Loading...
2000-02-28 CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING MEETING MINUTES160 MINUTES OF A PUBLIC HEARING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PEARLAND, TEXAS, HELD ON FEBRUARY 28, 2000, AT 6:30 P.M., IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, 3519 LIBERTY DRIVE, PEARLAND, TEXAS. The meeting was called to order with the following present: Mayor Mayor Pro -Tem Councilmember Councilmember Councilmember Councilmember City Manager City Attorney City Secretary Tom Reid William Berger Richard Tetens Larry Wilkins Helen Beckman Klaus Seeger Glen Erwin Darrin Coker Young Lorfing Others in attendance: Deputy City Manager Alan Mueller; Executive Director P. E.D.C. Mike Chance; Police Chief J.C. Doyle; City Engineer John Hargrove; Director of Community Development and Services Gene Tumlinson; Public Works Director Jerry Burns; Assistant City Attorney Nghiem Doan; Project Manager Michael Ross; Utility Accounts Supervisor Missy Miller; Purchasing Officer Gordon Island; Project Assistant Gene Simeon. PURPOSE OF HEARING - AMENDMENT OF IMPACT FEES To consider the amendment of land and use assumptions and a capital improvements plan and the imposition of an impact fee in the service area encompassed by the city limits. STAFF REVIEW OF PROPOSED AMENDMENT Deputy City Manager, Alan Mueller, gave a brief overview of Impact Fees. He also stated that this hearing was advertised in the Houston Chronicle rather than in the local paper because the notice has to be advertised in a newspaper of local circulation throughout the entire service area. The notice was advertised on January 26, February 2, and February 9, 2000. The study was presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission on February 7, 2000 and they forwarded the study to Council with a recommendation for approval. Ron Bavarian, Walsh Engineering, gave a detailed presentation regarding the Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study Update. Mr Bavarian stated that Water Impact Fee based on 6,426 service units is $1,803 which is the eligible Impact Fee. However, the proposed impact fee on the same number of service connection is $1,403. The Wastewater Impact Page 1 of 4 - 2/28/2000 161 Fee based on 6,426 equivalent service units is $2,933 which is the eligible fee, and the proposed Impact Fee for wastewater is $2,060. The total Water and Wastewater Impact Fee eligible amount is $4,736 and the proposed Impact Fee is $3,463. Mr. Bavarian gave a brief overview of the impact that the Shadow Creek Ranch Development will have on the City. CITIZEN COMMENTS Tom Alexander, 3208 Nottingham, addressed Council and gave a brief history of the City when he served on Council. He stated he does notthink that everyone understands Impact Fees and what it does to the property owners. Mr. Alexander stated that the report does not give the long time property owners who have been paying taxes any type of credit. He further stated that he cannot get water to his property in "Old Townsite." He said he has lost sales in the "Old Townsite" because of big assessments by Ordinance No 220-7. He also addressed previous amounts charged for Impact Fees. He said this is not fair, and the City is "shooting their self in the foot." Gary Cook, 2947 E. Broadway, Shadow Creek Ranch, stated that he would keep his comments to the Shadow Creek Ranch portion of the study. He stated that he has gone through the report and has some questions and concerns. Mr. Cook stated that the total equivalent EDU'S (Equivalent Dwelling Units) for Shadow Creek Ranch are approximately 17,000. The study uses only 10,000 EDU'S (Equivalent Dwelling Units), but uses the total infrastructure cost. The infrastructure cost should be spread over the entire 17,000 EDU'S (Equivalent Dwelling Units). The infrastructure costs used appear to have not netted out the EDA Grant funds. Only the actual out of pocket expenses should be used in this calculation. The costs of over -sizing sewer or water lines as well as costs of water and/or sewer plant expansion to serve other areas should not be a cost of Shadow Creek Ranch in this calculation. The basic cost of the water and sewer treatment plants and some of the trunk line costs should be prorated over a larger service area since this is the concept for their future use. Specifically the areas north and south of Shadow Creek Ranch is intended to utilize these facilities in the future. The total cost of the treatment plant appears to be extremely high. Shadow Creek Ranch only generates a treatment plant cost of $8 million versus the total $25 million used in the study. The total cost should be re-evaluated and the proration of that cost between Shadow Creek Ranch and the additional service areas should be adjusted. Mr. Cook requested that the City have the author consider these points prior to finalization of the impact fees and adoption by the City Council. Jack McGuff, Vice -President of Economic Development for the Chamber of Commerce, addressed Council and stated the Chamber is concerned about the Impact Fees. He stated that the Chamber is the one that initiated the removal of the Impact Fees in 80's. However, the Chamber understands that Impact Fees are back in. They also realize the amount of new construction coming into the City is tremendous. The main concern is the 80% increase Page 2 of 4 - 2/28/2000 and the sudden impact. If the Impact Fees could be spread out over a period of time and not all required at one time, it may not be as bad. In closing on behalf of the Chamber he asked Council to consider stretching the impact fees out a little bit. COUNCIUSTAFF DISCUSSION Councilmember Seeger asked does charging the Impact Fees place the City ahead of the necessary cost of development, as far as future cost of building the infrastructure? Deputy City Manager, Alan Mueller, stated historically the cash balance in the Impact Fee Fund has hovered very close to zero. Right now there is a fairly substantial balance, but there are several projects coming up that will use these funds. After the projects are complete most of this fund will be depleted. He also said the City tries to maintain that fund as close to zero as possible. Mr. Mueller also stated that the City recognizes that the proposed Impact Fee is a big increase, however, if the City chooses to do something lower than the proposed fee, the City will have to find other funding sources for these projects, or the projects will have to be deferred to a later time. Councilmember Beckman stated that she feels the Impact Fees have increased because of the City is growing so fast, and the City has so much area to serve. At some point basic facilities will be in place and the cost may start to go down. City Attorney, Darrin Coker, addressed the possibility of having a different rate for commercial versus residential. He said as Council is aware the City can charge different rates for different areas of town. Mr. Coker further stated that you would have to be concerned if we would be discriminating or treating people throughout town differently. He further explained how the courts would use a "standard of review" in considering a matter like this. Mayor Reid gave a brief overview of information that he has recently read from the Attorney General's Office regarding a city legally capping and not issuing building permits as Flower Mound did and other cities have done. City Attorney, Darrin Coker, stated that Cities are placing moratoriums on building permits, but yet that action has not been completely litigated. There have been court rulings that a city has the authority to do that. However, there is still a long way to go before there is clarification from the courts. Deputy City Manager, Alan Mueller gave a brief overview of the time line needed to adopt the proposed Impact Fees. ADJOURNMENT Page 3 of 4 - 2/28/2000 162 163 Meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Minutes approved as submitted and/or corrected this l7th day of March A.D., 2000. Tom Reid Mayor ATTEST: Page 4 of 4 - 2/28/2000