Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 03-21-2026-Retreat 1 APPROVED 4/21/26 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MINI-RETREAT March 21, 2026 1:00 P.M. The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a retreat on Saturday, March 21, 2026 at 1:00 p.m. at Whiffed Human Services Center in Hillsborough, NC. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Jean Hamilton, Vice-Chair Amy Fowler, and Commissioners Jamezetta Bedford, Marilyn Carter, Sally Greene, Earl McKee (arrived at 1:20 p.m.), and Phyllis Portie-Ascott COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None. COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: None. COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Travis Myren, Deputy County Manager Caitlin Fenhagen, and Clerk to the Board Laura Jensen. (All other staff members will be identified appropriately below) Chair Hamilton called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. All commissioners were in attendance, except for Commissioner McKee. The commissioners introduced themselves. Cy Stober, Planning and Inspections Director, introduced the topics for the retreat. The Board received presentations and engaged in a roundtable discussion on housing markets and pricing as response to the Board's request for additional background information for the Land Use Plan 2050 process. BACKGROUND: At its April 8, 2025, work session, the Board reviewed a tentative schedule for receiving presentations from County staff and in some cases, guest presenters, to provide additional background information for better informing its direction on the Land Use Plan 2050 process. The Board's preference was for staff to schedule work session and retreat agenda items to receive the information. Attachment A is Part A of the BOCC request for additional information grouped into six (6) topic areas by subject. To cover all topic areas, presentations to the Board were scheduled for work sessions on September 9, October 14, and November 11, 2025; half-day retreats were scheduled for November 14 and November 21, 2025, and March 21, 2026. The half-day retreats were needed to cover Part B (Attachment B) of the Board's request for information, which includes several guest presenters. Agenda Item 1— Housing Availability and Affordability Yonah Freemark, a principal research associate in the Housing and Communities Division at the Urban Institute, presented to the Board. Sections of the presentation included: 2 • Introduction • Setting the stage: Orange County in the broader housing market • How does land-use policy impact housing construction? • How does housing construction affect housing affordability? • What is the link between urban design, urban expansion, and transportation? • Implications for Orange County • Potential opportunities for Orange County Slide#1 Orange County Board of Commissioners/March 2026 Generating Effective Approaches to Land-Use Policy in Orange County :::URBAN •. Ix.rlrurl•111ratrl•r.1•.1.Ar1 YonahFreemark Slide#2 HOUSING IN ORANGE COUNTY About the Urban Institute and Our Research The Urban Institute is a nonprofit research organization that believes decisions shaped by facts have the power to improve public policy and practice, strengthen communities, and transform people's lives for the better. ALL RESEARCH FINDINGS REFLECT THE EVIDENCE-INFORMED VIEWS OF URBAN RESEARCHERS ALONE AND SHOULD NOT BE ASCRIBED TO THE URBAN INSTITUTE. Y R A A N I N 5 7 1 T V T■ 3 Slide #3 • The housing market today • Land-use policy's impacts on construction • Housing supply's impacts on Agenda affordability • Links between urban growth patterns and transportation • Implications for Orange County Slide#4 Orange County in the Broader .. • using Market Slide #5 Themes of the land use plan: • Cultivate sustainable development •A reminder: Key Protect natural resources aspects of the draft Advance opportunities for attainable,equitable housing and 2050 plan employment • Implement sustainable transportation and economic development initiatives 4 Slide #6 HOUSING IN ORANGE COUNTY Orange Has Added Homes More Slowly Than Other Counties in the Region Change in housing units from 2000,by county tAlamance County +Chatham County +Durham County Orange County has -*-Orange County -*-Wake County gained about 25% 200% additional housing units 180% since 2000, a far lower rate than the rest of the 160% Triangle. 140% 120% 100% 2000 2010 2020-2024 U R 9 A N - t N s T I U T c Source:US Census 2000 and 2010;ACS 2020-2024. E Slide#7 HOUSING IN ORANGF COUNTY Home Prices in Orange County Have Risen Rapidly, But Not As Quickly As In Other Counties Change in median housing value from 2000,by county tAlamance County -*-Chatham County (Durham County Median housing values +Orange County Wake County have risen dramatically 350% J' throughout the Triangle 300% since 2010, with 250 especially high rates of appreciation in 200% Chatham County. 150% 100% 2000 2010 2020-2024 IT a ^ t N s T t t U T [ Source:US Census 2000 and 2010;ACS 2020-2024.Data for Chatham County in 2010 is estimated.Not adjusted for inflation. Commissioner Carter said Orange County has always had higher valuations than other counties, and asked if it was possible that the county was starting at a higher point and other counties are catching up. Yonah Freemark said that was correct. 5 Slide #8 HOUSING IN ORANGE COUNTY But, by Some Measures, Orange Remains Less Affordable Than Surrounding Counties Median home value as share of median household income Median annual rent as share of median household income 6 25 5 20% 4 15% 3 10% 2 1 5% 0 0% Alamance Chatham Durham Orange Wake Alamance Chatham Durham Orange Wake County County County County County County County County County County u R 9 A N I N s T I T U T[ - Source:US Census ACS 2020-2024. Yonah Freemark said it would take 5.7 years for someone to pay off their house in Orange County, if they spent all their salary on housing. He said that the median household income in Orange County was lower than Wake, but higher than Durham. Vice-Chair Fowler asked if this information included students. Yonah Freemark said it includes students. Chair Hamilton said there is no control for composition of the households. She said because the community has a lot of students, it's going to both lower median household income and increase demand for housing. Yonah Freemark said that is correct. He said that the student population in Orange County is declining as a share of the population. Commissioner Greene said UNC Chapel Hill is looking to add 500 students each year to increase their student population to 5,000. Yonah Freemark said something to consider is how well UNC can absorb those students through dormitories. Commissioner Portie-Ascott there are other people in the community who are not able to afford to live in the county. Yonah Freemark said the students are just a portion of the market. 6 Slide #9 HOUSING IN ORANGE COUNTY Unlike in Other Counties in the Region, in Orange, Apartment Units Are a Declining Share of Total Share of housing units in buildings with 5 or more units,by county As they have grown, -0-Alamance County Chatham County Durham County other Triangle counties �OrangeCounty �WakeCounty have added apartment 30% units as a share of the 25% _ building stock. But since 1980, Orange has 20% become more 15% dominated by single- 10°% family homes, 50% potentially limiting housing options. 0% 1980 1990 2000 2008-12 2020-24 u x e A IN I If s T I T U T c - Source:US Census 1990,1990,2000,2010,and ACS 2020-2024. Commissioner McKee arrived at 1:20 p.m. Commissioner Bedford said that Chapel Hill recently approved several new apartments. She said that there are vacancies in some of the high-end expensive complexes. Yonah Freemark said complexes that were recently opened would not be included in the data. He said he uses 5-year estimates because they have a lesser margin of error. He emphasized that Durham and Wake have also been adding housing. Chair Hamilton said the Board recently received information that county is meeting its needs for apartments and multi-family units, but is falling behind in single-family homes. Yonah Freemark said the Board should consider if Orange County is an island or if the county is part of a metropolitan region. He said it's harder to compile data on that, because there aren't good surveys on people's housing choices from that perspective. He said it raises questions such as are there a number of people in the Triangle who would like to live in Orange County, but can't because there aren't enough apartments. 7 Slide#10 HOUSING IN ORANGE COUNTY Orange County Has Become More Occupied by Homeowners and One-Person Households Share of households that are owners Share of households that are one person -0-Alamance County-0-Chatham County Durham County -0-Alamance County-0-Chatham County Durham County Orange County Wake County Orange County Wake County 85% 36% 80% 34% 75% 32% 70% 30% 65% 28 26% 60% 24% 55% 22% 50% 20% 1990 2000 2010 2020-24 1990 2000 2010 2020-24 u R 9 A N I N s T I T U T [ Source:US Census 1990,2000,2010,and ACS 2020-2024. 10 Yonah Freemark said the share of households that are owners are affected by the type of available housing stock. He said the share of households that are one person may mean that there are more older adults who are living by themselves and staying in their homes. Commissioner Carter asked if the data in share of households that are owners table could show a regional effect. Yonah Freemark said it could be, but they would need to wait 5 years to determine trends. Commissioner McKee asked if the influx of high wealth residents affects the share of households that are owners. Yonah Freemark said yes. He said Orange County may be a more attractive place for higher income people who want to live in single-family homes. He said there may be a great demand among higher net worth and higher wealth individuals to live in the county. He said retiree income may not represent their wealth, but they are able to afford higher expense homes. Commissioner McKee said people in that category also carry less debt. He said 30 to 40 years ago there was a belief that Orange County would be the bedroom community for the Triangle, and there was an illusion created that the county was somewhere you could live but work somewhere else. Yonah Freemark said the interpretation of the date is that Orange County made land use decisions that encourage a pattern of growth that's like Chatham County. He said Orange County wants to be the place where people buy large lot single family homes. He said this is a trend that Chatham County is following, while Wake and Durham have focused on broader housing diversity and diversity of individuals that live there. Commissioner McKee said he thought that would continue. 8 Slide#11 HOUSING IN ORANGE COUNTY The County's Greatest-Needs Residents Face Persistent Housing Challenges Affordable and available housing units for every 100 extremely low- Share of people living in poverty residing in high-poverty Income residents neighborhoods 70 _ 25% 60 20% 50 40 _ _ 15% 30 10% 20 5% 10 0 0% Alamance Chatham Durham Orange Wake Alamance Chatham Durham Orange Wake County County County County County County County County County County -U N R A N. I N R T I T U T R - Source:Urban Institute Upward Mobility Dashboard(using 2023 data). Yonah Freemark said excluding students, Orange County is second from the bottom in providing affordable housing units to extremely low-income residents. He offered to examine in- depth the share of people living in poverty resident in high-poverty neighborhoods. Commissioner Carter asked what the picture looks like outside of these counties. Yonah Freemark did not have that information available. Commissioner Bedford said Chapel Hill has the housing authority, so that is where public housing is located. She said mobile homes are decreasing in the towns and county, and there are historic minority communities through the county as well. Slide #12 HOU5ING IN ORANGE COUNTY Conditions Imply that Orange County is Not Providing Homes for Those Who Need Them • A majority of Orange County workers are commuting in from elsewhere.They're likely doing so because they can't find the affordable homes they need. • The housing market is concentrating a specific demographic of residents—homeowners in single-family homes—rather than accommodating the broader market found throughout the Triangle. U R B A N I N 5 T I T U T R 1_ 9 Yonah Freemark said he suspects that there are people who can't afford to live in Orange County but live in Chatham or Wake, which leads to congestion on highways. He said the statement "is housing affordable to people in Orange County;' you aren't necessarily capturing people who would live in the county if they could. He said he is also concerned that the land use policy and the housing market in the county is concentrating a specific demographic of residents in the county that is different than the rest of the Triangle. He said that is the trend that county is going on, but questioned if it must be the trend in the future. Slide #13 How Does • -Use Policy Impact Housing Construction? Slide#14 HOUSING IN ORANGE COUNTY • Local governments use regulations to constrain what can be built. • "Deregulation," "zoning reform," or I`upzoning"typically mean making it Land-use possible to build more (more units, regulation and more stories, etc.) on the same lot. housing investment Common regulations are: • Minimum lot area per unit • Minimum parking requirements • Maximum height(stories or feet) • Maximum floor area ratio I N•T 1 7 N T f 10 Slide#15 HOUSING IN ORANGE COUNTY Restrictive zoning, particularly in the form of large-lot, single-family-only zoning, is associated with: • Less construction What's wrong 0 Higher housing costs with current • Higher economic and racial zoning policy? segregation • Higher automobile dependence R B A N - I N i T l T U T L 1S Slide #16 HOUSING IN ORANGE COUNTY Compared to Much of the Rest of the Triangle, Orange County is Zoned for Fewer Apartments Neighborhoods where 0 multifamily apartments can be built by right �- - - o, m Outside of Carrboro, Chapel Hill, =' , and Hillsborough, very little land is zoned to enable multifamily Cary 'FAL�tGH�� housing, minimum lot sizes are n high, and all housing must be associated with off-street 'g parking. s.A N I N s T I T U T [ Source:National Zoning Atlas. Commissioner McKee said that water and sewer affects where apartments can be built. Yonah Freemark said that there's been a policy connection between the provision of water and sewer and zoning policy. Chair Hamilton said the costs of water and sewer and who pays is also a question. 11 Commissioner Carter asked how much of the growth in multi-family housing in Wake County occurred in unincorporated areas where they presumably lack water and sewer capacity. Yonah Freemark said most of the growth occurred in municipalities, but it's been made possible by aggressive annexation policies. He said those municipalities associate annexation process with provision of urban services. Commissioner Carter said Chair Hamilton's point of "who pays" is a central question. Yonah Freemark said it's common to impose impact fees if you can justify it. Commissioner Greene said the General Assembly would not be in favor of impact fees. She said that the WASMPBA requires that developers pay. She said she'd like to see the capacity report done by Chapel Hill. She said she had a needs analysis report that said Chapel Hill needs to increase housing production of all types by 35%. She said Hillsborough is doing the same, and Carrboro has two transition areas that are designated for housing. She said this doesn't all have to occur in rural Orange County. Slide #17 ltill C I J.^.iFh C.:C.Ci ll J-Y The Theory Behind the Current "YIMBY" Movement to Reform Zoning Zoning as it currently Reform could exists restricts alter zoning to housing construction allow more More building and therefore limits construction housing affordability • U R B A N - I N B i 1 7 U 7 B - 1/ 12 Slide#18 111-1, IV 2�41 C_=:Ci LJ V-Y • Over the short-term, upzonings may or may not increase construction. What do we know • Over the long term, upzoning likely expands construction, but the scale about zoning of upzoning matters: The bigger the reform's impact on upzoning, the more likely it will have housing an impact. construction? • Downzoning reduces construction. N••A N - I N 5 T I T N T [ Chair Hamilton said there is a concept called "amenity effects," where upzoning and providing more amenities increases demand and reduces affordability. Slide#19 111-IC IV CIJLJV-Y How Might Zoning Reform Affect... Neighborhoods Versus a Region Overall? • Zoning reform's impacts are localized: They impact the neighborhoods where they are implemented. • But construction doesn't automatically follow! Construction is only feasible under the following circumstances: 1. Zoning change produces a large difference between a parcel's current built ("improvement") value and its potential built value. 2. A neighborhood has high enough rents or home values to cover the costs associated with new construction. 3. The real-estate market overall is profitable to investors at a return equivalent to, or higher,than other types of investment. • U R N A N - I N{T I T•T[ • 29 13 Slide #20 How Might Zoning Reform Affect... Investment in Different Types of Construction? • Experience in cities like Los Angeles and Portland shows how cities can accommodate high levels of new density through accessory dwelling units(ADUs)and small-scale apartment buildings. • In cities like Houston and Nashville, reduced minimum lot area requirements have enabled"tall-skinny"homes:tightly spaced townhomes. • In cities like New York and Washington,rezonings have encouraged the creation of high-density, mixed-use districts. Commissioner McKee asked how the information relates to what Orange County can do. Yonah Freemark said it depends on whether you see unincorporated Orange County playing a role in accommodating additional housing growth or not. He said if you think the county should play a role in that, then you must identify the parts of the county that can accommodate housing and can be associated with water and sewer, for example. Commissioner Carter said ADUs could be an option for the county. She said in Portland, ADUs are dispersed throughout neighborhoods. Vice-Chair Fowler said ADU rules were relaxed recently. Commissioner Portie-Ascott said this slide made her think of the Buckhorn EDD. Commissioner McKee said zoning around intersections might be appropriate. Yonah Freemark said there could be a situation where the county wants to preserve low density for most of the county, while also accommodating opportunities for higher density development types. Slide #21 How Might Zoning Reform Affect... Direct Investment in Affordable Housing? • Affordable housing projects need an accommodating land-use environment to be feasible, because they typically need to be efficient in their land utilization. • Moreover, most feasible subsidized affordable housing projects—like those supported by the Low Income Housing Tax Credit(LIHTC) projects—can only be built affordably as multifamily complexes. x eaYIMlITYT. _I 14 Slide#22 How Does • Supply Affect Housing Affordability? Slide #23 The Theory Behind the Current"YIMBY" Movement to Reform Zoning: Affordability There is less Zoning reforms More housing competition for enable additional units are built housing units, housing construction in a place meaning more affordability Slide#24 The Ideal Link Between Zoning Changes and Housing Affordability Zoning reform . . increase housing construction Ideally... Increased housing constructionoccurs Increased supply-side competition for Lower housing costs,both in neighborhood and'in region u...•....r��•r. _ 15 Slide #25 HOUSING IN ORANGE COUNTY The Reality of Complicating Factors—Making Affordability Harder to Achieve Zoning reform designed to increase But... housing construction Increased speculation in local real estate Increased demand-side competition for plus demolition of existing affectedSteady or her housing costs in the neighborhood R R R S N I N 5 T I T Y T E Yonah Freemark said regional housing needs affect the availability of affordable housing in Orange County. Slide#26 HOUSING IN ORANGE COUNTY • New construction helps accommodate housing demand, thus reducing upward pressure in What do we know highly sought-after areas. about the effects of The most likely impact of more new new construction construction over the medium to on housinglong term is moderation of price increases in both the affected area affordability? and the region overall. • Construction cannot make housing massively more affordable on average or investors would not build. R R R S N- I N 5 T I T R T 1 - 26 16 Slide #27 HOUSING IN ORANGE COUNTY New Housing is Unaffordable to Most Residents, But Can Allow "Filtering" of Older Units Estimated share of Orange County households that could afford a median home,by year housing unit constructed Less than a third of 50% Orange County 40% households can afford 30% the cost of a recently 20% constructed home 10% ($638,000). 0% wetti�pw�pc qti q �, qqq qq ot oa t�e t 10p e p 0 p oe op oy co e totip to q3 ti Year housing unit built u a e A N I N s T I T U T [ Source:US Census ACS 2020-24.Assumes mortgage rate of 5.8%;20%downpayment;0 other debts. Yonah Freemark said building more housing can lead to a filtering effect, where older homes become less competitive for people to afford. Chair Hamilton said she's read other research that filtering doesn't work in certain locations because older homes do not become less expensive. She said it's important to her to understand that so the Board focuses on areas where they can make changes. Yonah Freemark said one thing that stands out to him on slide #27 is the higher costs for homes built before 1939, because people see a lot of value in those types of homes. Chair Hamilton said lot size can also affect the value and interest in the home. Commissioner McKee said the cost of lots have gone up considerably in the last 50 years. Commissioner Greene said a study she shared to the Board from the Texas Low Income Housing Information says that housing requires subsidies. She said that there is discussion on filtering that casts some doubt on it. She wanted to talk about filtering with respect to rental properties. She said that they talk about naturally occurring affordable housing, but that refers to housing that has fallen into disrepair. She said trickle-up housing can make a difference,where you build subsidized housing and then people can live in that instead of low market rate housing, freeing up units. 17 Slide #28 Adding Homes Can Keep Costs Down for the Middle of the Market Median housing values as a multiple of median incomes,2022 Metropolitan areas that added O Metro areas with low housing values Metro areas with middle and high h—mg-1— more housing units between to 2000 and 2022 had lower housing costs by 2022, 8 meaning that the typical middle-class household was " much more likely to be able to gam" Mlaml afford buying a house. 4 2 04 20% 46% 60% 80% Change in housing units,2000 to 2020 U R B A N I N S i 1 7 U}R . Source:US Census 2000 and 2022;ACS 2020-24. 2b Slide #29 But Can We Be Sure That Zoning Reforms—and New Housing Supply—Target All Needs? The influence of zoning reforms is likely to vary! • Location: Reforms may enable construction in some neighborhoods, but not those where people most want to live. As such, those areas may continue to become more expensive. • Housing type and tenure: Reforms may intentionally encourage investment in multifamily, rental projects.That may not reduce costs for people in the market to buy single-family homes. • Affordability: If reforms are not associated with more investment in subsidized affordable housing, they may not help households with low incomes. u R e w x I N f i 1 f U I Commissioner McKee asked how the county can avoid driving out residents due to the taxes required for subsidies. Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked if filtering can help address housing needs. Yonah Freemark said filtering is made possible through the construction of substantially more housing units which make the existing market more affordable. He said this helps address the middle-income market. He said there are other policy decisions that should be considered. He said the low-income housing tax credit is key for people in the moderate-income range. He 18 said the credit was expanded so it is possible to build subsidized housing for people at 60% of AMI. He said if the zoning doesn't allow those properties to be built then you can have any low- income housing tax credit projects. Slide #30 HOUSING IN ORANGE COUNTY Public Subsidies Are Essential to Meet the Low End of the Market Share of renters with extremely low incomes and severe cost burdens, 2022 For the lowest-income renters, •Metro areas with low housing values'- Metro areas with middle and high housing values regions with limited housing construction but more public �% Oalles housing subsidies had less housing cost burden than those Nex Yerk regions with high housing • • � • 70% •-' �Ie,«a°°' construction and fewer housing • B�° subsidies. 60% 50% 20 30 40 50 60 70 HUD-supported housing units per 100 extremely low-income renters, 2022 U■B A N• 1 N•T 1 T U T• • Source:US Census 2000 and 2022;ACS 2020-24;US Department of Housing and Urban Development(HUD). 30 Slide #31 What is the Link Between • . Design, • and Transportation? 19 Slide #32 HOUSING IN ORANGE COUNTY The Primary Way By Which US Cities and Counties Have Accommodated Housing is Sprawl Sprawling development has the advantage of being cheaper for investors and households. • "Drive'till you qualify"is a real phenomenon that results in people living further and further from one another, if land-use policies enable it. But sprawl has major impacts on natural ecologies, destroying habitats. It also has substantial effects on transportation use and costs. U R B A N- I IS S T I T U T R - Slide #33 HOV5ING IN ORANGE COUNTY Different Development Patterns Have a Major Impact on Transportation Choices Densely developed Node-based development Sprawl El (e.g.,conservation subdivisions) ■ ■ e■ °■ ° ❑ El o �❑ ° ❑ ❑ Ll • Low transportation costs, Low transportation costs • High transportation costs. due to limited travel needs. for neighborly needs,but • High transportation- • Limited transportation- high costs for other needs. produced emissions. produced emissions. Mid-level transportation- • Virtually all trips must be • Easy ability to travel produced emissions. done by car. without driving. Walking,biking feasible— but only for local trips. •U R R A N- 1 N S T 1 T U T 1 33 20 Slide #34 People May be Willing to Shift to Non-Car Means of Transportation—But Only in the Right Contexts Only a very small share of noncollege Orange County residents get around by anything other than driving. Encouraging residents to shift travel patterns is infeasible if land-use policy isn't coordinated around effective transit. U R B A N I N b T I T U T T Slide#35 Urban Design Can Make or Break the Effectiveness of a Transit Corridor A potentially effective transit An ineffective transit line An ineffective transit line line ❑ Homes and ❑ Densities of The route is too ❑ ❑ are located El ❑ homes are too ❑ indirect and too directly along low near the ❑ slow to compete the route.The route to attract with driving line runs many riders. options. frequently and quickly. ■ ■ U R R A N 1 N s T 1 T U T 21 Slide #36 HOUSING IN OMNGE COU- How About Urban Growth Boundaries? Orange County maintains a rural ❑ buffer zone surrounding Chapel Hill and Carrboro that acts as an urban growth boundary. Classically, we would expect: ❑ ❑ ❑ New development on the outside edge,increasing ❑ transportation times and costs. ❑ ❑ ❑ Higher housing prices in the ❑ ❑ core,reducing affordability. •...A N. I N f T 1 i U T 1 Commissioner Greene referenced research on Portland's urban growth boundary, which found that contrary to common claims, housing price growth in Portland wasn't unusual for a western city experiencing economic expansion. She said that both Denver and Salt Lake City without growth boundaries experienced similar price increases during the 1990s. Yonah Freemark said Portland is a great example for preserving agricultural and natural spaces, and reducing segregation. He said that Orange County is not an island and that may be why there is development in Chatham County, because growth is constrained only within Orange County. He said that the county cannot act alone. Slide #37 Implications and Opportunities • Orange County 22 Slide #38 1 Ci ll M1C.IV CiAf C=C(i IIV-Y Challenges in the Market Make Addressing Orange County's Housing Costs Difficult • Construction costs have increased rapidly due to inflation in labor costs, higher materials costs, and tariffs. • Debt remains expensive for both investors in new buildings and homebuyers. • Incomes haven't increased as rapidly as other costs. • The federal government hasn't increased support for very affordable housing—though it did expand the LIHTC program in 2025. U R B A N I N S T I T U r f Vice-Chair Fowler asked if the county should try to time the market for when things improve, or do you average costs and keep trying, hoping it will get better in the future. Yonah Freemark said ideally the county would act on this plan and make sure it achieves the desired outcomes. He said they should do so in a way that when the housing market improves, development can respond appropriately. Slide #39 Orange County Has Conditions That Make it Somewhat Different than the Rest of the Triangle • Housing construction in the county is slower than elsewhere, and it's more focused on single-family homes for sale. • Housing costs—for rent or sale—are arguably the highest among Triangle counties, and low-income renters are cost burdened. • Outside parts of Carrboro, Chapel Hill, and Hillsboro, zoning for large- lot single-family homes dominates. • Current land-use policies may be contributing to higher home prices and increased transportation costs. • U R B A N - I N S T I T U T i - JJ 23 Slide #40 Options for Orange County to Help Address Needs and Ensure Effective Outcomes • State law limits the county's ability to use inclusionary zoning or enforce higher levels of environmental protection. • Even so, the county can: • Encourage additional construction by zoning for more homes, but in a way that limits impacts on ecologies and habitats, e.g.,through density, use of public land,and conservation subdivisions. • Reduce transportation costs by designating concentrations of homes, especially near frequent,fast transit. • Increase funding for affordable housing through direct spending. • Collaborate to refine the rural buffer zone. U R B A N I N S T I T U T S 41 Slide#41 Linking Approaches to the Land Use Plan's Stated Themes Land use plan themes Approaches . - . - .. Protecting . . neargood transportationAttainable housing Fund affordable housing Sustainable • U R B A N - I N S T I T U T R - 4'- 24 Slide#42 PracticeL. XA Land Use,and Transportation Urban aim yfreemark@urban.org Agenda Item 2—OWASA Utility Service Capacity and Limitations Todd Taylor, Orange Water and Sewer Authority Executive Director, provided a presentation to the Board on water and sewer capacities, constraints, ability to serve residential development in the future. He was joined by Board Chair Michael Hughes, Deputy Executive Director Monica Dodson, and Director of Engineering Vishnu Gangadharan. Slide #1 Board of Orange CountyCommissioners Housing 25 Slide #2 OWASA, Then and Now • Began Operation in February 1977 - • } • Prior to OWASA,water and sewer system separately owned and operated by the University and the Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro • OWASA executed agreements with the Towns of Carrboro and Chapel Hill and the University of JO�� ►� North Carolina at Chapel Hill which define OWASA's ~' obligations and responsibilities err NOW • Provide drinking water,wastewater and reclaimed - water services for 85,300 people in the towns of � Chapel Hill and Carrboro and the University • University is OWASA's largest customer(about 20% r•�' ' of drinking water sales) 1 About 148 employees(includes three apprentices) Taken In the 1990s Todd Taylor explained OWASA's formation 50 years ago when Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and UNC had separate water distribution and sewer collection systems supplied by University Lake. Studies in the late 1960s and early 1970s revealed that University Lake would be insufficient for growing community needs, requiring additional supply development. Simultaneously, the UNC system was exploring divestment from utility operations, leading to the creation of a single entity responsible for all community utilities. He said today OWASA serves approximately 86,000 people in Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and at UNC with about 150 employees. He said while UNC was initially over 50 percent of water sales, it now represents about 20 percent as the customer base has diversified. He said UNC is still the largest customer. Slide #3 Hd(s°er°u9h Operational Overview r 011A6.A 8 o' Water Supply s—i.A'. .• University Lake ca°streak Cane Creek R°�"°`r Quar WnUora Chapel HA Durham • Quarry Reservoir ® e=5rvryo;r Jordan Lake(via mutual aid agreements) wamrshea Jones Ferry Road Water Treatment Plant °naa"a i •�„ UnlvafSAy ®s e+.vice caunrr Lake % Wastewater Management Mason Farm Wastewater Treatment Plant g Reclaimed Water System Emergency Interconnections of Drinking Water Z' System • City of Durham(Town of Cary) Lake • Town of Hillsborough F • Chatham County N Q CeryApvxlno�a A1'matoro < PobMM11nNX•�F Mani n Jwdan 26 Todd Taylor detailed OWASA's water supply system, beginning with rainfall in Cane Creek and University Lake watersheds. He said the Quarry Reservoir resides within the University Lake watershed and functions like a storage tank. He said OWASA also holds water allocation from Jordan Lake, currently accessible through mutual aid agreements with Cary and Durham, though Durham plans to develop a western shore intake that OWASA can benefit from as a part of the Western Intake Partnership with Triangle Rural Water Authority. He said emergency interconnections exist with Hillsborough, Chatham County, and Durham. He said all water flows to OWASA's single treatment plant on Jones Ferry Road in Carrboro. Slide #4 r wAWater 0 .1 Supplies University Lake Cane Creek Reservoir Quarry Reservoir Total Water THE DRINKING WATER SYSTEM 3 . 65 Billion G a I i o n s o f T imtr S t 0 r a g e Reservoir Mixing Mriftatlan Filtration Dlsinfedlon Storage �Customer T • • Suppgy treatment distribution Days of Todd Taylor explained that the three reservoirs store 3.65 billion gallons, equating to approximately 575 days of supply based on average community use. He emphasized extensive planning for water supply since additional sources are difficult to obtain and take a significant amount of time to develop. 27 Slide#5 Our Expanded Quarry Reservoir and Jordan Lake Meet our Long-Term Water Supply Needs and Address Drought Vulnerability 20 Jordan Lake Allocation Included 18 16 Water m E 14 Expanded Quarry Reservoir su pply v 12 E Yield Also has Uncertainty l 10 ♦� Yield 6 ♦♦� ♦gyp♦ • m ♦♦► Actual Demands •�M♦�yM♦� Baseline,tst and 99th 3 6 ♦♦» Percentile Projections ♦♦N OC 4 2 0 — 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 FiscalYear O WASA's Water Supply Yreld and Demands-The estimated yield that includes our allocation of water from Jordan Lake is oversimplified as our access through the Western Intake Partners has notyet been modeled with our three local supplies. The projections shown in the figure are from 2019.In addition,there is uncertainty in the yield which is more difficult to quantify Shan the demand projections. Toddy Taylor said projections showed that current reservoirs plus quarry expansion would provide water supply decades into the future before requiring regular Jordan Lake use. Commissioner Bedford asked about quarry transition timing. Todd Taylor explained mining would cease in 2030, and the following five years will be spent connecting pits and filling them with water. He said that some capacity will be temporarily offline during this period. Commissioner Bedford asked if the 575 days of supply is the current capacity or future. Todd Taylor said that it represents the current capacity of the quarry. Slide #6 Y � Joness •.iIJ �.rr r- IN • •Treatment _ Water �>I�r•rr1� t�Ft♦S1St r' PLant 'w ne•rwl rn r• --------------- Peak Day THE DRINKING WATER SYSTEM CapacityT Iddh ��—�- 1 Million Gallons • t Reservoir Mixing cliniflati ri Filtration DIArfedian sttorage�Customer . T T Supply Treatment Distribution 28 Slide#7 Comparison of Peak Day to Plant Capacity 25 ba E 20 Peak Day Water Treatment Capacity r accounts15 •F Bael�ee!e�k9`V' Ir ' accounts Q' •••,•. • • otable water GlU • ♦••• ••• •.•• •.:• Baseline Peak 9aY'.P m Actual Peak U 0 5 0 51 y o ��y ryoyo tio"I �otio �oy5 Fiscal Year Todd Taylor said the Jones Ferry Road water treatment plant has 20 million gallons per day peak capacity, while the community uses slightly over 6 million gallons daily. Peak demands average 10-12 million gallons, a level maintained for about 15 years. Plant upgrades in the early 2000s increased capacity from 15 to 20 million gallons daily, providing sufficient treatment capacity for decades. Commissioner Bedford asked where the Clearwell is on this map Todd Taylor said it is in the top right corner (looks like part of the parking lot) and is underground. Slide#8 Mason Farm Wastewater Treatment Plant I THE WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM geaaimea Warern UNIC j l • ■ a c i t y is Customer Manhole Pumping Head—ks primary �Aeratnd0�SPCOndary Fikration Uisint—.— Morgan creel Clarification Basl clarification • elosolids aPPlied • ■ tp fdrmland Or dewatered for • - y Anaerobic composting 0lgesters 29 Todd Taylor said OWASA's single wastewater treatment plant off Old Mason Farm Road has 14.5 million gallons per day peak month capacity, currently processing 7-8 million gallons daily. Slide #9 Mason Month Flows OWASA has Sufficient Hydraulic Capacity at its WWTP for the next 35 is to 40 Years 4 16 0.0 E 14 T 12 a 10 • ♦ • m ♦• l7 6 ♦ c O 4 2 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 Fiscal Year Mason Farm WWTP Capacity and Demands.Projected/lows are from 2019. Todd Taylor said wastewater flows are more volatile than water use due to rainfall and groundwater impacts. The plant was expanded twice - in the late 1990s and 2000s - to reach current capacity, which should serve the community for several decades. Commissioner Carter asked about how current projections of housing in Orange County are considered for these capacity estimates. Todd Taylor said forecasting is not perfect, but it does take those factors into account. Commissioner Carter asked if projections in 2019 considered expanded housing stock in the service area. Todd Taylor said yes, OWASA monitors whether actual growth falls within projected bands and works closely with municipalities and the university to gather projection information. 30 Slide #10 AccountsDemand �.,9-0 24,000 m ,w W 8.5 22,000 a 8.0 m -6.3 MGD average projected for FY o 7.5 20,000 � 2026 y a +7.0 18,000 0.5 Water sales are the same as the n c 00 or 90,000 c early 1990s O C 5.5 '1a,000 w • Almost double the number of F N 5.0 customers m 4.5 12,000 y m �4.0 10,000 �i 114,110 141^99`L"(1,'191P I990 f0l ryOp`b If"ryOp6 ryO�O 10 fl,l ryo,b 10 ,16 ryO.6�OtiO ryOryl-�Orlb Flscat Year Water Sates —$—Cu stomer Accounts Todd Taylor highlighted remarkable water conservation achievements, showing that despite doubling customer accounts since the 1990s, OWASA sells the same amount of water today. He said this reflected the community's strong water conservation ethos and partnerships like the reclaimed water system with UNC that significantly reduced university consumption starting in 2009. He said conservation efforts extended water supply capacity well into the future. Slide #11 O OWA5A tm9'Tenn Interest Area ware coeds o Tin M 8u4ary R—I R&W B—d ry OWASA Primary 5ervire Area OWASA Service R•Bk Area `Jieersl�LaRa ;Na'elsllt� N 1 31 Todd Taylor explained how OWASA's service area has become constrained over time. He said originally, OWASA had no geographic limitations beyond serving the university, Chapel Hill, and Carrboro as its primary responsibility, and growth paying for growth was the only restriction. He said the rural buffer around University Lake watershed protection became the first geographic constraint, visible on maps as the green line, which follows watershed boundaries. He said state water supply watershed rules in the early 1990s added further protection in the hashed out blue areas of the map. He said the 2001 Water and Sewer Management and Boundary Agreement established formal geographic service boundaries for the first time, describing boundary change processes and exceptions for health concerns or public facilities like schools. He said the agreement established procedures for working with county entities to determine service provision and created OWASA's long-term interest area, shown in light blue. Slide #12 k! p OWASA Lo—Te m Lneaest Area ®watersheds Q Tom,En Rwndary �— Rural Buffer Boundary OWASA Pnmary SeMce Area w rsr OWASA cage r,Poe waiersned Service t • �. c i Chapel Hill ETJ Lnr+e slly Lnke +_ Vla,ersh Cd Sr N car boro ETJ 32 Slide#13 Supportdevelopment • Worked collaboratively with the Town of Chapel Hill on a concept plan to provide sewer service to the recently expanded service area along the 15/501 corridor. • Have developed a draft reimbursement policy. • Held several feedback sessions with the development community over the last year and have an action plan to improve communications, improve the plan review process, and create opportunities to provide additional feedback going forward. • Plan to update our sewer system hydraulic model in coordination with the Towns, County and UNC. Todd Taylor outlined recent efforts to support developers within the service area. OWASA worked collaboratively with Chapel Hill to develop a concept plan for sewer service in the recently expanded service area along Highway 15-501. He said a draft reimbursement policy was under board consideration to address situations where developers extend utilities past multiple properties but bear full costs without reimbursement when others connect later. He said OWASA held feedback sessions with the development community to improve communications and plan review processes, and planned to update the sewer system hydraulic model in coordination with towns, county, and UNC. Commissioner Bedford asked for clarification on the sewer system hydraulic model. Todd Taylor explained the model helps determine pipe capacity and upgrade needs when developers propose projects. Commissioner Carter asked about the model's implications for understanding future system capacity. Todd Taylor explained the updated model would enable quick analysis of proposed developments and identification of needed system upgrades or restrictions. 33 Slide#14 Questions40 • Our community's trusted partner for dean w a ter and environmental protect ion. Vice-Chair Fowler posed hypothetical questions about extending services to support transit-oriented development, such as along potential Hillsborough corridor extensions. Todd Taylor responded that it would be difficult to accommodate because planning was done with the current agreements in mind and the future demand models do not include expansion into the rural buffer or changes to WASMPBA. He said that extensions outside current OWASA boundaries would require study and analysis, and any boundary changes would need agreement from Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and the university. Commissioner Carter requested to review the supplementary slides. Slide #15 kFS/ } STROWp L7! Ran ewood o r O C� P TER CE VIEW DR Qt% T S IV Hwy 54 West ° s"aNmoN pR m _J ' Np� O Y `v Water Sewer 34 Todd Taylor explained that Rangewood was a failing septic system area that OWASA agreed to provide water and sewer to as an environmental health exception to WASMPBA. Slide#16 E TREE LN +RAP gO Lane laow 1-40 (`y ETEN -REEK RD- 140 wENjr70�J � R �i�sOG.P� TF�GRiO�. p�RRY9 ENGLEWQG(),CIR H SO��° �� o• 'Y N RSN v GNPp°L otDSTE z s Erwin Road p ��°�rX. 'S1ERSiPOK 4�Ci SAGE Rj� n � m-.. Water Sewer WSMPBA primary service boundary Todd Taylor noted that the WASMPBA boundary runs along this area, but that there is some developable land along 1-40 within OWASA boundaries. 35 Slide #17 ILI �66DKIRK LN MANOR DR `o BRUIN 7RL m CLYDE RD - h DRIVEWAY DRIVEWAY Millhousey y. O re Road and Eubanks ■ z Future Water Main \w • • q Z EUBANKS RD g O MORTyw I 00 DR D �^ Ve(pIRb ? �C WEAVER DAIRY RD E W ",LLN Water Sewer WSMPBA primary service boundary Todd Taylor said the Eubanks area includes the Carrboro transition areas, planned for future housing. He said OWASA has plans for a water main extension to connect the two systems and resolve hydraulic issues. Commissioner Carter acknowledged that changes to WASMPBA would take agreement amongst all parties. She asked which areas had development potential within service boundaries. Todd Taylor explained that the Eubanks Rd. area is in Carrboro's transition zone, and both transition areas have access to water and sewer, but it would be up to developers to make those extensions. He said Erwin Road has developable areas within boundaries, though 1-40 created challenges. He said Rangewood had limited expansion possibilities due to the restrictions of exceptions in the WASMPBA. Commissioner Bedford asked if the concept plan for sewer system is on the OWASA website. Todd Taylor said the OWASA Board of Directors just finished with that plan and plans to provide it to Chapel Hill Town Council for feedback. Commissioner Bedford referred to Todd Taylor's earlier points, acknowledging that the 15/501 corridor area wasn't in the plan, but was accommodated. She recognized that OWASA would need to study the possibility of other extensions. Todd Taylor noted that Chapel Hill petitioned the other parties to the WASAMPBA for that extension. He said part of the concept plan for that corridor was the cost of extension and who would pay for it. Commissioner Bedford assumed that's what the draft reimbursement policy will address, a reimbursement to the initial payer. 36 Todd Taylor confirmed the intent was to make it fairer for the original developer who initiated the extension to get reimbursed when future connections take place on the lines they paid to install. Commissioner McKee said it sounds like no planning was done that considers a change to WASMPBA. Todd Taylor said that is correct. He clarified that OWASA doesn't plan to serve areas outside of its established boundaries until the boundaries change, and then it would study how to accommodate that growth. He emphasized the growth-pays-for-growth policy, noting that even studies like the 15-501 concept plan were paid for by Chapel Hill rather than OWASA ratepayers. Commissioner McKee said he feels like without a change to WASMPBA and rural buffer, there will be no chance for housing affordability in the county. Commissioner Carter agreed the board would need conversations about policy change. Chair Hamilton reminded the Board that the purpose of these presentations is to understand the landscape, so they have the background while developing the 2050 Land Use Plan. Commissioner McKee said he has heard the same conversation this Board for 15 years, but there has been no change to policy. Commissioner Greene defended existing policies directing growth within urban service boundaries where affordable housing was possible. Chair Hamilton asked about the projected growth within the service boundary and what it means for affordable housing. Todd Taylor said the data OWASA has received comes from the towns and the university, and that is how they determine the need to increase capacity or not. He said he can only speak to the policies in place at the current moment. Chair Hamilton summarized that OWASA has the capacity to accommodate the towns' and university's projected growth. Todd Taylor said yes. He said if they grow faster or slower,that may change the projection. Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked about the Rangewood service restrictions, confirming that policy changes would require agreement among all parties to the WASMPBA. Todd Taylor said that is correct, it is part of WASMPBA restrictions. Commissioner Carter explored capacity expansion implications beyond the current projections. She noted that the full system capacity is much larger than the current projections when considering the quarry upgrade and the Jordan Lake mutual aid. Todd Taylor confirmed additional water supplies, treatment capacity, and infrastructure could accommodate more growth but emphasized significant costs. He said accessing the Jordan Lake allocation around 2050 would cost hundreds of millions of dollars, paid by ratepayers within the service boundary through monthly bills. Commissioner Carter noted the policy that developers pay for extensions. Todd Taylor clarified that major infrastructure, like water treatment plant upgrades, was funded by OWASA ratepayers through system development fees, requiring long-term planning rather than house-by-house upgrades. The Board took a break from 3:12 to 3:30 p.m. 37 Agenda Item 3 — Roundtable Discussion with Affordable Housing Partners, Chambers of Commerce, and Homebuilders Association The following organizations attended the Retreat and participated in the discussion: Kimberly Sanchez for Community Home Trust (CHT); Valencia Thompson and Delores Bailey for EMPOWERment; Ansel Pritchard for Habitat for Humanity; Ian Scott for the Homebuilders Association of Durham, Orange, and Chatham Counties and the Chamber for a Greater Chapel Hill-Carrboro; Blake Rosser for the Orange County Housing Department; and Lynn Nilsson for the Orange County Affordable Housing Advisory Board. • What do developers suggest for building more housing? • Types of housing? • Chamber for a Greater Chapel Hill-Carrboro "big bold ideas" summary: http://www.bigboldideas.org/ • What may be different for non-profit developers? • How can Orange County work collaboratively to better serve the need for attainable housing? Chair Hamilton opened by asking participants to describe barriers to affordable and workforce housing from their perspectives. Ansel Pritchard explained that Habitat for Humanity is shifting toward larger communities of scale and higher density for practical reasons to build more homes annually. He said their biggest barriers are cost and utility access -finding developable land with water and sewer access while competing with other developers. He said for the homeowners they serve, which are traditionally 30-80 percent AMI, reaching below 40 percent AMI has become increasingly difficult due to building costs and property taxes. Kimberly Sanchez noted that Community Home Trust (CHT) gets most housing inventory through Chapel Hill's inclusionary zoning requirement,which will bring them over 300 homes this year. She said while other jurisdictions show developer appetite for negotiating affordable housing inclusion, barriers include lack of strong policy or political will. She emphasized that public investment is critical since market supply alone won't provide necessary subsidies for homeowners earning 65 percent AMI like teachers and nurses. She said moderate income homeowners face barriers including conventional mortgage requirements and high closing costs despite down payment assistance. Valencia Thompson explained EMPOWERment focuses on affordable rentals, with inventory being their biggest barrier. She said they receive daily calls from people seeking rentals, but inventory is insufficient. She said finding funding for acquisitions and rehabilitation to keep units affordable is challenging, especially given increasing rents. She said renters also lack assistance for security deposits and other rental requirements, and housing vouchers remain unavailable. Lynn Nilsson from the Affordable Housing Advisory Board identified increasing property taxes and tax burden shifting to local residents as major concerns, particularly with state-level 38 reductions in corporate and personal income taxes creating a regressive tax policy. She said as a realtor, she noted significant price differences between Durham and Chapel Hill properties. Blake Rosser said he agreed with the points made in the first presentation during the retreat. Ian Scott said the Chamber discussed that the area needs a variety of housing types and available at price points across the spectrum. He said much of affordable housing has been delivered through partnership with private developers through inclusionary housing policy in Chapel Hill. He said employers struggle to recruit and retain people, and he speculates that there is increased competition from employers outside of the county. He said the number of Town of Chapel Hill employees that live in Chapel Hill could be counted on one hand and within Orange County, maybe on two. He said at the Chamber, maybe one employee lives within the county. Chair Hamilton asked Ian Scott if the Chamber has a breakdown by employer types of who is having the most trouble retaining employees. Ian Scott said it's all the biggest sectors in the economy. He said both the university and hospital have expressed concern that the housing supply creates constraints for their growth and operation. He said food and beverage employers also face difficulties. He said a lot of people commute into Orange County for jobs and a lot of residents commute out of the county for jobs, and this is a consisted pattern that has been exacerbated over time. Commissioner Carter asked Ansel Pritchard for policies in neighboring counties—are there things that other counties are doing the Board should know about. Ansel Pritchard noted Chapel Hill's recent land use management ordinance passage took cues from Durham and Wake counties, removing tedious requirements for rezoning applications and reducing required lot sizes and parking minimums. He said these changes provide access to additional infill lots throughout Chapel Hill that weren't previously available. Chair Hamilton asked for the definition of infill lots. Ansel Pritchard gave an example of infill lots which is to subdivide existing lots to create space for additional homes beyond just ADUs. Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked if Ian Scott could share the Chamber's membership survey slides which were presented at a recent economic forecast forum. Ian Scott said yes. He said the Chamber surveys members each January or February with a consistent set of questions. He said it gives the Chamber a sense of what businesses in the area are experiencing. Commissioner Greene requested more detail about precise income levels of employees who can't afford local housing, noting that teachers and nurses at 60 percent AMI and many food service/retail workers likely don't exceed 65 percent AMI, meaning subsidized housing is needed. Ian Scott said he would provide that. Commissioner Portie-Ascott said she thought there was a need for housing at 80-120% AMI. Ian Scott said he thought the earlier presentations accurately represented the state of housing in Orange County. He said while economic development efforts work to attract higher- wage jobs, many Orange County employees simply can't afford housing meeting their needs. He noted significant wage pressure on employers during inflationary periods, particularly affecting locally owned food and beverage businesses. 39 Commissioner Carter asked Ian Scott about the Chamber's initiative on workforce housing and opportunities for public private partnerships to address that need. Ian Scott said the Chamber launched a strategic campaign two years ago with three top initiatives based on member priorities: housing supply diversity meeting price points across the income spectrum, workforce development connecting young people to local career pathways, and expanding underrepresented business ownership to address persistent income gaps by race in Orange County. He said the Chamber has been working primarily with Chapel Hill, which has set and met numeric goals for housing units. He noted confidence in recommending policy changes when diverse development community stakeholders agree on barriers and solutions. He emphasized both for-profit and non-profit developers face the same constraints: land cost, labor cost, construction materials cost, and legal costs. He sees partnership between sectors spanning the housing need continuum, though they're still falling short despite progress. Delores Bailey said EMPOWERment has program for assisting minority business owners with sustainability. She said housing challenges got worse after the pandemic. She said the local government housing staff are doing what they can with the resources they have. She said they are opening Peach apartments in April which are directed to those who earn 30%AMI. Commissioner Greene asked Ian Scott to share any success stories regarding the position the county helped fund for minority economic work Ian Scott said he did not have that information today, but it could be provided. He said the three initiatives established by the Chamber are interconnected, but housing is number one. He said Chapel Hill has set and met numerical goals for total housing unites and affordable housing units. He said most of the barriers are just math: land cost, labor cost, and the cost of construction materials. He said the not-for-profit builder faces the same constraints as private developers. He said there's been significant progress in Chapel Hill and Carrboro intends to make strides in affordable housing as well. Chair Hamilton said that the county faces water and sewer issues that are different from municipalities. She said they have challenges in knowing what we can and cannot do to make sure the county is protecting the environment and the headwaters which tend to be in the unincorporated parts of the county. She said because the county works in partnership with the with the municipalities, they will have to lean on the towns to provide more of that denser housing. She said the high cost of building is one of the drivers that the Board cannot control, as well as the demand for housing from people moving from out of the county. Vice-Chair Fowler said regarding changing the comprehensive land use plan, during the discussion of barriers, she heard about decreased lot sizes and parking minimums. She asked what things the county could do in the land use plan to improve access to affordable housing. Kimberly Sanchez said the county could figure out where higher density is appropriate and connecting it to transportation. She said allowing various housing types including multifamily apartments would also help, and providing opportunities for naturally occurring affordable housing acquisition and rehabilitation.She said quick capital access would help nonprofits acquire aging inventory before investors. Ansel Pritchard agreed about preserving naturally occurring affordable housing and emphasized support for critical repairs on non-Habitat homes for seniors who are looking to age in place. He said that Habitat liked the idea of a conservation subdivision. He said access to capital for infrastructure and utilities would help as they build large developments. 40 Delores Bailey said housing that is specifically for families earning 50% AMI and below would help. no place to build a four-plex. She said density discussions should include these families and suggested the land use plan specify assistance for this population, including those in manufactured homes and traditionally African American communities facing displacement due to rising property taxes. Blake Rosser said a conversation about the rural buffer is appropriate and its relation to land use planning. Chair Hamilton agreed that there needed to be a diversity of housing for a diversity of incomes. She asked the Board to remember that they can't restrict who comes in. She gave an example of Los Angeles, a place with density but high demand and it's not affordable. She said they need to be realistic about how difficult it may be, and the available methods to protect the homeowners who are here. She liked the ideas for rehabilitating older homes and creating opportunities to help people who want to build ADUs or use their land more flexibly. Vice-Chair Fowler asked if the county could use the land use plan to restrict based on AMI. Commissioner Bedford indicated no. Vice-Chair Fowler said they want to encourage diverse incomes because there is already a problem of concentrating low-income residents. Ian Scott encouraged the Board to look at existing transportation and transit capacity and consider where municipal services could be extended. He said he took a tour of the rural buffer, and it struck him that the county is good at preserving land, but most of it is going into residential use rather than agricultural use. He said by maintaining the boundaries for so long, it pushes demand elsewhere. He said a conservation subdivision may not deliver affordability and he questioned the marketability of that kind of subdivision. Commissioner Greene said there could be interest in conservation subdivisions because of concerns about the environment, and the benefits of smaller lots with land around it conserved. Ian Scott said his main concern is that it may not improve affordability. Ansel Pritchard said conservation subdivisions could have an affordability aspect. He gave the example of Weaver's Grove, which is a mix of 50% market rate and 50% Habitat. He said EMPOWERment is possibly the only organizations serving anything below 40% AMI, and that's because it's too expensive. He said the possibility of doing mixed income homeowners could work. Commissioner Bedford said the county uses HOME funds to help seniors repair homes. She asked Kimberly Sanchez if the Community Home Trust buildings in Carrboro are apartments. Kimberly Sanchez said they are in Chapel Hill, and they are 58-unit apartment buildings. She said low-income tax credits are only for rentals. Commissioner Bedford asked how many units are at the Landings at Winmore operated by CHT and what the waitlist is like. Kimberly Sanchez said 58 and they cut off the waitlist at 25 because they don't have a lot of turnover. Commissioner Bedford asked about balancing rental versus homeownership funding for limited dollars. 41 Kimberly Sanchez said it is an impossible question due to great need on both sides, noting renters who stabilize become homeowners and homeowners who stabilize move to private market. Delores Bailey said she disliked pitting rental against ownership and emphasized that for- profit developers offering affordable rentals must maintain permanent affordability rather than temporary commitments. She said some developments like Shelton Station haven't maintained affordable commitments adequately. Ansel Pritchard asked how long they commit to keep the units affordable. Delores Bailey said it's not years. Commissioner Bedford said she was surprised that some units are only kept affordable for 30 years. She asked if the non-profits had any statistics on inventory held by hedge funds and investors to use the properties as rentals. Delores Bailey said it is happening, but they don't have the statistics. Commissioner Bedford informed participants about General Assembly committee activities that could limit counties'taxation abilities, potentially reducing available housing funds. She said it's time for nonprofits and housing advocates to engage with the General Assembly. Delores Bailey asked if that reduces the amount of money available to housing non-profits. Commissioner Bedford said it could, and it would force the counties to go to sales tax, which is regressive. Commissioner Carter said one potentially positive change being discussed would close loopholes allowing developers to receive property tax exemptions for affordable housing without adequate ongoing compliance monitoring. She asked about other counties' budget allocations for affordable housing programs. Kimberly Sanchez said Durham and Wake passed bonds to support housing. She said CHT worked with Self-Help to shape the property tax bill. Delores Bailey said Durham offers additional subsidies beyond bond funding through home buyer programs that have helped people purchase homes, while Orange County participants in similar programs haven't resulted in local home sales due to inventory and subsidy limitations. Blake Rosser said he would investigate what other municipalities are doing. He said it may be possible for the Board to allocate portions of the $5 million every three years in bond and CIP funding toward 30%AMI or below housing. Delores Bailey mentioned housing choice voucher homeownership possibilities. Blake Rosser said that it's a possibility, but the required income levels would disqualify people from the program due to high housing costs. Lynn Nilsson said transportation could be put along Old 86 and Hwy 86. She suggested that could be changed in the land use plan. Ansel Pritchard said that's what Habitat was considering as well. Lynn Nilsson said another challenge is septic limitations in the rural areas when looking to add ADUs, and alternative methods of providing septic would be helpful. Chair Hamilton said they'd had separate discussion on water and sewer possibilities in rural areas. Lynn Nilsson added having the workforce so far away from employers makes it difficult for employees to consistently show up for work when there are weather related issues. 42 Commissioner Greene said that old Highway 86 from Carrboro included developable areas in Carrboro's transition zone. She said the federal government only requires 30 years for affordability terms. She said Orange County non-profits make a commitment to holding properties for 99 years. Commissioner Carter said community septic and well systems have limitations and drawbacks, and Orange County soils are difficult to combine with septic in many cases. Kimberly Sanchez asked if changing WASMPBA boundaries is a possibility. Chair Hamilton said the land use plan will be created with those policies in mind. She said it will likely need to be a living document to accommodate changes to agreements or policies. Kimberly Sanchez said that made sense. She said this is a very popular place to live, and they can't know now what innovations might come up for soil and water issues. Commissioner Bedford said the land use plan will be created to comply with existing policies. She said the county could simultaneously target changes to those agreements with other partners. Chair Hamilton said that there will need to be a lot of community education and engagement on potential changes to policies or agreements. Commissioner McKee said he doesn't think there's any possibility of changes to urban boundaries. Delores Bailey said there are not enough retirement centers in the county or places for those with disabilities or who have aged out of the adoption program to go. She said that's an important part of the housing conversation. Commissioner Greene said that the county recently expanded WASMPBA. Ian Scott asked if tax increment financing is a possible method for increasing affordable housing opportunities. He gave an example of the area in the recent WASMPBA expansion, which has not developed due to questions of financing. He said that there is a revolving loan fund for the Town of Chapel Hill. He said the Chamber is exploring employer housing assistance programs with larger companies. Chair Hamilton noted the fiscal pressures of the county and the struggle to provide mandatory services. She said innovative partnerships will be key. Adjournment The Board adjourned the meeting at 5:01 p.m. without a formal motion. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Jean Hamilton, Chair Recorded by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board and Tara May, Deputy Clerk to the Board Submitted for approval by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board.