IPFNA_Final_Sept_06 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Chapter 2: Legal Framework follows. This chapter describes th e specific requirements of the State impact fee enabling act. It also explains the fund amental principles that govern impact fees. These principles guide the recommendations to base the im pact fees on the existing le vels of service, and to reduce the fees to account for other revenues that will be generated by new development and used to provide the same level of service that the fees are intended to Chapter 3: Policy Issues summarizes the public participation process and the recommendat major issues that came out of the first phase of the project. The policy issues deal primarily wi to structure the impact fee ordinance, rather than with the impact fee study that is the major focus of this report. Chapter 4: Agency and P ublic Participation describes the participation of County and State agency staff in providing data and input and the outreach efforts used Chapter 5: Lessons Learned describes some of the lessons learned during the agency and pub sessions . Chapter 6: Next Steps/Implementation outlines action items if impact fees are not adopted, and other action items if impact fees are adopted. Part II: Impact Fee Calculations contains the remaining chapters of the report, which calculate net cost to accommodate new development at the exis ting level of service for each of the following facility types: Chapter 7: Roads , Chapter 8: Parks and Recreation , Chapter 9: Fire/EMS , Chapter 10: Police , Chapter 11: Solid Waste and Chapter 12: Wastewater . Policy Recommendations Based on the analysis conducted for Phase I, the County should c assessments with a true impact fee system that follo ws the requirements of the State impact fee enabling act. An impact fee collected from all new development would be more legally defensible, more equit and generate significantly more revenue than the curre nt Ñfair shareÒ system. This additional revenue would translate into capital improvements that would benefit all 1. Treatment of Existing Lots. The concern about how to treat existing lots is rooted in a concern about affordable housing. It is reco mmend that affordable housing be addressed separately, with no special treatment of existing lots. 2. Affordable Housing. It is important to mitigate the effects of impact fees on lower-income residents. Therefore, impact fees for afford able housing projects (e.g., Habitat for Humanity or self-help housing) should be paid by the County from othe r funding sources. To promote housing affordability more generally, the County could provide grants or loans to eligible homebuyers at closing to cover the amount of the impact fees pai 3. Progressive Residential Fees. This report presents the option of progressive single-family fees that vary by the size of the dwelling as one way to address this option will not be available if the County d ecides to collect fees for new single-family lots at the time of subdivision approval, since the size of the unit will not be known at that time. H Ó C \I N A ÐI F S September 19, 2006, Page 2 AWAI I OUNTY NFRASTRUCTURE EEDS SSESSMENT MPACT EE TUDY