Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Impact Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Draft land‑use assumptions and infrastructure plan prompt debate as proposed development fees rise sharply
Summary
Consultant and staff presented draft land‑use assumptions and an infrastructure improvements plan that would substantially increase development impact fees — largely because of proposed fire facilities and Shea Boulevard widening costs; council opened a public hearing and asked for options before final adoption.
Ben Griffin of Tishler Bice presented the draft land‑use assumptions and infrastructure improvements plan (IIP) required by state statute before adopting development impact fees. He said the plan uses a 2025 base year that includes seasonal housing units and projects roughly 1,300 additional housing units and 175,000 square feet of nonresidential floor area over 10 years.
Griffin said the proposed fee increases are driven mainly by two factors: a new fire facilities component (facilities, apparatus and equipment) not included in the town’s prior IIP, and plan‑based street projects — chiefly the Shea Boulevard widening projects — whose estimated construction costs have risen substantially. Griffin told the council the total plan-based cost for streets is roughly $29 million and that MAG (the regional transportation authority) would fund roughly 70% of the larger Shea Boulevard project, leaving the town a development share of about $8.8 million for the work included in the IIP.
Council members asked detailed questions. Several expressed concern about the scale of the proposed fee increases: one council member noted an illustrative single‑family fee moving from about $4,000 to roughly $12,000 under the proposed IIP. Ben Griffin and staff said the council could ask staff and the consultant to present options at the October adoption date — for example, removing the new fire facilities component, adopting a lower percentage of the calculated fees, or extending the repayment horizon for the plan‑based street component to reduce per‑unit charges.
The council opened and closed the required public hearing on the draft land‑use assumptions and IIP; multiple council members asked staff to prepare alternative scenarios and to return with clear comparisons before the October adoption date. No fee schedule was adopted at this meeting; the town manager and consultant said they would prepare alternative options for council consideration.
