01/22/2014 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• • • Indian River County 1 Impact Fee Update Study procedural and methodological prerequisites, most of which were common to the practice already. More recent legislation further affected the impact fee framework in Florida, including the following: • HB 227 in 2009: The Florida legislation statutorily clarified that in any action challenging an impact fee, the government has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the imposition or amount of the fee meets the requirements of state legal precedent or the Impact Fee Act and that the court may not use a deferential standard. `-" • SB 360 in 2009: Allowed fees to be decreased without the 90 -day notice period required to increase the fees and purported to change the 'standard of legal review associated with impact fees. SB':360' also required the Florida Department of Community Affairs (now the Department of Economic Opportunity) and Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) to'coriduct studies on "mobilityfees," which were completed in 2010. " • HB 7207 in 2011: Required a''dollar-for-dollar credit, for purposes of concurrency compliance, for other impact fees paid-and:other concurrency mitigation required. The credit must be reduced by the percentage share the project's traffic represents of the added capacity of the selected iniprovement-(up to a maximum of 20% or to an amount specified by ordinance, whichever results in a higher credit). The courts have not yet taken up-the,issue.of whether a local government may still charge an ".impact/mobility fee in.;lieu of proportionate "share if the impact/mobility fee is higher that the calculated proportionate share contribution. • HB 319 in 2013: Applied mostly to concurrency management authorities, but also encouraged local governments'tol. adopt alternative mobility systems using a series of tools\identified in section 3180(5)(f), Florida Statutes, including: 1. Adoption `Of long-term strategies to facilitate development patterns that support multimodal solutions, including urban design, and appropriate land use mixes, including intensity and density. 2. Adoption of an area -wide level of service not dependent on any single road segment function. 3. Exempting or discounting impacts of locally desired development, such as development in urban areas, redevelopment, job creation, and mixed use on the transportation system. Tindale -Oliver & Associates, Inc. Indian River County January 2014 3 Impact Fee Update Study