Traffic fee is heated topic

Intense discussion of a proposed traffic impact fee during the City of Aiken Planning Commission's work session Tuesday left more questions than answers, but one thing was determined.

The controversial issue will be discussed again during a public hearing at the Nov. 14 Planning Commission meeting.

Commissioners were divided on the question of whether or not a traffic impact fee on new businesses and development is the best way to pay for the more than 35 million in anticipated growth-related projects over the next 10 years, ranging from the Whiskey-Powderhouse connector road to the widening of Hitchcock Parkway.

"We know we have road improvements that need to be made and we know it will be tens of millions of dollars," said City Manager Roger LeDuc. "The question Council has asked the Planning Commission is just how are we going to pay for those improvements."

Commissioner Ed Woltz said there are many issues to be considered.

"It is not an easy question," Woltz said. "We have to equally divide this thing up. We can't expect citizens of Aiken to pay for everyone else's enjoyment of Aiken."

Commissioner Roscoe Stanley had concerns about how to calculate impact fees fairly.

"The only way to have equal justice for all concerned is to raise the sales tax," Stanley said.

Ed Giobbe, commissioner, said developers and new businesses should pay for the costs associated with their decision. He rejected the notion that current City residents should pay for future growth-related road projects.

"The infrastructure that is already here, that guy hasn't paid a nickel for," Giobbe said. "It's not entirely accurate to say the cost of new development that comes in should be shared with everybody."

David Jameson, president of the Greater Aiken Chamber of Commerce, expressed concern that the impact fees would discourage growth in the City of Aiken.

"We stand a chance of more sprawl outside the City of Aiken," Jameson said. "Growth of the tax base has really sustained the City. Growth is a positive factor that has helped to keep taxes low in Aiken."

Several commissioners said Aiken County needs to work toward developing its own traffic impact fee at the same time.

If the City adopted a traffic impact fee, and there is no impact fee in the County, some believe businesses would move outside of the City limits to avoid the fee. Some commissioners were concerned developers would just build in areas such as Whiskey Road in the County, yet still significantly contribute to the City's traffic issues.

"Working something out with the County is essential," Giobbe said. "You can't throw it on the backs of Aiken taxpayers."

Several commissioners pointed out that some of the proposed City road projects are almost entirely in the County.

Roger Dyar, on-call traffic engineer for the City of Aiken, gave a presentation with examples of how impact fees could be applied to various types of businesses.

Fees are calculated based on the estimated number of trips created per type of business or project as determined by the Institute of Traffic Engineers to recover a percentage of the cost of the proposed road projects.

An example given was that of a 2,800 square foot convenience store. To recover 10 percent of the estimated shortfall, the fee for the business would be 8,882, whereas to recover 100 percent would be 88,826.

A single-family residential unit could have a 984.19 impact fee at 100 percent.

"There is a big difference between 10 and 100 percent," Giobbe said. "It does not necessarily have to be 100 percent. It could be 10 percent."

Woltz had some concerns about the fee being collected all at once at the time a business owner gets a building permit.

"That's cash they're going to have to have," Woltz said. "That could be a dealbreaker when someone can't borrow another 88,000."

LeDuc said if a traffic impact fee is enacted, it has to applied equally throughout the City in all areas.

Aiken City Council members also weighed in on the issue.

"The whole point of an impact fee is the notion that existing taxpayers should not have to pay for growth," said Jane Vaughters, Aiken City Council Member. "There is plenty of money being made from growth and that's who has to pay for it."

Council Member Don Wells said he believes a traffic impact fee would discourage people from opening businesses in the City.

"My concern is out of fairness to businesspeople," Wells said. "It would limit the type of businesses that can be located in the City of Aiken. It may not be hard for Wal-Mart to swallow a half million dollar impact fee, but an additional 40,000 for a small business before it opens its doors could cause them to go to North Augusta instead of Aiken."

Other potential funding sources were also discussed.

LeDuc said the City cannot rely entirely on state funding to get the projects done.

"We are getting money in, but it is not coming in fast enough and it is not enough," LeDuc said. "We will get money in the future, but so many projects need to be done it doesn't even come close."

The Nov. 14 Aiken Planning Commission Meeting will be held at 6 p.m. at the Municipal Building, 214 Park Ave. NW.

The only item on the regular meeting agenda, a request to annex a .94 acre parcel on Richland Avenue, was postponed to allow for more discussion of the traffic impact fee.