Barry Discusses Development And Concurrency During Town Hall
February 14, 2024
During a town hall meeting this week, Escambia County District 5 Commissioner Steven Barry said it may be time for the commission to talk more about concurrency in development.
Concurrency is the principle that public facilities and services necessary to support a proposed development should be available, or be made available, concurrent with the impacts of the development.
“Where are these students going to go, and Where are the roads going to come from,” Barrineau Park resident Bonnie Exner (pictured left) asked.
‘I don’t know where the kids are going to go to school,” Barry responded. “I know there’s a conversation with the school board district right now about parceling out a portion of OLF-8 for a K-8 school. There’s conversations about a new school in the north Cantonment- Quintette area.”
He said concurrency was removed out of the Escambia County Comprehensive Plan when it was no longer required by the state, around 1993.
“It is something that the board has discussed a little bit in the last year. It may be the time to begin having a little more of that conversation about some concurrency. It’s something that potentially adds cost to development; the majority of folks in my opinion that are doing development are trying to put a good product on the ground.”
For more town hall pictures, click or tap here.
Other residents that attended the District 5 town hall at the Langley Bell 4-H Center in Cantonment expressed concerns about traffic, code enforcement and drainage issues.
NorthEscambia.ocm photos, click to enlarge.
Comments
7 Responses to “Barry Discusses Development And Concurrency During Town Hall”
Requesting some street lighting on Marge Lane. Very dark down that short street.
JW, Thanks for your response. I agree an impact fee is viable but within reason. Is it fair to ask someone today to pay an exorbitant amount to build and the person who built yesterday to pay virtually zilch? I reckon the question is how much is fair. To ask a contractor to build a school, waste treatment facility, and/or roads isn’t fair. If a school is provided, who owns it? My remarks are never intended to be contentious, but to give the county carte blanche authority is dangerous.
Impact Fees is being seriously considered in Santa Rosa County because of all their growth. The positive result would be there would be funds available to help improve infrastructure needs ONLY IF THEY WERE EARMARKED FOR THAT DISTINCT USAGE…the negative results would be the price of new homes would be even higher because the builder would pass the increase on to the new home owner.
Wiggins, I agree, it is not the contractors responsibility. However, in most other areas, impact fees or infrastructure development is expected from the developer. I have designed civil engineering projects here, Texas, Ohio, Louisiana and Alabama. I can not recall a single project where the developer was not responsible for impact fees or development.
Impact fees are needed. Otherwise we crumble and never catch up.
It is not the contractor’s responsibility to build infrastructure; that is the county’s job.
The county doesn’t mind collecting millions of dollars in sales taxes, direct or indirect, or permanent property taxes, fire, and other items on your bill. Let the County borrow the money to pay for the new construction projects. We started the OLF project under the guise of job creation, but now it looks like a new subdivision. Wake up County Commissioners and smell Eight-Mile Creek
.
Impact fees on new construction!
Not in Escambia County!
So existing home owners and businesses pay for all needed infastructur until new construction starts paying taxes.
Services will lag behind without impact fees on new construction.
Great for developers, construction companies, Realtors, and inflates land sales.