Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Impact Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Maricopa council hears public objections to proposed infrastructure plan and higher impact fees
Summary
At a public hearing, city staff presented a draft 10-year land use assumptions and infrastructure improvement plan; builders and developers urged more work, saying proposed fees — particularly for roads — would more than double and risk harming housing affordability.
Maricopa City Council on Nov. 20 opened a public hearing on a draft 10-year Land Use Assumptions and Infrastructure Improvement Plan (LUA/IIP) and received public comment raising concerns about proposed development impact fees, especially for streets.
The draft IIP, presented by Deputy City Manager Ben Bitterman and consultant Fred Philpott of LRB Financial Advisors, outlines proposed facilities and cost allocations for parks and recreation, libraries, police, fire and streets and includes a separate fee calculation for two fire service areas. Bitterman told the council the study began in February 2022 and that staff will incorporate public and stakeholder comments before returning a final draft in January.
The draft fee schedule shown to the council is not being adopted at the hearing; staff said fees will be considered in a subsequent public process if the council adopts the LUA/IIP.
Why it matters: Builders said the proposed fees, particularly the transportation component, are large enough to affect home prices and affordability in Maricopa. Pulte Homes’ attorney said the single-family fee in the draft would “more than doubl[e]” — reporting a figure of about $13,000 per home — with an increase of roughly $6,000 attributed to roads. The Home Builders Association of Central Arizona argued the IIP does not clearly demonstrate the legal nexus required between new development and each road project included in the plan.
During public comment, Faye Souders, representing Pulte, said the draft shows existing roadway capacity at about 32 percent and projects usage at just over half of capacity in 10 years, raising questions about whether the road projects in the IIP are proportionate to growth. She also asked that the city account for an “excess tax” offset: Maricopa’s construction contracting transaction privilege tax of 3.5 percent, compared with a general rate staff cited near 2 percent, which she said should be applied against capital costs before charging new development.
James Ashley, representing the Home Builders Association of Central Arizona, said the IIP as drafted fails to demonstrate proportionality and nexus required by state law and warned the proposed streets fee would leave Maricopa with some of the highest street impact fees in the region.
Staff response and next steps: Bitterman said the city posted the draft online and held stakeholder meetings; he asked the council to allow staff to continue working with stakeholders and to bring a final draft in January that incorporates comments. Fred Philpott described the technical approach used to convert projected growth into demand units for each service area and to identify projects and cost shares for new development.
No council vote was taken on the draft at the hearing. The council closed the public hearing after two stakeholder presentations and public comment and will consider the final LUA/IIP and any accompanying impact fees in a future meeting.
