Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2017 05 15

Home Browse Search

Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes April 17, 2017 Page 11 of 14 be accomplished without having to add an additional tap fee. I am willing to talk with Public Works. Zuccaro says as far as maintenance of the system and having an additional tap, typically when you have separate structures, you have a separate physical tap into the main line which has its own maintenance requirements and expenses. As far as how much water is flowing in and out of the system, you are never going to capture that except on a head count basis. There are fees for the actual usage. We are not talking about usage fees but about the actual tap fee which goes beyond the actual day-to-day usage. It is really to maintain the whole system and expand the system as needed. There are other elements to this aside from how many people are in a structure. Chuck Thomas says I am suggesting an analysis of the usage and the cost providing that usage. That becomes the basis for the actual fee that is charged, rather than an arbitrary fee that says, this is going to cost X number of dollars versus an engineered evaluation that says, this is how much the actual cost would be. It requires more sensitive application to recovery of costs versus a blanket cost of tap fee which appears to be conceptually inequitable based on what we are trying to accomplish. Dickinson says I understand there is a big difference between the tap fee and the usage. If the City is incurring an expense because of the way it is designed, then the City needs to charge a tap fee. If it is just a source of revenue, then it is a nice way to find ways to incentivize historic preservation by waiving the fee. It really isn't an expense in the first place. We will forego that opportunity for revenue as a thank -you for preserving a historic structure. I am confused as to whether we have a true expense as a City when we create a new tap. Zuccaro says these are great points. I understand there can be different ways to treat the historic district, and that is a great policy discussion to have. When a commercial building does an addition, they still have water and sewer fees. It is not a tap fee but an expansion fee. These fees go towards water treatment, water rights purchases, and sewer treatment plant. These are growth driven requirements the City is trying to capture cost on. It is not for revenue but to pay for costs. Public Works has done rate increase studies often and dove into the details. Chuck Thomas says we are asking you to defend what you don't oversee. But these things are quantifiable and can be applied specifically to a subject property in a specific quantifiable way, rather than a blanket fee. This is the point I am trying to make. We do everything we can to encourage the preservation of structures within the district, in whole or in part, and put together a structure that reflects actual cost to the system to be applied rather than a blanket fee. I think in some cases, such as the garage being repurposed into a commercial use, to charge a fee that is applicable is inappropriate to the actual use. It doesn't reflect the cost; it reflects the fact there is an arbitrary fee. It needs to be scaled to the situation within historic preservation district so you can encourage the preservation of structures. I think this is the point we are agreeing on and could be the direction we are going in. Zuccaro says as I hear this, a couple thoughts come to mind on how you can make a statement in your role. You might want to consider somebody drafting a statement, resolution, or letter that HPC can discuss and vote on as a recommendation to CC. They can take the recommendation into consideration on a policy level. Trice says it is probably best we form a two -person subcommittee to work on this special topic. Fahey asks if we could have someone from Public Works with us so they can explain their reasoning, fee structure, and costs. Zuccaro says if there are technical questions, we can answer those as they arise or we can get a Public Works representative to attend a meeting to directly answer your questions. Chuck Thomas says in putting together a position paper on a particular topic like this without direct input from Public Works is that you put yourself on opposite sides. I prefer to do this in a collaborative way. This is the issue and on the surface, there may be some inequity in the way it