Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Paris council declines petition to create Belleview Estates public improvement district
Summary
After hearing staff detail a petition to create a Belleview Estates Public Improvement District covering roughly 120 acres, the Paris City Council voted unanimously to decline accepting the petition at this time, citing concerns about timing and fiscal prudence amid other city projects.
The Paris City Council on March 9 voted to decline a petition to create the Belleview Estates Public Improvement District (PID), which staff said would have covered roughly 120 acres north of the 12200 block of Southeast Loop 286 and east of Steelhouse Road and could have supported more than 600 homes on 50-foot lots as later reviewed through zoning.
City staff (identified in the presentation as Stephanie) explained the process and financial mechanics of a PID to council: a PID allows a developer to access public bonding to pay for public improvements, and those PID bonds are repaid through assessments on the lots inside the district rather than by the city at large. “The city is not liable for the bond repayment, but it would be obligated to foreclose on properties whose owners fail to pay their assessments,” Stephanie said in the presentation.
Council members said they supported development in principle but raised concerns about adopting a second PID while the first—Forestbrook PID—remains in early stages. Mayor Prom Savage said he favored development but did not think the timing was right: “I don't think that it is the right time for a second PID to be taken on by the city,” he said, citing the recent large wastewater project and its tax and bond implications for residents.
Following council discussion, a motion to decline acceptance of the petition was moved and seconded; council voted in favor, recorded as a unanimous vote (motion carries, five yes). Staff reminded the council that declining to accept the petition at this time does not preclude reconsideration at a later date; the resolution before council would have only set a public hearing and would not itself create the PID.
Key petition details presented by staff included the petitioner (Thomas Haynes, manager of Hannes Hannes and Jones LLC), a referenced potential buyer/developer (Steven Smith), the approximate site (about 120 acres), and the preliminary plan notes that envisioned over 600 homes on 50-foot lots (zoning changes would be required for lot sizes). The council did not adopt any ordinance creating the PID and no further action was required as a result of the vote.
Next steps: The developer may pursue the petition again at a later time; any future action to create a PID would follow state- and local-notice requirements and, if pursued, would proceed via ordinance after public hearing.
