have no other option but the homeless shelter. Without facilities for special populations or transitional housing opportunities for working residents, the homeless shelter becomes the county's main source of short-term housing for a broad spectrum of clients. No data are available for unsheltered homeless persons who choose not to stay at the IFC Homeless Shelter; however, local officials have observed an increase in rural homelessness even though figures are not currently available. Many of these homeless persons are migrant laborers or new arrivals who have not been able to find work or save enough money to move into permanent housing. 5 4. Sui2portive Housing Needs for Others with special Needs. In Orange County, the special needs population includes developmentally disabled, handicapped, and mentally ill residents, persons with AIDS, older adults, battered women, persons recovering from substance abuse, and homeless teenagers (including teenage mothers). Each of these groups has a different severity of need and each has different types of housing needs. Data on the number and needs of these groups are unavailable. In most cases, these groups will need increased support services and case management in order to live independently, even if low -cost housing opportunities are made available to them. Assisted housing opportunities for persons with special needs should provide a continuum of choices that offer transition from supervised housing situations to independent living with minimal support. Coordination of housing assistance with increased funds for case management is critical to programs for persons with special needs if. . attempts at "mainstreaming" clients is to be successful. In the case of older adults, the opportunity to "age in place" must be provided alongside new housing options, both rental and homeownership. Very low and lower income older adults are often subject to economic displacement, as they become less able to afford to maintain their family homes. In addition, as they age, older residents need modifications to their homes to make them more accessible, such as ramps, wider doorways, and grab bars. Many older adults continue to live in substandard housing because they cannot afford to make needed repairs yet they have a strong desire to remain in their homes. N a E m e cs �$ a � i9 qq .d �q O �a = 'r?5 Ef c m QU y ae � �o U w V/ 2 U H ,T d � O H = d � d 2 E VV C r- wiiiiii cc d N � t!� H s a N 2J m 0 } } 6. L I 19 } 4. c e a 0 o C 7 e s H a 0 r� O C 0 L W C 0 o� o� W O a V1 �o a 4 O� c L ro f; a ro r0 7 ro AJ O C ro 41 q9 III I I I I I I► I I I I I I �L� V N X i �_ I ► i i I i Q f I : .a Ac I i I ac -Z� i .. I l i ► E"� ull f� _ � I II III► I , I� I,II► in �.5d m�� I DNC: i I I I II O W_ I ► I I I V Ip as i I i I ► I I ; 1 1 I L, I Sit 11 I I I Ch W do m JIM 1 = f us LU ••!Ei W m A 01.2 E did ol��m!$I °► �Ia1ml$!`I aiat�' c ►� v elaolol� ►m C;mlaAIi a ul0 � �Im � o w m s C. �I; I•��u`19!1 +i0:71y irc t�Qio:7 y OI�I•Y ti 'Q71p T 3 .O.!•r- �i� �Q I•i 4i 7 w m ►O EOi ` r' 1 Y 0 7. �IoIaIal Q �} IU21zko �I! o � �;�I1 15 x elm e o e L6 1-b I� -N !1 ZII I^ I^ 6 IC* la! ,D ^ !{tl :w �� N N 7 e s H a 0 r� O C 0 L W C 0 o� o� W O a V1 �o a 4 O� c L ro f; a ro r0 7 ro AJ O C ro 41 q9 a a U C co b d d � Y C a t '' Il LP b O � O E E o r r� m � � V r m !0 vI 2 U �J Z d O � N = CD ai m Z� O C C il! y ao c2 2J S a b �n rn rn r r N Y Y. W W rl rrr W m 15 O f, I E a e N w 0 Q1 Q4 .,q it E r a m ^p C 7 t O 2 L d O C YY m i7 ... MCC cy 2 Z m W RT IN Q. 7 .c d C to LU t cc J3 rn fn 5 N c ch m� s mi a+ o �m m W 9a p s�� cm r, M en 5Q? -a ^ s IF r $ m $W V �S a m m 8a « 07 e E $ b c .� E E wa y g gig $m' $ S � c � s� $m x c m # o m y o !� m o E d a C �rl� U t G7 G] V U I.Z � S � C �w N {+I 1� Y7 1t0 P. iQ) .� �!Y � — ^ I ^ 4- m .- N N I E a e N w 0 Q1 Q4 .,q it ro a v a am am _ C� 7� O �g a Q O R _ O � � E m Q = U � �c v V6 t d O w H O 2 CD d Z� O C C is Q� a 0) cc r H i di H .Q C U) N� Lh, r 'S m a O c� rn r r •e .g N m� rn_ 66 � x E Se Ras Ea do N o t O W Ln 7 _ Q c� a t n �x -.. ® Im E U M �Y r-I r-4 'r-1 C% _ ° n r--1 r 4 Ln �x 3 E m a• CL �.Q m= E��ma A� EI$.� A j a E9 a o'~e H a 09 C I�IMIQ +o Im a �a10 A e C as SS C� Q o + w m = 1.� 313 �� IIm�a O li n o� E a3 Q o o !i a� O e C° Qi I lei—` $` 7 I CL 2 -CM I� IV 11(f I{C /► �m I 0! 1� O 1 r• N l�1 w co r. a I � N N Lh, r 'S m a O c� B. MARKET AND INVENTORY CONDITIONS. 1. Housing Conditions. Although data are not readily available for current estimates of housing assistance needs of low- and moderate- income households, recent reports from the Town of Chapel Hill Comprehensive Plan, the Orange County Low and Moderate Income Housing Task f=orce, and the Carrboro Planning Department summarize the market conditions in Orange County clearly. Generally, the cost of obtaining housing in the county has risen significantly faster than incomes of families seeking housing in the market. Rental Housing. In the southern part of the county, the rental market has been inflated by the large number of University of North Carolina students who compete with low- and moderate- income families for the lowest cost housing. Because students can live in groups and combine resources, they are able and willing to pay more for rental units than low- and moderate - income families can. Rental units represented 44% of the countywide housing market in 1987, and the 1980 Census estimated that 37% of those rental households paid more than 35% of their incomes for rent. While the number of multifamily rental units have increased since 1980, they are generally not -affordable to or appropriate for families. In the Town of Chapel Hill, rental units were 60% of the total housing stock in 1980, and between 1980 and 1986, 75% of all building permits issued were for multifamily developments. In the late 1980's, many new multifamily projects were offering premiums of up to 9 months free rent to fill the oversupply of new units, but these premiums are no longer available. In order to afford Chapel Hill's average 3- bedroom rent in 1988 of $529, a family of four would have to earn at least $25,000, or about 63% of the area median family income.3 Very low income families (below 50% of the area median) cannot afford even the 1988 average 2- bedroom rent of $442. In 1988, 53.2% of Carrboro's total housing stock was multifamily rental units, concentrated in 14 major apartment complexes. Average 2- bedroom rent was $455, comparable to Chapel Hill, and affordable to a family with $22,200 annual income. Very few 3- bedroom rental units are available in Carrboro. 3Affordable Rent calculated using the following methodology: Monthly Rent + Estimated Utilities ($100) = Total Housing Payment. Total Housing Payment/30% (Housing Ratio) = Monthly Income Required. Monthly Income Required X 12 = Annual Income Required. 10 In addition to high market rents, very few apartment complexes have units with amenities for families with small children. One- and two - bedroom units comprise the majority of multifamily rental units in Orange County, and in fact, families have difficulty locating 3- bedroom units even with a Section 8 voucher or certificate to make their rents affordable. Another gap in the rental market is the availability of single -room occupancy situations. No boarding houses or rooming houses .exist in Orange County, to provide transition from the homeless shelter or short- term housing for other special needs groups, such as battered women. Among the rental units available, the Town of Chapel Hill reports only 2.4% substandard units, or approximately 350 units. Countywide, the 1980 Census reported 9.8% of all housing units as substandard, or nearly 4000 units. Over one -third of all dwelling units in Orange County are more than thirty years old, but many of the rental units in the market have been built since 1960. Future production of rental housing that meets the needs of low- income families will be limited in southern Orange County by the availability of land that can be acquired at a price that will support the construction of affordable rental units. Within the urban services district for which public utilities are available or can be extended, very few parcels are available, and for those vacant parcels, the highest and best use is not low- income rental units. In addition, cost of development in southern Orange County is the highest in the Triangle, including the cost of meeting public policies that are intended to increase the quality of life. Even using the Low Income Housing Tax Credits, units cannot be built and rented for allowable rents without some subsidized source of mortgage financing for at least a portion of the project costs. Further, with the large student population the market is more supportive of production of one- and two - bedroom units, rather than three - bedroom units needed by four - person families. Recent efforts by the Town of Chapel Hill to locate a suitable site for 24 new public housing units point to the limited available land in southern Orange County. After an extensive search, the site finally selected on Highway 86 north of town required additional public investment in off -site utility extensions. These costs were not paid from the funds allocated by HUD to construct the public housing, and had to be paid from other Town sources. A Low Income Housing Tax Credit project would be difficult to develop with high off -site costs of utility extensions without substantial local subsidy to complement the Tax Credits. 11 Availability of land and utility capacity does not limit future production of affordable rental housing in northern Orange County; however, such development may be limited by the over 100 units of rental housing currently proposed to be built using Low Income Housing Tax Credits. Until those units are completed and occupied, additional construction of rental housing will be deterred by market absorption. However, the majority of those units will be 2- bedroom, continuing the need for appropriate -size housing for larger families. Also, the proposed units will be affordable to lower income families, but the need for rental units for very low income families is still unmet in the northern Orange County market area. No loss of assisted rental stock is anticipated in Orange County within the next five years. Homeownership Market. Orange County has the highest cost of new housing development in North Carolina. The average new home sales price in 1991 was $143,577. To afford that new home, a family would need income in excess of $60,000, or 130% of the area median. In the Town of Chapel Hill, the 1991 average new single - family home sales price is $165,082, which could be purchased by a family with an income of about $68,000. Among cities statewide, the average new home sales price is $125,500. A recent look at the Multiple Listing Service revealed only 38 single- family houses in the Chapel Hill - Carrboro School District listed at prices below $100,000. A family at 80% of the area median, or $35,120, can afford a mortgage payment of approximately $650, or a mortgage of about $80,000. Even with a large downpayment, the available housing in Chapel Hill and Carrboro is beyond the reach of low- income families. Homeownership assistance efforts undertaken by the Town of Chapel Hill have resulted in housing being developed that is affordable to families with 70% to 80% of the area median income, even with second mortgages from the Town, assistance from the County and special first mortgages from the N.C. Housing Finance Agency. With such high costs of development, producing new homeownership opportunities will be impossible without assistance from local governments. In addition to new construction, existing low income homeowners continue to need assistance in order to rehabilitate and maintain their homes. One -third of the housing stock in Orange County is over thirty years old, and many of those units are owned by low- and fixed - income owners who cannot afford to rehabilitate their homes. Particularly in Carrboro, Northside and Pine Knolls neighborhoods in Chapel Hill, and certain parts of rural Orange County, rehabilitation is a viable option for 12 both maintaining homeowners in their homes and converting rental properties into homeownership opportunities. Some new homeownership opportunities under $80,000 are available in Carrboro as attached townhouse or condominium units; however, many of these are two- bedroom units, not suitable to a family of four. More recent development proposals in Carrboro have been for housing units at prices above $100,000. Orange County Habitat for Humanity has an aggressive construction program, with a new subdivision underway that will eventually house 35 families. The Habitat model has been very successful in Orange County, and continued support of Habitat for Humanity will be important to meeting the need for homeownership opportunities for very low income families. One important concern about housing market pressure in Chapel Hill is the loss of black homeownership, particularly in the Northside and Pine Knolls neighborhoods. Pressure from student - driven investors have driven up the prices of homes in the traditional black communities in Chapel Hill, preventing other low- and moderate- income black families from purchasing homes in the communities. The units, often through an estate sale, are sold to investors and rented to students. This market phenomenon has resulted in the reduction of black land ownership and neighborhoods in Chapel Hill. Mobile Homes and Manufactured Housing. Another source of affordable housing in Orange County is mobile homes, comprising 16.4% of the County's total housing in 1987. While mobile homes do not appreciate in the same way as conventional homes and in many cases the homeowner does not own the land underneath a mobile home, it may be the most affordable option for some families. Very few standards exist for mobile home parks, and the Orange County Low and Moderate Income Housing Task Force Report stresses the need for some guidance for park owners to protect the mobile home owners who often cannot afford to move their home. Manufactured housing, which is conventional -style housing constructed in a factory and delivered to the site, is another affordable alternative. Recent improvements in construction technology have created a product similar in quality to a house constructed on -site, with features that result in affordable prices. 13 One issue regarding manufactured housing is confusion around definitions and quality. Any manufactured housing built after 1976 must meet specific Federal guidelines regarding construction and safety standards: Traditional perceptions of mobile homes must change to meet the changing quality standards now required. Many manufactured homes are indistinguishable from site -built houses, and can provide quality affordable housing options in Orange County. Local development regulations should be sensitive to permitting manufactured housing as an option for developers and builders who are trying to provide affordable opportunities. Public Improvements. In southern Orange County, vacant land that is served by public utilities is very limited. With supply limited, the price of land with water and sewer service is too high for development of affordable housing. Subsidies for extension of services into less expensive land or for purchasing land with the service area will be needed for successful housing development activities in Chapel Hill and Carrboro. In northern Orange County, while land accessible to urban services is available, many existing residences lack adequate plumbing facilities. A 1987 survey of housing conditions countywide reported over 500 residential structures without indoor bathrooms. A countywide housing strategy must address the need for attention to water and sewer problems of individuals in rural settings without access to public water systems. Transportation. While the public transportation system in the Chapel Hill - Carrboro urban area is comprehensive, access to jobs and facilities outside the urban area is limited by lack of transportation. The homeless shelter, located in Chapel Hill, serves the entire county, yet no public transportation is available from Chapel Hill to northern Orange County for persons whose employment or families are located there. The battered women's shelter is located in Durham, without adequate inter -city transportation to give women access to their jobs, schools and other support systems in Orange County. Some human services transportation is provided to give low income persons access to health care. For these and other special needs groups, transportation will continue to be a barrier to solving their housing problems. In other ways, private and public transportation has been used as a solution to housing issues in southern Orange County. Large numbers of individuals commute to Chapel Hill from adjacent counties (Durham, Chatham, Alamance, Person) to work at UNC or Memorial Hospital, either 14 through personal vehicles or employer- sponsored transportation. Resulting traffic problems on major transportation arteries into Chapel Hill from the south and east have created a community -wide concern. Influence on use of funds. The market conditions described above have and will continue to influence decisions on use of funds for housing. Rental assistance will focus on rehabilitation of existing units and construction of new units with at least three bedrooms to accommodate families. Homeownership assistance will be through production of specific new affordable units with subsidies from local governments, since very few units exist in the market that are affordable to low- and moderate - income families. 2. Invento of facilities and services for homeless persons. The Inter -Faith Council (IFC) operates the homeless shelter serving the entire county, rehabilitated and operated with funds from many sources, including private fund - raising, HUD funds under the McKinney Act for homeless assistance and other HUD funds through the Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro and Orange County, and energy funds from the N.C. Housing Finance Agency. Operating funds also come from many sources, including private fundraising, rent and utilities from the Town of Chapel Hill, and contributions from other local governments. The IFC Shelter has a total overnight sleeping capacity of 32 men and 18 women, and is currently operating at capacity most nights. The IFC Shelter also offers a Community Kitchen offering meals to anyone in need. No other overnight shelter for homeless persons exists. Both IFC and Orange Congregations in Mission (OCIM) operate emergency programs that offer financial assistance for rent, rent deposits, utilities, food, or other necessities to families at imminent risk of homelessness. 3. Facilities and Services for Persons with Other S ecial Needs. An inventory of residential facilities and services for populations with other special needs reflects the community's non - institutional approach to housing for these populations. A current review of existing facilities reveals inadequate housing options for persons with special needs to offer the continuum of care consider by human services providers to be important to the success of counseling and assistance programs. For develol2mentally disabled handicagged, and mentally ill persons, the major housing provider is Residential Services, Incorporated, providing 7 group homes and one apartment complex in Chapel Hill. There are currently no Independent Living Facilities for persons who do not need close supervision but would benefit from a structured living situation. The Mental Health Association in Orange County has applied to HUD in 15 conjunction with the Mental Health Association in North Carolina for a grant to build up to 14 units of supported independent living for persons with mental illness in Chapel Hill. For battered women, the only facility specifically for them is located in Durham. In most cases, locating in Durham creates a transportation problem for women with school -age children, and dislocates the battered woman from her support network. The Orange County Mental. Health Association indicates that there are approximately 35 chronically mental) ill persons in Orange County who have immediate needs for affordable housing. For persons with AIDS, the AIDS Services Agency of Orange County is working to provide both host homes for persons who need out - patient treatment at Memorial Hospital and a group home -type facility for long -term residents with AIDS. For persons recovering from substance abuse, Orange County has one halfway house for women, Freedom House, but no facilities for men are available. A private home for pregnant teenagers also exists in Chapel Hill. Very low and lower income older adults in Orange County may choose to live in Adelaide Walters Apartments in Chapel Hill, the only assisted housing specifically for elderly residents. The 1987 Report of the Orange County Task Force on Low and Moderate Income Housing estimated that there are 6,845 persons over age 62 receiving a Social Security income in Orange County, 40% of whom are men and 60% women. There are also three nursing homes, five rest homes and 11 family care homes in Orange County. A significant number of the public housing population and Section 8 certificate - holders are also elderly. Many older adults are able to maintain their home environment, "aging in place ", if resources were available to provide home maintenance and repair and simple support services like transportation and meals. Additional rental opportunities would complement efforts to allow older adults to "age in place" by making assisted living situations available if staying at home is no longer possible. 16 CHAS Table ZA U.S. Department of Housing and Urban pevelopment Office of Community planning and Development Population and Minority Data Namr of Jw�sa�caental or Consoraum: Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) Five Year P9natr: (@rater fiscal Orange County FY: n Fv 1992 1996 I Category I 1980 Census Data 1990 Census Data (A) or Currant Estimate I (B) 1. Total Population 77,055 93,851 I I 2. White (Non- Hispanic) I 62,522 I 75,871 3. Black (Non - Hispanic) i 13,326 I 14,893 � 4. Hispanic (All races) 309 I 1,279 15 - Native American I 1 63 ' I 286 nd Pacific Islanders I 735 I 2,361 #Group artors 9, 597 9,224 nal I604 770 9. Non - Institutional I - 8,993 8,454 10. Household Population I 26,879 I 36,104 17 rom, HU040090 I91;91 CHAS Table 2A Population and Minority Data Name or Junsd;cAOnls) or consomlw. TbM of Chapel Hill Icawgory 1. Total Population 2. White (Non - Hispanic) 3. Black (Non- Hispanic) 4. Hispanic (All races) S. Native American �. Asian and Pacific Islanders 7. Group Quarters S. Institutional 9. Non- Institutional 10. Household Population U.s. Dapatement of HOW n0 and Urban Development Office of Community Planning and Deveiapmem COmprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) Five Vow Pena: ( Mw fish; V FY: Mmugh FY 1992 I loo 1!180 Cenws Data 1990 Census Data (A) or currant Estimate (a) 32;421 38,719 27,690 31,444 3,947 4,840 330 607 77 123 531 1,684 9. 075 I 8,665 133 245 8,942 I 8,420 23,346 I 30,054 18 form HUD40090 (9/9, CHAS Table 2H Market and Inventory Conditions Housing Stock Inventory . name or Junao cton(s) or (:o Orange County Category I Total A 1. Total Year -Round Housing I 38,683 2- Total Occupied Units 3. Renter Occupied Units 4• Needing Rehab 5• Not Rehabbable 36,104 16,156 1,616 N/A U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Community Planning and Development Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) Five Yw Paned: (enter f w yrs.) FY: 1992 I ftV4„ FY: ChW* en.: _.. I 8 90 Census Current Estimate as of: (enter 0 or t pearoom$ 2 bedrooms 3 or more becrocr (a) I 1 (D) 6. Owner Occupied Units I 19, 948 7. Needing Rehab I 1,995 I I 8• Not Rehabbable I N/A 9. Total Vacant Units I 2,579 I ;, i7-W 71 • Needing Rehab 60 I I 1 12. Not Rehabbable N/A 13. For Sale 14. Needing Rehab I 15 471 24 Not Rehabbable i N /A. 16. Awaiting Occupancy or Held 1 251 17. Other I 663 CHAS Table 2B Market and Inventory Conditions Housing Stock Inventory U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Community planning and Development Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) Name of Jkw"cnon(sl or Consornum: Five Year Ponca: (entry fimm yrs.) FY: 1992 I through rte: L Cheek am: 'Iowa of Chapel Hill rV-7 19-9D— Census ❑ Current Estimate as of: (enter Category I Total 0 or 1 bedrooms 2 oms bedro more or 3 beoroorr, (A) (B) I (C) I (D) 1. Total Year -Round Housing I 14,850 I I 2. Total Occupied Units I 13,780 3. Renter Occupied Units � 8,199 4. Needing Rehab I 212 5. Not Rehabbable I 0 6. Owner Occupied Units I 5,581 I 7. Needing Rehab 144 I 8. Not'Rehabbable 0 I I 9. Total Vacant Units 1,070 I 10. For Rent I 591 I 11. Needing Rehab I 14 I 12. Not Rehabbable I 0 13. For Sale I 241 14. Needing Rehab I 5 1s. Not Rehabbable I 0 16. Awaiting Occupancy or Held I I I 17. Other 20 farm HUD -40090 '3:5 9. Other State /Local N/A 1 D.Horneowner Assistance I 465 I DATA NOT AVAILABLE 21 form HUD-:0090 _ CHAS Tabie 2C U.S. Department of Housing d Urban Development p Community. Development Office of Planning and Assisted Housing Inventory Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) Nam* of Junsacoon(a) or Contorourn: Five Year Penoo: (enter fisca, yrs.) Orange County FY: 1992 I VMx4n FY: lot Currant Esomate as of (anfer Gatel October 31; 1991 Total Stock and Invemory Category Total ((A) SRO 0 or t bedrooms (B) I 2 bedrooms 3 or m m ore oedroos i (E7 1. Project Based Tenant Assistance I 686 ; 122 348 216 2. Public Housing 312 I 32 I 126 154 3. Section 202 24 I i 24 I ; 4. Section 9 I 240 I I 37 I 141 I 62 S. Other HUD 29 I 29 1 6. FmHA 81 29 I 52 I 7. Tenant Based Tenant Assistance 504 I 95 I 257 ! 152 S. Section 8 I 504 95 257 I 152 9. Other State /Local N/A 1 D.Horneowner Assistance I 465 I DATA NOT AVAILABLE 21 form HUD-:0090 _ CHAS Table 2C Assisted Housing Inventory of Jur"=Gms► or coreeroum: Town of Chapel Bill U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Orrice of Community Planning and Development Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) rive year rsrm: lentsr uswi yrs.) Fy: 1992 tltioWhFY: 19S t Esomate as ol: (enter den) October 1, 1991 form HUD -40090 (9/91 Total Stook and Inventory Total SRO 0 or 1 bedrooms 2 bedrooms 3 or more bedrooms Category (A) (e) (C) (D) (E) 1. Project Based Tenant Assistance 413 74 160 179 2. Public Housing 282 32 106 144 3. Section 202 I 24 22 2 0 4. Section 8 107 20 52 35 S. Other HUD G. FmHA 7. Tenant Based Tenant Assistance 153 33 81 39 S. Section $ 153 33 81 39 9. Other Stawtoew 10-Homeowner Assistance form HUD -40090 (9/91 II. FIVE YEAR STRATEGY A. PRIORITIES FOR ALLOCATING INVESTMENT 1. Assigning Priorities (Table 3). Because the cost and price of housing in Orange County is so high, families with incomes between 50% and 80% of the area median are considered of equal priority with families below 50% of the area median. Renters. Direct local tenant -based rental assistance is not emphasized, since even with assistance, many families cannot find suitable rental stock. Instead, investment over the next five years would be directed toward the creation of new rental units for families needing three bedrooms and older adults. Lesser priority will be placed on creation of smaller units. Once the stock of affordable units is increase, attention can be given to those very low income families and individuals who may need extra assistance through local rental subsidy. Emphasizing a one -time investment in housing development through second mortgages or development grants rather than a long -term commitment to rental assistance is also more appropriate given the limited administrative staff available and limited local funds that could be committed for a long -term rental assistance program. Permanent affordability will be an important consideration in the funding of rental projects with local, state and federal funds. Priority will be given to projects that use federal Low Income Housing Tax Credits. Rental rehabilitation funds available through the N.C. Housing Finance Agency and supplemented as needed by local funds should also be used to upgrade neighborhood conditions, regardless of unit size to maintain value of all units in the neighborhood. Homeowners. Programs for first -time homebuyers with incomes below 80% of the median will be a very important part of all housing programs in Orange County. Very few affordable units are available for purchase, especially in southern Orange. All forms of assistance that will reduce the monthly cost of homeownership will be considered in the allocation of housing funds, including new construction, substantial rehabilitation, and related infrastructure /site development. Funds for land acquisition assistance, predevelopment costs, and development financing may be considered. Manufactured housing should also be considered a viable option for affordable housing. 23 For existing homeowners, in a county where one -third of all units are over thirty years old, housing rehabilitation assistance will be an important part of an overall housing strategy, allowing homeowners to maintain their property while keeping it in the affordable stock. No funds are currently available for housing rehabilitation assistance for homeowners. Public Improvements. In Orange County, utility extension into undeveloped areas may relieve some of the upward pressure on developed lot prices, and make land available for affordable housing development. In rural parts of Orange County, funds for public improvements will be used both for public utilities and for upgrading from outdoor toilets commonly found throughout the county. Public Housing Resident Involvement. Public housing residents have had input to the Housing and Community Development Department through the Housing Advisory Board and through residents' councils at each site. No resident management initiatives have been instituted to date, nor have specific homeownership opportunities been offered within the public housing projects. However, public housing residents are notified of the homeownership education classes offered by Orange Community Housing Corporation, and in 1992, a specific homeownership education program will be conducted at a public housing site, if at least ten residents are interested in participating in the program. With very few affordable rental units in the private market, public housing has a low turnover rate and has some residents paying rents that could be applied toward homeownership in an assisted homeownership project such as those envisioned by OCHC. The education program may be a beginning for more resident initiatives toward homeownership. Homeless and _Special Populations. For the next five years, assistance to homeless persons will be continued and evaluated regularly to determine the need for creation of an additional facility. In 1989, the former Chapel Hill Town Hall building was renovated into a homeless shelter through assistance from local governments, HUD, N.C. Housing Finance Agency, and private fundraising, and the Town of Chapel Hill continues to fund some utilities and lease the facility to IFC at no cost. That shelter now operates at capacity, and provides emergency short- term shelter for many populations, including battered women., persons recovering from substance abuse, and persons with mental illness. Another important priority regarding the homeless and special populations will be providing transitional housing opportunities to bridge the gap between the homeless shelter and the private or assisted housing markets. In southern Orange County particularly, no affordable 24 alternatives exist for individuals who have obtained employment but have not saved enough money to move into a private rental situation. Transitional needs for several groups will be addressed during this period. Regarding other persons with special needs, local governments will continue to support activities of local organizations that provide housing assistance to special populations through federal and state programs of grants and loans. Assisted housing opportunities for persons with special needs should provide a continuum of choices that offer transition from supervised housing situations to independent living with minimal support. Coordination of housing assistance with increased funds for case management is critical to programs for persons with special needs if attempts at "mainstreaming" clients is to be successful. Geographic distribution. Funds will be distributed equally among the jurisdictions proportional to the needs identified on an annual basis. 25 O a U_ a. E (n Y C 'n E w A :5C O 9a 4 e a Z � � Y 7 ' N E E m o = w � m CL N V O �O U cn ai H a U 4) V C N .y :s a o c +o— cis H a, a CL �n ko M Q1 =r W L N a �! M m 0 9. L G a a, O� C 0 o j t 2 CL v Un N c x c+r1 r+) O cr) cn O �+ s °a L7 c+1 N P-4 �4 n9 N 0-4 rl �a i 0 s W � E cv)m c A a°� W N N N N W Z o� Gyp N N O N N N O N 7 d Q Y 4 e Q Ev N .w O N O m p �r V �v a�m O —4 O N m - a W N O :A NN 14 N A a to ca .O N b " N N -a cr. N � {L d N � z ¢ _ V) Q z o u w C G e C C #� y.a �ti s�a 0 Q V � C6 p � A a so �a o wo e c C C N ?I O u F EE m o � Q`o � N m °- O .O U C cc N cc cn CD C C a as wir O G vCL Unz N Q� ri LL Ot m D cn H 8 ��S f+1 en O 4 N m � Y � � m!r I� S I =� Ic 1 m F-4 .-� �II O MEN 4 In m O I \ ri I r-f I r�l I r-1 um ©© .-i rl P-4 I r-I =00 t+1 N I N %W O Wx N ri \ I I � w c ax I N NI NI I O 1.0 Me 22a r4 N O N .-I N C I �+ E'5 Q i o LU Cu C 1 N nl rl O ' I "l i sSC Jk- I ¢ I V M I w p � Q U N d O 3 � �5 O �aa 3 MEN 4 In m O I \ ri I r-f I r�l I r-1 um ©© .-i rl P-4 I r-I =00 Imo, ro [%lJ N Cil t+1 N I N O I � N NI NI I O 1.0 N .-I N C N nl rl O Jk- I i 3 �5 3 I.� S C i LL ,6 I m di I r a O N C C ` 0 -a ci 27 Imo, ro [%lJ N Cil B. RELEVANT PUBLIC POLICIES. 1. orange County. Orange County enacted a density bonus for affordable housing in 1990, allowing up to 50% increase in density for developments that are all affordable and sold to qualifying low and moderate- income households. Other public policies generally do not have an adverse impact on the cost of housing. 2. Chapel Hill. The Town of Chapel Hill has adopted zoning and development regulations that, while protecting the quality of life desired by its residents, add cost to the development of new housing opportunities. Within the designated urban services area, where access to employment, transit, day care, schools, and public utilities is located, the supply of vacant land is small and the price is high. In addition to the high cost of available land, development costs in Chapel Hill are high: plan preparation, processing fees, utility installation, street improvements, and lengthy review schedules all add to development costs. In Chapel Hill, the Town Council has responded by special accommodations for assisted housing development: waiving processing fees, expediting review schedules, and modifying street improvement requirements. Currently, the zoning ordinance provides a density bonus for rental projects that include units affordable to low- income families. As developers and non - profit organizations interested in housing development begin to identify the actual cost impact of local development regulations, the Town can provide subsidies or regulatory flexibility to encourage development of affordable housing. 3. Carrboro. Carrboro's zoning ordinance offers flexibility in the design of infrastructure, and includes a wide variety of allowable housing types, including mobile homes, modular homes, townhouses, and condominium developments. The review process is streamlined to avoid unnecessary delays, and the resulting supply of affordable units is relatively large. 4. Hillsborough, Public policy for affordable housing in Hillsborough is in the process of being assessed by staff to determine the current situation and to compile a housing element to the Comprehensive Plan. While density bonuses are not provided for in the Zoning Ordinance, other regulations are supportive of affordable housing including numerous overlay and mobile home park districts that allow single -wide mobile homes. Also, doublewide mobile homes, duplexes, and modular homes are allowed in all residentially zoned areas including the Historic District. Site plan review for multi - family development is expedited by the use of consultants and approvals can generally be obtained in about three 28 months. The town exacts no impact fees on development other than those required to provide appropriate infrastructure. C. PROGRAMS SERVICES AND SPECIAL INITIATIVE STRATEGIES. Generally, the participating jurisdictions will continue to use funds available through CDBG small cities, CDBG entitlement, N.C. Housing Finance Agency, other HUD programs including new initiatives under the 1990 Act, and local appropriations to carry out housing development programs, with emphasis on new construction and rehabilitation to create new units of both rental and owner - occupied housing, along with related public improvements that reduce the cost of housing development. Local funds for gap financing for rental projects or homebuyer second mortgages for owner - occupied units will be considered on a project -by- project basis, based on the specific financing needs of the projects proposed and availability of local funds. While none of the participating jurisdictions have ongoing housing assistance programs funded from local sources, for the past three years, the Town of Chapel Hill has allocated approximately $150,000 from general revenues for low income housing, representing the revenues from approximately one penny of the local tax rate. Those funds, combined with the Housing Loan Trust Fund, have supported the Tandler and Culbreth Park homeownership initiatives. The Housing Loan Trust Fund was established in early 1970's with federal General Revenue Sharing funds for the purpose of subsidizing mortgages for low and moderate- income homebuyers, and funds remain in the Housing Loan Trust Fund for future homeownership initiatives. Recently, Orange Community Housing Corporation (OCHC), a nonprofit housing development corporation, was established and funded as a cooperative effort of all local governments in the county. Orange County, Chapel Hill, and Carrboro share the cost of operation of OCHC. Orange County and the Town of Carrboro have both committed ongoing local administrative assistance to the CDBG small cities program. Affordable Housing. a. Rental Housing. GOAL: Both the Orange County Low and Moderate Income Housing Task Force and the Public Private Partnership Affordable Housing Task Force recommended construction of up to 50 new units of affordable rental housing each year, or 20% of the public housing waiting list. The Chapel Hill Comprehensive Plan states a goal of 35 new rental units each year affordable to very low and low income families. Priority will be given to projects with projected rents at or below those established for the Low Income Housing Tax Credit program, affordable to families with incomes below 60% of the area median, with at least three bedrooms. Meeting this goal will K1.1 require substantial local, state, and federal investment. Proposed actions during the five -year period include: (1) New construction of low- income rental projects with a majority of three - bedroom units using Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) will be supported by participating jurisdictions through assistance with applications for gap financing from the N.C. Housing Trust Fund, the small cities CDBG program, the Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta Affordable Housing Program, new initiatives under the National Affordable Housing Act of 1990, and local sources of funds as available. (2) The County will continue to provide Section 8 vouchers and certificates to families as they are available through HUD. (3) The Town of Chapel Hill will continue to operate its public housing and those located in the Town of Carrboro, undertaking a rehabilitation and renovation program using CDBG entitlement and Comprehensive Improvements and Assistance Program (CIAP) funds. In addition, the Town of Chapel Hill is constructing 24 new units of public housing using a combination of HUD development funds, Town, and CDBG entitlement funds, expected to be completed in 1992. (4) For older adults, applications for Section 202 assistance will continue as projects arise, including a current proposal from New Covenant United Church of Christ for 50 units. (5) The Mental Health Association in Orange County, with assistance from Orange Community Housing Corporation and the State Mental Health Association, is applying to HUD for funds to construct 14 apartment units for persons with mental illness. (6) The Town of Carrboro has established rental rehabilitation programs through both the N.C. Housing Finance Agency and CDBG small cities programs. Funds are still available under that program. (7) The Town of Chapel Hill will consider establishing a fund for land acquisition and pre - development costs. b. Homeownership Opportunities. GOAL: Construction of new or substantially rehabilitated housing units that are affordable to families below 80% of the area median, with mortgage payments (principal and interest) below $700. Priority will be given to projects that provide homeownership opportunities for families below 60% of the area median, with mortgage payments below $550. All groups that have studied the housing need in Orange County agree that little or no opportunities exist for homeownership for families with incomes below 80% of the area median. The 30 serious shortage of homeownership opportunities for low- and moderate - income families in Orange County has prompted the Town of Chapel Hill and Orange County to participate in two projects intended for first -time homebuyers. These two projects did provide homeownership opportunities to first -time homebuyers; however, even with special financing these projects did not reach far below 80% of the area median family income. All participating jurisdictions are interested in the creation of affordable homeownership opportunities, and are looking to Orange Community Housing Corporation, Habitat for Humanity and other nonprofit developers to propose projects that will offer these opportunities. (1) The Town of Chapel Hill has committed to provide 30 second mortgages of $14,000 each for homebuyers in Culbreth Park, a project which has combined CDBG construction loan funds through the County, Town second mortgages, N.C. Housing Trust Fund third mortgages, and N.C. Housing Finance Agency Mortgage Credit Certificates, to create 30 units priced at $92,000, with subsidies to reduce the first mortgage to $72,000. (2) Orange County Habitat for Humanity, with a $200,000 site development grant from the CDBG small cities program through Orange County Housing and Community Development Department, is developing Chestnut Oaks, a 34 -unit homeownership project under the national Habitat for Humanity model. The Town of Chapel Hill purchased 8 lots in Culbreth Park and is working now with Orange County Habitat for Humanity, Inc. to develop the lots for very low income homeownership. (3) The Town of Carrboro, which initiated the Habitat for Humanity program in Orange County also contributed 6 single family lots to Orange County Habitat which have been developed and sold to very low income families. (4) Orange Community Housing Corporation will initiate and operate a homeownership education and counseling program, including general information about homeownership and specific credit counseling information and prequalification for potential buyers. (5) Orange Community Housing Corporation is working now to locate a site for a homeownership development. to begin construction in 1992. (6) The Town of Chapel Hill will consider establishing a fund for land acquisition and pre - development costs. GOAL: To create a county -wide homeowner rehabilitation program for very low income homeowners (incomes below 60% 31 of the area median family income). Some low- income homeowners cannot afford to make needed repairs to their homes, and deferred maintenance has created a need for homeowner rehabilitation assistance. Based on the existing CDBG homeownership rehabilitation program guidelines, a local rehabilitation program could keep low and moderate- income families in decent, standard homes. This program is especially important to homeowners on fixed incomes, working poor, and rural poor with little borrowing capacity. c. Public Improvements. GOAL: To reduce the number of housing units without indoor plumbing. In rural Orange County, many families still live with outdoor privies rather than indoor plumbing. Lack of income to make needed improvements results in substandard conditions even in homeownership situations. Public facilities funds are needed in combination with rehabilitation funds to bring these rural homes up to minimum housing code. Orange County is one of only a few counties in North Carolina with a minimum housing code, and without funds for low income homeowners, enforcement of the code would result in displacement of these homeowners, as they cannot afford to make needed repairs. GOAL: To reduce the cost of development and land costs in areas outside utilities service areas. The cost of developed lots in southern Orange County is a large contributor to the higher cost of housing development relative to neighboring counties. Providing water and sewer service to project sites, grading and filling on sites with extreme slopes, and building roads and other amenities to local standards, can result in very expensive site development costs. In Culbreth Park, an affordable housing project with participation from the private sector, Orange County, Chapel Hill, and the state CDBG program, the lot cost represents nearly 50% of the total price of the housing unit, while the conventional building industry standard is approximately 20 -25% of the total house price. d. -ommunily Education and Participation. GOAL: To increase awareness and participation of consumers of affordable housing in the planning and program design aspects of local housing programs. Lack of involvement from low- income persons and housing consumers in planning and designing assistance programs results in programs that may not meet the needs in Orange County. Through community education, public information, and increased participation of consumers such as public housing residents in the 32 management and operation of their housing units, a more responsive program can be designed. Programs such as the homeownership education program of Orange Community Housing Corporation are critical to increasing citizen awareness of the housing market and the types of assistance working families need to become homeowners. Over the next five years, an action plan for increased citizen involvement should be prepared and implementation begun, to create a housing program that addresses the specific needs of very low and lower income families in Orange County. e. SuI212ortive Housing for Homeless Persons. GOAL: To continue operation of the InterFaith Council Homeless Shelter. The current shelter represented a substantial investment in the homeless population by the local community with assistance from HUD, NCHFA, and private fundraising, and the Town continues to provide the facility and some utilities for the building annually. The InterFaith Council, a local nonprofit service agency, operates the shelter program. This shelter currently operates at capacity, and this program should be regularly evaluated to determine if expansion or addition of a second facility is needed. No shelter exists in northern Orange County, creating a transportation problem for persons who may be employed in that part of the County. In addition, the current shelter must serve persons with very different needs, from single mothers with young children to single men recovering from substance abuse, within the same facility. An additional facility may be needed during the five -year period. GOAL: Creation of transitional housing units for shelter residents who can live independently. In 1992, the InterFaith Council and OCHC plan to submit an application for funds to create a transitional housing program for those shelter clients who can live independently with some transition assistance, using local funds to match the federal contribution. A large number of shelter clients are persons new to the area seeking work; once they find employment, they still cannot afford to move to permanent housing. Also, battered women often cannot afford to move from their homes into the private housing market. A transitional program would allow them to leave the shelter environment while having an affordable housing unit to help them save the funds necessary for rent and utility deposits. Such transitional housing may reduce the population needing services from the homeless shelter, especially those who KIC] can live independently but for whom no opportunities exist in the Orange County rental market. f. Supportive Housing for Other Persons with Special Needs. GOAL: To assist local nonprofit human service agencies to provide a continuum of housing options for special populations, including older adults, disabled, mentally ill, and persons with AIDS. Such a continuum would provide for a variety of housing choices, from unassisted living to small group homes, including boarding house -style living and other supportive settings. As local agencies identify needs, plan projects that could meet those needs, and locate state and federal programs that could fund those projects, local funds for housing could be used to meet matching requirements, to provide up -front planning costs, or to provide extra amenities or services not otherwise included in other programs. 2. Institutional Structure. Important actors in achieving Orange County's low- income housing goals are: a. Orange County Housing and Community Development Department, responsible for administration of the Section 8 program for the county and for the CDBG small cities program. b. Chapel Hill Department of Housing and Community Development, administrator of the Town's CDBG entitlement program as well as acting as the Town's Housing Authority, operating public housing in Chapel Hill and Carrboro, and implementing the Town's affordable housing program. C. Chapel Hill Planning Department, responsible for long range planning and policy design for housing development. d. Carrboro Planning Department, which houses the Carrboro CDBG small cities program and the Rental Rehabilitation Program administration. The Carrboro Planning Department is responsible for planning and policy design for housing development. e. Hillsborough Planning Department, responsible for planning and policy development for the Town, including the recently- adopted 2010 plan. f. Orange Community Housing Corporation, newly- created nonprofit housing development corporation, whose operating budget is funded by Orange County, Chapel Hill, and Carrboro governing boards. OCHC is also a central clearinghouse for information about other nonprofits' housing efforts, including Orange County Mental Health Association, AIDS Service Agency, local churches and other involved in housing assistance. OCHC is planning at least one housing development project each year. R11 I g. Orange County Habitat for Humanity, Incorporated, a strong local affiliate of the national organization. h. InterFaith Council for Social Service, operators of the homeless shelter and chief advocates for the homeless population. IFC also offers a program to prevent homelessness through financial assistance to families that are at risk of losing their permanent housing. i. Orange Congregations in Mission, serving northern Orange County, offering programs that prevent homelessness through financial assistance to families that are at risk of losing their permanent housing, and proposing a 35 -unit rental project in Hillsborough. j. Joint Orange - Chatham Community Action Agency, offering a wide variety of rehabilitation, weatherization, counseling, and financial assistance to very low income families. k. Culbreth Park Community Development Corporation, a nonprofit formed to construct 50 housing units in Culbreth Park which has purchased adjacent land for additional housing opportunities. I. Triangle Housing Partnership, a private non - profit corporation with support from local governments and the private sector in Wake, Durham, and Orange counties whose goal is to facilitate the creation of affordable housing opportunities through creating funding pools for debt and equity financing. m. Private lenders (especially those interested in achieving the lending goals of the Community Reinvestment Act), public lenders like FmHA, builders, realtors, and developers, whose assistance will be crucial to the success of any housing initiatives undertaken in Orange County. Most organizations listed above work closely together on housing issues, with OCHC and Habitat for Humanity sharing an office to provide a central place for housing development activity in the county. Local government staff work with the nonprofits on a regular basis, since most nonprofit activities are supported with local funds. Communication could be improved between housing development agencies and social service agencies that provide support and empowerment for families receiving housing assistance, a common concern addressed in the 1990 Act. 3. Coordination of Resources. With the creation of Orange Community Housing Corporation, Orange County, Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and Hillsborough demonstrated the desire to cooperate among the several jurisdictions to provide the best housing assistance that will serve the low and moderate income residents of Orange County. With respect to coordination of resources, all agencies will continue our history of communication regarding projects in progress, applications submitted to 35 state and federal funding agencies, programs that are particularly successful or troublesome, and other sharing of information and sources of funds. 9 III. ONE -YEAR ACTION PLAN, October, 1991 through September, 1992 A. RESOURCES During this Federal fiscal year, participating jurisdictions intend to use the following resources for carrying out housing assistance activities: 1. CDBG Entitlement Funds (Town of Chapel Hill) in the amount of approximately $300,000. For FY 1991 -92, these funds are earmarked for: (1) rehabilitation and renovation of public housing; (2) off site improvements for the 24 new public housing units to be constructed in 1992. 2. A grant of $250,000 from the CDBG Small Cities Program has been requested to provide partial financing for 35 rental units for families in Hillsborough, sponsored by Orange Congregations in Mission with assistance from Orange Community Housing Corporation and M.B. Corporation, a private developer based in Raleigh. The project will also use Low Income Housing Tax Credits to lower rents to be affordable to families with incomes below 50% of the area median. This grant will leverage over $1,000,000 in private mortgage funds and equity raised through the sale of Low Income Housing Tax Credits. 3. Over $600,000 in Section 811 funds for housing for special needs populations have been requested through the Mental Health Association of North Carolina and its local chapter, with assistance from Orange Community Housing Corporation. Those funds, if awarded, would be used to construct 14 subsidized apartment units for persons with mental illness, and funds would also be available for rent subsidies for the residents. 4. Section 202 funds for 50 rental units for older adults have been requested by New Covenant United Church of Christ through their national organization, United Church Homes, to be located near the intersection of Smith Level Road and Culbreth Road. 5. Funds from the McKinney Act Transitional Housing for the Homeless Program will be applied for during this fiscal year by Orange Community Housing Corporation and the InterFaith Council for Social Service. A 6- to-9 unit project is proposed, using existing housing stock and including supportive services for the residents who will be trying to move from sheltered to independent living. The proposal was considered this year, but delayed due to competing uses of the potential matching fund from the Town of Chapel Hill. If the Town continues its practice of allocating $150,000 for low- income housing, matching funds may be requested from the Town for the transitional project. 6. $175,000 in CDBG Small Cities funds will be expended during this fiscal year to construct a public street in Chestnut Oaks, a 34 -unit development sponsored by Orange County Habitat for Humanity. The CDBG funds 37 will leverage nearly $2,000,000 in private investment in the single family homes to be constructed on the site. 7. $252,000 in general funds earmarked for low income housing will be expended during this fiscal year to provide 18 second mortgages for Culbreth Park homebuyers. A total of 30 second mortgages will have been provided to Culbreth Park over a two -year period, primarily serving first -time homebuyers with incomes up to 80% of the area median. The County also assisted with the Culbreth Park project through a construction loan from the State's Small Cities CDBG Program. 8. Operating support for Orange Community Housing Corporation (OCHC) includes $35,000 from Orange County, $35,000 from Chapel Hill, and $10,000 from Carrboro. As a nonprofit corporation, OCHC can apply for and use funds for which local participating jurisdictions may not be eligible. The Town of Chapel Hill also provided $4,000 in operating support to Triangle Housing Partnership. 9. Orange County and Carrboro will continue to submit applications for Small Cities CDBG Grants for Community Revitalization activities. 10. Carrboro will continue its participation in the Rental Rehabilitation program of the N.C. Housing Finance Agency as long as funds are available. 11. Chapel Hill public housing residents, through the Housing and Community Development Department, have applied for a $150,000 grant from HUD for Drug Elimination activities in public housing units. 12. The Town of Chapel Hill will use funds under the Comprehensive Improvements and Assistance Program of HUD for improvements to several public housing developments. The 1991 -92 award was $1,200,000. m U m a�i o � p E a a a 72 0 W � Q C C C =a e � � m E y EE y U = CD o `p_ 69 p =io U .. C .r N d C 0 cc L7 R! cn V = N n 0 Q CL v � r c a Q. >I S a� a 6E CD CD 10, in 0 q v OIN INS IN ,\EENENNNER 'MOMM"" 'EMME" 0 q v kfI p51 L L7 1 U r 7 C_ o � M c:, CD C* S m e o LC1 N to O to Co r-I Lf1 m 0 o� m c m o c !2?U N l4D co n m %D a r-I 0— %.0 i N r-I O b w CN N •O H '0 C Y7. 3 LL D a 7 7 LL m E U) LL LL m W o` p51 L L7 1 U r 7 C_ o � M c:, CD C* S m e o LC1 N to O to Co r-I Lf1 m n m Q !2?U N l4D co n m %D m r-I p %.0 i N r-I e8 d � a eo �v o M m rn m • a co c c o .--I N o x U $ LC1 N to O to Co r-I Lf1 m m UQ Q N l4D co n m %D m r-I Lf1 b w m V C 7 N •O H '0 C Y7. 3 LL D a 7 7 LL m Q U) LL LL m W e = m H �a r ro H m H c L7 N Lrl L6 E CL o �+ 'c A w E a. m °�' o �a o in mm C 9 C � sL = c'e m' EE N c o � U D _ d O. m E �O U C 41 to 7 G L 0 CO a V L r7 a o 4 CD a a U a Mil SE IMME'll XN ME 'EMENI ii M ONNN LW CD a ■ § 0 K �6 ma } k k »c 2 %D � m m q E �2 g k� _ # k § ■ g q � LU a k k 2 m CL J, m m n � ® k 2 8 2 ■ cn 0) '0 c B § a § 2 2 2 2 LL Lf , 2 ` 2 2 -0 LL 6 co 2 c 2 J � Q $ 2 9 � E I 0 � � a B. IMPLEMENTATION 1. One -Year Action Plans. a. Orange County. Carrboro. Hillsborough (1) With assistance from the Town of Chapel Hill and Orange County, the Culbreth Park Community Development Corporation will complete Culbreth Park homeownership project in Chapel Hill, a total of 30 second mortgages to qualifying homebuyers in the project. (Assistance received from Orange County, the Town of Chapel Hill, and the N.C. Housing Finance Agency.) (2) InterFaith Council and Orange Community Housing Corporation will apply for funding for a 6 -9 unit transitional project for homeless persons under HUD's McKinney Act Transitional Housing Program, location not yet determined. (3) The Town of Carrboro, through the NCHFA Rental Rehabilitation Program, will provide funds to rehabilitate 10 rental units in Carrboro. (4) Orange Congregations in Mission, working with Orange Community Housing Corporation and M.B. Corporation, will work to obtain funding for 35 -unit rental development in Hillsborough. (5) All local governments will participate in continued operation of Orange Community Housing Corporation, including project support as funds are available. b. Town of Chapel Hill (1) With assistance from the Town of Chapel Hill and Orange County, the Culbreth Park Community Development Corporation will complete Culbreth Park homeownership project in Chapel Hill, a total of 30 second mortgages to qualifying homebuyers in the project. (2) The Town of Chapel Hill Housing and Community Development Department will complete 24 new public housing units in Chapel Hill, located on Highway 86 North. (3) Mental Health Association in Orange County, with assistance from Orange Community Housing Corporation and Mental Health Association in North Carolina, will work to obtain funding for 14 -unit rental development for persons with mental illness located in Chapel Hill. (4) New Covenant United Church will work to obtain funding for 50 -unit elderly rental development located in Chapel Hill under HUD's Section 202 program. I:t~7 2. Monitoring Plans. a. Monitoring Plan -- Orange County. The Orange Community Housing Corporation Board of Directors will serve as the monitoring agent for evaluating the success of the annual action plan. OCHC will prepare a report for all local governments in Orange County and HUD describing all housing activities in the county during the previous year, relating each to this action plan. All agencies and organizations providing housing assistance of any kind will be requested to comment on the evaluation and help determine ways to improve performance under this CHAS. b. Monitoring Plan -- Chapel. Hill. The Department of Housing and Community Development will be responsible for the implementation of all housing programs and assistance within the Town of Chapel Hill. The Housing Advisory Board will serve as the monitoring agent for evaluating the success of the annual action plan. The Housing Advisory Board is a volunteer group of Chapel Hill citizens, including public housing residents, who advise the Town Council on housing issues. The Board will provide oversight for the implementation of the CHAS to insure that statutory and regulatory requirements are being met. A quarterly report will be submitted to the Town Council. 3. Supportive Housing Action Plans. a. Homeless Action Plans. (1) Chapel Hill. During the past several years, local initiatives to address the needs of homeless families and individuals have been focussed on the renovation and expansion of a permanent shelter and community kitchen, located in the renovated old Town Hall building in Chapel Hill. That project was the result of a coalition of community fundraising, local funds, contribution of the building by the Town of Chapel Hill, work by Carrboro and Orange County to obtain grants under the McKinney Act for Homeless Assistance, and assistance from the N.C. Housing Finance Agency. Continued operation of the shelter is through volunteer efforts, fundraising by the InterFaith Council, and contribution of the facility and utilities by the Town of Chapel Hill. Now the shelter is operating at capacity, and planning should begin soon to determine how to meet the growing needs of new types of homeless individuals and families, including single mothers with small children, new arrivals in Orange County, battered women, and teenagers. 46 In addition to operating the shelter, IFC provides financial assistance to families in imminent danger of becoming homeless due to inability to pay rent or utilities. Now the emphasis has turned to providing housing for individuals in the shelter to transition into the private housing market. In the southern Orange County housing market, which includes Chapel Hill, very few affordable opportunities are available for individuals and families moving from the homeless shelter. In addition to continued operation of the shelter, during the current year, IFC and OCHC plan to jointly submit an application for funds to provide transitional housing for guests at the shelter who have employment and need a place to live without the large upfront costs of renting a private apartment needed for rent and utility deposits. (2) Orange County. Carrboro, Hillsborough. Activities to date to serve the homeless population have been cooperative ventures that include Orange County, Carrboro, and Chapel Hill. Orange County and Carrboro participated in the development of the current shelter located in Chapel Hill, through applying for federal grants to assist in its financing. Orange Congregations in Mission provides assistance to families in danger of becoming homeless due to inability to pay rent or utilities, with either money, food, or other necessities. The planned application by IFC and OCHC for a transitional facility will include requests for participation to all local jurisdictions in Orange County. b. Other Special Needs Action Plans. (1) Chapel Hill. Coordination between housing agencies and human service agencies that serve special needs populations has been improving during the process of development of the CHAS; however, the next year will be spent working to develop a strong connection between the housing and human service providers. This year will be a planning year for special needs housing, and will include regular communication among all agencies concerned about increasing housing opportunities for the special needs population. The goal for this year is to develop a long -term strategy specifically for the special needs groups such as developmentally disabled, handicapped, mentally ill, battered women, persons with AIDS, and older adults. That strategy will be a five -year plan to determine: (1) 11 VA the interaction of housing activities and social services, including the types of support services needed to provide a continuum of housing opportunities for special needs groups; (2) the types and quantities of housing needed, including building styles for new construction and types of renovations needed for rehabilitation of existing units; (3) how to include the large mobile home stock in the provision of housing for special needs populations; and (4) the type and amount of resources needed to provide a full range of opportunities, from supervised residential settings to supported independent living. The planning process would include the Human Service Advisory Boards of all local governments, the Orange County Department of Social Services, Department on Aging, and Health Department, OPC Mental Health, Joint Orange Chatham Community Action Agency, Orange Chatham Comprehensive Health Services, the Mental Health Association in Orange County, the Association for Retarded Citizens, the Coalition for Battered Women, Residential Services, Inc., the InterFaith Council, Orange Congregations in Mission, the AIDS Services Agency of Orange County, the Orange County Women's Center, Orange County Commission for Women, and other groups or individuals identified with an interest in providing housing appropriate to persons with special needs. (2) Orange County, _Carrboro, Hillsborough. The planning process described for Chapel Hill will actually be a county -wide effort. The goal for this year is to develop a long -term strategy specifically for the special needs groups such as developmentally disabled, handicapped, mentally ill, battered women, persons with AIDS, and older adults. That strategy will be a five -year plan to determine: (1) the interaction of housing activities and social services, including the types of support services needed to provide a continuum of housing opportunities for special needs groups; (2) the types and quantities of housing needed, including building styles for new construction and types of renovations needed for rehabilitation of existing units; (3) how to include the large mobile home stock in the provision of housing for special needs populations; and (4) the type and amount of resources needed to provide a full range of opportunities, from supervised residential settings to supported independent living. 48 The planning process would include the Human Service Advisory Boards of all local governments, the Orange County Department of Social Services, Department on Aging, and Health Department, OPC Mental Health, Joint Orange Chatham Community Action Agency, Orange Chatham Comprehensive Health Services, the Mental Health Association in Orange County, the Association for Retarded Citizens, the Coalition for Battered Women, Residential Services, Inc., the InterFaith Council, Orange Congregations in Mission, the AIDS Services Agency of Orange County, the Orange County Women's Center, Orange County Commission for Women, and other groups or individuals identified with an interest in providing housing appropriate to persons with special needs. 49 1 � r a a CL d 9 w m r �s �Q a 7 0 7 C H za O.c � o � � EE o m C6 m yy 0 y O �0 U N Q1 r-I G __ 0 2 y..r o x .cu Lo E 4i y co B o N Q1 r-I G o x C G Q S o O G MMMMW\\�Mmm -m ®U®MM \\MMMM® Ln o \ o c o \ a G c G o G d c X r 4 ... a G N a N o a G G a a C o G O c O � N G N o o G N G N N r-4 fn en [ 1W d � o c _0 ° ° G G G G O O to O Ln en 9 r- r E 46z � 2 h C M ° ° G G CD C IV CD g Go G w Is r-I � Q1 I O o$ G co d O G CO �, p v G'3 w CV O N b � 75p s N in w 3 m d i o �$ ti a a a; $� vt lV !7 Yf qd Ir b Oi .+ r .... • I 50 N mmwmmmEmmw1\E\\M\"MMMMN=1 ° to o \ a o G G w o co - CD a. Le m V £ O a a \ a a G o c ° ° O m e y o c i? co cc Q) coo ° ° C c c C a n a n �0 0 �W a ee C `m$ =a = �o-- o a o a o 0 o c c a a c o a E Ep d �o V o cc E qQ d m 0 N ° N G 4 c a a a 4 v ° v ui E W N N s ac�a mN. ° ° ° ° c o 0 0 o a a c a Mi. -�. E e Y -w °-' w ° c o G ° C', n n F C0 c' co ° c ° o 0 0 a o Ln $ z rn m w o o 00 o o a ,n � We �3 IM Co FS CD v x Cc V w ci ci 4 Sri m : ~ m ° _ C%i � r mi 51 -rr- Comprehensive Housing Affordlblllty Strategy (CHAS) Certification The jurisdiction hereby certifies that it will affirmatively further fair housing. Signature of rtify' g Official , x Certification The jurisdiction hereby certifies that it will comply with the requirements of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended, implementing regulations at 49 CFR 24, and the requirements governing the residential antidisplacement and relocation assistance plan under section 104(d) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (including a certification that the jurisdiction is following such a plan). Sig Note: The jurisdiction's execution of these certifications acknowledges that it will maintain supporting evidence, which shall be kept available for inspection by the Secretary, the Comptroller General of the United States or its designees, the Inspector General or its designees, and the public. 4 U.S. Government Printing Office : 1991 - 512 - 228/40002 Appendix E Comprehensive Housing Affordibility Strategy (CHAS) Certification The jurisdiction hereby certifies that it will affirmatively further fair housing. SigZ.L of&Ci Lin�ff ici al X Qo if Certification The jurisdiction hereby certifies that it will comply with the requirements of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended, implementing regulations at 49 CFR 24, and the requirements governing the residential antidisplacement and relocation assistance plan under section 104(d) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (including a certification that the jurisdiction is following such a plan). Signa re of C ifyi official r X �PP.h Note: The jurisdiction's execution of these certifications acknowledges that it will maintain supporting evidence, which shall be kept available for inspection by the Secretary, the Comptroller General of the United States or its designees, the Inspector General or its designees, and the public. G U.S. Government Printing Dffiee : 19!) -3 3 ; 4 00tl� APPENDIX E COhPREHF_rI51VE HOUSINy AFFCRDAAILITY STRATEGY (CHAS) CERTIFICATION The jurisdiction further fair housin hereby certifies community g in the that it wi.l.l affirmatively Y development activitaeSnistration of housing and sectors. The n the private anti mai,�itain supporting further carr_iFi„ public inspection by °rting evidence which shall be s that it will Public. Y the Secretary, the Tnspector, ^,zneraava,ilable for. Signature C eve ying off i c CERTIFICATION The jurisdiction herein the re ?uirements of the tJnif.ocertifies that i �roPerty Acquisition Policies Act o t will comely with Rslocation Assistance ;�ij;j implementing regulati Policies at 4� C f 1970, as amended, Real governing the residential an49 C R 24, and the requirements assistance elan under Placement and relocation Development Act of Section lA4(d) of the Housing jurisdiction is followln(lncluciinv a g and Community certification that the g "such a Plan). Signature �.. : -i ,� Ce�rk i Eying Off i�ia l Appendix E comprehensive Housing Affordibllity Strategy (CHAS) Certification The jurisdiction hereby certifies that it will affirmatively further fair housing. Signa e f (Mrt- ' g Official X Certification The jurisdiction hereby certifies that it will comply with the requirements of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition policies Act of 1970, as amended, implementing regulations at 49 CFR 24, and the requirements governing the residential antidisplacement and relocation assistance plan under section 104(d) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (including a certification that the jurisdiction is following such a plan). Sign of ertifying Official X Note: The jurisdiction's execution of these certifications acknowledges that it will maintain supporting evidence, which shall be kept available for inspection by the Secretary, the Comptroller General of the United States or its designees, the Inspector General or its designees, and the public. 41 0.5. Government Printing Office : I99I - 31:_18 /dODU= 112.01 ' r- .112.02 s 120 N J • ,.....� - 119 -. - It its ....__ -. i . 121 l .. _ E 114 i1 115 i107.01 {{. -,._'= _ •- 107.03 �'• r+¢ p %i6 r s � 20.0 • 117 • • • • • .� �' "'"• 107.0, �. 'Nk, r-•- -. �...i 20.04 GENERAL LOCATION FOR ASSISTED HODS; 122 Minority Areas x ❑ Assisted Housing r` (Outside CD Area) 1980 CENSUS TRACTS ....................... i I ORANGE COMMUNITY HOUSING CORPORATION ANNUAL REPORT July 1, 1990 through June 30, 1991 Summary of Activities July 1, 1991 through December 31, 1991 Audited Financial Statements Orange Community Housing Corporation Post Office Box 307 - 116B West Main Street - Carrboro, NC 27510-0307 Donna L. Dyer Telephone: 919/967 -1545 Executive Director FAX: 919/968 -4030 ANNUAL REPORT July 1, 1990 through June 30, 1991 A Little History In July, 1989, the mayors of Chapel Hill and Carrboro and the Chair of the Orange County Commissioners announced the joint appointment of a steering committee whose task it will be to form a new housing development corporation to serve Orange County. Steering Committee members are drawn from the Orange County Low and Moderate Income Housing Task Force and the Public- Private Partnership's subcommittee on housing. The - Coordinator for the steering committee was provided by Community Housing Alternatives, owners of a Section 202 project in Chapel Hill, with funds from a grant from the Z. Smith Reynolds Foundation. Additional staff assistance was provided by Orange County, Chapel Hill, and Carrboro. During that year, the steering committee completed the organizational activities that resulted in the incorporation of Orange Community Housing Corporation (OCHC), and turned to obtaining operating funds for the corporation. 1990 -91 Administrative Activities For fiscal year 1990 -91, funding was awarded from Orange County, Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and Z. Smith Reynolds Foundation. In August, 1990, OCHC advertised for an Executive Director. Office space was leased at 116B West Main Street in Carrboro, and in October, 1990, OCHC held its first annual meeting and elected officers and a Board of Directors for the coming year. After an intensive search with over 100 applicants, the Board of Directors selected its first Executive Director, Donna Dyer. With eight years of experience in housing and economic development finance with the City of Durham, Ms. Dyer brings to OCHC an extensive knowledge of funding programs for low -cost housing development and experience with both rental and homeownership projects funded by Durham's housing bond program. The Executive Director began work in January, 1991, and the office opened for business. In the first months, Ms. Dyer established and upfit the office space, purchased supplies and equipment, installed telephones, created an accounting and administrative management system, and met with all the members of the Board of Directors. During that same period, she began the process of developing an identity for OCHC among local elected officials, administrators, human service providers, financial institutions, builders, realtors, and others involved in the development of affordable housing. 1990 -91 Program Activities The most important activity of OCHC staff this spring has been the search for a site for our first development project. Although no site was secured during the fiscal year, several sites have been evaluated and staff has become familiar with local development regulations that will effect any site selected. In addition, OCHC is working with Professor William Rohe, UNC Department of City and Regional Planning, to conduct a workshop class in the fall that will focus on site selection for affordable housing development. Two affordable housing projects were underway in Orange County when the Executive Director began work in January. Whitted Forest Apartments, a 35 -unit apartment complex for families, was proposed as a joint venture between Orange Congregations in Mission (OCIM), a 10- year -old human service agency serving rural Orange County, and MB Corporation, a private developer based in Raleigh. With no previous experience in housing development, OCIM requested that OCHC assist them in procuring funding and analyzing proposals from the private developer. Before Ms. Dyer began work in January, OCHC provided funds to retain the services of staff from Downtown Housing Improvement Corporation, a Raleigh non - profit housing development organization, to analyze the development proposal. The OCHC Board also sent letters to funding agencies in support of Whitted Forest. Once the Executive Director began work, OCHC helped Whitted Forest in its search for second mortgage funding for the project. OCHC continues to assist OCIM and Hillsborough Affordable Housing Corporation, established by OCIM to develop Whiffed Forest, as they contract and build the project. Culbreth Park, 50 units targeted for first time homebuyers with incomes below 80% of the area median, was also underway when Ms. Dyer began work. The Town of Chapel Hill requested that OCHC evaluate the possibility of assuming the administration of Culbreth Park, including the ongoing management of second mortgages from the Town to homebuyers in the subdivision. Although the project was not at a stage that administration could be delegated from the Town to OCHC, we completed research regarding Culbreth Park's progress and provided comments to the Town and the developer about the project's development, financing, and marketing. We are continuing to work with Culbreth Park Community Development Corporation regarding other housing development opportunities, and we have left open the question of long -term administration of the Town's second mortgages. Orange Community Housing Corporation FY 1990 -91 Annual Report Page 2 In our evaluation of Culbreth Park, we determined that the key factor to marketing delays experienced by the developer was finding qualified applicants for first mortgages. In March, 1991, the Board of Directors approved the hiring of an intern to create a Homebuyer Education and Counseling Program. Jennifer Taylor, a 1991 graduate of the UNC Department of City and Regional Planning, was hired for the summer and continues to work at OCHC as long as funding is available. Ms. Taylor spent several weeks gathering information about other homeownership seminars, and the first classes are scheduled to begin the first week of September, 1991. During the month of June, both Ms. Dyer and Ms. Taylor were busy working with the North Carolina Housing Finance Agency ( NCHFA) prequalifying potential buyers for the Resolution Trust Corporation auction of foreclosed properties. That auction, held on June 21 and 22, 1991, provided over 100 affordable properties in Wake, Durham, and Orange Counties for sale to the highest qualified bidder. Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) is a federal agency created to oversee sales of properties taken as a result of savings and loan failures. Both RTC and NCHFA offered special financing for the auction, and representatives from non -profit corporations in all three counties met with buyers to determine their eligibility for the auction and the special financing as well as the maximum amount each buyer could bid at the auction. OCHC pre - qualified approximately 100 buyers for the auction. Other Activities Throughout the year, other groups interested in housing activities also requested assistance from OCHC. The Inter -Faith Council proposed that IFC and OCHC work together to submit an application for funds under the federal McKinney Act for the Homeless the create transitional housing for homeless persons. With the high cost of rental housing in southern Orange County, many individuals and families residing in the homeless shelter cannot find housing they can afford even if they get a job. Because this proposal required local matching funds, IFC and OCHC Boards decided to postpone the application until next year. OCHC is also considering a request from the Mental Health Association of Orange County for $2,500 to prepare an application for funds to construct 14 apartment units in Chapel Hill for persons with mental illness. The AIDS Service Agency of Orange County has also requested that OCHC work with them in their search for a family care home for Persons with AIDS. Orange Community Housing Corporation 1=Y 1990 -91 Annual Report Page 3 First Six Months of FY 1991 -91 - -A Preview From July 1 through December 31, 1991, OCHC: • Coordinated the preparation of a county -wide Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS), with a working group of staff from Orange County, Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and Hillsborough. The CHAS must be submitted to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) prior to application for any funds under the National Affordable Housing Act of 1990. • Purchased a single - family lot in Carrboro being foreclosed by Orange Water and Sewer Authority. • Researched, negotiated, and made an offer on a site in Chapel Hill that would accommodate up to 20 homeownership units. • Provided funds to the Mental Health Association in Orange County to make application to HUD for a 14 -unit apartment development for person with mental illness. • Initiated a homeownership education and counseling program with more than 100 participants and 40 volunteer instructors in its first three months of operation, with programs at Hargraves Recreation Center, Chapel Hill Town Hall, UNC Union, and Hillsborough Public Library. • Organized a panel discussion on affordable housing for the Public Private Partnership that resulted in the recommendation of a Technical Advisory Committee comprised of development professionals in the community willing to volunteer assistance in our development efforts and activities. • Continued assistance to OCIM and Hillsborough Affordable Housing Corporation on the development of Whiffed Forest Apartments, providing comments on proposals from the private developer and assisting with applications for mortgage financing. • Participated in discussions with Triangle Housing Partnership regarding a planned lending consortium for first mortgage loans for qualifying buyers and other possible programs through joint participation from several local financial institutions. • Held a planning retreat to determine a one -year course of action for OCHC, beginning January, 1992. Orange Community Housing Corporation FY 1990 -91 Annual Report Page 4 ATTACHMENT A AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS ORANGE COMMUNITY HOUSING CORPORATION Carrboro, North Carolina AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS For the Year Ended June 30, 1991 K9jFJqPkV i� PAGES Independent Auditor's Report 2 Financial Statements EXHIBITS: Balance Sheet 3 "B" Statement of Support, Revenue, Expenses 4 and Changes in Fund Balance "C" Statement of Cash Flows 5 "D" Statement of Functional Expenses 6 Notes to Financial Statements 7_8 1 13LACKMAN & SLOOP, CPAs, P.A. CUMMM NCNB PLAZA - P.O. DRAWER 929 2 CHAPEL FILL, NORTH CAROLINA 27614 INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S REPORT Board of Directors Orange Community Housing Corporation Carrboro, North Carolina We have audited the accompanying balance sheet of the Orange Community Housing Corporation, as of June 30, 1991, and the related statements of support, revenue, expenses and changes in fund balances and cash flows for the year then ended. These financial statements are the responsibility of the corporation's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We belive that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Orange Community Housing Corporation, as of June 30, 1991, and the results of its operations and changes in cash flows for the year then ended, in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. / �. op Chapel Hill, North Carolina September 13, 1991 ORANGE COMMUNITY HOUSING CORPORATION 3 BALANCE SHEET June 30, 1991 ASSETS CURRENT ASSETS: EXHIBIT A Cash $43,193 Grant receivable 8,750 TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS 51,943 PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT: Office furniture and equipment 8,701 Less: accumulated depreciation B79 TOTAL PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT 8,022 TOTAL ASSETS $59,965 LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCE CURRENT LIABILITIES: Accounts payable $249 TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES 249 FUND BALANCE 59,716 TOTAL LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCE $59,965 The accompanying Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of these statements. ORANGE COMMUNITY HOUSING CORPORATION 4 STATEMENT OF SUPPORT, REVENUE, EXPENSES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE For the Year Ended June 30, 1991 EXHIBIT B SUPPORT AND REVENUE: Grants $100,000 Interest and other income 61 TOTAL SUPPORT AND REVENUE 100,061 EXPENSES: PROGRAM SERVICES 12,134 SUPPORTING SERVICES: - - ~- General and.administrative 28,211 TOTAL EXPENSES 40,345 EXCESS OF SUPPORT AND REVENUE OVER EXPENSES 59,716 FUND BALANCE - BEGINNING OF YEAR -0- FUND BALANCE - END OF YEAR $59,716 The accompanying Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of these statements. ORANGE COMMUNITY HOUSING CORPORATION 5 STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS For the Year Ended June 30, 1991 EXHIBIT C CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES: Excess of support and revenue over expenses $59,716 Adjustments to reconcile excess revenue and support over expense to net cash provided by operating activities: Depreciation 679 (Increase) in grant receivable (8,750) Increase in accounts payable 249 NET CASH PROVIDED BY OPERATING ACTIVITIES 51,894 CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES: 4 Capital expenditures (8,701) NET CASH USED BY INVESTING ACTIVITIES (8,701) NET INCREASE IN CASH 43,193 CASH AT BEGINNING OF YEAR CASH AT END OF YEAR $43,193 The accompanying Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of these statements. 0 r ORANGE COMMUNITY HOUSING CORPORATION STATEMENT OF FUNCTIONAL EXPENSES For the Year Ended June 30, 1991 Personnel Rent Telephone Supplies Contractual services Repairs and maintenance Insurance Training Printing Travel Depreciation Memberships /publications Postage and freight Miscellaneous General [1 EXHIBIT D Program and Total Expenses Administrative Expenses $8,464 $17,183 $25,647 1,300 3,900 5,200 190 1,711 1,901 163 1,465 1,628 1,260 490 1,750 1,084 1,084 455 455 375 375 347 347 338 338 679 679 357 357 25 223 248 336 336 $12,134 $28,211 $40,345 The accompanying Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of these statements. ORANGE COMMUNITY HOUSING CORPORATION 7 NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Page 1 of 2 ORGANIZATION AND SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES v A. Organization. Orange Community Housing Corporation (OCHC) is incorporated as a tax - exempt organization to support and initiate construction, conversion, or rehabilitation of both rental and owner - occupied housing, focusing on families and individuals with income levels at or below the median income for their community. B. Accounting Policies. The financial statements of the Organization are prepared on the accrual basis of accounting in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Accordingly, revenues are recognized when earned and expenses are recognized when the obligation is incurred. C. Fund Accounting. To ensure observance of limitations and restrictions placed on the use of resources available to the Organization, the accounts of the Organization are maintained in accordance with the principles of fund accounting. For the year ended June 30, 1991, no funds other than unrestricted had activity, and are reported. D. Cash and Cash Equivalents. Cash and cash equivalents consist of money on deposit with local financial institutions. E. Property and Equipment. Office furniture and equipment is stated at cost. Depreciation is provided for over estimated useful lives of 5 and 7 years on a straight -line basis. F. Income Tax .Status. The Organization is a nonprofit, tax - exempt, publicly supported organization under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. G. Commitments. A one -year employment agreement exists between Orange County and the Organization regarding the services of the executive director that expires January 7, 1992. At June 30, 1991, remaining payments under this agreement are $25,064. ORANGE COMMUNITY HOUSING CORPORATION 8 NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Page 2 of 2 ORGANIZATION AND SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) G. Commitments (Continued). The Organization entered into a lease agreement for office space requiring a monthly rental of $650 which expires September 30, 1991. Future minimum rentals of $1,950 are required under this lease. The Organization has the option to renew this lease agreement for two successive one -year periods. H. Functional Allocation of Expenses. The costs of providing the various programs and other activities have been summarized on a functional basis in the Statement of Support, Revenue, Expenses, and Changes in Fund Balances. Accordingly, certain costs have been allocated among the program and supporting services benefited. ORANGE COMMUNITY HOUSING CORPORATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS Keith Aldridge, Chair Donald Boulton Hilliard Caldwell Jacquelyn Gist Sharon Freeland George Horton Sally Jessee STAFF LeAnn Nease Peggy Pollitzer, Vice -Chair Susan Rodemeir Margi Shoffner Everett Thomas Gloria Williams, Secretary Diana Woolley, Treasurer Donna Dyer, Executive Director Jennifer Taylor, Education Program Coordinator 116B West Main Street Post Office Box 307 Carrboro, North Carolina 27510 919 -967 -1545 112t 0 ' 'No' 6 OPPORTUNITY UDD Ql�. .r PI/,f F;E)14 0 C i I e� I�j C, k4 cl U L'i v�C