Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Impact Fees Roadways topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council reviews semiannual roadway impact-fee report; service-area D created to meet statutory travel limits
Summary
City staff presented the semiannual Capital Improvements Plan report on roadway impact fees, including collection totals, project spending and the creation of a new service area (D) to comply with the six-mile statutory limit; council unanimously approved the semiannual report.
Harold, a city staff presenter to the Capital Improvements Advisory Committee (CIAC), presented the semiannual Capital Improvements Plan report on roadway impact fees and explained a recent service-area change and current spending and project allocations.
Harold told the council the city now has four roadway impact-fee service areas—A, B, C and the newly created D—and said creation of service-area D addressed a statutory travel-distance limit (no service area should require more than six miles of travel). He said the city has completed five years of collections and phase three of the plan and that service-area D began collecting in January of the prior year.
On collections, Harold reported the city had collected about $13,200,000 since inception and had allocated roughly 50% of what had been collected to date. He walked through service-area project spending and current construction activity: Wyoming Springs design and right-of-way work and active construction; Chilton Trail widening; Eagles Nest awaiting a developer right-of-way parcel; University Boulevard (service area B) completed; Ken Road 112 preparatory work completed and construction to begin; Kinney Ford design and work on phases; and a planned joint project along U.S. 79 with TxDOT. Harold said the city finds it effective to get projects shovel-ready locally and then leverage state resources.
Council member Flores asked whether fees collected in one service area may be spent in another; Harold replied service-area fees are dedicated to their service area and that there is a 10-year window to implement projects with those funds. He added that redistribution would be administratively complex. Harold and council members discussed developer offset agreements; Harold said none had been recorded in the most recent reporting period and that impact fees have reduced the need for piecemeal agreements in many development cases.
At the end of the presentation the council voted to adopt the semiannual roadway impact-fee report. The motion to adopt was made by Council member Ortega, seconded by Council member Fleming; the roll-call vote was unanimous.
The report and the council discussion continued to frame the city's multi-year plans for Kinney Ford, Gattis, Ken Road and other arterial improvements funded in part by impact fees.
