Atherton: Refunds look unlikely for town's road-impact fee
Original post made on Aug 5, 2009
Read the full story here Web Link posted Wednesday, August 5, 2009, 12:00 AM
on Aug 5, 2009 at 8:43 am
My ears are still ringing from hearing Carol Flaherty wail and moan about the fees she has to pay.
It is people like her crying all the way to the bank that give developers a bad name.
on Aug 5, 2009 at 11:08 am
I'm confused by this story. How much of a reduction was the consultant recommending? Duncan Jones's method of calculating sounds reasonable, and Atherton's got an attorney advising about the legality of the fee (it's legal, and most if not all towns have a road-impact fee). Why was a consultant hired to do this study? Sounds like a waste. And developers who whine about having to pay a fee for damaging residential streets are hard to stomach.
on Aug 5, 2009 at 1:09 pm
the council always hires "consultants" because they are afaid to stand up to the develpers themseves-- Too scary--the problem with this ingenios display of leadership is that all-- and I do mean all- of the consultants have both long established ties and the future insentive to accomadate the developement community who are Very clear about what they want--the consultants will cash our check, and turn in some words but it's alaways going to be whatever the developers wanted to begin with and the coucil off the hook. Look at the artifact ordinace---the drainage study---the zoning ord--the housing element--the biz lisc tax..........
Could we at least not hire anymore consultants who have three initials for their name???
No more CSGs oe BKFs or PMGs.....this might help
Also-how about hiring a city planer who actually works for Just the town instead of an outside consultant with another boss somewhere else in the county ?