Sunnyvale — The Capital Improvement Advisory Committee on Jan. 15 voted to recommend that Town Council adopt higher roadway impact-fee collection rates and approve updates to the town's thoroughfare plan and 10-year capital improvement program (CIP).

Committee members voted to recommend an 85% residential adoption rate and a 65% nonresidential (commercial) adoption rate, to use a 10-year growth projection that assumes roughly 80% of residential build-out and 70% of nonresidential build-out in that period, and to include the roadway projects shown on the study's project list. The motion was made by Blackson, seconded by Childers, and passed by those present.

The recommendation is advisory; Town Council is scheduled to review the thoroughfare-plan updates at its Jan. 27 meeting and will consider the formal impact-fee ordinance and final rates in a later action. The fees and plan are being updated under Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code, the statute that governs municipal impact fees.

Consultants from Kimley-Horn presented the study, explaining the basic formula used to set impact fees: "It's cost divided by growth," said Jeff Whitaker of Kimley-Horn as he described how the study converts roadway costs and projected future travel demand into per-unit fees. Whitaker and town staff described five required components for the study: a single townwide service area, land-use assumptions, the capital plan, calculation of service units, and the derived fee.

Key numbers and assumptions presented to the committee included a 10-year CIP need of about $52 million for capacity projects; roughly $25 million of that was identified as existing needs that cannot be charged to future development under state law. The study projects approximately 1,396 additional residential units over 10 years and uses trip-generation and vehicle-miles-traveled metrics to convert demand into feeable service units.

The thoroughfare-plan changes shown to the committee include upgrading Townease Boulevard from a two-lane undivided collector to a major arterial, adding three new collectors (including Jobson Road and a new east'west collector), and removing Rebecca Road from the plan. The study also identifies intersection projects (future signals and a roundabout at specific intersections) that would be eligible for impact-fee funding because they increase capacity.

Committee members and staff discussed how regionwide modeling informed the plan. Kimley-Horn and town staff used the travel model maintained by the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) and accounted for a proposed George Bush/President George Bush Turnpike (referred to in the meeting as the GBT) alignment in its base-case projections. Staff said the study assumes the GBT will be built because that alignment materially changes traffic patterns, and noted NTTA and TxDOT remain responsible for design and environmental clearances on that regional project.

Committee members raised local concerns during discussion. Members and residents highlighted Trip Road (east of Collins) and Collins Road between Tripp Road and Towne East as deteriorated corridors and urged prioritization of repairs and intersection improvements. Participants also discussed truck impacts from potential industrial or warehouse development near the East Fork/US 80 area; consultants explained that the town's current zoning limits some heavy-industrial uses and that pavement damage from heavy trucks is treated as a factor in design and cost calculations.

Staff and consultants emphasized the legal limits on impact-fee use: fees can be spent only on capacity-improving projects listed in the CIP that are part of the impact-fee study. They noted impact fees cannot be used to pay for repairs or rehabilitation that do not increase roadway capacity. Staff also described options for funding the gap between the CIP cost and fees collected, including grants, bonds or certificates of obligation, and extending the program timeframe.

On timing, Planning and Development Director Saroopa told the committee the town issued a request for proposals for a comprehensive plan consultant on Jan. 6; staff estimated the comprehensive-plan process would take about 18 months and said the impact-fee study should be defensible even if the comp plan is completed later. Staff noted the council can adopt fee percentages below the study maximum in an ordinance and can amend those percentages without redoing the entire study if assumptions change after the comprehensive-plan process.

The committee's recommendation now goes to Town Council for further public hearings and ordinance drafting. If council adopts a fee ordinance based on the recommended percentages, the town would collect the revised fees at the time of building permit issuance, as required by state law.