Agenda - 11-15-2016 - 7-a - School Impact Fee Updates

Browse Search

32 in longer approval time if the plans need revisions/resubmittals. Because this concern has been expressed by parties that are directly affected by this provision, language has been modified in both Attachments 2 and 3 to increase the number of days to 180. o Going forward, a receipt of a ZCP or who have an `accepted'building permit application will be able to pay that year's fees. Following the initial year of implementation, developers should be able to plan for scheduled impact fee increases. This modification would represent a departure from current policy. • We support using the 50/50 basis and starting at 37% MSIF. The current revenue neutral projection is 43% of the maximum supportable impact fee based on 75% of new multi-family units in the zero to two bedroom category and 25% in the three bedroom or more category. This bedroom distribution was chosen because it is more likely to reflect actual construction. If the projection formula is revised to have an equal distribution of bedroom counts, the projection model would produce more revenue from the three or more bedroom units. If that number of units did not materialize, the amount of total revenue collected would be less than current collections. As a result, a higher fee would be needed across all housing types to produce a revenue neutral position. • We support spreading any increase of fees over five (5) years instead of three years. The BOCC may choose to spread the increases out over a greater number of years. Three years is currently suggested in the Ordinances in Attachments 2 and 3. If a five year implementation timeframe is used, it would also delay an update to the impact fee study for two years that would potentially capture more recent changes to housing choices and student generation rates. If the BOCC chooses to extend the implementation period,the Board would also need to determine the rate at which fees would increase during that timeframe. • We support an annual fee increase related to projected cost of construction increases, rather than an effort to achieve some arbitrary percent of MSIF. As the County Attorney has advised, impact fees must be tied to legally defensible data, which serve as the basis of the impact fee studies. Actual school construction costs are one of the components of the formula that calculates the MSIF; however, tying increases to projected cost of construction is not included in the analysis. The purpose of the impact fee is for new residential growth to pay for public costs associated with population growth. An amount less than 100% of the MSIF means that revenues to pay for additional school capacity must be funded through other means, likely property taxes,which is a policy decision made by the Board.