Laserfiche WebLink
There are several reasons for the continuing predominan ce of impact fees that do not vary by unit size. <br />One obvious reason is that a flat fee per dwelling unit is easier to calc ulate and has fewer data <br />requirements. While this is still the case, the da ta requirements are not in surmountable, and greater <br />resources are now available. The other principa l reason for the predominance of one-size-fits-all <br />residential impact fees was legal in nature. In the early days of the development of impact fees in the <br />late 1970s and early 1980s, there were no state impa ct fee enabling acts, and impact fees were based on <br />the Ñpolice powerÒ of local governments to regulate development <br />welfare of the community. Great care had to be ta ken to ensure that impact fees would not be struck <br />down by the courts as an illegal tax. Even today, there is a residual feeling by some attorneys that a fee <br />per square foot for residential development may appear more like a tax than a re gulatory fee. However, <br />this should no longer be a major concern, as the authority to enact impact fee ordinances is now well- <br />established in most states. <br />We recommend that the CountyÔs impact fees incorpor ate progressive fees for single-family homes that <br />vary by the size of the dwelling unit. <br />H Ô C \I N A ÐP A M January 5, 2006 , Page 25 <br />AWAI I OUNTY NFRASTRUCTURE EEDS SSESSMENT OLICY NALYSIS EMORANDUM <br /> <br />