Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/13/2010 Capital ImprovementsMINUTES CITY OF THE COLONY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE April 13, 2010 After determining that a quorum is present, the Capital Improvements Advisory Committee (CIAC) of the City of The Colony, Texas convened into regular session which was held on 'Tuesday, April 13, 2010 at 6:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers located in City Hall, 6800 Main Street, The Colony, Texas, at which time the following items were addressed: Board Members Present: Karen Hames, Chairperson; Deville Hubbard; Helene Parker; Debbie Morrison; David Terre; and Brian Wade. Board Member Absent: Eddie McCormick Staff Present: J. Michael Joyce, Development Services Director; Gordon Scruggs, Director of Engineering; Felicia Koppang, Recording Secretary; Ed Voss, City Attorney. 1 LO CALL REGULAR SESSION TO ORDER Chairperson Hames called the meeting to order at 6:30 pm. 12.0 REGULAR AGENDA 2.1 Receive a workshop on Land Use Assumptions and Capital Improvements Plan relating to Roadway Impact Fees. Mr. Scruggs introduced Jeff Whittaker and Tom Grant with Kimley Horn. Jeff Whittaker, Traffic Engineer, conducted presentation to answer the questions of what an impact fee is, why the update is happening, the role of the CIAC, the four major components in an impact fee study, and the next steps in the process. Chairperson Hames asked why the study shows the vehicular mile is different than the state regulation. Jeff Whittaker responded that COG (Council of Governments) did a home-based work study to calculate what the trip length was but the state law requires the service area to not exceed 6 miles, which was interpreted as the trip length cannot exceed 6 miles. The Colony's service area is four miles. Mr. Scruggs continued with the response that since The Colony covers an area of four miles and there cannot be travel of more than four miles within the City, the trip length in the equation would be four. Capital Improvements Advisory Committee April 13, 2010 Page 2 of 5 Commissioner Hubbard asked if a stoplight will be proposed to be located where proposed project number eighteen would meet Main Street. Mr. Scruggs responded that he was not sure and needs to see if it would be warranted. Commissioner Hubbard asked if the extension of Memorial to underneath the railroad track is not identified as a project, would it be eliminated from funding. Mr. Scruggs responded that the bridge under the railroad is being funded by TXDOT, excess regional toll revenues and Denton County and since it has separate funding sources, it will not be included on the project list. Commissioner Hubbard asked if a recommendation of percentages from maximum to somewhere in the middle would be made by the Committee or if it is done by staff. Mr. Scruggs responded that the Committee is welcome to make a recommendation, but typically in the past, the maximums were presented to Council. Commissioner Hubbard asked if a total for all 18 projects has been calculated. Mr. Whittaker responded the total is estimated at $30 million. Commissioner Hubbard asked how the total would relate to our decision on the percentage impact fee and if the total targets a percentage. Mr. Whittaker responded that Council will look at neighboring communities and figure out a competitive percentage that they feel is appropriate. Kimley Horn's job is to calculate the maximum and figure out if they want to put the full burden onto paying for new growth, what the 100% number would be. State law requires that the 100% number be cut in half because there is maximum for what can be charged. Mr. Scruggs continued that Council normally figures a percent of that, which is figured by category. Lower impact fees were put on things like General Retail, whereas other categories would be assessed higher impact fees. Commissioner Hubbard asked if the reason for the study was to get the projects identified and listed as to reason. Mr. Scruggs responded yes. Commissioner Terre asked when the last time was that the study was done. Mr. Whittaker responded December 2004. Commissioner Terre asked if it has all remained the same until now. Capital Improvements Advisory Committee April 13, 2010 Page 3 of 5 Mr. Whittaker responded yes. He continued that as a comparison, the maximum fee that could be charged in 2004 has gone down about $200 because the CIP and Land Use combined. Commissioner Terre asked if it was normal for all communities to follow a 4-5 year update and if cities could look at it more frequently. Mr. Whittaker responded that state law requires it to be looked at every 5 years, however, it can be reviewed at any time but it is typically not seen very often due to the public hearing and adoption process. Commissioner Terre asked what the timeline is for the projects. Mr. Scruggs advised that some of the projects are already completed but there have been no schedules set for the others. Mr. Whittaker continued in stating that Roadway Impact Fees are not required to be on a schedule because sometimes the demand can be there without the funds. The projects noted are within a 10 year window. Commissioner Hubbard asked if all projects shown on the Thoroughfare Plan are required to be included because the Causeway is not included in the roadway impact fee study. Mr. Scruggs responded that the Causeway is outside the impact fee area. Mr. Whittaker continued that the Thoroughfare Plan is used for the standards and can only collect for items on the Thoroughfare Plan within the service area. Commissioner Hubbard asked if it was an issue that the Causeway was not on the report. Mr. Scruggs responded no, it just means that since it is not on the report, Impact Fees cannot be used to construct the road or the approach to it. Mr. Scruggs continued in stating that if there are questions that need to be addressed, if the Commissioners would email Mr. Joyce or call him (Mr. Scruggs), the questions could be addressed and/or answered during the next meeting. Commissioner Hubbard asked when the homes are taken, like the extension of Lakeshore Blvd, would impact fee funds available to pay for the homes. Mr. Scruggs responded that the costs for right-of-way purchase were not included, but the funds could be used for that purpose. Mr. Whittaker stated that a small portion of the project is included for right-of-way, but is not included for accommodations or housing. Commissioner Parker asked if the Appendices at the back gave a breakdown of costs for each of the 18 projects. Capital Improvements Advisory Committee April 13, 2010 Page 4 of 5 Mr. Whittaker responded yes. Some of the projects that have already been constructed show a lump sum for the City's contribution. Commissioner Parker asked for clarification for Project #1, Line Item #501 for Concrete Driveway Approach as well as Project #4, Line Item #501. Mr. Whittaker responded that they are rounding errors, which can be adjusted. Mr. Scruggs continued that the numbers are kept low to be sure that there are no issues with Capital Project numbers being really high and not representing what is actually out there. Chairperson Haines asked what the next step would be. Mr. Scruggs responded the next step would be for the Board to go through the report, let them know if there are any questions, respond to comments and questions, and if acceptable, make a recommendation to Council. Commissioner Terre asked if there is another projected meeting for the CIAC. Mr. Whittaker responded yes, in two weeks there will be a short overview with a presentation of the plan which is state required, and then there will be a month to address questions before going to Council. Mr. Joyce continued that the next meeting would be prior to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, starting at 6:30 pm with CIAC. He also stated that staff is looking for one more CIAC Board member from the ETJ (Extra-Territorial Jurisdiction) but yet to have any success Chairperson Hames asked which of the project had not been completed. Commissioner Hubbard responded with the Lakeshore extension. Commissioner Wade continued that there are several on the list that have not been completed, including #6, #7, #8 and #15. Mr. Whittaker stated that some are median lanes which need to be reconstructed. Mr. Scruggs continued that most of the projects on Memorial, Paige, and a segment of South Colony have all been done. Project #13 is only half done. Commissioner Hubbard asked if approval has been granted for a tunnel to go under the railroad tracks to Headquarters. Mr. Scruggs responded that a overpass was projected at one point but nothing has been decided. Capital Improvements Advisory Committee April 13, 2010 Page 5 of 5 Commissioner Hames asked if it was normal to be behind in looking at the report when many of the proposed projects have already been completed. Mr. Scruggs responded no. Commissioner Hubbard continued in stating that many of the projects noted were on the previous report. Mr. Joyce stated that all the funds hadn't been collected yet. Commissioner Parker asked what the Board was supposed to be advising Council to do. Mr. Scruggs responded that the CIAC Board will make a recommendation to Council for approval or to not approve the Land Use Assumptions and Capital Improvement Projects. Commissioner Parker asked if the Board could make a recommendation for none, some or all of the projects, even though some of the projects have already been completed. She continued by asking when of the 18 projects have been completed. Mr. Scruggs responded yes and that on Appendix A, the projects that have cost estimates noted have not been completed, if it shows a city contribution, those projects have been done. Commissioner Hubbard asked if the Thoroughfare Plan that was previously approved would be available to the Commissioners. Mr. Scruggs responded that the Thoroughfare Plan is available on the Engineering page of the City's website under Master Plans, but a copy can be provided to the Commissioners that would like one. Commissioner Morrison asked Commissioner Hubbard if the previous Thoroughfare Plan would include project #18 and project #4. Commissioner Hubbard responded yes. Chairperson Hames adjourned the meeting at 7:10 pm. Karen Hames, Chairperson elici Koppan ec r ' g Secretary