My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Finance Committee Agenda and Packet 2016 07 18
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
FINANCE COMMITTEE
>
2006-2019 Finance Committee Agendas and Packets
>
2016 Finance Committee Agendas and Packets
>
Finance Committee Agenda and Packet 2016 07 18
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 2:34:15 PM
Creation date
7/15/2016 8:48:45 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
FCPKT 2016 07 18
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
141
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
CALCULATION METHODOLOGIES <br /> There are three basic methods used to calculate impact fees. The incremental expansion method <br /> documents the current level of service for each type of public facility. The intent is to use revenue <br /> collected to expand or provide additional facilities, as needed to accommodate new development, <br /> based on the current cost to provide capital improvements. The plan-based method is commonly used <br /> for public facilities that have adopted plans or engineering studies to guide capital improvements. A <br /> third approach, known as the cost recovery method, is based on the rationale that new development is <br /> paying for its share of the useful life and remaining unused capacity of an existing facility. All three <br /> methodologies are employed for the fees included in this study and are described further in this report <br /> in the respective fee chapter. A summary is provided in Figure 1 showing the methodologies, <br /> infrastructure components, and allocations used to calculate impact fees for the City of Louisville. <br /> The objective of evaluating these different methodologies is to determine the best measure of the <br /> demand created by new development for additional infrastructure capacity. <br /> Figure 1: Recommended Calculation Methodologies <br /> Methodology <br /> Fee Category Component Buy-in Incremental plan-based <br /> Expansion <br /> Parks Improvements ✓ <br /> Trails ✓ <br /> Recreation Facilities ✓ <br /> City Hall ✓ <br /> General City Shops ✓ <br /> • <br /> Government Police ✓ <br /> Headquarters <br /> Library <br /> Facility ✓ <br /> Materials ✓ <br /> Bicycle and <br /> Transportation <br /> Pedestrian ✓ <br /> Improvements <br /> Street Projects ✓ <br /> CREDITS <br /> A general requirement common to impact fee methodologies is the evaluation of credits. Two types of <br /> credits should be considered, future revenue credits and site-specific credits. Revenue credits may be <br /> necessary to avoid potential double payment situations arising from a one-time impact fee plus the <br /> payment of other revenues (e.g., property taxes) that may also fund growth-related capital <br /> improvements. There is a potential for double payment of capital costs due to future payments on debt <br /> for public facilities. This type of credit is included for the Recreation and Library Impact Fees. <br /> 6 FINAL VERSION <br /> 12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.