A planned unit development (PUD) set for County Road 64 and Pollard Ave. in Daphne was the subject of major discussion during the last Daphne City Council meeting, with some members raising questions about the infrastructure burdens created by that type of development.

Councilman John Lake said he had major concerns about what the city was doing in moving forward with the PUD and said he wanted to insure the developers were paying an “appropriate amount” for the potential infrastructure issues any major development may cause.

The developer offered to give the city $90,000 for infrastructure improvement in the area due to the potential impact the new PUD could have on traffic in the area, but Lake said he felt they should be made to pay more.

“The problem I have with that amount is that they said it was going to be $600,000 to address all of the issues with growth on that road,” Lake said. “When you add 199 lots and the type of traffic you’re going to be putting on those roads over there, you’re creating a huge burden that someone is going to have to pay for and I don’t want it to be the taxpayers.”

Lake said letting the developers off the hook for those funds could be problematic.

“What we’re doing is subsidizing the developers’ profits,” Lake said. “That money could be better used in other areas. Developments like this will create a burden on our school system, infrastructure and recreational opportunities.”

Councilwoman Angie Phillips countered she felt this was the appropriate way to handle the potential development because of the annexation.

“It is my understanding that this property is in the county and that the subdivision could move forward without being annexed,” Phillips said. “This seems like a good effort for them to work with the city instead of moving forward and not being subject to the city of Daphne or our rules.”

Mayor Dane Haygood said it wasn’t necessarily fair to put all of the traffic issues near those roads on a yet unbuilt development.

“I drive through that intersection on a daily basis, and there is already a traffic issue on this road created by the success of the region,” Haygood said. “This new development will certainly add to it, but this alone is not creating the problem.”

Lake suggested trying to put impact fees on the development, which caused Haygood to reply that it might not currently be possible.

“It’s nice that the developer voluntarily offered funds to try to help address some of the issues,” Haygood said. “But to impose impact fees without a concrete argument as to why – that could put us on shaky legal ground, and I’m not certain that’s the best decision for the city.”

All of the council members agreed the concept of impact fees and what issues large scale developments could cause in the community would continue to be an issue for the city.

“We want to make sure we have availability for all types of people who want to come here to live,” Councilman Robin LeJeune said. “But we also have to try to maintain the quality of life and the amenities that people already living here have come to enjoy. We have some hard decisions ahead of us to make.”