Laserfiche WebLink
EXAMPLES <br />District Land Use <br />Type <br />3 Multi -family <br />9 Single Family <br />Existing Proposed Change <br />$77B $682 -12% <br />$159 $1027 +546% <br />POSSIBLE PROBLEMS WITH FORMULA: <br />1. Districts too small <br />2. Time Periods between re-evaluation too short <br />3. More study needed to distinguish between sizes and types of <br />residential housing <br />REQUEST: <br />That the staff be asked to re-evaluate the district <br />boundaries and the formula in order to refine them and correct <br />their defidiencie5. <br />Director Davis explained that the impact fees vary in the 9 <br />transportation districts due to the cost of building a lane mile <br />in some districts, and Director Keating pointed out that the - <br />ordinance provides an appeal process for a readjustment to the <br />impact fees. <br />Attorney Vitunac advised that Mr. Mackie's inequity chart <br />puts a lot of emphasis on the value of the property, whereas the <br />impact fee formula doesn't include the value of the property. <br />Mr. Mackie continued that he didn't feel that the formula <br />relates to the budget for capital improvements in certain <br />districts, but Director Davis said that we have to average out <br />the costs of building the lane mile in all of the districts. <br />Mr. Mackie pointed out how difficult it is for a developer <br />to absorb these increased impact fees, and Director Keating <br />explained that the fee schedule can be brought to the Board for <br />adjustment every two years. <br />Mr. Mackie felt the reason we are seeing a high increase now <br />is because the formula for lane costs was too low originally. <br />40 BOOK i! 4 17�� <br />