PICKERINGTON CITY COUNCIL
MONDAY,
APRIL 25, 2005
CITY HALL, 100 LOCKVILLE ROAD
COUNCIL
WORK SESSION AGENDA
6:00
P.M.
1. ROLL CALL. Mrs. Riggs called the work session to order at 6:00 P.M., with Mrs. Riggs, Mr. O’Brien, Mr. Wright, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Parker, Mr. Sabatino, and Mr. Wisniewski present. Mayor Shaver was absent. Others present were: Judy Gilleland, Lynda Yartin, Frank Wiseman, Linda Fersch, Susan Crotty, Lance Schultz, PaulLane, Jennifer Frommer, Chris Cullinan, Mike Maurer, Patti Wigington, and others.
2. Discussion regarding Impact Fee Analysis. Ms Crotty stated she would like to introduce Mr. Chris Cullinan of TischlerBise. Ms Crotty stated Mr. Cullinan would give a brief presentation of the study and he would then answer any questions the Council members may have.
Mr. Cullinan stated impact fees may only be used for facilities that add or expand capacity, they cannot be used to maintain or replace existing capital assets. Mr. Cullinan continued there must be a reasonable connection between the need for additional facilities as a result of new growth and that the fees must not exceed a proportionate share of the cost for these facilities to serve that development. He stated this is called the direct benefit test. Mr. Cullinan stated they recommended the impact fee revenues must be spent within five or six years for a person to realize that direct benefit after paying their fee. He stated the five to six year period matches the City’s capital improvements planning horizon. Ms Gilleland clarified the report provided reflected the maximum supportable amount and the City could choose to go lower than that. Mr. Cullinan stated the City could adopt 100 percent of the fees recommended or they could adopt a certain percentage. Ms Gilleland stated, as she understood it, in order to remove a certain component we would need to do it across the board for both residential and commercial. Mr. Cullinan stated that was correct. Mr. Sabatino inquired if there were other metro areas that have imposed the fees, and, if so, how have they treated the disparity between residential and nonresidential. Mr. Cullinan stated the only community he knew for sure was the City of Delaware, and they implemented 100 percent of the fees for residential and non-residential. Mr. Hackworth stated as he understood if, if we set aside money for a specific road project, at some point in time we would be obligated to do that project. Mr. Cullinan stated in that case, that money must be spent on some sort of capacity road improvement. He stated it may not be to the magnitude originally planned, but you still must spend the money on some sort of capacity road improvement. Mr. Cullinan stated he would recommend the fees be updated every three years. Mr. O’Brien inquired if other communities have an administrator that monitors the collections and disbursements of the funds. Mr. Cullinan stated he was not aware of any community in Ohio that had that, but he would recommend an annual report be done showing who paid what, where it was spent, what the current balances were, etc. Mr. O’Brien further clarified the City could elect to put an administrative charge of some type on the application, but you could not actually make it a part of the fee itself. Mr. Cullinan stated to do that, you must come up with some sort of basis for the administrative charge. Mr. Cullinan stated he felt the administration of the impact fee normally fell to the Planning Director. Mr. Parker stated he understood Delaware imposed the impact fees, however, other communities in that area are getting a lot of commercial development. He stated his concern was that the impact fee would drive commercial development to a community that did not impose these fees. Mr. Parker stated he would like to know if commercial development in Delaware has moved to the outskirts of the city. Mr. Parker stated further he would like to know if there was any relationship between impact fees and density, and Mr. Cullinan stated he did not know the answer to that. Mr. Wright inquired if the City were to enter into a JEDD or something like that with a nonincorporated entity, would we have to re-look at all of the calculations, because the development could occur anywhere but could have an impact on the city. Mr. Cullinan stated if there is an impact fee on the books, and development occurs, that should be a part of the discussion when entering into the JEDD. Ms Crotty stated we have an attorney that specializes in this area and that would have to be something he would have to look at. Ms Crotty stated further the formation of a JEDD takes a long period of time so all of these issues can be looked at during that time. Mr. Parker stated he does support impact fees, but he does not support pricing ourselves out of a market. Ms Gilleland clarified that individual accounts for each category should be created to keep track of the revenues and the expenditures.
Ms Gilleland stated this issue is very complex and she felt Council may want to review everything discussed this evening and then schedule another Council work session and it may require more than one work session. She stated she would obtain the impact fee legislation from Delaware and provide it to Council to review and then the first work session can be scheduled.
3. ADJOURNMENT: There being nothing further, Mrs. Riggs closed the work session at 7:25 P.M., April 25, 2005.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
__________________________________
ATTEST:
___________________________________