1/3/1989 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Administrator Collins recalled that this was tabled from the last meeting because he was not convinced that it qualified for an impact fee credit. Subsection E of the ordinance states that the County will give credits if it meets an expansion or a capital road improvement that is shown on the County Thoroughfare Plan or if it provides a capacity expansion. Part of the difficulty is that this is worded wrong. It should say: "Provides capacity expansion not necessitated by the proposed land development activity." If it was necessitated, it would be site related and there should be no credit. Administrator Collins also recommended changing the wording at the end of Subsection 1 from "for" to "and". For instance, if somebody provides a capacity expansion to the county road system, which is not on the capital road network as well, we don't want to give them some kind of impact fee for paving a dirt road out in the middle of nowhere that we don't care about. He felt this was poorly written and that staff should come back with an amendment. However, for this purpose, staff has provided a little sketch, and essentially, Sandpointe has come in and straightened out a road. The cost to them to put in the third lane was more than the impact fee credit they are requesting. They did about $90,000 worth of work, and they are getting a $36,000 credit for the amount of expansion they have provided. Administrator Collins recommended an impact fee credit of $36,931.55 and suggested that staff be authorized to go back in and clear up the wording of the subsection of the ordinance, because the way it reads now, they are entitled to this credit. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved a Traffic Impact Fee Credit of $36,931.55 for Sandpointe Subdivision for additional work, and authorized staff to clean up the wording in the code. 65 JAN 3 1989 ROOK 75 PAGE 5113