IPFNA_Ord Issues Memo_Mar_06 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Infrastructure and Public Facility Needs Assessment St udy – Ordinance Issues Memorandum, March 1, 2006, page 7 that district is calculated. It is recommended that there be on In other words, all fees will be ca lculated on a county-wide basis. While there may be some geogra variations in land and construction costs, any addi tional accuracy in fee calculations would be offset by greater complexity and administrative difficulty. G. BENEFIT DISTRICTS Benefit districts represent an area within which the fees collec improvements funded with impact fees are constru cted within reasonable proximity of the fee-paying developments as a means of helping to ensure that Figure 1 developments benefit from the improvements. PROPOSED EAST/WEST DISTRICTS Concern has been expressed th at a broad-based impact fee should be restricted to internal subdivision improvements like roads and parks, because otherwise owners of individual lots would not feel they were g etting any benefit. However, It would not be practical to make every subdivision its own benefit district, as some of them will have little development. Most types of facilities serve a much larger area. Given the size of the is land, it may be necessary at a minimum to have East and West benefit districts for all types of facilities. Any benefit district boundaries should match judicial district boundaries to the extent practical. Suggested benefit district boundaries for roads, fire, police and solid waste facilities are illustrated in Figure 1. The proposed east/west benefit district boundaries conform with existing judicial district boundaries. In proposing the benefit district boundaries, the Consultant attempted to balance current population and projected population growth. Figure 2 Since parks tend to serve a smaller geographic areas than PROPOSED PARK DISTRICTS other facilities, it is recommended that the County create several benefit districts for park impact fees. The County currently restricts fair share assessments to the judicial district in which they were collected. There are nine judicial districts, and these were utilized in developing five proposed park development districts shown in Figure 2. Some of the judicial distri cts were combined since fewer benefit districts provide greater flexibility in the expenditure of fees collected. In developing the districts, the consultant looked at existing parks and development patterns and combined several districts to create five park and recreation impact fee benefit districts. Wastewater impact fees could be subject to either the east/west or the five benefit districts, but would need to be further restricted to be spent only to improve the system that the fee payer is physically connected to. Language in the ordinance would allow revenues collected 13276 research blvd , ste 208 austin tx 78750 phone 512 258 7347 fax 512 258 9994 email clancy@duncanplan.com # # # #