Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBuilding Review Board - Minutes - 09/27/2018City of Fort Collins Page 1 September 27, 2018 Alan Cram, Chair City Council Chambers Tim Johnson, Vice Chair City Hall West Brad Massey 300 Laporte Avenue Bernie Marzonie Fort Collins, Colorado Katharine Penning Rick Reider Staff Liaison: Justin Robinson Russ Hovland Chief Building Official The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224- 6001) for assistance. Regular Meeting Minutes September 27, 2018 A regular meeting of the Building Review Board was held on Thursday, September 27, 2018, at 1:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Fort Collins Municipal Building at 300 Laporte Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado. • CALL TO ORDER Chair Cram called the meeting to order at 1:01 p.m. • ROLL CALL PRESENT: Cram, Massey, Marzonie, Penning ABSENT: Johnson, Reider, Robinson STAFF: Hovland, Van Hall, Schiager • PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA None. • DISCUSSION AGENDA 1. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE JUNE 28, 2018 MEETING. Mr. Marzonie moved to approve the minutes of the June 28, 2018 meeting. Ms. Penning seconded. The motion passed 4:0. Building Review Board City of Fort Collins Page 2 September 27, 2018 The Board discussed whether to proceed with agenda item #3 given the low attendance of members for this meeting. They agreed it would be preferable to postpone the discussion of the 2018 I-Codes Adoption until the October 25, 2018 meeting. Mr. Hovland stated he would do a brief review of the code change highlights at that point in today’s meeting. Mr. Massey asked about the International Swimming Pool and Spa codes. Mr. Hovland explained his preference for adoption of all the new codes at the same time, since they cross-reference each other. 2. 2018 IMPACT FEE UPDATE Staff Presentation Mike Beckstead, City of Fort Collins Chief Financial Officer, gave a presentation to the Board. He explained that the impact fees are complex, and include Capital Expansion, Transportation Capital Expansion and Utilities Plant Investment Fees. Using Community Parks as an example, he explained how the fees are used. He reviewed the timeline for the impact fee project and the drivers of the fee increases. He summarized the key findings of the Fee Group. He talked about whether residential fees should be based on home sizes. Mr. Beckstead also provided a comparison of the fees in neighboring communities. Board Questions and Discussion Mr. Massey asked for clarification about the percentage of permits in various square footage ranges, and what the new breaks would be. Mr. Beckstead stated that 90% of the permits pulled in the past few years have been 2200 sq. ft. or greater. He went on to explain that determining the fees by square footage will involve marrying the breaks in the permit data with what the census data shows in terms of the number of residents in larger homes. He said the fees are calculated by the value of assets divided by population, and while the value of the assets and the total population won’t change, how those fees are spread out based on number of people may change depending on what the data shows. Mr. Massey asked why the expansion fee for Parks is the only one that pays 100% of the cost, while others are subsidized by other tax revenue streams. Mr. Beckstead said it was set up that way when capital expansion fees were established back in 1996. He explained that the asset infrastructure of Police Services or general government, for example, does not support higher fees, while the asset infrastructure of Parks does. Mr. Maroni asked if there is an ideal number of acres of parks per capita. Mr. Beckstead said he would have to refer that question to Kurt Friesen in Parks, however he there is a plan to build two new community parks, at which point the parks plan would be fully built. Ms. Penning asked whether refurbishing existing parks would reduce the need to build new parks, and whether that would be more cost effective. Mr. Beckstead stated that the City does have a goal of having a neighborhood park within a mile and a community park within four miles of every residence, as well as a target number of park acres per capita. He also pointed out that the existing parks are not currently in a state of disrepair, and capital expansion fee cannot be used for maintenance and upkeep. Chair Cram noted that the last time the fees were reviewed, the main source of contention was the emphasis of residential versus commercial fees, which is not going to change at this point. Mr. Marzonie expressed concern that increased fees impact the cost of construction which may eventually make Fort Collins an undesirable place because of the cost of living, particularly to buy a home. He asked about how much territory has been built out. Mr. Beckstead talked population estimates for the future based on available undeveloped land within the Growth Management Areas between neighboring communities. Mr. Beckstead invited the Board to provide a memo for Council, if desired.