My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11/10/2015 (2)
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2010's
>
2015
>
11/10/2015 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/5/2018 9:52:25 AM
Creation date
2/2/2016 12:19:50 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
BCC Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Date
11/10/2015
Meeting Body
Board of County Commissioners
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
167
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Indian River County I Impact Fee Update Study <br />capacity expansion projects. In other words, case law requires that the new development <br />should not be charged twice for the same service. <br />Legal Standard Overview <br />In Florida, legal requirements related to impact fees have primarily been establis ed <br />through case law since the 1980's. Generally speaking, impact fees must comply • h the <br />"dual rational nexus" test, which requires that they. <br />• Be supported by a study demonstrating that the fees are proportio : to in amount to <br />the need created by new development paying the fee; and <br />• Be spent in a manner that directs a proportionate benefi to new development, <br />typically accomplished through a list of capacity-addin: projects included in the <br />County's Capital Improvement Plan, Capital Impro -ment Element, or another <br />planning document/Master Plan. <br />In 2006, the Florida legislature passed the "Flo <br />impact fees as "an outgrowth of home rule po <br />services within its jurisdiction." § 163.3180 <br />mostly procedural and methodological li <br />particular public facility type from b <br />procedural and methodological pr <br />already. <br />a Impact Fee Act," which recognized <br />r of a local government to provide certain <br />2), Fla. Stat. The statute — concerned with <br />stations — did not expressly allow or disallow any <br />ng funded with impact fees. The Act did specify <br />equisites, most of which were common to the practice <br />More recent legislation f.rther affected the impact fee framework in Florida, including the <br />following: <br />• HB 227 in 009: The Florida legislation statutorily clarified that in any action <br />challen; ng an impact fee, the government has the burden of proving by a <br />pre••nderance of the evidence that the imposition or amount of the -fee meets the <br />r quirements of state legal precedent or the Impact Fee Act and that the court may <br />not use a deferential standard. <br />SB 360 in 2009: Allowed fees to be decreased without the 90 -day notice period <br />required to increase the fees and purported to change the standard of legal review <br />associated with impact fees. SB 360 also required the Florida Department of <br />Community Affairs (now the Department of Economic Opportunity) and Florida <br />Tindale -Oliver & Associates, Inc. <br />September 2014 <br />3 <br />Indian River County <br />Impact Fee Update Study <br />Attiingnt 4a <br />• <br />142 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.