02-23-2015 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE � ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 9,2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. (9. STORM WATER AND DRAINAGE TRITNK FEE REVIEW continuea� 4. Provisions should be established and documented in the City Code with regard to past and future payments of the SW&DT fees. The Council should establish standards defining how past fees paid are credited for future development of a site. 5. Examine how the fee takes into consideration on-site stormwater improvements and consider adopting standards for fee credit for off-site improvements. 6. The need to analyze whether the triggers for charging the SW&DT fee for both new development and redevelopment are clear and appropriate. Staff is working on a number of options for the Council to consider in the future. In early January of 2014, Staff, in conjunction with the Planning Commission,looked at a number of questions that need to be answered. However,the Planning Commission did not spend much time on this. The analysis being prepared by Staff should be available in late February or early Mazch for Council review. At this time the Council should provide input and direction on the materials included in their packets this evening. McMillan asked if Staff is looking for Council input on the direction the City should pursue. Gaffron indicated that is correct. Gaffron requested the Council review the Planning Commission memo and documents. Gaffron stated Staff hopes to have a potential solution or option to each of the elements to make it easier for developers to accept as it relates to new homes and remodels. Gaffron noted the City would have ended up under the current City Code with X number of dollars towards these CIP projects in the future as the development happens. Gaffron stated if the Council's goal is to collect fewer dollars that will need to be a conscious decision. Another option that can be looked at is collecting the same number of dollars but devising a different system of collection. Gaffron stated the biggest question is how much revenue the City would like to collect from this source. McMillan stated it appears the City Council is looking at land that is being subdivided;vacant lots,which is land that is not subdivided; a redeveloped lot,such as a tear down and rebuild; and an addition to the structure. McMillan noted currently the City does not charge a stormwater fee on a redeveloped lot or a remodel. Gaffi-on asked if the City Council has a priority or whether she would like to look at them together. McMillan stated she realizes the City is experiencing some pressure on this issue with regard to subdivisions but that she would like to look at the other ones as well. McMillan indicated she would like to add the 50 percent reduction credit to subdivided land and that she would place the vacant land and redeveloped lots in the same category. McMillan indicated she is not interested in charging a stormwater fee on additions unless they are doubling the size of the house. Levang stated she likes those four categories,but as it relates to an addition,if it adds more bedrooms, that could result in an increase of usage and have an impact on the stormwater system. Levang stated in her view there should be a threshold established and that the City should look at what the stormwater impact is likely to be from that piece of land. Page 15 of 26