|
|
ix | |
|
|
xiii | |
|
|
xiv | |
Acknowledgments |
|
xv | |
Prologue: Reflections on Impact Fees |
|
xvii | |
|
|
1 | (126) |
|
The Progression of Impact Fees |
|
|
3 | (2) |
|
|
3 | (7) |
|
Impact Fees of the Future |
|
|
10 | |
|
National Impact Fee Survey |
|
|
5 | (88) |
|
What Qualifies as an Impact Fee? |
|
|
15 | (1) |
|
|
16 | (1) |
|
|
17 | (1) |
|
Average Fees by Facility Type |
|
|
17 | (1) |
|
|
17 | (1) |
|
|
17 | (2) |
|
|
19 | (3) |
|
|
22 | (1) |
|
|
23 | (70) |
|
Legal Principles of Impact Fees |
|
|
93 | (20) |
|
|
93 | (1) |
|
|
94 | (1) |
|
Constitutionality of Impact Fees |
|
|
95 | (1) |
|
Land-Use Regulation or Taxation? |
|
|
95 | (1) |
|
Tests for Impact Fee Validity |
|
|
96 | (2) |
|
|
98 | (1) |
|
The Taking Issue: The Rational Nexus Test Revisited? |
|
|
99 | (3) |
|
The Relationship of Impact Fees to the Comprehensive Plan |
|
|
102 | (1) |
|
State Authorizing Legislation |
|
|
103 | (1) |
|
Drafting Impact Fees to Pass Judicial Scrutiny |
|
|
103 | (2) |
|
|
105 | (1) |
|
Extending the Applicability of Impact Fees Across the Development Spectrum |
|
|
106 | (1) |
|
Making Impact Fees More Sensitive to Affordable Housing and Other Societal Needs |
|
|
106 | (1) |
|
|
107 | (6) |
|
State Impact Fee Enabling Acts |
|
|
113 | (14) |
|
Distribution of Enabling Acts |
|
|
113 | (3) |
|
|
116 | (2) |
|
Planning and Analysis Requirements |
|
|
118 | (3) |
|
|
121 | (1) |
|
|
122 | (1) |
|
|
123 | (1) |
|
|
124 | (1) |
|
|
124 | (3) |
|
|
127 | (80) |
|
Proportionate-Share Basics |
|
|
129 | (12) |
|
Overview of Impact Fee Analysis |
|
|
130 | (2) |
|
|
132 | (1) |
|
Level-of-Service Standards |
|
|
133 | (2) |
|
|
135 | (1) |
|
|
136 | (3) |
|
|
139 | (2) |
|
|
141 | (14) |
|
|
141 | (2) |
|
Overview of Forms of Credit and Their Applications |
|
|
143 | (2) |
|
Principles for Estimating Credit With Applications |
|
|
145 | (6) |
|
|
151 | (2) |
|
|
153 | (2) |
|
Impact Fees and the Planning Connection |
|
|
155 | (16) |
|
Impact Fees and Exactions |
|
|
157 | (1) |
|
Capital Improvements Element |
|
|
158 | (1) |
|
|
159 | (1) |
|
|
159 | (1) |
|
Projections of Facility Needs |
|
|
160 | (1) |
|
|
161 | (1) |
|
Description of Funding Sources |
|
|
162 | (1) |
|
|
163 | (1) |
|
Relation of Impact Fees to Community Planning Goals |
|
|
163 | (1) |
|
|
164 | (1) |
|
Appendix 7A: Sample Capital Improvements Element |
|
|
165 | (6) |
|
Uniform Measures of Impact |
|
|
171 | (10) |
|
Common Measures of Impact |
|
|
171 | (1) |
|
Measures of Impact and Planning |
|
|
172 | (1) |
|
The Need for Common Measures of Impact |
|
|
172 | (1) |
|
Fire and Police Demand Multipliers: Calls for Service Versus Functional Population |
|
|
173 | (3) |
|
Extensions of Functional Population: Toward Truly Uniform Impact Assessments |
|
|
176 | (3) |
|
Appendix 8A: Review of Consulting Studies |
|
|
179 | (2) |
|
Variations of Proportionate-Share Fee Design |
|
|
181 | (26) |
|
General Calculation Approaches |
|
|
181 | (7) |
|
Review of Impact Fee Programs Selected Nationally |
|
|
188 | (6) |
|
Florida Impact Fee Survey Findings |
|
|
194 | (13) |
|
|
207 | (140) |
|
Proportionate-Share Fees for Physical Infrastructure |
|
|
209 | (48) |
|
|
209 | (1) |
|
Impact Fees for Public Facilities |
|
|
209 | (48) |
|
Proportionate-Share Fees for Social Infrastructure |
|
|
257 | (48) |
|
Proportionate-Share Principles to Provide Workforce Housing from Commercial Development |
|
|
257 | (6) |
|
Proportionate-Share Principles to Provide Workforce Housing from Residential Development |
|
|
263 | (20) |
|
Proportionate-Share Development Fees for Other Social Infrastructure |
|
|
283 | (1) |
|
|
284 | (2) |
|
Appendix 11A: Workforce Housing Linkage Programs in California |
|
|
286 | (5) |
|
Appendix 11B: Sample Workforce Housing Mitigation Impact Fee Ordinance |
|
|
291 | (14) |
|
Proportionate-Share Environmental Mitigation Fees for Green Infrastructure |
|
|
305 | (28) |
|
Legal and Economic Foundations |
|
|
305 | (12) |
|
|
317 | (7) |
|
Appendix 12A: Environmental Lands Impact Fee Draft Ordinance |
|
|
324 | (9) |
|
Proportionate-Share Fees for Operations and Maintenance |
|
|
333 | (14) |
|
|
333 | (1) |
|
Transit Impact Development Fee |
|
|
333 | (1) |
|
Transportation Utility Fees |
|
|
334 | (3) |
|
Case Study: Aventura, Florida Transportation Operations and Maintenance Mitigation Fee |
|
|
337 | (5) |
|
|
342 | (1) |
|
Appendix 13A: Sample Ordinance Implementing Operations and Maintenance Proportionate Share Fees |
|
|
343 | (4) |
|
|
347 | (40) |
|
Model Proportionate-Share Development Fee Ordinance |
|
|
349 | (18) |
|
Principles of Ordinance Design and Drafting |
|
|
349 | (6) |
|
Appendix 14A: Model Ordinance |
|
|
355 | (6) |
|
Appendix 14B: City of Canton, Georgia, Road Impact Fee Ordinance |
|
|
361 | (6) |
|
Development Impact Fee Administrative Code |
|
|
367 | (20) |
|
Appendix 15A: Sample Impact Fee Administrative Code |
|
|
369 | (18) |
|
|
387 | (6) |
|
Impact Fees in the Future |
|
|
388 | (1) |
|
Unification of Developer Funding Requirements |
|
|
388 | (1) |
|
Expanding the Base and Scope of Infrastructure Funding Requirements |
|
|
389 | (1) |
|
Innovative Funding Programs |
|
|
389 | (1) |
|
State and Regional Impact Fees |
|
|
390 | (1) |
|
State and Federal Funding to Cure Infrastructure Deficiencies |
|
|
390 | (1) |
|
|
391 | (2) |
References and Selected Bibliography |
|
393 | (6) |
Index |
|
399 | (13) |
About the Authors |
|
412 | |