Laserfiche WebLink
OCT Q 19 BOOK 62. PAGE 5. <br />So <br />FAIR SHARE ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS ORDINANCE <br />Attorney Craig Richardson stressed the fairness factor in <br />the "Fair Share Ordinance". He explained that the ordinance <br />would be a county -wide ordinance and while the cities have the <br />option to exempt themselves out of the ordinance, the ordinance <br />is designed for their cooperation and participation. <br />Attorney Richardson explained that the case of the City of <br />Dunedin was the landmark decision used for designing the original <br />transportation ordinance, which eventually went to the Florida <br />Supreme Court in 1976 and has been used by the Appellate Courts <br />for utility fees, transportation fees, etc. Basically the <br />principles that were established in that case are: <br />1) New growth must demand that road facilities be <br />increased; <br />2) Assessment can be only as much as is needed and at a <br />cost not to exceed local government's actual cost of <br />providing the improvements; <br />3) It must benefit the people paying the fees, and the <br />new monies must be specifically earmarked for capital <br />road improvements. <br />Dr. Nicholas advised that these are the principles all <br />governments must use in evaluating an impact fee ordinance. <br />Recent changes under the State's Planning Act require local <br />governments to adopt a capital improvement plan as part of their <br />comprehensive planning effort. In conjunction with that <br />requirement, an amendment in Chapter 380 of the DRI provisions <br />under the Florida Environmental Land & Management Act requires <br />that local, governments have some type of financing mechanism in <br />place by July, 1986, if they are going to continue exacting <br />development conditions for public facilities. Basically, this <br />means that Indian River County must adopt something like an <br />impact fee ordinance to ensure that the small developer is paying <br />10 <br />