City Council Minutes 1988 12 20 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

developers have expressed their desire to have Council give people time to review the Ordinance more completely before adopting it. Mr. Hoyt feels that the taps need to be taken into context of the total fee charged to a consumer coming to Louisville. "With t:he impact fees, Louisville's total building permit structure is one of the highest in the whole Metropolitan area." Mr. Hoyt continued stating that the building permit fee increase is sending a message to the development communit:y at a time when the developers are working trying to upgrade what they are doing in Louisville with higher-end development and being put at a $10,000 disadvantage on the bottom line of Louisville's building permit fee compared to the County. Mr. Hoyt stated, "I understand what you are doing with the tap fees in principle as a financing technique and I think probably it needs to happen. I do think that the whole financing structure can't be done one at a time without thinking about your whole revenue side.'" Mr. Hoyt feels it is a difficult thing to ask developers to pay some of the highest impact fees, and also expect a high level development iri terms of what the developer puts into the development such as landscaping, land contributions, major roadways, etc. Mr. Hoyt asked that the developers be included in looking at the fee structure: overall. Chuck Bellock, Coal Creek Associates, stated that 10-12 years past, th:e City developed a policy change whereby a series of fee increases were put into effect so that new construction would pay its own way. There has never been any argument about that, Mr. Bellock stated, and feels it is appropriate. However, Mr. Bellock stated that along the way the fees became a little skewed and new capital improvements versus maintenance and operational costs of` existing capital improvements somehow is not exactly considered and an imbalance was created. "I think new construction eventually became looked upon t:o pay for not only new homes, but for the cost of operating some of the old homes as well," Bellock stated. Mr. Bellock stated that this Ordinance does begin to address this imbalance and user fees are long over due. Mr. Bellock also felt the developers haven't had an opportunity to lc-ok at the Ordinance in depth and would like see a deeper examination of the fees in context of all the other fees as well. Specifically, Mr. Bellock asked that the 10 points awarded for fire extinguishing capabilities in a residential home and outlined in the structure of the Ordinance shouldl be looked at more closely. 4