My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2005-169a
CBCC
>
Official Documents
>
2000's
>
2005
>
2005-169a
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/19/2016 11:11:28 AM
Creation date
9/30/2015 8:44:50 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Official Documents
Official Document Type
Interlocal Agreement
Approved Date
05/17/2005
Control Number
2005-169A
Agenda Item Number
9.A.1
Entity Name
Tindale-Oliver
Subject
Impact Fee Study Interlocal Agreement
Supplemental fields
SmeadsoftID
4919
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
318
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
• The BCC may establish a policy that pays the calculated impact fees from <br /> revenue sources other than impact fees . <br /> • If the County exempts particular land uses or development projects from the fee <br /> requirement and does not reimburse the affected impact fee accounts with non - <br /> impact fee revenues , the ordinance may be rendered ineffective as a mechanism <br /> for funding capital improvements necessary to serve new development and may <br /> be subject to legal liabilities . <br /> Updating the Impact Fee Program and Indexing the Fees <br /> • Typically , impact fees are updated every three years to ensure that development <br /> continues to pay a fee that is proportionate to its impact and receives a <br /> proportionate benefit to the fee paid . <br /> • Indexing is a method used to adjust the impact fee on an annual basis between <br /> periodic updates . Indexing of impact fees is becoming increasingly popular as a <br /> way to avoid significant increases when fees are subsequently updated . <br /> o Indexes must reflect cost increases that the County can reasonably expect <br /> to incur in the provision of needed capital facilities and be consistent with <br /> the underlying impact fee methodology . <br /> c Common indexes include the Consumer Price Index, local property <br /> appraiser records , and publications such as the Engineering News Record <br /> (ENR) construction cost index . <br /> Appeals Process <br /> • Typically , provisions for appeals of impact fee decisions made by staff, the <br /> County Administrator, and the BCC must be defined in the ordinance or through <br /> existing County procedures . <br /> • The approach used by many jurisdictions is similar to the appeal process <br /> contained in the County ' s current Traffic Impact Fee Ordinance , as summarized <br /> below . <br /> o The County Administrator or designee shall have the right to accept or <br /> reject the decision made by staff concerning an impact fee ; and <br /> o Final appeal of the County Administrator ' s decision shall be made to the <br /> BCC . <br /> LOS STANDARDS AND FEE REVIEW <br /> Current LOS and adopted LOS standards in IRC were reviewed for each facility service <br /> category being considered in the impact fee study . In addition , performance standards <br /> from impact fees in other Florida counties were compiled and reviewed for comparative <br /> purposes . Summary data from this review of LOS standards and fees are provided in <br /> Tables 1 -2 and 1 -3 . <br /> Table 1 -2 provides the current LOS in IRC , the adopted LOS standard in IRC ( if any ) , <br /> and the recommended LOS standard for each program area . It should be noted that, for <br /> Tindale -Oliver & Associates , Inc . Indian River County <br /> May 2005 I - 10 Impact Fee Study <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.