2002 - Agenda Pre-Council Meeting1
CITY OF MERIDIAN
PRE.COUNCIL MEETING
AGENDA
Tuesday, November 19,2OO2 at 6:00 p.m.
City Council Chambers
Roll-call Attendance:
Tammy de Weerd
Cherie McCandlessk M"yo'"
-'-v-Bill Nary
Keith Bird
X
Robert Corrie
2.
6:00 p.m.3.
6:30 p.m. 4.
Adoption of the Agenda: ant vre Amc--/zoL
uRdate on flk lmpact Fee Ordinance: a(t.ra,.ttzo{_ 1<V d.a..d-(alfca- d* /a22,^i firr ?4L I ltb*14r6
Discuss Mill Levy Adjustment Election:
4/c?6zrrzd-t
Meridian City Corncil Agen& - November 19, 2002 Ptg. I of I
All rnat€tials fesertted ar Frblic mecting! shdl b€clme Foperty oflhe City of Maidian-
Anyorc desiring accoEtnodation for disabiltiB related to documerns aodor hearings
ploase coolact the City Clerk's OnEce rr EEk433 al lcast 4E hours P.i6 to lhe public meeting
}IAYOR
Roben D. Comc
CITY COUNCIL !IE}tBERS
Tammy deWcerd
Willirm L. Il. Nrry
Chene !lcClndless
Kcirh Bird
\l
LEGAL DEPART}IENT
{:08) lS8-:r99. Frx :38-:501
P\RKS & RECRE.\TION
(loE 33E-1579. FL\ 898-5501
PUBLIC WORKS
(108) S98-i500 .Frr lt87- l:i)iIDAHO
lq0l
BUILDING DEPTRT!IENT
(:0S) 3S7-l:ll . Fi:( 387-l19;
PLANNING AND ZONINC
(:08) 88+5i31 . Fxr lt83-685{
NOTICE OF PRE.COUNCIL MEETING
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
NOTICE lS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Meridian
will hold a Pre-Council Meeting at City Hall, 33 East ldaho, Meridian, ldaho, on
Tuesday, November 19,2002 at 6:00 P.M. The Meridian City Council will be
discussing agenda items which are on the regular scheduled City Council
meeting as well as the following issues:
- Update on Park lmpacl Fee Ordinance
- Discuss Mill Levy Adjustment Election:
The public is welcome to attend the meeting.
OF
lr
DATED this 15h day of November,2OO2.
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR.CI c
l,:i:Y'
33 EAST IDAHO . MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
(208)888-4433.Fax(208)887-4813. Ciry Clerk Office Fax (208) 888-4218 . Human Resources Fax (208)288-1193
r is1
SEAL
RECEIVEtr
2007U
)ITY OF [/ERIDIAN
ITY Cl trRK OtrtrlarJuly 16,2002
Tom Kuntz
Parks and Recreation Director
City of Meridian
11 West Bower Sheet
Meridian, ID 83642
Re: Impact Fee Ordinance No. 723
Dear Tom:
During the last two Impact Fee Advisory meetings a number of
members have raised the issue as to whether or not Meridian's
current Impact Fee Ordinance 723 ("the Ordinance'), adopted
in 1996 to frrnd parks and recreation system improvements
conforms to the requirements of the Idaho Impact Fee Act
('rDrFA).
In order to facilitate further discussion on this issue, we have
prepared the attached chart that compares the existing
Ordinance to the requirements of the recently amended Idaho
Impact Fee Act ('IDIFA).
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
To help Meridian meet the mandates of House Bill 607, we
have compared each section of the City's Ordinance to the
provisions of the IDIFA and commented whether the
Ordinance is consistent, not inconsistent, or inconsistent and in
need ofrevision. A finding of consistency means that the
Ordinance's language tracks the IDIFA. Where the Ordinance
includes a provision that is not addressed by the IDIFA, but
oREALTOQ
9550 West Bethel Court
Bois€, Idaho 83709
Tel: 208-376{363
Fax: 208-377-8066
www.adacounty-realton. com
20O2 OFFICERS:
President
GENE STRATE, CRS, GRI
President-elect
MICKIE KNIJDSE\ CRI, AB& CRS, CSP
Vice Presideot
BEVERLEY ROSS, AB& CRS, GRI, LTG
2OO2 BOARD OF DIRECTORS:
TIM BURR,OUGHS, CSP
DALE K HOYD
STJE LIEN, CRS, CSP, CRI
KATHI MCLEOD, CRS
JIM PAULSON, CRS, CSP, GRI
GREG SCRIVIIE& CRS .
Pad Presidcnt
SCOTT CRT'M, GRI
MLS Chai.person
STEVE OSBIJRN, GRI
2OO2 STATE DIRECTORS:
ELZABETH ALLAN HODCE
CTIERIE BARTON, CRS. CSP. CRI
ruLIE DELORENZO. CRS. CSP. LTG
SHARRON L. DOMENY, CRS
GARRET J. LONGSTREET, AB& CRS
STJE NIELSEN, CRS, CSP, GRI
ROCER PATTERSON, GRI
TRACY THOMPSON
WCR Prcsident
DARLENE BLAKESLEE
ACAR Foundation Prcsident
BARBARA A. DAWSON
Executive Vice P.esident
DAMA W. OVERSTREET
We believe that now is the time to make the firndamental
revisions to the Ordinance to conform to Idaho law. This is
especially true in light ofthe Legislature's inclusion of I.C. $
67 -8204(25), which states in pertinent part, that impact fee
ordinances must either comply with the IDIFA in their entirety
or nonconforming and inconsistent provisions become null and
void on July l, 2002.
THE
ADA
COUNTY
ASSOCIATION
OF REALTORS'
Tom Kuntz
July 16,2002
Page 2
that does not appear to conflict with the IDIFA, we have labeled the provision as "not
inconsistent." For those provisions that appear to conllict with the IDIFA and are, therefore,
inconsistent with the IDIFA, we have provided comments as to the nature of the inconsistency
and have suggested revisions to the language of the Ordinance. In addition, we have included
comments where we believe the Ordinance should be revised even though not directly in conflict
with the IDIFA. Comments that call for the City to revise the Ordinance have been "bolded."
The most significant inconsistencies identified include: (1) the Ordinance fails to include specific
IDIFA language related to the consideration ofprevious contributions to system improvements,
including taxes and user fees, in determining proportionate shares; (2) the Ordinance does not
specifically require an adjustment in impact fees assessments in the event an enor in the impact
fee formula is discovered; (3) the Ordinance includes a provision for "alternative methodologies"
for calculating impact fees, when the IDIFA has been amended to remove this option; (4) the
Ordinance allows the City to hoid impact fees for ten years with expending them, while the
IDIFA, generally allows impact fees to be held for only five years (and in certain situations for
no more than eight years); (5) the Ordinance imposes a ten percent administrative fee on all fee
payers, while the IDIFA authorizes only administrative charges to reflect a development's
proportionate share of the cost to prepare the Capital Improvements Plan ("CIP"); (6) the
Ordinance fails to include specific language recently added to the IDIFA regarding a fee payer's
right to submit a variety of docurnents and materials in support ofan individual assessment; (7)
the Ordinance fails to speciff the elements required in the Fee Administrator's written decision
on an individual assessment application, as specified in the IDIFA; and (8) the Ordinance
provides that "certification" ofa fee schedule or individual assessment shall be for one year,
whereas the IDIFA requires that it remain in force unless there is a material change tii the project
or the impact fee schedule.
ACAR respectfully requests that Meridian work with its Impact Fee Advisory Task Force and
other rcpresentative stakeholders and undertake a comprehensive revision of Ordinance 723 that
is mandated by the IDIFA, specifically LC. $ 67-8204(25) as incorporated by HB 607.
Sincerely yours,*+e**
Mayor Robert D. Corrie
Tammy de Weerd,
Keith Bird
William L.M. Nary
Cheri McCandless
Mark H. Estess
Director of Govemment Affairs
Tom Kuntz
Jluly 16,2002
Page 3
Planning & Zoning Commission
Keith Borup,
Jerry Centers
Kevin Shreeves
David Zarimba
Leslie Mathes
Impact Fee Advisory Task Force
Gene Strate
Keith Borup
Phil Krichbaum
Dan Wood
David Fulkerson
Shari Stiles, Planning Director
Brad Hawkins-Clark
Steve Siddoway
cc: Bill Nichols
cc Will Berg
CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 723
ADA COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS@ COMMENTS
JULY 16,2002
SECTION CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINA}ICE NO. 723 TEXT STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS
2-t2-l
A. This Ordinance shall be known and may be cited as the
"City of Meridian Impact Fee Ordinance."
B. This Ordinance shall apply to the development ofproperty
located within the boundaries of the City of Meridian as well as
"service areas" identified in the City of Meridian/Ada County
Area of Impact Agreement as the same is amended from time
to time.
C. The Meridian City Council finds that an equitable program
for planning and financing public facilities needed to serve new
growth and development is necessary in order to promote and
accommodate orderly growth and development and to protect
the public health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of
City of Meridian. It is the intent by enacting this chapter to:
Consistent with IDIFA, Idaho Code $ 67-8202.
(1) Ensure that adequate facilities are available to serve new
growth and development;
consistent wirh IDIFA, $ 67-8202.
(2) Promote orderly growth and development by establishing
uniform standards by which the City may require that those
who benefit from new growth and development pay a
proportionate share ofthe cost ofnew public facilities needed
to serve new growth and development;
consistent wirh IDIFA, $ 67-8202.
Consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8202.
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJULY 16,2002 Estess 7.16.02
(3) Ensure that those who benefit from new growth and
development are required to pay ho more than their
proportionate share of the cost ofpublic facilities needed to
serve new growth and development and to prevent duplicate
and ad hoc development requirements;
(4) Collect and expend development impact fees pursuant to the
enabling powers granted by the provisions ofThe Idaho
Development Impact Fee Act, Title 67, Chapter 82, IdahoCode; :1
Consistent with IDIFA generally.
(5) Provide the legal and procedural basis for the
implementation of development impact fees within the area of
city impact; and
Consistent with IDIFA generally.
(6) Ensure that any capital improvement funded wholly or in
part with impact fee revenue shall first be included in an
approved capital inrprovements plan that lists the capital
improvements that may be funded with impact feo revenues as
well as the estimated costs and timing for each improvement.
Consistent with IDFA, $$ 67-82O8 and67-
8210.
D. It is intended that this Chapter will be amended as capital
improvements plans are approved and adopted as part of the
Comprehensive Plan, pursuant to the provisions ofldaho Code
67,- 82 08, to include specific methodology for the calculation
ofddvelopment impact fees for specific categories ofpublic
facilities. Development impact fees shall not be charged,
collected or expended for public. facilities which are not
included in an approved capital improvements plan that lists the
capital improvements which may be funded with impact fee
revenues, as well as the estimated costs and timing for each
improvement. No amendment to this Chapter adopting an
impact fee for public facilities or amending or adopting the
methodology for calculating an impact fee shall be effective
unless approved by ordinance adopted by the Meridian City
Council in accordance. with the procedural requirements of
Idalro Code 67-8206.
Consistent with IDFA, $$ 67-8206 and67-
8208.
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIA}.I'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJT'LY 16,2002
)
Bstegs 7.16,02
2-12-2 RULES OFCONSTRUCTION.
A. This Chapter shall be liberally construed to effectively carry
out its purpose in the interest ofthe public health, safety an{ _
welfare.
B. Unless otherwise stated, the following rules of construction
shall apply to the tcxt of this Chapter.
(l) Ifthere is any conflict between the text of this Chapter and
any table, summary table or illustration, the text shall control.
(2) The word "shall" is always mandatory and not
discretionary; the word "may'' is permissive.
(3) The phrase "used for" includes "arranged for", "desigaed
for", or "occupied for".
(4) The word "person" includes an individual, a corporation, a
pirtn'ership, an incorporated association, or any other similar
entity.
(5) The word "includes" shhll not limit a term to the specific
example but is intended to extend its meaning to all other
instances or circumstances of like kind or character.
(6) Words used in the present tense shall include the future;
words used in lhe singular shall include the plural and the
plural the singular, unless the context clearly indicates the
contrary; and use of the masculine gender shall include the
feminine. ::.
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJULY 16,2002
3
F-stess 7 .16.02
(7) Unless the context clearly indicates the contrary, where a
regulation involves two or more items, conditions, provisions,
or events connected by the conjunction "and", "or" or "either,..
or", the conjunction shall be interpreted as follows: l ,.
(a) "And" indicates that all the connected terms, conditions,
provisions or events shall apply.
(b) "Or" indicates that the connected iterns, conditions,
provisions or events may apply singly or in any combination.
(c) "Either... or" indicates that the connected items, conditions,
provisions or events shall apply singly but not in combination.
2-12-3 DEFINITIONS:
For the purpose of this Chapter, the following terms, phrases
and words shall have the meaning given herein.
APPROPRIATE: To legally obligate by contract or otherwise
commit to use by appropriation or other official act of the City.
Consistont with IDIFA definition at $ 67-
8203(2).
APPLICANT: Person who applies for a Building Permit or-is
otherwise subject to the provisions of this chapter.
BUILDER: Person who applips for a Building Permit or is
otherwise subject to the provisions of this chapter.
Not defined under the IDIFA, but not
inconsistent with the IDIFA.
BUILDING: Any structure having a roof entirely separated
from any other structure by space or by walls in which there are
no communicating doors or windows or any similar opening
and erected for the purpose ofproviding support or shelter for
persons, animals, things or propertyof any kind.
Not defined under the IDIFA, but not
inconsistent with the IDIFA.
BUILDING PERMIT: An official document or certificate by
that name issued by the Meridian Public Works Department,
authorizing the construction or siting ofany building.
Not defined under the IDIFA, but not
inconsistent with the IDIFA.
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJULY 16,2W2
4
Not defined under the IDIFA, but not
inconsistent with the IDIFA.
I
Estegs 7. I 6.02
CAPITAL MPROVEMENTS: Improvements with a useful
Iife of ten ( l0). years or more, by new construction or other
action, which increase the service capacity ofa public facility
or service. I '"
Consistent with IDIFA definition at $ 67-
8203(3).
CAPITAL MPROVEMENTS PLAN: A plan adopted and
amended pursuant to the provisions ofThe Dovelopment
Impact Fee Act, Idaho Code 67-8208, which identifies capital
improvements for which development impact fees may be used
as a funding source.
Consistent with IDIFA delinition at $ 67-
8203(5).
CITY COLINCIL: The City Council of the City of Meridian,
Idaho.
Not defincd under the IDIFA, but not
inconsistent with the IDIFA.
CITY PARK SYSTEM: Inctudes all Park and Recreation
Facilities operated by the City.
Not defined under the IDIFA, but not
inconsistent with the IDIFA.
COMMUNITY PARK: A park planned primarily to provide
active and structured recreation activities for young people and
adults. In general, community park facilities are designed for
organized activities and sports, although individual and family
activities are also encouragqd. Community parks can also
provide indoor facilities to mbet a wider range ofrecreation
interests. Where there are no neighborhood parks, the
community park can also serve this function.
In comparison to neighborhood parks, community parks serve
a much larger area and offer more facilities. Their service area
is roughly a l-2 mile radius, and will support a population of
approximately 7,500-15,000 persons, depending upon size and
facilities. As a result, they require.pore support facilities such
as parking, rest rooms, covered play areas, etc. Community
parks are usually about 20 acres in size and often have sports
fields or similar facilities as tlre central focus of the park.
Not defined under the IDIFA, but not
inconsistent with the IDIFA.
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJIJLY 16,2cf,2
5
Estess 7.I6.02
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The City of Meridian
Comprehensive Plan known as "The City of Meridian
Comprehensive Plan" as updated and amended from time to
time pursuant to Idaho Code 67-6508. :
Not defined under the IDIFA, but not
inconsistent with the IDIFA.
CREDITS: The present value ofsystem or service
improvements, contribution or dedication of Iand or money
required by the City from a developer for system or service
improvements of the category for which the development
impact fee is being collected.
Not defined under the IDIFA, but not
inconsistent with the IDIFA.
DEDICATION: A deliberate appropriation of land by its owner
for use as public facilities as the same are defined herein.
Not defined under the IDIFA, but not
inconsistent with the IDIFA,
'DEVELOPER: Person who applies for a Building Permit or
submits a plat or is otherwise subject to the provisions ofthis
chapter.
This definition differs in form from the
definition at IDIFA $67-8203(6) which
specifies "a party that undertakes the
subdivision of property pursuant to sections
50-1301 througb 50-1334, Idaho Code,'
lnstead of "submits a plat rr
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATED JI,'LY 16,2002
6
Estess 7.I6.02
DEVELOPMENT: Any construction or installation of a
building or structure, or any change in use ofa building or
structure, or any change in the use, character or appearance of
Iand, which creates additional demand and need for public ; :
facilities.
This delinition differs from langurge
recently added to the IDIFA $67-8203(7),
which expands "development" to lnclude
"@pggllany change in the use, character or
appearance of land." To be consistent wlth
the delinition of "developer' above, which
includes a person who submits I plot (or
undertakes subdivision), the IDIFA language
should be used. However, lf the city dom not
Intend to impose impact fees at the
su[division stage, then the definition of
"developer' should be revised to delete
"submlts a platr" which would brlng lt into
line with the delhition tif "development."
DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL: Anywritten authorization
from.the City, which authorizes the commencement of a
development.
Consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8203(8).
DEVELOPMENT MPACT.FEE: A payment of money
imposed as a condition ofdevelopment approval to pay for a
proportionate share of the cost ofsystem or service
improvements needed to serve development. This term is also
referred to as an impact fee in this ordinance. The term does not
include the following:
consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8203(9).
(a) A charge or fee to pay the administrative, plan review, or
inspection costs associated with permits requi.red for
development; ? :
Consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8203(9)(a\.
(b) Connection or hookup charges;consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8203(9Xb).
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJIJLY 16,2cr,2 Estsss 7.16.02
7
(c) Availability charges for drainage, sewer, water or
transportation f,or services provided directly to the
development.
Consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8203(9)(c).
(d) Amounts collected from a developer in a transaction in
which the govemmental entity has incurred expenses in
constructing capital improvements for the developnrent if the
owner or developer has agreed to be financially responsible for
the construction or installation of the capital improvements,
unless a written agreement is made pursuant to section 67-
8209 (3) Idaho Code, for credit or reimbursement.
consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8203(9Xd).
Consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8203(10).
DWELLING UNIT: A Building or portion of a Building
designed for or whose primary purpose is for residential
occupancy, and which consists ofone or more rooms which are
arranged, designed or used as living and/or sleeping quarters
for one or more persons. Dwelling unit includes mobile home.
EXISTING DEVELOPMENT: The lawful tand use which
physically exists or for which the landowner holds a valid
building permit as ofthe effective date of this ordinance or that
maximum level of development activity for which a previous
impact fee was paid under the provisions of this Chapter. As
used in this Chapter, the term "lawfrrl land usel' shall not
include a land use which has been established or maintained in
violation of this Chapter or applicable codes.
Not defined under the IDIFA, but not
inconsistent with the IDIFA.
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATED'['LY 16,2002
8
Estess 7.16.02
DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENT: A requirement attached
to a development approval or other govemmental action
approving or authorizing a particular development project
including, but not limited to, a rezoning, which requirement
compels the payment, dedication or contribution ofgoods,
services, land, or money as a condition ofapproval,
Not defined under the IDIFA, but not
inconsistent with the IDIFA.
EXTRAORDINARY COSTS: Those costs incuned as a result
of extraordinary impact.
consistenr wirh IDIFA, $ 67-8203(l l).
EXTRAORDINARY IMPACT: An impact which is
reasonably determined by the City to: (i) result in the need i6r t'
system improvements, the cost of which will significantly
exceed the sum of the development impact fees to be generated
from the project or the sum agreed to be paid pursuant to a
development agreement as allowed by section 67 -8214(2)
Idaho Code, or (ii) result in the need for system improvements
which are not identified in the capital improvements plan.
consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8203(12).
. FEE ADMINISTRATOR: The oflicial or designee appointed
by the Mayor, with City Council approval, to administer this
Chapter.
FEE PAYER: A person intending to commence a proposed
development for which an impact fee computation is required,
or a person who has paid an impact fee, provided a letter of
credit, or made a contribution in-lieu-of-fee pursuant to this
Chapter.
This definition differs from the definition at
IDIFA $67-8203(13), which defined "fee
payer" as "that person who pays or is required
to pay a development impact fee." The broader
definition may be an improvement to the
statutory language.
IMPACT: The effect on the local public facilities and services
in a given area produced by the additional population attracted
by development
Not defined under the IDIFA, but not
inconsistent with the IDIFA.
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJT'LY 16,2002
9
Estess 7.16.02
Not defrned under the IDIFA, but not
inconsistent with the IDIFA.
INDIVIDUAL PROJECT ASSESSMENT: An assessment of a
particular project based upon an agreement between a fee payer
and the City whereby clear and convincing evidence has
established that the impact fee requires adjustment. ,1 -
Thls term is not deflned under the IDIFA,
but this definition should be revlsed to be
conslstent with Sectlon 2-12-13(G) (see
comments thereunder) as follows:
INDIVIDUAL PROJECT ASSESSMENT:
An assessment of a particular proJect based
upon materlals and lnformation submitted
bv a fee paYer. as Drovi ded bv Section 2-12-
13(G). which establishes by
clear and convincing evidence h*s
iistablishe&that the lmpact fee requires
adjustment.
LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS: A description of the service
area and projections of land uses, densities, intensities, and
population in the service area over at least a twenty (20) year
period.
Consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8203(16).
LEVEL OF SERVICE: A measure of the relationship between
service capacity and service demand for public facilities.
conslstent with IDIFA, $ 67-8203(17).
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERJDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJT'LY 16,2002
10
Estess 7.16.02
MANUFACTURED HOME: A structure, constructed
according to HUD/FHA mobile home construction and safety
standards, transportable in one or more sections, which, in the
traveling mode, is eight (8) feet or more in width or is forty: ,
(40) body feet or more in length, or when erected on site, is
three hundred twenty (320) or more square feet, and which is
built on a permanent chassis and designed to be used as a
dwelling with or without a permanent foundation when
I connected to the required utilities, and includes the plumbing,
heating, air conditioning, and electrical systems contained
therein, except that such term shall include any structure which
meets all ttre requirements and with respect to which the
manufacturer voluntarily files a certification required by the
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and complies
with the standards established rnder 42 U.S.C. 5401, et Sec.
Tbis delinition differs ln substance from the
IDIFA 567-8203(18) and to be conslstent
should be amended as follows:
MANUFACTURED HOME: A structure,
constructed according to HUD/FHA moblle
home constructlon and safety standards,
trtnsportable ln one or more sections, which,
in the traveling mode, ls eight (8) feet or
more in width or is forty (40) bbdy feet or
more ln length, or when erected on site, ls
three hundred twenty (320) or more square
feetl and whlch ls bullt on a permanent
chassls and deslgned to be used as a dwelllng
with or without a permanent foundation
when connected to the reduired utilities, and
lncludes the plumbing, heating, air
conditioning, nnd electrical systems
contained therein, except tbat such term
shall include. any structure which meets all
the requirements gll[S_gg!$g!9 t
the slze requlrements and with respect to
which the manufacturer voluntarily liles a
certillcation requlred by the Secretary of
Houslng and Urban Development and
complles with the standards established
under 42 U.S.C. 5401, et Sec.
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINAIVCE NO. 723
DATEDJI,JLY 16,2c[i2
ll
Estess 7.16.02
MOBILE HOME: (See also manufactured home) A
transportable, factory-built home; designed to be used as a
year-round residential dwelling and built prior to the enactment
of the Federal Manufactured Housing Construction and SaGty:
Standards Act of 1974, which became effective June 15, 1976.
Not defined under the IDIFA, but not
inconsistent with the IDIFA.
MODULAR BUILDING: Any building or building
component, other than a manufactured home, which is
constructed according to standards contained in the Uniform
Building Code, as adopted by the City, or any amendments
thereto, which is ofclosed construction and is either entirely or
substantially prefabricated or assembled at a place other than
the buildlng site.
consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8203(19).
NEIGHBORHOOD PARK: A combination playground and
park, designed primarily for non-supervised, non-organized
recreation activities. They are generally small in size (about 5
acres), and typically serve residents within a half-mile radius.
At average residential densities, this amounts to a service area
population of about 3,000 to 5,000 residents. Since these parks
are located within walking gnd bicycling distance of most
users, the activities they support often become a daily pastime
for neighborhood children. '
Not defined under the IDIFA, but not
inconsistent with the IDIFA.
NON- RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT: Any development
project not providing for residential dwelling units.
Not defined under the IDIFA, but not
inconsistent with the IDIFA.
OWNER: The Person holding legal title to the real property,
including the local, state or federal govemment or any
subdivision thereof.
Not defined under the IDIFA, but not
inconsistent with the IDIFA.
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATED JI'LY 16,2002 Estess7.16.02
12
Not defined under the IDIFA, but not
inconsistent with the IDIFA.
PARK PLANNING AREA: A statistical area of the Oflicial
City of Meridian Corporate Boundary as determined by
annexation boundaries, sometimes refened to as "Service
Area." Community Park facilities in Meridian are deemed to
serve the entire community and impact fees for such facilities
shall be charged equally within the boundaries of the Meridian
Area of City Impact, including the City of Meridian.
Not defined under the IDIFA, but not
inconsistent with the IDIFA.
PRESENT VALUE: The total current monetary value of past,
present, or future payments, contributions or dedications of
goods, services, materials construction or money.
consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8203(20).
PROJECT: A particular development on an identifiable parcel
of land.
Consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8203(21).
PROJECT MPROVEMENTS: Site improvements and
facilities that are planned and designed to provide for a
particular development project and that are necessary for the
use and convenience of the occupants or users of the project.
Thls delinltion differs sllghtly from the
IDIFA, S 67-82O3Q2) which provides as
follows:
Site lmprovements rnd facilities that are
planned and deslgned to provide servlce for
a particular development proJect and that
are neceqsarT for the use and convenience of
the occupants or users of the project.
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJT'LY 16,2002
13
Esless 7.16.02
PARK AND FACILITIES: All park lands and facilities as
described in the Comprehensive Plan including Neighborhood,
Community, Linear and Regional Parks as well as Special Use
and Open Space Areas together with the park system ; ''improvements necessary to support the recreation needs of the
population served and to be served as identified in the Plan.
PROPORTIONATE SHARE: That portion of the cost of
system improvements determined pursuant to Section 67-8207
Idaho Code, which reasonably relates to the service demands
and needs of the project. ) -
Consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8203(23).
PUBLIC FACILiTIES: Shall include: (a) Wastewater
collection, treatment and disposal facilities; (b) Storm water
collection, retention, detention, treatment and disposal
facilities, flood control facilities, and bank and shore protection
and enhancement improvements; (c) Landscaping associated
with roads, streets and bridges and the rights ofway associated
therewith; (d) Parks, open space and recreation areas, and
related capital improvements; and (e) Public safety facilities,
including law enforcement, fire, emergency medical and rescue
and Street lighting facilities.
This definition differs from the IDIFA, but is
not inconsistent with IDIFA.
PUBLIC FACILITIES PLANNING AREA: A designated area
identified in the Comprehensive Plan and capital facilities plan
for which public facilities needs have been determined based
upon assumptions made in.accordance with generally accepted
planning and AREA: engineering standards.
Not defined under the IDIFA, but not
inconsistent with the IDIFA.
SERVICE AREA: Any defined geographic area identified by
the City in the Comprehensive Plan or by intergovernmental
agreement between the City and another govemmental entity,
in which specifio facilities provide service to development
within the area defined, on the basis of sound planning or
engineering principles or both.
Consistent with IDIFA $ 67-8203(26).
SERVICE UNIT: A standardized measure of consumption, use,
generation, discharge or need attritititable to an individual unit
ofdevelopment calculated in accordance with generally
accepted municipal, engineering or planning standards for a
partibular category of capital improvements.
consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8203(27).
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATED JIJLY 16,2002
t4
Estcss 7.16.02
SYSTEM MPROVEMENTS: ln contrast to project
improvements, mean capital improvernents to public facilities
which are designed to provide service to a service area
including, without limitation, the type of improvements ::
described in section 50-1703, Idaho Code.
Consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8203(28).
SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT COSTS: Costs incurred for
construction or reconstruction ofsystem or service
improvements, including desigr, acquisition, engineering and
other costs attributable thereto, and also including, without
limitation, the type ofcosts described in section 50-1702 (h),
Idaho Code, to provide additional public facilities or services
needed to serve new growth and development. For clarification,
system improvement costs do not include:
Consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8203(29).
(a) Construction, acquisition or expansion ofpublic facilities or
services other than capital improvements identified in the
capital improvements plan;
The insertion of the term "or services" differs
from the IDIFA $ 67-8203(29)(a), but this
change would tend to decrease the extent of
impact fees.
(b) Repair, operation or maintenance olexisting or new capital
improvements;
(c) Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing
capital improvements in order to meet stricter safety,
efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards;
consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8203(29)(c).
consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8203(29)(d).
(e) Administrative and operating cdsts of the City unless such
costs are attributable to development of the capital
improvements plan, as provided in section 67-8208, Idaho
Code; or
Consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-82O3(29)(e).
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJT'LY 16,2002
15
Bstess 7 .16.02
Consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8203(29)(b).
(d) Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing
capital improvements solely for the purpose ofproviding better
service to existing development;
(f) Principal payments and interest or other finance charges on
bonds or other. indebtedness except financial obligations issued
by or on behallofthe City to finance capital improvements
identified in the capital improvements plan. -: :
UNIT(S) OF A DEVELOPMENT: A quantifiable increment of
development activity dimensioned in terms of dwelling units,
or other appropriate measurements contained in the impact fee
schedule.
Not defined under the IDIFA, but not
inconsistent with the IDIFA.
2-t2-4 GENERAL PROVISIONS
All development is deemed to create an impact and therefore an
increased demand for public services. As such, the cost ofnew
, public facilities should be bome by new users to the extent new
use requires new facilities. Therefore, any application for a
building permit enabling the construction on or after the
effective date of this impact fee ordinance or any amendment
hereto which provides for impact fees for any additional
allowOd category of public facilities, adopted by the Meridian
City Council pursuant to the provisions ofldaho Code 67-8206,
shall be subject to the imposition of impact fees in the manner
and amount set forth in this Chapter as it is adopted initially or
as it is amended as provided for in section 2-12-l D. hereof.
Not inconsistent with the IDIFA.
.4,-
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINAI.ICE NO. 723
DATED JI'LY 16,2002
l6
F*lees 7 .16,02
consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8203(29)(f).
A. Completo applications for building permits received by the
Public Works Department prior to the effective date of this
Ordinance or amendments hereto adopting impact fees or
amending or adopting any methodology by which inrpact fdes ,
are calculated, will be exempt from that portion of the Impact
Fee Ordinance or amendment enacted after the application, ifa
complete building permit is issued within 120 days of the
effective date of this Ordinance or amendment. A complete
application for a building permit shall be defined as including
permitted plans signed and sealed by a State of Idaho licensed
engineer or architect showing all site work, zoning cornpliance,
architectural, structural, electrical, and plumbing work.
Applications for building permits filed prior to the effectivb
I date of said Ordinance or amendment but which become nutl
and void shall be subject to the provisions of the Impact Fee
Ordinance in the event of reapplication. ln the event that an
amendment to this Ordinance involves a change in the amount
of impact fees charged for a particular categor-y ofpublic
facility or services, the fee payer shall pay the lesser impact fee
amount. For building permits which expire or are revoked after
the eflective date of this Ordihance the fee payer shall be
entitled to a refund of previously paid impact fees (see Section
2.12-1) provided that in the case ofa reapplication for permit,
the impact fee in effect at that time shall be paid.
Submission of a "complete" building permit
application should be sufficient to exempt an
applicant from impact fees or changes to impact
fees enacted after the date an application is
deemed filed and complete. Exemption siorrld
zot be conditioned upon issuance of the permit
within 120 days, as the applicant has no control
over the time it takes staff to issue the permit.
This subsection should be amended as set
forth below:
Complete appllcations for building permits
iecelved by the Publlc Works Department
prior to the elfectlve date of this Ordinance
or amendments hereto adopting impact fees
or amending or adoptlng any methodology
by which impact fees are calculated, wlll be
exempt from that portlon of the Impact Fee
I Ordinance or amendment enacted after the
apIlication@
MAcomplete
application for a building permit shall be
defined as including permitted plans signed
and sealed by a State ofldaho licensed
engineer or archltect showing all site work,
zoning compllance, archltectu ral, structural,
electrlcal, and plumbing work. Applicatlons
for bullding permits liled prior to the
effective date of said Ordlnance or
amendment but which become null and void
shall be subJect to the provisions of the
Impact Fee Ordinance ln the event of
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJI'LY 16,2002
17
Esless 7.16.02
\
reapplicrtion. In the event that an
amendment to this Ordlnance involves a
change in the amount of impact fees charged
for a particular category of public facility or
serviies;4 tle fee paye r who submitted a
comolete application prior to amendment of
the Ordinance shall pay the lesser impact fee
amount. For building permits which explre
or are revoked after the effective date of this
Ordinance the fee payer shall be entitled to a
refund of previously paid impact fees (see
Section 2-12-7) provided that ln the case ofa
reapplicatlon for permit, the lmpact fee in
effect at that time shall be paid.
B. All fee payments shall be made to the Fee Administrator
prior to the issuance of a building permit unless otherwise
agreed to in writing by the City and the Developer; and no
bqilding shall commence nor shall a building permit be issued
unlesi and until the applicant has satisfied the provisions of this
Chapter. Violations of this provision shall be subject to the
sanctions set forth in Section,2-l2-05 E.
Inconsistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8204(3), which
provides that a developmeirt impact fee may be
collected "no earlier than . . . the issuance ofa
buildingpermit. . ."
C. This Chapter shall not be constru'ed to subject any
development to double payment of the same impact fees.
consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8204(19).
consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8204(23).
Note that in last line: "person's" should be
ttpepsons.t'
E. Compliance with this Chapter siiall not excuse the applicant
from conrpliance with all other govemmental development
regulations. Building and/or use permits may be withheld until
all sich requirements are mst.
Not inconsistent with the IDIFA.
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJI,JLY 16,2002
l8
Fxtess 7.16.02
D. A Development knpact Fee shall not be deemed invalid
because the intended improvement for which the fee was paid
may result in an incidental benefit to owners or developers
within a service area other than the person's paying the fee.
F. The Council recognizes that there may be circumstances
where the anticipated fiscal impacts ofa proposed development
are of such magnitude that the City may be unable to
accommodate the development without excessive or J
.-..'unscheduled public expenditures which exceed the amount of
the anticipated impact fees from such development. If the
Council determines that a proposed development activity would
create such an extraordinary impact on the City's public
facilities and services system, the Council may refuso to
approve the proposed development activity and/or may
recommend to the other affected govemmont agencies that the
project not be approved. In the altemative, the Council may
calculate a pro rata share per service unit of the extraordinary'impact and charge an impact fee greater than the fee indicated
by use ofthe fee schedule.
Consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8204(22),which
required that an impact fee ordinance include a
process for dealing with a project that has
extradidinary impacts.
G. Individual project assessments ofdevelopment impact fees
may be made by application to the Fee Administrator who shall
evaludte such individual project assessments under the
guidelines provided for in Section 2-12-13 G. of this Chapter.
If the guidelines are met, the individual project assessment
shdll be recommended for approval by the Fee Administrator
and forwarded to the City Codncil for approval within thirty
(30) days ofreceiving such application. An adverse
recommendation by the Fee Administrator may be appealed to
the Council under Section 2-12:l3G (3) of this Chapter. Final
determination regarding project assessments shall be made by
the City Council.
.;.-
ACAR @MMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJI,]LY 16,2@2
19
Estess 7.16.02
Consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8204(5); see
Section 2-12-l3G for further discussion.
H. The Developmenl Impact Fee Advisory Committee shall
periodically review the contents ofthe adopted Impact Fee
Ordinance and, when appropriate, make recommendations for
revisions to the Meridian City Council. The Meridian City ; -
Council shall consider the Development Impact Fee Advisory
Committee's recommended revision(s) to the City of Meridian
Development Impact Fee Ordinance at least once every twelve
(12) months. The Development Impact Fee Advisory
Committee's recommendations and the City Council's action
are intended to ensure that the benefits to a fee paying
development are equitable, in that the fee charged the
developrnent shall not exceed a proportionate share of the costs
ofsystem improvements, and the procedures for administering
impact fees remain efficient.
This subsection is incomplete. The IDIFA, g
67 -8205, lmposes specifi c requlrements for
the creatlon and operation ofa Development
Impiict Fee Advisory Committee. The
requlrements ofIDIFA S 67-8205 should be
set out in the Cityts ordinance, These
include requirements as to the composltion
of commlttee membership and detalls of
committee duties, inclrdlng that the
committee must file a report "at least
annually" with the city council regardlng
trthg capital improvements plan and . . . any
perceived inequities in implementlng the
plan or imposlng the development impact
fees.t'
2-12-5 DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE - STANDARDS AND
PROCEDURES
The development impact fee reflects tlte need for capital
improvements to public facilities or services made necessary by
new development. Any person requesting a building permit for
development or who is otherwise subject to this Chapteq shall
pay the impact fee equal to the sum of impact fees reflected in
the Impact Fee Schedules set forth in the Meridian Cily Code
and determined pursuant to the following:
consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8207.
A. The development impact fee shall not exceed a
"proportionate share" of the costs incurred or the costs that will
be incuned by the City in the proriision of"system
improvements" to serve the new development.
Consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8207.
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJI'LY 16,2002
20
Estess 7. I 6.02
B. The "proportionate share" is the qost attributable to the new
development after consideration by the City of the following
factors:
Consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8207(l).
(l) Any appropriate credit, offset or contribution ofmoney,
dedication ofland, or construction of system improvements;
consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8207(l).
(2) Payments reasonably anticipated to be made by or as a
result ofthe new development in the form ofuser fees, debt
service payments, or taxes which are dedicated for system
improvements for which development impact fees would
otherwise be imposed;
To be consistent with the amended IDIFA
$ 67-8207(1), subsection needs to be revised
and a new subsectlon (3) created as follows;
{2).Payments reasonably antlcipated to be
made by or rs s result of the new
ilevelopment ln the form of user feess-43!
debt service paymenklertrxe+r+bieh*re
@@
oth€H+ise++lmpos€d; (3) that portlon of
general tax and other revenues allocated by
the Jurisdiction to system lmprovements; and
(3) All other available sources offunding such system
improvements.
This subsection should be renumbered as
follows:
(3) g) All other svailable sources of fundlng
such system lmprovements.
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJI,'LY 16,2N2 I ,
21
Egtese 7.16.(D
C. ln determining the "proportionate share" ofthe cost of
system improyements to be paid by the developer, the
following additional factors shall be considered.
To be consistent with the amended IDIFA
g 67-8207Q), this subsectlon should be
revlsed as follows:
:
C. In d'etermlning the aproportionate share"
of the cost of system lmprovements to be
pald by the developer, the followlng
addltlonal factors shall be consldered- 94!
accoutrted for ln the calculation of the tmDact
fee:
(l) The cost of existing system improvements within the
service area or areas impacted by the new development;
'Consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-82O7(2)(a).
consistent with IDIFA, $ 67 -8207 (2)(b).
(3) The extent to which the new development will contribute to
the cost of system improvements through taxation, assessments,
or developer or landowner contributions;
To be consistent with the requirements of the
IDIFA, $ 67-8207Q)@), thls subsection
should be revised as follows:
(3) The extent to whlch the new development
will contribtte to the cost ofsystem
improvements through taxatlon,
assessments, or developer or landowner
contrlbu tions;g@glgggly
co ntributed to the cost of system
improvements through developer or
landowner contributions.
(4) The extent to which the new ddi,elopment is require<fto
contribute to the cost of existing system improvements in the
future;
Consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-82O7(2)(d).
ACAR COMMENTS ONMERIDIAN'S ORDINA}ICENO. 723
DATEDJT,'LY 16,2W2 ] '
22
Bstess 7.16.02
(2) The means by which existing system improvements have
been financed;
consistenr with IDIFA, $ 67-8207(2)(e).
(6) Extraordinary costs, ifany, incurred in serving the new
development;
Consistent with IDIFA, i 67-82O7(2)(f).
(7) The time and price differential inherent in a fair comparison
offees paid at different times; and
Consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8207(2)(d.
(8) The availability ofother sources of funding system
improvements including, but not limited to, user charges,
general tax levies, intergovemmental transfers, and special
taxation as set forth more specifically in the Comprehensive
Plan as required by Idaho Code 67-8207 (2) (h).
,Consistent with IDIFA, $$ 67-8207(2)(h) and
67-8208(1X0.
D. After payment of development impact fees to the Fee
Administrator or the execution of an agreement for payment of
develppment impact fees, additional impact fees or increases in
fees may not be assessed unless the number ofservice units
increases or the scope or schedule ofthe development changes.
In the event of an increase ih"the number of service units or
schedule of the development changes, the additional
development impact fees to be imposed are limited to the
amount attributable to the additional service units or change in
scope of the development.
Consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8204(18).
t ;,:
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJULY 16,2002
23
Estess 7. I 6.02
(5) The extent to which the new development should be
credited for providing system improvements, without charge to
other properties within the sgrvice area or areas impacted by
the new development; -1 :
E. To insure collection ofdevelopment impact fees, the Fee
Administrator may use the following means and methods:
This subsection (E) should be revised to be
consistent with the amended IDIFA $67-
8213, which requlres a government entity to
adJdst lmpact fees ln the event an error in
the impact fee formula ls discovered. The
recommended revlsion is as follows:
E: To insure collectlon of development
impact fees, the Fee Administrator may use
the followlng means and methodsrry;!!99!
that if the Fee Admlnistrator or the
Development Impact Fee Advisorv
Committee discovers an error in the impact
fee formula that results in assessment or
oavment of more than a proportionate share.
the impact fee shall be adiusted at the time of
assessment on a case case basis to collect
no more thatr a proportionate share or. at
the Citv Council 's dis cretion. the collection
(l) Additions to the fee for interest at the highest legally
allowable rate as well as a penalty offive per cent (SYo) for
each thirty (30) day period paJment is late under the terms of
this chapter or the agreement between the developer and the
City;
(2) Withholding the building permit:or other approval until the
impact fee is paid;
consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8213(2).
(3) Withholding utility services until the impact fee is paid; and consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8213(3).
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATED JIJLY 16,2002
24
Estess 7.16.02
of anv impagt fees mav be discontinued until
@3
Inconsistent with IDIFA, $ 67-82I3(I), rvhich
provldes ior collectlon of rrreasonabte
lnterest and penalties,rr A 5 percent monthly
penalty (60% per year uncompounded) is not
a reasonable penalty.
consistent with IDIFA, $.67-8213.
2-12-6:DETERMINATION OT' DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES-
Prior to issuance of a building permit for development, the
applicant or owner will be required to pay monetary fees in
acoordance with this section. It is intended that this requirement
extend to any owner or builder, including the state ofldaho, the
United States of America and any other govemmental or quasi
govemmental entity,
The requirement to pay impact fees "prior to
issuance of a bullding permit" is
insufficiently precise and may be applied
lnconsistently with the IDIFA, S 67-8204(3)
requirement that the fee be collected no
earlier than the issusnce of a building
permit. Also, the requirement to pay
rrmonetary feesrr is a general statement that
does not account for other sectlons of the
ordinance which contem!late credits against
monetary fees. We note that there may be
constitutional or other issues that would
prevent the collection of local impact fees
from the federal, state or other governmental
entities.
A. General Formula: The development impact fee per service
unit may not exceed the amount determined by dividing the
costs of the capital improvements described in the Capital
Improvements Plan and as required by Idaho Code 67-
8208(1X0, by the total number of projected service units as
I described in the Comprehensive Plan and as required by Idaho
Code 67-8208(lXg). Ifthe number ofnew seryice units
projected over a reasonable period of time is less than the total
number of service units shown by the approved land use
assumptions at full development ofthe service area, the
maximum impact fee per service unit shall be calculated by
dividing the costs ofthe pad ofthe capital improvements
Consistent with IDIFA, $$ 67-820a(16) and
67-8208(1X0, (g). The requirement that the
total number of projected service units be
described in the Comprehensive Plan does
not appear in $ 67-8204(f6), but $ 67-
8208(1)(g) requires service units to be
lnchided.in the CIP, which must be made an
element of the Comprehensive Plan
according to S 67-8208(I).
25
Estess 7.16.02
(4) Imposition of liens for failure to timely pay the impact fee
following the procedures set forth in Chapter 5, Title 45, Idaho
Code.
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJT'LY 16,2002 I ,
necessitated by and attributable to the projected new service
units described in Idaho Code 67-8208(1)(g) by the total
projected new service units described in that section.
B. An alternative methodology may be used provided that i-!
can be demonstrated that such altemative methodology :1
accurately calculates the proportionate share of the impact of
the proposed development on the capacity ofsystem
improvements in terms of generally accepted municipal,
engineering and planning principles. Challenges to the
methodology adopted by any impact fee ordinance approved by
the Meridian City Council may be brought by any interested
individual within sixty (60) days of the adoption or
rnodification of such inrpact fee methodology by filing formal
protest with the City of Meridian Clerk who shall set the matter
for hearing before the City Council within thirty (30) days of
receiving such protest. The protesting party shall be specific in
identifying objections to the methodology. The City Council
shall render a written decision within fifteen (15) days ofthe
closuie of the hearing on the protest. The decision ofthe City
Council shall be final.
This sectlon should be deleted to make it
conslstdnt with the amended IDIFA which no
longer contalns the alternatlve methodology
language.
C. In the case ofdevelopment activity involving a change of
use and/or magnitude of use in which a building permit is
required, the applicant shall be required to pay the computed
impact fee for any proposed development activity for which the
impact fee has not been previously paid. When any building
permit expires or is revoked after the effective date of this
Ordinance and a fee has not previously been paid under this
Chapter the applicant shall be required to comply with the
provisions lrerein. No tefunds willtb given for proposed
development activity resulting in a negative fee calculation.
Thls provlslon ls not clear in lts reference to
a change in the rruse or magnitude of the
use.rr IDIFA$67-8204(18) and (19) set forth
the circumstances under which proJect
changes can result ln addltional impact fee
payments.
D. No impact fee payment shall be required for any
development activity when the total calculated fee is less than
Although not specified in the IDIFA, this is not
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCts NO. 723
DATEDJT,JLY 16,2ctr2 I '
26
Estess 7.16.02
five dollars ($5.00).inconsistent with the IDIFA.
E. If the type of dwelling unit within a proposed or current
development is not specified in the impact fee schedule, the Fee
Administrator shall use the dwelling unit most nearly
. comparable in computing the fee. This determination shall be :
made at the discretion of the Fee Administrator, with appeal to
the City Council if the Applicant disagrees with the Fee
Administrator's determination.
Although hot specified in the IDIFA, this is not
inconsistent with the IDIFA. Appeal processes
should be set forth in the ordinance.
F. In determining existing development activity and the units of
proposed or existing development, the Fee Administrator shall
use the building permit or zoning certificate ofuse information
contained in the building or zoning records of the City of
Meridian.
Although not specified in the IDIFA, this is not
inconsistent with the IDIFA.
G. A development impact fee will be assessed for installation
of a modular building, manufactured home or mobile home
unless the fee payer can demonstrate by documentation such as
utility bills and tax records either:
Consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8204(21).
(l ) That a modular buildingi manufactured home or mobile
home was legally in place on the lot or space prior to the
effective date of this Chapter; or
Consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-820a(21)(a).
(2) That a development impact fee has been paid previously for
the installation of a modular building, manufactured home or
mobile home on that same lot or space,
consisrent with IDIFA, $ 67-8204(2lXb).
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINAIiTCE NO. 723
DATEDJT'LY 16,2002 i ,
)7
Estess 7.I6.02
2-12-7 REFUND OFIMPACT FEES PAID:
A. The fee payer or current owner shall be entitled to a refund
of the impact fee if (l) a building permit encompassing fee _
_paying development expires or is revoked, or (2) if the public
facility for which the fee was paid is available but never
provided, or (3) the City, after collecting the fee when the
public facility for which the fee was paid is not available, has
failed to appropriate and expend the collected development
impact fees within ten (10) ye.us on a first- in, first-out (FIFO)
basis, except that the City shall retain the General
Administrative or Specified Administrative Charge portion of
the fee to cover the cost of the administration ofthe impact fee
.calculation, collection and refund. However, no refund shall be
provided for the cost of completed improvements contributed
in lieu offee unless otherwise provided for in a development
agreement.
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJTJLY 16,2002
28
Estess 7.16.02
This section is inconsistent with the IDIFA, $$
67-8204(12); and 67-8211. Subsection A(l) is
incorisistent with the provisions of IDIFA $67-
821 1(b) for a refund if a building permit is
denied or abandoned. Subsection (A)(3) is
inconsistent with the requirement under the
IDIFA, $$ 67-8211(l)(c) and 67-8210(4), that
expenditures, other than those for waste water
collection, treatment, disposal and drainage
facilities, be made within five (5) years of the
colleption of impact fees. The IDIFA requires
refunding any impact fees not expended within
five (5) years, except that the fees may be held
longer than five (5) years ifthe city identifies a
"reasonable cause," in writing why they should
be so held. Nevertheless, under IDIFA $ 67-
8210(4), "in no event [may the fees be held for]
greater than eight (8) years Iiom the date they
were collected."
ln addition, the IDIFA does not authorize
collection of "administrative" costs, unless the
administrative costs are attributable to
development of the capital improvements plan..
.lee IDIFA, $$ 67-8203(29Xe) and 67-8208(l).
Finally, this subsection must be revised per the
amended IDIFA, which requires a refund when
a fee that was paid "under protest" is later
determined to exceed the fee payer's
proportionate share. .
I This section 2-12-7(A), therefore, should be
I amended as follows:
A. The fee payer or current owner shall be
entitled to a refund o[ the lmpact fee lf (l) a
building permit encompassing fee paying
development@
or abandoned, or (2) lf the publie4ritiff
se]rvlce for which the.fee was paid is available
but never provided, or (3) the City, after
collecting the fee when the public facility for
which the fee was paid is not avallable, has
failed to appropriate and expend the
iothcted development impact fees within ten
(10) Iive ($ years on a lirst- in, Iirst-out
(FIFO)basls@
written reasona ble cause for holdins the fees
lonser than live (5) v ears. lrut in no event
mav the fees be held lonser than eisht (8)
vearst@
@
i
or (4) the fee Dayer Da vs a fee under orotest
an4 a subsequent review of the fee paid or
the completion of an individual assessment
determines that the fee paid exceeded the
DroDortionate share to rvhich the
sovertrmental entitv was entitled to receive.
However, no refund shall be-p.ovided for the
cost of completed improvements contributed
in lieu of fee unlesS otherwise provided for in
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJT'LY 16,2002 I ,
29
Estess 7.16.02
a development agreement.
B. Any impact fee trust funds refunded shall be retumed to the
fee payer or cuirent owner by the Fee Administrator with
accrued interest at one half(l/2) the legal rate as provided {or -
in Idaho Code 28-22-104. The fee payer or current owner shall -'
be required to submit a written request for refund to the Fee
Administrator before issuance of the refund can be authorized.
No refunds of development impact fees will be provided for in
the event the fee payer or current owner does not request such a
refund prior to the expiration ofone year following the ten (10)
year period from the date the development impact fee was paid,
This subsection is inconsistent rvith IDIFA
$67-8211(2) and (3). It should be revlsed as
follows:
B. Any impact fee trust funds refunded shall
be returtred to the fee payer or current
owner by the Fee Administrator rvlth
accrued interest at one half (l/2) the legal
rate. from the date on which the fee rvas
originally paid. as provided for in Idaho
Code 28-22-104. The fee payer or current
owner shall be required to submlt a wrltten
request for refund to the Fee Administrator
before issuance of the refund can be
authorized. Ns-+efrmds-efde+el,epment
i
@
ien
t*asa*ld,
C. Refunds shall be sent to the fee payer, or person entitled to
such refund, within ninety (90) days oftheir approval by the
City.
Inconsistent with IDIFA, $ 67-821 l(2). Should
be revised as follows:
C. Refund$sholl be sen
@
When the ripht to a refund exists. the Citv
shall issue a nd to the orooertv orvner of
record within 90 d sa r d ined
bv the Fee Administrator that a refund is
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDI,AN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJT'LY 16,2002
30
Estess 7.16.02
due.
D. Funds shall be deemed expended for purposes of this
Chapter when payment ofsaid funds has been approved by the
City of Meridian . :
The term "expended" is not defined in the
IDIFA, however IDIFA $67-82 I 0(3X6)
distinguishes between fees that are appropriated
and thosb that are spent and provides that fees
shall be refunded ifnot expended within the
statutory time period. IDIFA $67-8210( ). To
thO extent that there is nothing to stop the City
from approving but not actually making a
payment, this section ofthe ordinance appears
to be inconsistent with the apparent intent ofthe
statute that fees be refunded ifnot actually used
lbr the intended purpose.
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJI'LY 16,2W2 I '
3l
Egtess 7.16.02
2-t2-8 EXEMPTIONS
A. The following shall be exempted from payment of
Development Impact Fees:
Consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8204(20).
( I ) Rebui lding the same amount of floor space of a structure
which was destroyed by fire or other catastrophe, providing the
structure is rebuilt and ready for occupancy within two (2)
years ofthe fire or other catastrophe;
consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-820aQ$@).
(2) Remodeling or repairing a structure which does not increase
the number ofservice units;
consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8204(20)(b).
(3) Replacing a residential unit, including a manufactured
home, with another residential unit on the same lot, pro'i'ided
'that the number of service units does not increase;
Consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8204(20)(c).
(4) Placing a temporary construction trailer or office on a lot;consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8204(20)(d).
(5) Constructing an addition on a residential structure which
does not increase the number of service units;
consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8204(20)(e).
(6) Adding uses tlrat are typically accessory to residential uses,
such as tennis courts or clubhouses, unless it can be clearly
demonstrated that the use creates a significant impact on the
capacity of system improvements; and
consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8204(20)(f).
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATED JIJLY 16,2002 Estess 7. I 6.02
32
(7) Development projects which aro commercial, industrial or
oflice projects, or portions ofprojects that involve commercial,
industrial or office uses or building permits.
Although not specified in the IDIFA, this is not
inconsistent with the IDIFA. We note,
however, that projects that add employees to a
service area may have an impact on the level of
demand for parks and recreational facilities by
non-residents. From a policy perspective,
assessing an impact fee against such
commercial developments could help reduce lhe
impact fees that must bo assessed against
residential development, while still maintaining
the .LOS established for resident use ofparks
and recreational facilities.
B. An exemption must be claimed by the fee payer upon
application for a building permit. Any exemption not so
claimed shall be deemed waived by the fee payer. All requests
shall be submitted to and determined by the Fee Administrator.
Appeals of the Fee Administrators determination shall be made
under'the provisions ofSection 2-12-16 of this Chapter
This section should be deleted. The process
for involvlng an exemption ls not specllied ln
the IDIFA, but thls provislon appears to
undercut the requlrements of the IDIFA if
the technlcal walver requirement applies to
uses that are exempt by statutc
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJT'LY 16,2002 i
JJ
Fstess 7 .16.A
2-t2-09 Credits
A. In the calculation of impact fees for a particular project,
credit shall only be given for the present value ofany t
. construction of system improvements or contribution or
dedication ofland or an interest in land or money required by
the City from a developer for system improvements. Credit
shall not be given for project improyements.
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJULY 16,2002
34
Estess 7. I 6.02
Although not identical to the language in the
IDIFA, this subsection (A) is consistent with
the IDIFA, $67-8209(l)
However, a new subsection should be
included after this subsection (A) to meet the
amended IDIFA, S67-8209(2) requirement
that credits be given for tax and user fees
pald. The following subsection should be
iidded:
fees for a particular proiect. credit shall be
given for the nresent value of all tax and user
is beinq assessed and used bv the Citv for
collected. Ifthe amount ofcredit exceeds the
Droportionate share for the particular
proiecL the developer shall receive a credit
on future lmpact fees for the amount in
mav be applied bv the developer as an offset
area rryhere the credit rvas generated.
B. A developer who is required to construct, find or contribute
system improvements in excess of the impact fees which would
otherwise have been paid by the development project, shall be
reimbursed for such excess construction, funding or i .,
contribution from analogous impact fees paid by future
development located in the service area which is benefited by
such improvements.
Although not identical to the language in the
IDIFA, $ 67-8209(3), this subsection is
generally consistent with the IDIFA, except that
under the IDIFA the developer is authorized to
choose either a credit against future impact fee
or reimbursement.
Thls subsection should be amended as
follows:
BQ. A developer who is required to
bonstruct, fund or contribute system
irnprovements in excess of the inrpaet-fees
*hGh-",outd€S$#ise+€#€+€en"aid#h€
gglg shall. at the developer's choice. gggglg
a credlt on future imoact fees or be
relmbursed for such excess construction,
funding or contributlon from analogous
lmpact fees paid by future development
located ln the service area rvhlch ls benefited
by such improvements.
oroportionate share svstem imDrovement
C. If credit or reimbursement is due to the developer pursuant
to this section, the City and the developer shall enter into a
written agreement, negotiated. in good faith, prior to the
construction, finding or oontribution. The agreement shall
provide for the amount of credit or the amount, time and form
of reimbursement. . ::
consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-8209(4)
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJULY 16,2002
35
Bstess7.16.02
I D. Any person requesting such credit or reimbursement shall
I present documentation ofcosts or payments for facilities to be
considered by the Fee Administrator for use in determining the
amount of credit or reimbursement to be given. The tr .
determination shall be made no more than thirty (30) days alter
complete documentation is submitted to the Fee Administrator.
Any appeal from such a decision by the Fee Administrator will
be reviewed by the City Council pursuant to the procedures set
forth in Section 2-12-16 of this Chapter.
I Although not specified in the IDIFA, this is not
inconsistent with the IDIFA
2-12-to SUITABILITY OF LAND OF'FERED FOR DEDICATION
In the event that a developer intends to contribute or dedicate
an interest in land in lieu ofpaying impact fees or a portion
thereof; the following procedures and criteria shall be applied:
.The IDIFA does not address the issue of
suitibility of land olfered for dedication.
A. The Fee Administrator, with the advice of the appropriate
Department Head and the City Attomey, will determine
whether the land proposed for dedication is acceptable. He will
be guided by the following consideration:
l. Size: The size ofthe parcel is expressed as a net amount and
is exclusive ofstreet right-of-way, existing and proposed
easements, borrow pits, lakes and other man made or natural
conditions which restrict or impede the intended use ofsuch
areas.
2. Unity: The land to be dedicated shall form a single parcel of
land except where aforesaid review determines that two or
more parcels would be in the best public interest.
3. Shape: The configuration ofthe iiarcel of land is such as to
be usable for public facilities purposes as determined by the
City.
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJIJLY 16,2002
36
Esless 7.16.02
4. Location: The land to be dedicated is so located as to serve
the needs of the development, by being within the Service Area
and/or Public Facilities Service Zone.
6. Utility: Dedicated land should be usable for public facilities
purposes and meet the following criteria prior to its final
acceptance by the City Council:
(a) The property is platted and ready to be developed so that no
funds would be required to be expended for site development.
(b) All utilities are in place and are at the perimeter of the site
' and include roads, walks, curbs, water lines, sewer lines,
electric service lines, and telephone service lines.
(c) All utilities are of sufficient quality and quantity to
adequately service the site.
(d) The property is filled and compacted to comply with all
appropriate subdivision codes, building and zoning codes, and
flood insurance laws and reiittlations. The fill and compaction
are ofsuflicient quality to aecept the improvements
contemplated.
7. Plans: City, Regional and State plans shall be taken into
consideration when evaluating land proposals for dedication.
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJT'LY 16,2002 Estess 7.16.02
.5. Access: Appropriate access to the land to be dedicated is
provided by improved public street frontage.
37
8. The Fee Administrator shall determine, based on specific
review ofeach application, whether the proposed site contains
the requisite site characteristics consistent with public facilities
criteria. This determination shall be in writing and shall spedifyt
the reasons the site was approved or denied credit for inclusion
in the land dedication requirement. The Fee Administrator's
determination shall be made within thirty (30) days from the
date ofreceipt of the request and shall be forwarded to the
Council for action. The Council may affirm, reject or revise the
determination of the Fee Administrator providing written
findings offact and conclusions of law.For'clarity, the following revlsion should be
madp:
The Council may alfirm, reject or revlse the
determlnation of the Fee,Admlnlstrator 43!gglprovldinp written findings of fact and
conclusions of law.
B. Appeals of the Fee Administrator's determination of land
suitability shall be made td th€ City Council by the filing of an
appeal with the Meridian City Clerk no later than ten (10) days
[ollowing the date of the decision of the Fee Administrator.
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJIJLY 16,2002
38
Bstess 7 .16.02
2-12-tt:IMPACT FEE SERVICE AREAS AND TRUST
ACCOUNTS:
A. All impact fees will be deposited in a designated "Trust-,
. Fund". Interest-bearing trust accounts shall be established and '
maintained by the City of Meridian; said trust accounts shall
correspond to the aroa contained in the corporate boundary as
the same is adopted and amended from time to time by action
of the Meridian City Council.
This subsection is generally consistent with
IDFA, $ 67-8210(l), although it doos not
contain the same level of specificity as $ 67-
8210(l), which requires that interest eamed on
development impact fees be considered funds of
the account on which they are eamed. For
clarity, the Clty should incorporate the
-IDIFA language more closely, as follows:
,,A. AII impact fees wlll be deposited ln a
designated (Trust Fund". Interest-bearing
tnrst accounts shall be established and
maintained by the City of Meridian; said
trust accounts shall correspond to the area
contalned in the corporate boundary as the
same is adopted and amended from time to
tlme by actlon o[the Meridlan City Councili
there shall be accountlng records malntalned
of svstem improvements
within each service area for which impact
development impact fees shall be considered
restrictions placed on the use ofdevelopment
ordinance,
for each category
fees are collected: a
impact fees under the provisions of this
d interest earned on
39
Estess 7. I 5.02
funds of the account on which it is earned.
atrd trot funds subiect to section 57-127.
Idaho Code. and shall be subiect to all
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDTAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJIJLY 16,2002
B. Public Facilities Planning Area (service area) shall
correspond to the Meridian corporate boundary and Meridian
Comprehensive Plan, and the same area adopted as part of
Capital Improvements Plan approved by the City Council, I
1,
indicating the designated planning areas for the public facilities
needed, including but not limited to, those associated with
parks and recreation.
This subsection is not inconsistent with IDIFA.
C. All impact fees collected by the Fee Administrator will be
promptly deposited into the proper trust account, excepting
General Administrative charges which will be directed to the
appropriate Department to underwrite the cost of administering
this Chapter.
As previously discussed, the IDIFA does not
authorize collection of "administrative" costs,
unless the administrative costs are attributabte
to development of the capital improvements
[lan. ,See IDIFA, $$ 67-S203(29)(e) and 67-
8208(r).
2-12-t2 IMPACT FEE EXPENDITURES
A, Except as othenwise provided herein, funds from the lmpact
Fee Trust Funds, including any accrued interest, shall be
limited to the financing ofacquisition, expansion, and/or
improvement ofreal properti capital facilities, or for principal
and interest payments (includiirg sinking fund payments) on
bonds or other borrowed revenues used to acquire, expand or
improve such facilities or seryices necessitated by the impact of
new development within the community.
Although this subsection (A) is not identical to
the language in the IDIFA, it is generally
consistent with IDIFA $ 67-8210(l). A better
provision, however, would simply say:
"Funds from the Impact Fee Trust Funds,
including any accrued interest sball be subject
to all restrictions placed on the use of
development impact fees by this Ordinance and
$$67-8201 through 67-8213 ofthe Idaho
Code."
B. Trust account funds shall be dedmed expended in the order
in which they are collected.
Not addressed by, but not inconsistent with, the
IDIFA.
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATED JI'LY 16,2002
40
Estess 7. I 6.02
C. In the event that the Level of Service Standards for public
facilities have been met within a particular area of the
community, the Meridian City Council may authorize the
Mayor or his designee, following a public hearing, to expena ,.
the funds in another area of the community for system
improvements ofthe same category, in a fair and reasonable
proportion to tlre fees charged. Said authorization shall only be
permitted upon a finding that the expenditure will fairly and
proportionately mitigate the impacts of and will fairly and
proportionately benefil the development paying the fees in
question.
This subsection could lead to the unauthorized
use of impact fees. If the LOS is met within a
particular area, then no impact fees should be
asseised in those areas. This subsection
should be deleted in its entircty and replaced,
according to the provisions of the IDIFA, $
67 -8210(2),, as follows :
C. Expenditures of development imoact fees
shall be made onlv for the catesorv of
svstem improve ments and with or for the
of tbe service area for h
development impact fee was imposed as
shown bv the caoital rovemen ts nlan and
D. In the ovent complianca with the Level of Service Standard
for public facilities meets or exceeds the projected population
estimates adopted in the Coirtprehensive Plan through the year
2015, the City Council may.authorize the Mayor or his
designee, following a public hearing, to expend the additional
impact fees collected from the development in excess of
original projections, for system improvements within the
community from which the fees were collected. Said
authorization shall be permitted ipon a finding that the
expenditure will mitigate the impacts of and will benefit the
development paying the fees in qri6stion in a fair and
proportionate manner.
This use of lmpact fees is not addressed by
the IDIf,'A, but does not appear to be
prohibited by lt. As a policy matter it is a
questionable practice to impose or expend
development lmpact fees where level of
service standards have been met
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 7Z'
DATEDJT'LY 16,20A2
41
Bstess 7. I 6.02
as authorized in this ordlnance.
E. A financial report on the Impact Fee Trust Funds shall be
provided annually by the Fee Administrator to the Mayor and
Council.
This subsection (F) needs to be revised to
bring it into compllance with'the
requirements of IDIFA $ 67-8210(3), as
follows:
E. A financial report en-thcJmpae$Fee
Tr*o$Fu*d+shall be provlded annually by
the Fee Adminlstrator to the Mayor and
Councll describing the amount of all
development impact fees collected.
-aDDroDrlated. or soent durin g the preceding
r ca of ublic facili and service
e
and revenues other than impact fees
collected. apDropriated..or sDent for svstem
imDrovements during thb preceding year by
categorv of public facility and service area.
F; Any interested citizen may challenge the expenditure ofany
impact fee funds within one (1) year ofsaid expenditure by
filing a written protest with.the Meridian City Clerk. The City
Clerk shall set the matter for hearing before the City Council
within thirty (30) days of the filing ofsuch protest. The
protesting party shall specifically identify the impact fee
expenditure and the basis of the protest. The City Council shall
render a decision regarding the protest within thirty (30) days
after tlre close of the hearing btr the matter.
Not addressed by, but not inconsistent with, the
IDIFA.
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJIJLY 16,2002
42
Estess 7. I 6.02
2-12-13 PARKAND RECREATION IMPACT FEES
A. INCORPORATION OF STANDARDS: This section
addresses the Development Impact Fees collected for Meridian
Park and Recreation Service Improvements. The Meridian :'
Comprehensive Plan as adopted by the Meridian City Council
together with the land use, acquisition and construction cost
and service unit assumptions upon which said plan is based are
hereby incorporated into this section by reference.
This subsection is not inconsistent with the
IDIFA, but the City is required to incorporate
into the Comprehensive Plan a capital
improvements plan (CIP) which meets the
requirements of the IDIFA, $ 67-8208.
The CIP rnrst include, among other things: (a)
a description ofall existing facilities and any
deficiencies; (b) a commitment to cure any
ileficiencies with other sources of available
revenue; (c) capacity and usage analysis; (d) a
description of land use assumptions; (e) a table
specifying tevel ofuse of a service unit (or
facility); (f) a description bfall system
improvements and their costs attributable to
new development to achieve the LOS
established in this ordinance; (g) the total
number of service units (or facilities) needed to
serve new development within the service area
based on the land use assumptions; (h)
projected demand for system improvements
over "a reasonable period not to exceed twenty
(20) years;" (i) identification ofall sources of
funding available to finance system
improvements; and () a schedule of estimated
dates for construction system improvements.
In addition, the CIP must be updated, with
respect to each of the above elements, each tinle
an amendment is proposed to this Impact Fee
Ordinance. .See IDIFA, $ 67-8208(4).
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINAI.ICE NO. 723
DATEDJI'LY 16,2002 I ,
43
Estess 7.16.02
B. INCORPORATION OF MAPS: The maps contained within
the Comprehensive Plan are hereby incorporated into this
section by reference. Copies ofsaid maps may be obtained at
the office of the Meridian City Clerk or viewed and obtained at
the Administrative office of Meridian Planning. -l
-",
C. PARK MPACT FEE - PURPOSE AND
IMPLEMENTATION: All residential development is deemed
to create an impact and therefore an increased demand for park
and recreation services. As such the cost for new public park
facilities should be borne by new users ofpark and recreation
facilities to the extent new use requires new facilities.
Therefore, any application for a building permit enabling the
construction on or after the effective date of this impact fee
ordinance shall be subject to the imposition ofpark and
recreation impact fees in the manner and amount set forth in
this section.
Not inconsistent with the IDIFA.
D. PAYMENT OF PARK MPACT FEE: Prior to receiving a
building permit or commencing construction of any building
for which park impact fees are to be paid pursuant to this
chapter, whichever first occprs, the applicant therefore must
demonstrate that the appropriate impact fee has been paid to the
Fee Administrator. The Fee Administrator and/or the Public
Works Department Director shall have the authority to
withhold a building permit or stop construction, as the case
may be, until the appropriate impact fee has been collected.
consistent wirh rhe IDIFA, $$ 67-8204(3) and
67-8213(2).
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJIJLY 16,2002 Bstess 7.16.02
44
Not inconsistent with the IDIFA.
E. METHODOLOGY: The methodology adopted for the
purpose of determining park and recreation impact fees shall be
based upon the assumptions set forth in the Comprehensive
Plan that new neighborhood and community park facilities ire;
needed in Meridian to serve growth. Said assumptions, based
upon the Existing and Future Facilities Approach, set the
existing standard for park needs as set forth in the following
table:
Park Description Existing Standard
Neiehborhood Parks 0.28 Ac/l,000 population based upon the
existing situation ofone five (5) acre neighborhood park per
18,000 population.
Community Parks 1.67 Ac/l,000 population based upon the
existing situation of two fifteen acre community parks per
I 8,000 population.
Parkland Acquisition Existins Cost (October 1. 1994)
One Acre (Developable) $25,000
Parkland Improvements Existine Cost (October 1. 1994)
Develop One Acre $70,000
See comments above at.subsection (A)
regarding required elements in the CIP.
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINA}.ICE NO. 723
DATEDJT'LY I6,2OU2 I.,
45
Bstess 7.16.02
Total Service Cost Per Acre $95,000
Cost Per Person Calculations:
.$95,000 (existing value ofone acre ofdeveloped parkland)-:
times 0.28 (existing neighborhood park standard) divided by
1000 population: $26.60 ($95,000 x 0.28 + 1000 $26.60)
$95,000 (existing value of one acre of developed parkland)
times 1.67 (existing community park standard) divided by 100
population = $158.65 ($95,000 x 1.67 + 1000 = $158.65)
Additionally the Comprehensive Plan and demographic data
provided.by the Ada Planning Association during preparation
. of the Comprehensive Plan assumes the lollowing average
numbers of people per dwelling unit.
Single Family Residential 2.6 persons per dwelling unit
Multi-Family Residential 2.0 persons per dwelling unit
,l
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINAI.ICB NO. 723
DATEDJI'LY 16,2002
46
Este$ 7.15-02
F. DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE SCHEDULE FOR
MERIDIAN PARKS: Pursuant to the assumptions in the
Meridian Comprehensive Plan and demographic data provided by
Ada Planning Association, development impact fees for parks are
set forth in the following table:
Park Description
Neighborhood Parks
Impact Fee $/Person
$26.60
S inele Fami lll$/Residence
$69.16
Multi Familv $ Residence
$53.20
Park Description
Community Parks
Impact Fee $/Person
$158.65
Sinsle Familv $/Residence
$412.49
Multi Family $ Residence
$3 17.30
-.-.' .- ACAR C6MMENTS oN MERIDIAN'S oRDINANCE No. 723
DATED JULY 16,2002 Estess 7.16.02
See comments above at subsection (A)
regarding required elements in the CIP.
TOTAL
Impact Fee $ Person
Single Family $ Residence
Multi Family $ Residence
$ 185.25
$481.65
$370.50
(Example: $26.60 x 2.6 persons per average Single Family
dwelling unit: $69.16)
This subsection should be revised to clarify the
materials which the fee payer may submit as
part of tho individual project assessment
application for consideration by the Fee
Administrator. As provided by the IDIFA, g
67-8204(51, thls subsection should be revised
as follows:
An indivldual project assessment of park
impact fees ls permltted ln situatlons where
the fee payer can demonstrate by clear and
convinclng evidence that the establlshed
impact fee is inapprop riate based upon
studies. data. and any other relevant
tn ati oform n which y be submitted by the
develooer to adiust the amount of the fee.
(l) Written application for individual project assessment shall bo
made to the Fee Administrator prior to receiving building permits
or other necessary approvals. Late applications for an individual
project assessment ofpark impact fees may be considered for a
period ofsixty (60) days after the.qeceipt of the building permit
only if the fee payer makes a sho'friig that the facts supporting
such application were not known or discoverable prior to receipt
of the building permit and that undue hardship would result if
said application is not considered.
This subsection should be revised to clarify that
an application for an individual assessment will
be permitted sufficiently in advance of the time
thc fee payer may seek a building or similar
permit so that the issuance of the permit will not
be delayed. As provlded ln the IDIFA, $ 67-
8204(14), and to make it more reasonable for
fee payers, thls subsectlon should be revlsed
as follows:
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATED JULY 16,2002 Estess 7.16.02
c. INDMDUAL PROJECT ASSESSMENT: An individual
project assessment of park impact fees is permitted in situations
where the fee payer can demonstrate by clear and convincing
evidence that the established impact fee is inappropriate.
48
(l) Written appllcation for individual project
assessment shall be made to tbe Fee
Admlnistrator at anv time prlor to receiving
bullding permits or other necessary
apiiiovals. Late applications for an
lndividual project assessment of park lmpact
fees may be considered for a period of sixty
(60) days after the recelpt of the bulldlng
permlt o*ly lf the fee payer makes a showlng
that the facts supporting such application
were not known or discoverable prlor to
receipt of the building permit and that undue
hardship would result if said appllcatlon ls
not considered or for other qoodJause.
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATED JT]LY 16,2002
49
Estess 7.16,02
:
(2) The Fee Administrator shall render a written decision
regarding the individual project assessment ofPark Impact Fees
within thirty (30) days of the date a complete application is
submitted. The decision of the Fee Administrator shall estab'lish
the Park Impact Fee for the project in question for a period ofone
(l) year from the date said decision becomes final. The decision
of the Fee Administrator shall be forwarded to the Council for
action. The Council may accept, reject or revise the Fee
Administrator's decision regarding individual project assessment
and shall provide written findings offact and conclusions of law.
"-::
This subsection should be revised to clarify that
the Fee Administrator's written decision must
include an explanation of the calculation.of the
fed and the factors considered in calculating the
fee. In addition, it shoutd bc rcvised to reflect
that the fee shall be established "so long as
there is no material change" to the project. To
conform to the IDIFA, S$ 67-8204(5) and 67<
8204(Q, thls subsection should be revlsed as
follows:
(2) The Fee Admlnistrator shall render a
written decision regarding the individual
project assessment of Park Impact Fees
which shall lnclude an exnlanation of the
explanation of factors considered under
section 67-8207. Idaho Code
soecifv the svstem improvemen
the impact fee is intended to be used. The
wrltten decislon shall be rendered within
thlrty (30) days of the date a complete
application for indivldual proiect assessment
is submitted. The declsion of the Fee
Administrator shall establish the Park
Impact Fee for the proJect in question for a
@
deeisio+$eeemesf,*d so long as there is no
identilied in the individual assessment
application. The decision oIthe Fee
Adminlstrator shall be forwarded to the
Council for action. The Council ma
t(s) for which
material chanse to the particular proiect as
. and shall
act fee. includins antocalculetnof the im
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJULY L6,2OO2
50
Estess 7.15-02
reject or revise the Fee Administrator's
decision regardlng indlvldual project
assessment and shall provide rvritten
Iindings of fact and concluslons of law.
(3) Appeals of the Fee Administrator's determination of
individual project assessment shall be made to the City Council
by the filing of an appeal with the Meridian City Clerk no later
than ten (10) days following the date of the decision of the Fee
Administrator.
Not inconsistent with the IDIFA.
H. CERTIFICATION: Certification of the park impact fee
schedule for a particular project may be applied for in the
following manner.
(l) Written application may be made to the Fee Administrator not
later than sixty (60) days after preliminary plat approval by the
Meridian City Council. Late applications for certification of the
park impact fee schedule will not be considered unless the fee
payer makes a showing that the facts supporting such application
were hot known or discoverable until after the time had run and
that undue hardship would result i[said application is not
considered.
Not inconsistent with the IDIFA.
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJT'LY I6,2WL
51
Estess 7.16.02
(2) The Fee Administrator shall provide the applicant with a
written park impact fee schedule for the particular project within
thirty (30) days ofthe date ofapplication. The certified schedule
provided by the Fee Administrator shall be based upon the ] I
Comprehensive PIan and shall establish the park impact fee for
the project in question for a period ofone (1) year from the date
ofcertification.
This subsection should be revised to conform
to the IDIFA, $ 67-8204(6), as amended, as
follows:
(2) The Fee Administrator shall provide the
appllcant with a written certilication of the
park impact fee schedule for the particular
'project wlthin thirty (30) days ofthe date of
application.Theg!!!ry!!!!g1!!q
eert{Se*sehedde provided by the Fee
Admlnlstrator shall be based upon the
Comprehensive Plan shall include an
explanatlon of the calculation of the impact
fee. lncluding an explanation of factors
improvement(s) for which the impact fee is
intended to be used. and shall establish the
park impact fee for the project in question
for@
eerti$ertier so long as there ls no material
chanse to the oartlcular orolect or the
lmpact fee schedule.
,See comments at Section 2-12-16.
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJULY 16,2002
52
Estess 7. I 6.02
considered under section 67-8207. Idaho
Code. shall specifv the system
(3) The certification of the park impact fee schedule may be
appealed to the Meridian City Council as provided in Section 2-
l2-16 ofthis Chapter.
2-12-14 ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS:
The City of Meridian shall add a ten percent (10%)
administrative charge to the impact fees to administer this ,
, ordinance. The 107" administrative fee will be added to the' :
subtotal ofall applicable impact fees required by this ordinance.
The IDIFA does not authorize the assessment of
administrative costs in addition to impact fees,
unless the costs are attributable to the
development of the capital improvement plan,
as provided in Idaho Code $ 67-8208. ,See
Idaho Code g 67-8203(29)(e).
Pursuant to $ 67-8208, "[t]hat portion ofthe
cost ofpreparing a capital improvements plan
which is attributable to determining the
development impact fee may be funded by a
one (t) time ad valorem levy which does not
exceed two one-hundreths percent (.02%) of
market value or by a sdrcharge imposed by
ordinance on the collection ofa development
impact fee which surcharge does not exceed the
development's proportionate share of the cost
ofpreparing the plan."
The IDIFA does ,ror, therefore, authorize the
City to impose a flat l0o/o administrative fee,
but rather requires the City to calculate an
adminlstrative fee based on a development's
proportlonate share of the cost of preparing
the CIP.
The City should calculate these costs and
revise this subsectiol accordin gly,
Otherwise, pursuaDt to Idaho Code $ 67-
8204(25), this subsection "shall be null and
vold and . . . shall haye no legal effect."
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDI,AN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJLTLY t6,2002
53
Bstess 7.16.02
2-t2-15 SUMMARY OF IMPACT FEES
Description, Cost per Person, Single Family $/Residence, Multi-
Family $/Residence u _'Park: $ 185.25 $481.65 $370.50
l0% Administrative Fee: $18.53 $48.17 $37.05
GRAND TOTAL: $203.78 $s29.82 $407.5s
,See comment above regarding invalidity of
administrative fee.
2-12-16 APPEALS OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS:
Excipt as otherwise provided in this Chapter, the decisions of the '
Fee Administrator may be appealed by the fee payer to the City
Council. Decisions of the City Council shall be final.
Qonsistent with IDIFA, S 67-8212(l).
A. Ifa feo payer wishes to appeal, the fee payer shall first file
with the Meridian City Clerk, a Notice of Administrative Appeal
on the form provided by the Fee Administrator. All appeals shall
be flied within thirty (30) days after the earlier of(a) issuance of
a written decision by the Fee Administrator; or (b) the Fee
Administrator's acceptance of payment of the development
impact fee. When filing an appeal, the fee payer shall submit a
letter providing a full explanation of the request, the reason for
the appeal, as well as all supporting documentation. A fee payer
may pay a development impact fee under protest in order to
obtain a development approval or building permit and shall not
be stopped from exercising the right ofappeal provided herein,
nor shall such fee payer be stopped from receiving a refund of
any amount deemed to have been;illegally collected.
This subsection is consistent with IDIFA, $ 67-
8212(2),but fails to include the mediation
option required by $ 67-8212(3). Therefore,
the following new subsection should be
added:
B. Unon volun ta rv ereement bv the fee
naver and the Cltv.diatlon bv a oualilied
indeoenden t Dartv y be used to address a
disasree m ent rela to the impact fee for
proposed development, The mediation may
take place at anv time during the appeals
Drocess and Dartici tion in the mediation
Mediation costs shall be sha
eouallv bv the fee aver and the Citv.
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJI'LY 16,20/J2
54
Estess 7. I 6.02
does riot oreclude the fee paver from
pursuing other remedies nrovided for in this
B. The Meridian City Clerk shall schedule the appeal before the
City Council as soon as practical. The City Council may aflirm,
reject or revise the decision of the Fee Administrator, providing
written findings of fact and conclusions of law. The written
decision of the City Council shall be mailed to the fee paye?, .,
certified mail, retum receipt requested.
C. A party aggrieved by the decision of the City Council may,
witlrin twenty-eight (28) days of the City Council's decision,
seekjudicial review by filing a petition in the District Coud in
tho manner provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code.
2-12-17 VESTED RIGHTS:
Nothing in this Chapter shall limit or modify the rights of any
person to complete any construction for which a lawful building
permit was issued prior to the effective date of this ordinance and
on which there has been a good faith reliance and a substantial
change of position.
This subsection should be revised to protect a
developer's right to complete any project for
which a valid and currcnt building permit was
issued prior to the effeciive date of this
ordinance, without regard to any "change of
position." Thls cubsectlon should read:
Nothlng in this Chapter shall timlt or modify
the rlghts.of any person to complete any
construction for whlch a lawful building
permit was issued prlor to the effective date
of this ordinance *n6enr+hleh{here*es
elange-o+posltior.
,;I
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJULY 16,2c/J2
55
Estess 7-16-02
2-12-18 OTHER POWERS AND RIGHTS NOT AFFECTED:
A. Nothing in ihis Chapter shall prevent the City from requiring a
developer to construct reasonable project improvements in:
. conjunction with a development project.
Consistent with the IDIFA, $ 67-8214(l).
B. Nothing in this Chapter shall be construed to prevent or
prohibit private agreements between property owners or
developers and the City in regard to the construction or
installation ofsystem improvements or providing for credits or
reimbursements for system improvement costs incurred by a
developer including inter-project transfers ofcredits or providing
for reimbursement for project improvements which are used or
shared by more than one development project.
consistent with the IDIFA, 5 67-8214(2).
C. Nothing in this Chapter shall obligate the City to approve
development which results in extraordinary impact.
consistent with the IDIFA, $ 67-8214(3).
D. Nothing in this Chapter shall obligate the City to approve any
develtrpment request which may reasonably be expected to
reduce levels of sewice below minimum acceptable levels as
established herein.
consistent with the IDIFA, $ 67-8214(4).
E. Nothing in this Chapter shall be construed to create any
additional right to develop real property or diminish the power of
the City in regulating the orderly development ofreal property
within the service area.
Consistent with the IDIFA, $ 67-8214(5).
F. Nothing in this Chapter shall work to limit the use by the City
of the power of eminent domain or supersede or conflict with
requirements or procedures authorized in the Idaho Code for
local improvement districts or generiil obligation bond issues.
consistent with the IDIFA, S 67-8214(6).
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATEDJIJLY 16,2002
56
Estess 7.I6.02
2-t2-19 SAVINGS CLAUSE:
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or provision oftthis
Chapter is held invalid, the remainder of this Chapter shall not be
affected by such invalidity.
Section 2. It is the intention of the Meridian City Council, and it
is hereby ordained that the provisions ofthis ordinance shall
become and be made a part of the Revised and Compiled
Ordinances of the City of Meridian. The sections of this
ordinance may be renumbered or relettered to accomplish such
intention, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section",'
"article" or other appropriate word.
Section 3 This ordinance shall be published within and become
effective 30 days after the date of its adoption.
PASSED and ADOPTED by the Council of the City of Meridian,
Idaho, this lst of March, 1996.
APPROVED by the City Council and the Mayor of the City of
Meridian, Idaho, this lst tihy of March, 1996.
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
CITY CLERK
ACAR COMMENTS ON MERIDIAN'S ORDINANCE NO. 723
DATED JULY.I6,2OO2
57
Estess 7.16.02
RECEIVED
JUN I 7 2002
Cltv of MeridiauCiti Cterk offic.
VIA FACSIMILE AND US MAIL
June 14, 2002
Tom Kuntz
Parks and Recreation Director
City of Meridian
1 1 West Bower Street
Meridian, lD 83642
Re: Proposed Park Impact Fees
Dear Mr. Kuntz:
These written comments are intended to clarify and address five
specific issues related to the calculation and administration of
impact fees discussed during the May 22,2002 Task Force
meeting.
As an initial matter, we would like to thank you for responding to
our February 20, 2002 request to provide us with the detailed
information and analysis our members need to adequately assess
and justiff an increase in Meridian's park impact fee.
In our discussion below, we address whether the City may properly
consider undeveloped open space lands when calculating park
impact fees, address whether the City may impose a 10 percent
"administrative fee" assessment as part ofthe impact fee
calculation, address how the Level ofService ("LOS") for
community parks will be affected when the City of Meridian has
made a policy decision to stop building neighborhood parks,
address whether the City may include a golfcourse and park
pathways as part of its level of service standards, and address
whether the City must use all its impact fee revenue to offset the
costs made necessary by new development.
THE
ADA
COUNTY
ASSOCIATION
OF REALTORS'
REALTOR
9550 Wcst Berhel Court
Bois€,ldaho 83709
Tel:208-376{363
Fax: 208-377-t065
wwlr,,.adacounty-realtors.com
2002 0FFTcERS:
Pr€sident
CENE STRATE, CRS, GRI
2OO2 BOARD OF DIRECTORS:
Presidenl-elecl
MICKIE KNUDSEN, CRI AB& CRS, CSP
TIM BTJRROUGHS, CSP
DALE K HOYD
SUE LIEN, CRS, CSP, CRI
KATI{I MCLEOD, CRS
JIM PAULSON, CRS, CSP, GRI
GREG SCRM{ER. CRS
PLrt Prcsid.Dt
SCOTT CRUN4 GRI
MLs Chairperson
STEVE OSBURN, CRI
2OO2 STATE DIRECTORS:
ELZABETH ALLAN HODGE
CHERIE BARTON, CRS, CSP, GRI
JULIE DEI,ORENZO, CRS, CSP, LTG
SHARRON L. DOMENY. CRS
GARRET J. LONGSTREST, ABR CRS
SUE NIELSEN, CRS, CSP, GRI
ROCER PATTERSON, GRJ
TRACY THOMPSON
WCR President
DARLENE BLAKESLEE
ACAR Foundation Prcsident
BARBARA A DAWSON
Executive Vic€ President
DAMA W. O}'ERSTREET
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Vic€ Presidcnt
BEVERI.EY ROSS, AB& CRS, GRI, LTG
Tom Kuntz
Jwrc 14,2002
Page 2
In addition, in a separate letter to follow, we will analyze whether Meridian's Impact Fee
Ordinance 723 ("the Ordinance") is in compliance with the requtements of the recently
amended Idaho Impact Fee Act ("IDIFA").
Issue No. 1: Does the IDIFA allow the City of Meridian to "take credit for" land it
owns but has not yet developed when calculating impact fees?
The IDIFA authorizes the imposition of impact fees to fund "parks, open space and recreation
areas, and related capital improvements" that are necessitated by new residential development.l
From this language it appears that, in general, the acquisition ofundeveloped lands to be
maintained as open space may be funded with impact fees. The city may only expend
development impact fees for a category ofsystem improvements identified in its Capital
Improvement Plan ("CP").' The November 2001 Meridian Parks and Recreation System Plan
Action Plan, ("Action Plan") meets the statutory requhements for a CIP or a CIP update.
However, we note that this Action Plan includes recommendations for open space acquisition
and trail development as part ofa six year capital improvement plan.'If the CIP identifies
undeveloped or open space lands as part of its parkland level of service (.'LOS) goal, then it
would be appropriate to include existing city-owned undeveloped lands that are used for open
space or passive recreation in the city's inventory ofexisting parkland for purpose of calculating
impact fees.
Ordinance 723 defines "park and facilities" to include "all lands and facilities as described in the
Comqrehensive Plan including Neighborhood, Community, Linear, and Regional Parks as well
as Special Use and Open Space Areas together with park system improvements necessary to
support the recreation needs ofthe population served and to be served as identified in the Plan."
However, Ordinance 723 calculates impact fees only for the acquisition and development of
"neighborhood" and "community" parks, and does not expressly consider the acquisition of
lands to be designated as undeveloped open space.
Based on the chart of "Curent Park Space Available," prepared by the Meridian Parks and
Recreation Department, the overall LOS for parks in the city is presently 2.39 acreas per 1,000
residents. However, the chart given to us entitled "Impact Fee Calculation Information" indicates
that the city cunently has 90 acres ofdeveloped parks and 52 acres ofundeveloped park area
(identified as community and neighborhood parks), for a total of 142 acres ofparkland. Based on
the year 2000 population estimate of36,000 residents, this works out to 3.9 acres per 1,000
residents, which is close to the stated LOS goal. Based on these numbers, therefore it appears
that the current LOS figure provided by the city (2.39) is based only on developed parks.
' Idaho code g 67-8zneq@).
' tdaho code $ 67-8zto(z)
3 Action Item OS-9, Five Mile Creek Pathway, see pp.2-22 and 5-5 ofthe Action Plan. Two other proposed
open space acquisitions are also indicated atpp.2-22 and 5-6 ofthe Action Plan.
Tom Kuntz
hne 14,2002
Page 3
Including city-owned undeveloped open space areas in its calculations of current park inventory
would be consistent with the definition of "park and facilities" in Ordinance 723, and also
consistent with the Action Plan, which calls for the city to acquire open space as part of its parks
and recreation system plan. It would also bring the city's current overall park inventory aknost to
the stated goal of 4.0 acres per 1,000 residents.a
We believe it is a significant issue whether new development will bear the cost of meeting a
level ofservice that exceeds the level ofservice achieved for existing development. In particular,
because parks are a type ofpublic good that are not resuicted to particular users, in the same way
that a water pipe or local road improvement serving new development might be, there is a real
concem that forcing new development to assume the cost of achieving a 4.0 acre per 1,000
resident standard, while existing development lags that standard, will over time increase the
community's overall level ofservice primarily at the expense ofnew development. This is
particularly a concem given the stated intention to focus future park development on community
parks serving a larger service are4 which may include already developed portions ofthe city that
are presently "underserved" by parks, rather than principally on the neighborhood parks serving
a smaller area more immediately related to the new development.
Issue No. 2:Whether the IDIFA permits the City of Meridian to assess an
additional ten percent (10%) ofa calculated impact fee to cover the
administrative costs of implementing the Ordinance?
To offset the cost of preparing a capital improvement plan, the IDIFA expressly authorizes local
govemments to impose a "surcharge.. .by ordinance on the collection of a development impact
fee which surcharge does not exceed the development's proportionate share of the cost of
preparing the plan." ' To the extent the administrative fee being charged by the cityris
characterized as a surcharge, it would be permissible. However, the charge is only permissible to
the extent that it does not exceed a development's proportionate sharc ofthe cost ofpreparing the
CIP. Under this provision of the IDIFA, City staff would hav'e to develop a reasonable method
for calculating each development's proportionate share of the actual cost to prepare the CIP.
Because it is unlikely that the flat ten percent (10%) assessment is based on such a calculation,
the proposed ten percent fee would not appear to be authorized by this provision.
The surcharge to offset the cost ofthe CIP is the only surcharge or administrative fee expressly
authorized under the IDIFA. The question remains, therefore, as to whether the city may impose
an administrative fee by some other authority. According to the Idaho Supreme Court, a
municipality may, under its police powers, "provide for the collection ofrevenue incidental to
the enforcement of [a] ... regulation ... however if the fee or charge is imposed primarily for
revenue raising puiposes, it is in essence a tax and can only be upheld under the power of
I Note that impact fees are not properly used to remedy an existing deficiency in a community's level ofservice, but
only to provide capital facilities to serve new development. To the extent that the city intends to develop additional
park facilities to serve existing development at 4 acres per thousand residents LOS, it should not use impact fees on
new residents to pay for those facilities.
t Iotre 5 4, amending Id. code S 67-8208(l).
Tom Kuntz
Jturle 14,2002
Page 4
taxation." 6 In other words, if the administrative fee is charged "for a direct public service
rendered to the particular consumer," it falls within the municipality's lawful police powers as
long as it is reasonably related to enforcing a regulation or ordinance.' However, a fee will be
considered an unauthorized tax if it has not been specifically authorized by statute and it serves
the purposes ofproviding funding for public services at large.t
In ldaho Building Contractors Ass'n v. City of Coeur D'Alene, the Idaho Supreme Court struck
down an impact fee ordinance that was not specifically authorized by statute because the impact
fee, by providing funding for public services, constituted an unauthorized tax. Based on this
reasoning, the City of Meridian could not collect the impact fee itselfabsent the authorization
ueated by the IDIFA. By the same logic, a chzuge imposed to offset costs associated with
administering the impact fee ordinance that is not itself authorized in the IDIFA could also be
considered an unauthorized tax. However, while it appears that the "administrative fee" is not
specifically authorized by the IDIFA, there may be other sowces of authority to impose an
equivalent charge. For example, in the same way that permit fees may cover the estimated cost of
administering the development review process, these costs, in the case ofa project subject to
impact fees, would arguably include the costs of administering the impact fee ordinance "as a
direct public service rendered to a particular consumer."
Issue No. 3:How will the LOS for community parks be affected when the City of
Meridian has made a policy decision to stop building neighborhood parks,
once two remaining planned neighborhood parks are developed?
According to the Ordinance, community parks are usually about 20 acres in size, designed to
serve areas within a one to two mile radius, and offer a wide range of recreational facilities,
including sports fields. Neighborhood parks, on the other hand, are intended to servetesidents
within a % mile radius and are generally only about 5 acres in size. If the city has decided that
residents will be better served through community parks than through neighborhood parks, then
to maintain the overall parkland LOS constant, the number ofacres dedicated to community
parks may need to go up. If more community parks are anticipated, then one would expect that
the impact fee associated with community parks would likewise increase, and to the extent that
these are more expensive facilities, the overall impact fees would increase. On the other hand if
the decision is to eliminate neighborhood parks, without altering the LOS for community parks,
then the city would presumably need to include a greater percentage of other gpes of parklands,
perhaps open spaces or "special use areas," in order to maintain a constant overall LOS.
Although authorized under the IDIFA, it appears that, to date, the city has not chosen to impose
impact fees associated with open space or special use areas.
As a related point, it would be important for our members to know whether the city will accept a
dedication ofneighborhood parks in a new development in lieu of impact fees, even though the
city itselfdoes not intend to build any more neighborhood parks. Such facilities are the tlpe most
6 ldaho Building Contractors Ass'nv. the City ofCoeur D'Atene, 890 P.2d 326, 329 (ldaho 1995)
' See Id At 329.
' Id.
Tom Kuntz
June 14,2002
Page 5
easily included within a new development, and it might be a significant consideration for
developers if the city were to decide that dedications ofneighborhood parks would not count
against park impact fees.
Issue No. 4: Can the City of Meridian include the public golf course and park pathways
in its inventory of developed parks for the purpose of calculating impact
fees ?
As discussed above at Issue No. 1, the IDIFA authorizes the imposition of the impact fees to
fund "parks, open space and recreation areas, and related capital improvements" that are
necessitated by new residential development.e The IDIFA does not provide a definition of
recreation areas. Likewise if"park pathways" are part ofthe city's park system, they would
appear to fall within the scope ofprojects for which impact fees may be imposed. To the extent
that the golf course and park pathways are counted toward meeting the city's LOS goal, this
presumably will decrease any LOS deficiencies that may require city funding. This in tum would
fiee up more revenue to assist in financing system improvements for new development, which
may, in tum, help keep impact fees down. In addition, if by counting such facilities towards the
LOS standard it helps particular service areas to meet or exceed LOS goals, park impact fees in
those areas should be lower or non-existent, which would help encourage infill development.
Issue No.5r Should the City of Meridian use a level of impact revenue less than
100 percent to offset the cost of new development?
There are strong public policy reasons for setting impact fees at a level that is less than 100% of
what would be needed to achieve the indicated LOS for new development. Impact fees should
not be the sole source of financing system improvements if other funding sources are,available.
The IDIFA requires local govemment to identify in a CIP "all sources and levels of fundino
available to the governmental entity for the financing of sys[ri;;;;;;r.;;m r,ii".iror.,
because parks are a public good that are easily used by existiirg as well as new residents, some
portion of the benefit from new parks will accrue to existing residents who arc not subject to
impact fees, as well as the residents ofnew developments that are. This is particularly the case
where there is an existing deficiency in LOS, and would be even more true where the park plan
calls for an emphasis on "community parks" and other large facilities serving larger service areas
rather than neighborhood parks. As new parks come on line at a ratio of 4.0 acres per 1,000 new
residents, the existing residents who must make do with parks at a lower ratio would be expected
to take advantage ofthe new parks to some extent. The amount ofsuch use might depend on
where the new parks are located in relationship to existing development and also on the extent to
which the existing deficiency is addressed with parks funded from sources other than impact
fees. But until the existing LOS equals the target LOS on which the impact fee would be based,
there are good policy arguments why some portion of the target LOS for new development
' IOtfe 5 2, amending Id. Code $ 67-8203(24)(e).
'o IDIFA 5 4, amending ID. Code $ 67-8208(i).
Tom Kuntz
June 14,2002
Page 6
should be achieved with revenues derived from the population as a whole rather than just from
new residents. To the extent that tax revenues are used in order to make up an existing LOS
deficiency, a further argument exists for funding a portion of the new development target LOS
with general revenues. Otherwise, new development would be forced to bear the full costs of
meeting the target LOS through impact fees, and some portion of the tax revenues derived from
the new residents will go to remedying the LOS deficiency suffered by existing residents. This
would result in new residents not only paying in full for the parks that they will enjoy but also
subsidizing some portion ofparks built to serve existing residents.
Sincerely yours,
+e**
Mayor Robert D. Corrie
Tammy de Weerd,
Keith Bird
William L.M. Nary
Cheri McCandless
Planning & Zoning Commission
Keith Borup,
Jerry Centers
Kevin Shreeves
David Zarimba
Leslie Mathes
Shari Stiles, Planning Director
Brad Hawkins-Clark
Steve Siddoway
Bill Nichols
Will Berg
cc
cc
Mark H. Estess
Director of Govemment Affairs
*x TX CCrl€lRmnTION REPoRT xx nJ- 16 '@. 12139 PAGE.AI
CITY OF IIER I DI AN
AS OF
a2
DNTE TITE TOIFROI'I
w/r6 12t38 377 6
r'10DE
EC--S
r'1lN/SEC PGS
og'43" @3
CI'IDH STATUS
@55 0K
?ar tt+g
3lr - 8066
'l -lt -u.z-
June 14,2002
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEEIING June 18,2002
APPUCAM
REQUEST Appoinlments ot lmpocl Fee Committee Members ond Adminblrotor
ITEM NO.3-L
^GENCY
COMMENTS
See Altoched C0y Cld ldoho sh. codeCITY C[ER(:
CIIY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECIOR:
CIry ATTORNEY
CIIY POTICE DEPI:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CIIY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WA]ER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
MERIOIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
MERIDIAN POST OMCE:
ADA COUNIY HIGHWAY DISTRICI:
SANI]ARYSERVICE COMPANY
CEMRAL DISIRICT HEATIH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETIIERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
BUREAU OF RECTAMAIION;
Cq.^r"-k'''--@ Bo.^"
/h,-/ /(n-calaaa'
6erc {fv'"-* <
Of /zzttc.,,-
Varrac fttll:e rrc>)
ban h)ealL
{-lAi rfilz-'
frd^,2!&
7>,-//unlz-
1-/
0
0q{
oIHER: See Altoched ,liemos lrom Moyor ond Ports Dheclor
Dole:Phone:Contocled:
l offib p,ot.rr.d ql grDlc r't.allBgE rhol becoite proDcrf, ol th. Clly ol taaddo.L
Tom Kuntr
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Steve Siddoway lsiddowas@ci. meridian.id. us]
Thursday, July 26, 2001 4:36 PM
'Tom KunE'
Shari
Park lmpact Fees
RECEIVED
AUG tq 2001
CTTY OF MERIDIAN
Tom & shari-,
Based on our discussion earlier this week with Jerry Dragoo,
assessment of the impact fee calc:
here.i-s ny
Input Data & Assumpt ions
Standard = 5 acres/1000 populatlon
Existing Population = 35,00c
ULtimate Population = 12,70A (where did this come from? Is it based on
comp plan land use densities for the impact area, or based on growth
projections over a certain period of time?)
Existing Parkland:
Developed = 45.6 acres
Acquj-red but Undeveloped = 88.2 acres
Total Parkland under current City Ownership = 133.8 acres
Cost to acquire land = S30,000/acre
Cost to develop .Land = S80,000/acre
Persons per Household = 2.93
Park Land Needed for the Current Population:
35,000 pop * 5 acl1000 pop = 175 acres
Additional acres needed to acquire today
AdditionaL acres needed to develop today
develop
Cost to acquire needed
Cost to develop needed
175
175
133.8 = 41.2 acres
45.6 = 129.4 acres
needed
to
parkLand
parkland
Total defj-cit to be made up through non-impact fee sources, i.
Fund, G.O. Bond, etc. = S11.588,000
Note: This amount j,s to nake up the deficit for acquisj'tion &
but does not incl-ude ongoing maintenance costs'
4L.2 ac * S30,000/ac = 91,236,000
L29,4 ac * S80,000/ac = 10,352,000
e. General-
development,
Park Land Needed for the Future Population:
Ultimate PoPulation '7 2,100
Current PoPuJ-ation -35,000
Future PoPulation 37,100
Total Park Land needed to serve
pop = 188.5 acres needed
Cost to acquire needed Parkland:
Cost to devel'oP needed ParkLand:
future PopuLation: 37,700 PoP 5 acl1000
188.5 ac " 930,000/ac =
188.5 ac * S80,000/ac =
needed for (onIY)
I
s5,656,000
s15,080,000
Totat Cost to acquire & develop parks future re s ident s.
not including maintenance
Tota1 Euture Households:
Households
Inpact Fee Calculati-on:
Cost of Future Parks
Future Households /
s20.736,000
people / 2.93 people per househol,d = 12,86'l
costs:
3?,700
s20,736,000
t2,86'7
Park Impact Fee per Household 51, 611.56
Note: The inpact fee does not change regardless of the u.Lt:-nate futurepopu.Latj-on. Thj.s is because the fee is based origj-naIly on a standard
nunber of acres per thousand population and standard per-acre costs-
Test: Ultimate populatj-on = 100,000.
Future popuLation = 65, 000
Acres needed = 325 acres
Cost for Acquisitj.on & Developnent = 935,750,000
Number of Households = 22,L84
Impact Fee per household = S1511.52
validity Test I
The Park Master Plan shows 9 future Community Parks.
Tota1 amount of parkland needed to acquire:Deficit - 41.2 acres
Future = 188.5 acres
Total = 229.1 acres
229.7 / 9 parks = 25.5 acres averaqe per park.
25,5 acres is i,vithin the planned size range for the 9 Community Palks.
Actual average acreage must be slightty higher (around 27 acres per park)
because part of the park near Mtn. View H.S. is already oianed.
Note: ff the actual ul-tinale population number is higher than 12t100, tl,e
size of the parks will also have to increase to acconmodate the extra
population within the same nunber of parks and naj-ntain the proper
parks,/1000 ratio. Based on land use and projected densities, my very rough
estimate shows t.he ultimate popuLation at over 80,000.
Total park land needed to serve a popuLation of 80,000 is 266.2 acres. This
would correspond to an average future park size of 31 acres for each of the
9 future community parks. Or, alternative)-y, if 2 more Cornmunity Parks were
added, to bring the total to 11 new parks, the average sj,ze wouLd be back
down to 25 acres.
Ihe only other factor to manipulate this calcuLation would be to reduce the
proposed acres per thousand to less than 5 (which doesn't seem like a very
good alt ernat ive ) .
Changi-ng the 'per thousand' standard is also the only way to alter the
defici-t for the existing populat ion-other than land donations & volunteer
construction ( part nerships ) .
2
-7sgra /g,
period of three b five years. This property u/ould be developed by PAL as heir cenfal site licr
all activities (soccer, baseball, et cetera).
Potential lndoor lce Rink at 58-acr€ Pa.t(:
The Paks Deparfnent has been apprcached by an investnent group and PAL to consfuct a
temporary, indoor ice rink at he 58-acre Park. Ron Taylor, a representative ficr fre investors,
will be at your Workshop to provide information on he proposal.
Completing Yearend Projects with Line ltem Transfes (Bear Crcek Softball Fields, 86
Sbeet Bridge to Pathway and Storage Shed at Bower Shop):
The Parks DeparEnent is anticipating a savings in two of his yea/s CapiEl line items. We are
proposing to address his yea/s needs wih he savings as outined below:
Fubbon{uting Ceremony for FlvBl,lile Creek Pathway:
Due tc some scheduling conflicts, tre opening ceremony has been moved b July 19, 2001, at
11:OO".m. at he 1 th Sreet Pedestrian Brirlge. '
Update on Park lmpact Fees Collected Thrcugh the County:
We have obtsined Boise Cit/s ordinance wih Ada County hat allorc br colledion of impact
fees in he County. Wll be working with the City Attomey t3 bring a drafi b City Council at the
end ofJuty.
* 4, oio,dl
#?
-#B
@
1o@
Savings
Capital Five Mile Creek $100,000
Carry Forward $53,000
$16:1,000
Prcpoeed Projects:
Bear Creek Phase I $129,000
(indud€s t o sollball fuUs necessary sincs nE hpled ou dul soiball prcEam hb sunm€r)
Genorations Plaza $9,000
(BiJ O/erun)
8th Sbeet Bridge $25,000
(conneding pa0lvlay)
3163,000
. Pagez
(( (g
@
June 14,2002
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEEIING June 18.2002
APPLICANT ITEM NO
REQUESI Appointmenls of Impocl Fee Commiltee Members ond Administrotor
3-L
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATIORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER OEPI:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SENLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION:
COMMENTS
See Alloched Clty ond ldoho Stote Code
Ccr-r-r r-'-H e'<-
/ac,:U-
/h,-/ /(nzAbaau"''
6enz J^kd<
J7>* /zz/te-"-\-Aarroc Fa//.e rro"s
b 4n ldoe.aL
dl-a; frz Le-r
/4A'n,n ti-rl.--ta'u
/Z*>,- //unlz-
(_/
0
il
OTHER: See Atloched Memos from Moyor ond Porks Direclor
Contocted
Moladob preranled ql publlc maellng! sholl b.come prop.dy ol thc C[y ol ruerldlon.
Dole:Phone:
lVemo
Mayor Corrie
Tom Kuntz fl*
June 13,2002
Impact Fee Committee
RECEIVED
,L,; i 3 2102
CITY OF MERIDIAN
clTY Ct ERK Otrtrrar
To:
From:
Date:
Re:
I am requesting the Mayor to appoint the following individuals to the City of Meridian
lmpact Fee Committee.
Keith Borup - Builder
Phil Krichbaum - JUB Engineers
Gene Strate - Ada County Associates of Realtors
Jim Keller - Meridian Parks and Recreation -Oegarmre* t o * rn;t r )'.'-r-
David Fulkerson - Accountant
Dan Wood - Developer
Shari Stiles - Meridian Planning & Zoning Department
Meridian Parks & Recrcalion
Page 1
Memo fiECEIVED
'i r _..-
CITY OF I/ERID|AN
cl-lv cLtrR'1OFF|Ctrroc City Council
Ftom:Mayor Robert Corrie
CG: File
Date,@11312002
Re lmpact Fee Administrator
I would like to appoint Tom KunE as the lmpact Fee Committee's Fee Administrator.
Definition of Fee Administrator: The ofhcial or designee appointed by the Mayor with
City Council approval, to administer this Chapter.
6>v-'
Mayor Robert Gorrie
1
( ceo, o.ro-Jlu I P.1
IMPACT FEE COMMITTEE
Dan lllood Email - dan* or:d@spro,net
13 14 I West Bluebonnet Court
Boise, Idaho 83713
208-331-6348
208-870-6444 (cell)
Jhn Keller Email - ikeller@kelle rassoclates.com
13 1 Sr.ruLhwest 05tl' Avenue
Ivleridian, Idaho 83642
208-288- 1992
208-859-3478
Gene Strate Email - gene@genestl-ate.com
825 East Pine Avenue
Meridian, ldaho 83642
208-377-8850
208-409-0374 (cell)
David Fulkersor Ema
2370 North Morello
Meridian. ldaho 83642
208-424-3289
208-850-6796 (cell)
il - dfullt er s@ ci.state.id.us
Phil Krichbaum Email - phk@jub.conr
250 S Beachwood
Meridian. Idaho 83642
208-376-7330 (work)
208-870-3628 (cell)
Keith Borup Enrail - keithboruo@ cableone.net
2250 North Merid.ian Road
I\4eridian, Idaho 83642
208-884- 1092
208-440-7383 (cell)
Shari Stiles Email - stiless @ci.meridian. id. us
660 East Watertower, Suite 202
Meridian, lciaho 83642
208-884 - 5533
1
JUL LA 'Z? L!159 204 a9B 55@7 PAG€.D?
r
Impact Fee A dministrator:
Tom Kuntz Email - kuntzt@ci. nreridian. id. us
268 West Claire
Meridian, Idaho 83642
208-884-5335
208-371-1717 (cell)
Advisorv:
Bill Nichol Email - wf n@whitepeterson.com
830 North Main Street, Ste 200
Meridian, Idaho 83642
208-288-2499
Stacy Kilchenmann Email - kilchens@meridiancitv.ore
33 East Idaho Avenue
Meridian, Idaho 83642
208-888-4433
6/ r9/20C2
2
JUL 18 'A2 11:59 2AA S9A 55A!PNGE. A3
3t-q b
d\ OR.DD{.{NCE OF THf CITI'OF }IERIDL{N ADOPTD{G AND CRIATDiG A NEW
CEA.PTER 12 TO TITLE 2 OF THf, REI'ISED .{ND COMPTLED ORDD{ANCES OF TEE
CITI' OF iltERIDAN, IDAHO; PROIIDING FOR AN DIP.{CT FEE ON NEW
DEVELOPNTENT TO PRO!'IDE FOR PTTIBLIC FACILITIES, }TITIGATE IIIPACTS, AND
SERV-E NEEDS CREATED BY SLrCH DEI'ELOPIIENT; PROWDD{G FOR SEORT
TITLE, .{PPLICABILITY, PTJRPOSE, RULES OF CONSTRUCTION, DEFIT{TfIONS, AND
GENER{L PROVISIONS; PRO!'IDING FOR trIIPACT FEE COLLECTION AND
EXPENDITURES, R"EFUND OF INIPACT FEES, EXE}IPTIONS, CREDITS, AND
.APPEALS OF ADNIMSTRATIVE DECISIONS; PROVIDING rOR PARK AltD
R.ECREATION IMP.{CT FEES A"\D }TETEODOLOGY PERTAINING TO PARK AND
RICREATION; PROYIDD{G FOR TRUST ACCOIII{TS, YESTED RIGETS,
SEITR{BILTTY, INCLUSION IN THE R.EV-ISED AND COMPILED ORDINANCES,
APPROVAL OF Tm SUNINL{RY OF TEIS ORDINANCE; AND PRO}IDING AN
EFFECTTVE DATE.
WEEREAS, the Idaho Development Impact Fee Act, Tille 67, Chapter 82, Idaho Cde,
authorizes the imposition of developmental impact fees as an equitable program for planning and
financing the public facilities needed to serve new growth and development.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
OF TEE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO:
Section I That a new Chapter 12 is added to Title 2 ofthe Revised and Compiled Ordinances ofthe
City of Meridian, hereby adopted, created and enacted to read as follows
IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE - T
ORDINfu\CE NO, 723
2-t2-t:
2-12-3t
2-12-4:
,-tr-<,
2-124:
2-12-7:
2-12-E:
2-12-92
2-12-lOz
2-12-tt:
2-12-12:
2-12-13:
2-t2-14:
2-12-t5:
2-12-16:
2-12-17|
2-12-lE:
2-12-19:
CIIAPTER 12
INIPACT FEE ORDTNANCE
SEORT TMLE, APPLICABTLITY, AIID PURPOSE
RTJLES OFCONSTRUCTION
DEFINTIIONS
GEI\,ERAL PRO\ISIONS
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE. STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES
DETERMINATION OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
REFI'ND OF IMPACT FEES PAID
EXEMPTIONS
CREDTTS
SUTIABILITY OF LAND OFFERED FOR DEDICATION
IMPACT FEE SERVICE AREAS AI\TD TRUST ACCOTINTS
IMPACT FEE EXPENDITURES
PARK A}{D RECREATION IMPACT FEES
ADMIMSTRATTYE COSTS
ST'MMARY OF IMPACT FEES
APPEALS OF ADMIITISTRATTW DECISIONS
YESTED RIGHTS
OTHER POWERS AI\ID RIGETS NOT AITECTED
SAYINGS CI,AUSE
A.
B.
2-12-l: SEORT TTILE, APPLICABILITY, AltD PURPOSE:
This Ordinance shall be known and may be cited as the "City of Meridian Impact Fee
Ordinance.'
This Ordinance shall apply to the development of property located within the boundaries of
the City ofMeridian as well as 'service areas' identified in the City of Moidian/Ada County
Area of Impact Agreement as the same is amended from time to time.
The Meridian City Council finds that an equitable program for planning and financing public
facilities needed to serve new growth and dwelopment is necessary in order to promote and
accommodate orderly gowth and development and to protect the public health, safety and
ganeral welfire ofthe citizens ofCity ofMeridian. It is the intent by enacting this chapter to:
( 1) Enzure that adequate facilities are available to serve new growth and development;
C
IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE.2
(2) Promote orderly growth and development by establishing uniform standards by which the
City may require that those who benefit from new growth and development. pay a
proportionate share of the cost of new public lacilities needed to serve new gowth and
development;
(3) Ensure that those who benefit from new growth and development are required to pay no
more than their proportionate share ofthe cost ofpublic facilities needed to serve new growth
and development and to prevent duplicate and ad hoc development requirements;
(4) Co[ect and expend development impact fees pursuant to the enabling powers granted by
the provisions of The ldaho Development ImWt Fee Act, Title 67, Chapter 82, Idaho Code;
(5) Provide the legal and procedural basis for the implementation of development impact fees
within the area of city impact; and
(6) Ensure that any capital improvement funded wholly or in part with impact fee revenue
shall fust be included in an approved capital improvements plan that lists the capital
improvements that may be fi.rnded with impact fee rwenues as well as the estimated costs and
timing for each improvement.
D It is intended that this Chapter will be amended as capital improvements plans are approved
and adopted as part of the Compreheasive Pla4 pursuant to the provisions of ldaho Cde 67-
8208, to include specific methodology for the calculation of development impact fees for
specific categories of public facilities. Development impact fees shall not be charged,
collected or expended for public facilities which are not included in an approved capital
improvemerts plan that lists the capital improvements which may be funded with impact fee
revenues, as well as the estimated costs and timing for each improvement. No amendment
to this Chapter adopting an impact fee for public facilities or amending or adopting the
methodology for calculating an impact fee shall be effective unless approved by ordinance
adopted by the Meridian City Council in accordance with the procedural requirements of
Idaho Code 67-8206.
2-12-2 RULES OF CONSTRUCTION.
This Chapter shall be liberally construed to effectively carry out its purpose in the interest of
the public healt[ safety and welfare.
Unless otherwise stated, the following nrles of construction shall apply to the text of this
Chapter.
(1) Ifthoe is any conflict between the text of this Chapter and any table, zummary table
or illustration, the text shall control.
(2)The word "shall" is always mandatory and not discretionary; the word "may' is
permissive.
A.
B,
IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE - 3
(3) The pkase "used for" includes "arranged for", "designed for", or "occupied for"
(5) The word "includes" shall not limit a term to the specific example but is intended to
extend its meaning to all other instances or circumstances of like kind or character.
(6) Words used in the present tense shall include the future; words used in the singular
sha.ll include the plural and the plural the singular, unless the context clearly indicates
the contrary; and use ofthe masculine gender shail include the feminine.
(7) Unless the context clearly indicates the contrary, where a regulation involves two or
more items, conditions, provisions, or events connected by the conjunction "and",
"or" or'either... or", the conjunction shall be interpreted as follows:
(a) "And" indicates that all the connected terms, conditions, provisions or events
shall apply.
O) "Or' indicates that the connected items, conditions, provisions or events may
apply singly or in any combination.
(c) "Either... or" indicates that the connected items, conditions, provisions or
events shall apply singly but not in combination.
2-12-3: DEFINTIIONS:
For the purpose ofthis Chapter, the following terms, phrases and words shall have the meaning given
herein.
APPROPRIATE:To tegally obligate by contract or otherwise commit to use by appropriation
or other official act of the City.
APPLICANT Person who applies for a Building Permit or is otherwise subject to the
provisions of this chapter.
Person who applies for a Building Permit or is otherwise subject to the
provisions of this chapter.
Any structure having a roof enttely separated from any other structure by
space or by walls in which there are no communicating doors or windows or
any similar opening and erected for the purpose of providing support or
shelter for persons, animals, things or property of any kind.
BIIILDING An official document or certificate by that name issued by the Meridian
IMPACT FEE ORDINAI\ICE. 4
(1) The word "person'' includes an individual, a corporation, a partnership, an
incorporated association. or any other similar entiry.
BUILDER:
BLIILDING:
Public Works Department, authorizing the construction or siting of any
building
Improvements with a useful life ol ten ( l0) years or more, by new
construction or other action, which increase the service capacity ofa public
facility or service.
A plan adopted and amended pursuant to the provisions of fhe
Development Impact Fee Act, Idaho Code 67-8208, which identifies capital
improvements for which development impact fees may be used as a funding
source.
CITY COLiNCIL. The Ciry Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho
PER.,\1IT
CAPIT.A'L
INIPROVEMENTS
CAPITAL
IMPRO\EMENTS
PLAN:
CITY PARK
SYSTEM:
COMMLINITY
PARK:
Includes all Park and Recreation Facilities operated by the Ciry
A park plarned primarily to provide active and structured recreation activities
for young people and adults. In general, community park facilities are
designed for organized activities and sports, although individual and family
activities are also encouraged. Community parks can also provide indoor
facilities to meet a wider range of recreation interests. Where there are no
neighborhood parks, the community park can also serve this function.
ln comparison to neighborhood parks, community parks sewe a much larger
area and offer more facilities. Their service area is roughly a l-2 mile radius,
and will support a population of approximately 7,500-15,000 persorxi,
depending upon size and facilities. As a result, they require more support
facilities such as parking, rest rooms, covered play areas, etc. Community
pad<s are usually about 20 acres in size and often have sports fields or similar
facilities as the central focus ofthe park.
COMPREIIENSIVE The City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan known as "The City of Meridian
PLAN: Comprehensive Plan' as updated and amended from time to time pursuant to
Idaho Cde 67-6508.
CREDITS:The present value of system or service improvements, cootribution or
dedication ofland or money required by the City fiom a developer for system
or service improvements of the category for which the development impact
fee is being collected.
A deliberate appropriation of land by its owner for use as public facilities as
the same are defined herein.
IMPACT FEE ORDINAIiCE - 5
DEDICATION:
DE\GLOPER:
DE\rELOPr'IENT
DE\GLOPMENT
APPROVAL.
DEVELOPMENT
IIvIPACT FEE:
DE\ELOPMENT
REQUIREMENT:
E>oSTING
DEVELOPMENT:
Person who applies for a Building Permit or submrts a plat or is otherwise
subject to the provisions ofthis chapter.
Any written authorization from the City which authorizes the commencement
of a development.
A payment of money imposed as a condition of development approval to
pay for a proportionate share ofthe cost of system or service improvements
needed to serve development. This term is also referred to as an impact fee
in this ordinance. The term does not include the following:
(a) A charge or fee to pay the administrative, plan review, or inspection
costs associated with permits required for development,
O) Connection or hookup charges;
(c) Availability charges for drahage, sewer, water or transportation for
services provided dtectly to the development.
(d) Amounts collected from a developer in a transaction in which the
govemmental entity has incurred expenses in consructing capital
improvements for the development ifthe owner or developer has agreed to be
financially responsible for the construction or installation of the capital
improvements, unless a written agreement is made pursuant to section 67-
8209 (3) Idaho Code, for credit or reimbursement.
A requirement attached to a dwelopment approval or other governmental
action approving or authorizing a particulil development project including,
but not limited to, a rezoning which requirement compels the paymelt,
dedication or contribution ofgoods, services, land, or money as a condition
of approval.
The lawfi:l land use which physically exists or lor which the landowner holds
a valid building permit as of the effective date of this ordinance or that
maximum level of development activity for which a previous impact fee was
paid under the provisions ofthis Chapter. As used in this Chapter, the term
"lawful land use" shall not include a land use which has been established or
maintained in violation ofthis Chapter or applicable codes.
IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE.6
Any construction or installation ofa building or structure, or any change in
use of a building or structure, or any change in the use, character or
appearance of land, which creates additional demand and need for public
facilities.
DWELLING UMT: A Building or portion of a Building designed for or whose primary purpose
is for resider:tial occupancy, and which consists ofone or more rooms which
are arranged, designed or used as living and/or sleeping quarters for one or
more persons. Dwelling unit includes mobile home.
EXTRAORDINARY Those costs incurred as a rezult of extraordinary impact
COSTS:
EXTRAORDINARY
IMPACT:
FEE
ADMIMSTRATOR:
An impact which is reasonably determined by the Citv to: (I) result in the
need for system improvements, the cost of which will significantly exceed the
sum of the development impact fees to be generated from the project or the
sum agreed to be paid pursuant to a development agreement as allowed by
section 67-3211(2) Idaho Code, or (ii) resutt in the need for system
improvements which are not identified in the capital improvements plan.
The official or designee appointed by the Mayor with City Council
approval, to administer this Chapter.
FEE PAYER:
IMPACT:
INDN'IDUAL
PROJECT
ASSESSMENT
LAND USE
ASSLMPTIONS:
LE\'EL OF
SERVICE:
MANUFACTURED
HOME:
A person intending to commence a proposed development for which an
impact fee computation is required, or a person who has paid an impact fee,
provided a letter of credit, or made a contribution in-lieu-of-fee pursuant to
this Chapter.
The effect on the local public facilities and services in a given area produced
by the additional population attracted by development.
An assessment ofa particular project based upon an agreement between
a fee payer and the City whereby clear and convincing evidence has
established that the impact fee requires adjustment.
A description of the service area and projections of land uses, densities,
intensities, and population in the service area over at least a twerty (20) year
period.
A measure of the relationship berween service capacity and service demand
for public facilifies.
A strucnrre, constructd according to H[ID/F[{A mobile home construction
and safety standards, Eansportable in one or more sections, whic[ in the
traveling mode, is eight (8) feet or more in width or is forty (40) body feet or
more in lengttq or when erected on site, is tkee hundred twenty (320) or
more square feet, and which is built on a pemurnent chassis and designed to
be used as a dwelling with or without a pernanent foundation when
connected to the required utilities, and includes the plumbing, heating, air
conditioning, and electrical systems contained therein, except that such term
shall include any structure which meets all the requirements and with respect
to which the manufacturer voluntarily files a certification required by the
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and complies with the
standards established wl,d.er 42 U.S.C. 5101, et sec.
IMPACT FEE ORDINAIYCE - 7
I,IOBILE
HONIE:
IVIODL]LAR
BLILDI}iG:
NEIGFIBORHOOD
PARK,
NON-
RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT:
OWNER
PARK AND
FACILITIES:
PARKPLANNING
AREA:
(See also manufactured home) A transponable. factory-built home, designed
to be used as a year-round residential dwelling and built prior to the
enactment of the Federal Manufacrured Housing Construction and Safety
Standards Act of 1974. which became effective June 15, 1976.
Any building or building component, other than a manufactured home. which
is constructed according to standards contained in the L ntform Building
Cale, as adopted by the City, or any amendments thereto, which is ofclosed
construction and is either entirely or substantially prefabricated or assembled
at a place other than the building site.
A combination playground and park, designed primarily for non-supervised,
non-organized recreation activities. They are generally small in size (about 5
acres), and typically serve residents within a half-mile radius. At average
residential densities, this amounts to a service area population of about 3,000
to 5,000 residents. Since these parks are located within walking and bicycling
distance of most users, the activities they support often become a daily
pastime for neighborhood chil&en.
Any development project not providing for residential dweltng units.
The Person holding legal title to the real property, including the local, state or
federal government or any subdivision thereof.
All park lands and facilities as described in the Comprehensive Plan including
Neighborhood, Community, Linear and Regional Parks as well as Special Use
and Open Space Areas together with the park system improvements necessary
to $.rpport the recreation needs ofthe population served and to be served as
identified in the Plan.
A statistical area of the Official City of Meridian Corporate Boundary as
determined by annexation boundaries, sometimes referred to as "Service
Area." Community Park facilities in Meridian are deemed to serve the entte
community and impact fees for such facilities shall be charged equally within
the boundaries of the Meridian Area of City Impact, including the City of
Meridian.
PRESENT VALUE: The total current monetary value of past, present, or future payments,
contributions or dedications of goods, services, materials constnrction or
money.
PROJECT A particular development on an identifiable parcel of land
IMPACT TEE ORDINANCE. s
PROJECT
L\IPROIENIENTS
PROPORTIONATE
SFL\RE.
PTJtsLIC
FACILITIES
PI.IBLIC
FACILITIES
PLANNING
AREA.
SERVICE AREA,
SERVICE UNIT:
SYSTEM
IMPRO!'EMENTS
SYSTEM
IMPROVEMENT
COSTS:
Site improvements and facilities that are planned and designed to provide
for a panicular development project and that are necessary for the use and
convenience ofthe occupants or users ofthe project.
That ponion ofthe cost ofsystem improvements determined pursuant to
Section 67-8207, ldaho Code, which reasonably relates to the service
demands and needs ofthe project.
Shall include: (a) Wastewater collection, treatment and disposal facilities;
(b) Storm water collection, retention, detention, treatment and disposal
faciiities, flood control facilities, and bank and shore protection and
enhancement improvements; (c) Landscaping associated with roads, streets
and bridges and the rights ofway associated therewith; (d) Parks, open space
and recreation areas, and related capitai improvements; and (e) Public safety
facilities, including law enforcement, fire, emergency medical and rescue and
street lighting facilities.
A desigrated area identifed in the Comprehensive Plan and capital facilities
plan for which public facilities needs have been determined based upon
assumptions made in accordance with generally acceptd planning and
engineering standards.
Any defined geographic area identified by the City in the Comprehensive Plan
or by intergovemmental agreement between the City and another
governmental entity, in which specific facilities provide service to
development within the area defined, on the basis of sound ptanning or
engineering principles or both.
A standardized measure of conzumptioq use, generation, discharge or need
arributable to an individual unit ofdevelopment calculated in accordance with
generally accepted municipal, engineering or planning standards for a
particular category of capital improvements.
In contrast to project improvements, mean capital improvements to public
facilities which are desigaed to provide service to a service area including,
without limitatiorL the tpe of improvements described in section 50-1703,
Idaho Cde.
Costs incurred for construction or reconstruction of system or service
improvements, including design, acquisitioq engineering and other costs
attributable thereto, and also including, without limitatiorl the type ofcosts
described in section 50-1702 A), Idaho Code, to provide additional public
facilities or services needed to serve new gowth and dwelopment. For
clarification, system improvement costs do not include:
IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE.9
LINIT(S) OF
DEVELOPMENT:
(a) Constructioq acquisition or expansion of public faciliries or semces
other than capita.l improvements identified in the capital improvements plan;
(b) Repair, operation or maintenance of existing or new capital
improvements;
(c) Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital
improvements in order to meet stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or
regulatory standards;
(d) Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital
improvements solely for the purpose of providing better service to existing
development;
(e) Administrative and operating costs ofthe City unless such costs are
atributable to development ofthe capital improvements plan, as provided in
section 67-8208, Idaho Code; or
(f) Principal payments and interest or other fnance charges on bonds or other
indebtedness except fimncial obligations issued by or on behalf of the City to
finance capital improvements identified in the capital improvements plan.
A quantifiable increment of development activity dimensioned in terms of
dwelling units, or otho appropriate measurements contained in the impact fee
schedule.
2-12-4: GEIYERAL PROYISIONS:
Ail dwelopment is deemed to create an impact and therefore an increased demand for public services.
As suclr, the cost ofnew public facilities should be borne by new users to the extent new use requires
new facilities. Therefore, any application for a building permit enabling the construction on or after
the effective date ofthis impact fee ordinance or any amendment hereto which provides for impact
fees for any additional allowed category of public facilities, adopted by the Meridian City Council
purzuant to the provisions of.Idzio Code 67-8206, shall be zubject to the imposition of impact fees
in the manner and amount set forth h this Chapter as it is adopted initially or as it is amended as
provided for in section 2-12-l D. hereof
A.Complete applications for building permits received by the Public Works Department prior
to the effective date of this Ordinance or amendments hereto adopting impact fees or
amending or adopting any methodology by which impact fees are calculated, wifl be exanpt
from that portion ofthe Impact Fee Ordinance or amendment enacted after the application,
if a complae building permit is issued within 120 days of the effective date of this Ordinance
or amendment. A complete application for a building permit shall be defned as including
permitted plans signed and sealed by a State ofldaho licensed engineer or architect showing
all site worlg zoning compliance, architectural, structural, electrical, and plumbing work.
Applications for building permits filed prior to the effective date of said Ordinance or
amendment but which become null and void shall be subject to the provisions ofthe Impact
Fee Ordinance in the event of reapplication. ln the event that an amendment to this
Ordinance involves a change in the amount of impact fees charged for a particular category
ofpublic facility or services, the fee payer shall pay the lesser impact fee amount.
IMPACT FEE ORDINAI{CE. TO
B
C
D
E
F
For building permits which expire or are revoked after the effective date ofthis Ordinance the
fee payer shall be entitled to a refund of previously paid impact fees (see Section 2-13-7)
provided that in the case of a reapplication for permit, the impact fee in effect at that time
shall be paid.
AII fee payments shall be made to the Fee Administrator prior to the issuance ofa building
permit unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the City and the Developer; and no building
shall commence nor shall a building permit be issued unless and until the applicant has
satisfied the provisions of this Chapter. Violations ofthis provision shall be subject to the
sanctions set forth in Section 2-12-05 E.
This Chapter shall not be construed to subject any development to double payment ofthe
same impact fees.
A Development Impact Fee shall not be deemed invalid because the intended improvement
for which the fee was paid may result in an incidental benefit to owners or developers within
a service area other than the person's paying the fee.
Compliance with this Chapter shall not excuse the applicant from compliance with all other
govemmental development regulations. Building and/or use permits may be withheld until
all such requiremerts are met.
The Cormcil recognizes that there may be circumstances where the anticipated fiscal impacts
of a proposed development are of such magritude that the Crty may be unable to
accommodale tlte dwelopmant without excessive or unscheduled public expenditures which
exceed the amount ofthe anticipated impact fees from such development. If the Council
determines that a proposed development activity would create such an entraordinary impact
on the City's public facilities and services systern, the Council may refuse to approve the
proposed development activity and/or may recommend to the other affected government
agencies that the project not be approved. ln the altemative, the Council may calcriate a pro
rata shae per *rice unit of the exraordinary impact and charge an impact fee geater than
the fee indicated by use ofthe fee schedule.
Individual project assessments ofdevelopmert impact fees may be made by application to the
Fee Administrator who slull er"aluare srch individual project assessments under the guidelines
provided for in Section 2-12-13 G. ofthis Chapter. Ifthe guidelines are met, the individual
project assessment shall be recommelded for approval by the Fee Administrator and
forwarded to the City Council for approval withh thirty (30) days of receiving such
application. An adverse recommendation by the Fee Administrator may be appealed to the
Council under Section 2-12-13 G(3) ofthis Chapter. Final determination regarding project
assessments shall be made by the City Council.
The Dwelopmeat Impact Fee Advisory Committee shall periodically review the contents of
the adopted Impact Fee Ordinance and, when appropriate, make recommendations for
revisions to the Meridian City Council. The Meridian City Council shall consider the
G
H
IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE. II
A
B
Development Impact Fee Advisory Committee's recommended revision(s) to the City of
lvleridian Development Impact Fee Ordinance at least once every twelve ( l2) months. The
Development Impact Fee Advisory Committee's recommendations and the City Council's
action are intended to ensure that the benefits to a fee paying development are equitable, in
that the fee charged the development shall not exceed a proportionate share ofthe costs of
system improvements, and the procedures for administering impact fees remain efficient.
,_t r_<.DEITLOPMENT ITv-IPACT FEE - STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES:
The dwelopment impact lee refleas the need for capital improvements to public facilities or services
made necessary by new development. Any person requesting a building permit for development or
who is otherwise subject to this Chapter, shall pay the impact fee equal to the sum of impact fees
reflected in the Impact Fee Schedules set forth in the Meridian City Code and determined pursuant
to the following:
The development impact fee shall not exceed a "proportionate share" of the costs incurred
or the costs that will be incurred by the City in the provision of "system improvements" to
serve the new development.
The "proportionate share" is the cost attributable to the new development after consideration
by the City of the following factors:
(l) Any appropriate credit, offset or contribution of money, dedication of land, or
construction of system improvements;
(2) Payments reasonably anticipated to be made by or as a result ofthe new development in
the form of user fees, debt service payments, or taxes which are dedicated for system
improvements for which development impact fees would otherwise be imposed,
(3) All other available sources of funding such system improvements.
C In determining the "proportionate share" ofthe cost of system improvements to be paid by
the developer, the following additional factors shall be considered.
(l) The cost of edsting system improvements within the service area or areas impacted by
the new development;
(2) The means by which existing system improvements have been financed;
(3) The extent to which the new development will contribute to the cost of system
improvements through taxation, assessments, or developer or landowner contributions;
(4) The o<tent to which the new developmant is required to contribute to the cost of existing
system improvements in the future;
IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE. T2
E
(5) The extent to which the new development should be credited for providing system
improvements, without charge to other properties within the service area or areas impacted
by the new development;
(6) Extraordinary costs, if any, incuned in serving the new development;
(7) The time and price differential inherent in a lair comparison of fees paid at different times;
and
(8) The availability of other sources olfunding system improvements including, but not
limited to, user charges, general tax levies, intergovernmental transfers, and special ta.\ation
as set forth more specifically in the Comprehensive Plan as required by ldaho Code 67-8207
(2) A).
After payment ofdevelopment impact fees to the Fee Administrator or the execution ofan
agre€ment for payment ofdevelopment impact fees, additional impact fees or increases in fees
rnay not be assessed unless the number of service units increases or the scope or schedule of
the development changes. In the went of an increase in the number of service units or
schedule of the dwelopmeat changes, the additional development impact fees to be imposed
are limited to the amount attributable to the additional service units or change in scope of the
development.
To insure collection of dwelopment impact fees, the Fee Administrator may use the following
means and methods:
(1) Additions to the fee for interest at the highest legally allowable rate as well as a penalty
of6ve per cent (5%) for each thirty (30) day period payment is late under the terms ofthis
chapter or the agreement between the developer and the City;
(2) Withholding the building permit or other approval until the impact fee is paid;
(3) Withholding utility services until the impact fee is paid; and
(4) Imposition of liens for failure to timely pay the impact fee following the procedures set
forth'n Chopter 5, Tille 15, Idaho Code.
2-124l. DETERMINATION OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES:
Prior to issrance ofa building permit for development, the applicant or owner will be required to pay
monetary fees in accordance with this section. It is intended that this requirement extend to any
owner or builder, including the state of ldaho, the United States of America and any other
govemmental or quasi governmental entity.
General Formula: The development impact fee per service unit may not exceed the amount
determined by dividing the costs of the capital improvements described in the Capital
A.
IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE - 13
D.
Improvements Plan and as required by ldaho Code 67-8)08(l)O,by the total number of
projected service uruts as descnbed in the Comprehensive Plan and as required b,1 ldaho Code
67.9208(l)(9. If the number of new service units projected over a reasonable period of time
is less than the total number of service units shown by the approved land use assumptions at
full development of the service area, the maximum impact lee per service unit shall be
calculated by dividing the costs ofthe part of the capital improvements necessitated b.v and
attributable to the projected new service units described in ldaho Code 67-8208(l)(g by the
total projected new service uruts descnbed in that section.
An alternative methodolog.v may be used provided that it can be demonstrated that such
alternative methodolog.v accurately calculates the proportionate share ofthe impact ofthe
proposed development on the capaciry of system improvements h terms ofgenerally accepted
municipal, engineering and planning principles.
Challenges to the methodology adopted by any impact fee ordinance approved by the
Meridian City Council may be brought by any interested individual within sixty (60) days of
the adoption or modification of such impact fee methodology by filing formal protest with the
City of Meridian Clerk who shall set the matter for hearing before the City Council within
thirty (30) days ofreceiving mch protest. The protesting party shall be specific in identifying
objections to the methodology. The City Council shall render a written decision within fifteen
(15) days ofthe closre ofthe hearing on the protest. The decision ofthe City Council shall
be final.
In the case of development activity involving a change of use and/or magniode of use in
which a building permit is required, the applicant shall be required to pay the computed
impact fee for any proposed development activity for which the impact fee has not been
previously paid. Whan any building permit expires or is revoked after the effective date of
this Ordinance and a fee has not previously been paid under this Chapter the applicant shall
be required to comply with the provisions herein. No refunds will be given for proposed
development activity resulting in a negative fee calculation.
No impact fee payment shall be required for any development activity when the total
calculated fee is less than five dollars ($5.00).
Ifthe type of dwelling unit within a proposed or current development is not specified in the
impact fee schedule, the Fee Administrator shall use the dwelling unit most nearly comparable
in computing the fee. Ttris determination shall be made at the discretion of the Fee
Administrator, with appeal to the City Council if the Applicant disagrees with the Fee
Administrator's determination.
In determining existing development activity and the units of proposed or existing
dwelopment, the Fee Administrator shall use the building permit or zoning certificate of use
information contained in the building or zoning records ofthe City ofMeridian.
C
IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE. T4
B
F
D.
E,
G A development impact fee will be assessed for installation of a modular building,
manufactured home or mobile home unless the fee payer can demonstrate by documentation
such as utility bills and ta.r records either:
( I ) That a modular building, manufactured home or mobile home was legally in place on the
lot or space prior to the effective date ofthis Chapter; or
(2) That a dwelopment impact fee has been paid previously for the installation of a modular
building, manufactured home or mobile home on that same lot or space.
2-12-7:. REFUFID OF IiltPACT FEES PAID:
The fee payer or current owner shall be entitled to a refund ofthe impact fee if (l) a building
permit encompassing fee paying dwelopment expires or is revoked, or (2) if the public facility
for which the fee was paid is available but never provided, or (3) the City, after collecting the
fee when the public facility for which the fee was paid is not available, has failed to
appropriate and expend the collected development impact fees within ten (10) years on a first-
in, fust-out (FIFO) basis, except that the City shall retain the General Administrative or
Specifid Administrative Charge portion ofthe fee to cover the cost ofthe administration of
the impact fee calculatioq collection and refund. However, no refund shall be provided for
the cost ofcompleted improvements contributed in lieu of fee unless otherwise provided for
in a development agreement.
Any impact fee trust firnds refunded shall be retumed to the fee payer or cuffent owner by the
Fee Administrator with accrued interest u one half (%) the legal rate as provided for in ldaho
Code 28-22-10l. The fee payer or current owner shall be required to submit a written
request for refird to the Fee Administrator before issuance ofthe refund can be authorized.
No refunds of development impact fees will be provided for in the event the fee payer or
currant owner does not request such a refund prior to the expiration of one year following the
ten (10) year period from the date the development impact fee was paid.
Refunds shall be sent to the fee payer, or person eotitled to zuch refund, within ninety (90)
days oftheir approval by the City.
Funds shall be deemed expended for purposes ofthis Chapter when payment of said funds has
been approved by the City of Meridian.
2-12-8: EXEMPTIONS:
A. The following shall be exempted from payment of Development Impact Fees:
(1) Rebuilding the same amount of floor space of a structure which was destroyed by fue
or other catastrophe, prodding the structure is rebuilt and ready for occupancy within two
(2) years ofthe fire or other catastrophe,
A.
B
c
D
IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE - T5
B
(2) Remodeling or repairing a structure which does oot increase the number of service
units;
(3) Replacing a residential unit, including a manufactured home, with another residential
unit on the same lot. provided that the number of service units does not increase,
(5) Consructing an addition on a residential structure which does not increase the number
of service units;
(6) Adding uses that are typically accessory to residential uses, such as tennis courts or
clubhouses, unless it can be clearly demonstrated that the use creates a significant impact on
the capacity of system improvements; and
(7) Dwelopment projects which are commercial, industrial or office projects, or portions
of projects that involve commercial, industrial or office uses or building permits.
2-1249: CREDITS
In the calculation of impact fees for a particular project, credit shall only be given for the
present value of any construction of system improvements or contribution or dedication of
land or an interest in land or money required by the City from a developer for system
improvements. Credit shall not be given for project improvements.
A developer who is required to construct, fund or contribute system improvements in excess
ofthe impact fees which would otherwise have been paid by the development project, shall
be reimbursed for such excess constructiorL funding or contribution from analogous impact
fees paid by future development located in the service area which is benefitted by such
improvements.
If credit or reimbursement is due to the developer pursuant to this sectiorl the City and the
developer shall enter into a written agreement, negotiated in good faittL prior to the
constructiorL funding or contribution. The agreement shall provide for the amount of credit
or the amount, time and form of reimbursement.
D Any person requesting zuch credit or reimbursement shall present documentation ofcosts or
payments for facilities to be considered by the Fee Administrator for use in determining the
amount of credit or reimbursement to be given. The determination shall be made no more
than thirty (30) days after complete documentation is submitted to the Fee Administrator.
A.
C
IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE. T6
(1) Placing a temporary construction trailer or office on a lot;
An exanption must be claimed by the fee payer upon application for a building permit. Any
exemption not so claimed shall be deemed waived by the fee payer. All requests shall be
submitted to and determined by the Fee Administrator. Appeals of the Fee Administrator's
determination shall be made under the provisions of Section 2-12-16 ofthis Chapter.
B,
Any appea.l from such a decision by the Fee Administrator will be reviewed by the City
Council pursuant to the procedures set forth in Section 2-12-16 ofthis Chapter.
In the event that a developer intends to contribute or dedicate an interest in land in lieu ofpalng
impact fees or a portion thereof, the following procedures and criteria shall be applied.
A.The Fee Administrator, with the advice of the appropriate Department Head and the City
Attomey, will determine whether the land proposed for dedication is acceptable. He will be
guided by the following consideration:
Size: The size ofthe parcel is expressed as a net amount and is exclusive of street
right-of-way, existing and proposed easements, borrow pits, lakes and other man-
made or natural conditions which restrict or impede the intended use of such areas.
Unity: The land to be dedicated shatl form a single parcel of land except where
aforesaid review determines that two or more parcels would be in the best public
interest.
Shape: The confguration of the parcel of land is such as to be usable for public
facilities purposes as determined by the City.
Location: The land to be dedicated is so located as to serve the needs of the
development, by being within the Service Area and/or Public Facilities Service Zone.
Access: Appropriate access to the land to b€ dedicated is provided by improved public
street frontage.
Utility: Dedicated land should be usable for public facilities purposes and meet the
following criteria prior to its final acceptance by the City Council:
(a) The property is platted and ready to be developed so that no funds would be
required to be expended for site dwelopmant.
O) AII utilities are in place and are at the perimeter of the site and include roads,
walks, curbs, water lines, sewer lines, electric service lines, and telephone
service lines.
(c) All utilities are ofsutrcient quality and quantity to adequately service the site
(d) The property is filled and compacted to comply with all appropriate
subdivision codes, building and zoning codes, and flood insurance laws and
regulations. The filI and compaction are of zufficient quality to accept the
improvemants contanplated.
2
J
4
5
6
IMPACT FEE ORDINA}TCE - 17
2-12-10. SUIIABILITY OF L.\ND OFFERED FOR DEDICATION
1.
Plans: City, Regional and State plans shall be taken into consideration when
evaluating land proposals for dedication.
The Fee Administrator shall determine, based on specific review ofeach application,
whether the proposed site contains the requisite site characteristics consistent with
public facilities criteria. This determination shall be in writing and shall specifu the
reasons the site was approved or denied credit for inclusion in the land dedication
requirement. The Fee Administrator's determination shall be made within thirty (30)
days from the date of receipt ofthe request and shall be forwarded to the Council for
action. The Council may affirm, reject or revise the determination of the Fee
Administrator providing written findings of fact and conclusions of [aw.
Appeals ofthe Fee Administrator's determination of land suitability shall be made to the City
Council by the filing of an appeal with the Meridian City Clerk no later than ten (10) days
following the date ofthe decision ofthe Fee Administrator.
2-12-tl: IMPACT FEE SERVICE AREAS AI\iD TRUST ACCOUNTS:
All impact fees will be deposited in a desigrated "Trust Fund". lnterest-bearing trust
accounts shall be established and maintained by the City of Meridian; said trust accounts shall
correspond to the area contained in the corporate boundary as the same is adopted and
amended from time to time by action of the Meridian City Council.
Public Facilities Planning Area (service area) shall correspond to the Meridian corporate
boundary and Meridian Comprehensive Plan, and the same area adopted as part of Capital
Improvements Plan approved by the City Council, indicating the designated planning areas
for the public facilities needed, including but not limited to, those associated with parks and
recreation.
All impact fees mllected by the Fee Administrator will be promptly deposited into the proper
trust account, excepting General Administrative charges which will be directed to the
appropriate Department to underwrite the cost of administering this Chapter.
2-12-12: IMPACTFEEEXPET{DITURES:
Except as othenrise provided herein, funds from the Impact Fee Trust Funds, including any
accrued interest, shall be limited to the financing of acquisition, expansioq and/or
improvement of real property, capital facilities, or for principal and interest payments
(including sinking fund payments) on bonds or other borrowed revenues used to acquire,
orpand or improve srch ficilities or services necessitated by the impact of new development
within the community.
Trust account funds shall be deemed expended in the order in which they are collected.
'7
8
B
A.
C
A,
B
IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE - 18
B,
C In the event that the Level of Service Standards for public facilities have been met within a
particu.lar area olthe community, the lvteridian City Council may authorize the lVlayor or his
designee, following a public hearing, to expend the funds in another area ofthe community
for wstem improvements of the same category in a fair and reasonable propodon to the lees
charged. Said authorization shall only be permitted upon a finding that the expendirure will
fairly and proportionately mitigate the impacts ofand will fairly and proportionately benefit
the development paying the fees in question.
ln the event compliance with the Level of Service Standard for public facilities meets or
exceeds the projected population estimates adopted in the Comprehensive Plan through the
year 2015, the City Council may authorize the Mayor or his designee, following a public
hearing, to expend the additional impact fees collected from the development in excess of
original projections, for system improvements within the community from which the fees were
collected. Said authorization shall be permitted upon a finding that the expenditure will
mitigate the impacts of and will benefit the development paying the lees in question in a fair
and proportionate manner.
A financial report on the knpact Fee Trust Funds shall be provided annually by the Fee
Administrator to the Mayor and Council.
Any interested citizen may challenge the expenditure of any impact fee funds within one (l)
year of said expenditure by filing a written protest with the Meridian City Clerk. The City
Clerk shall set the matter for hearing before the City Council within thkty (30) days ofthe
filing of such protest. The protesting party shall specifcally identify the impact fee
expenditure and the basis of the protest. The City Council shall render a decision regarding
the protest within thirty (30) days after the close ofthe hearing on the matter.
2-12-13: PARK AtrtD RECREATION IMPACT FEES
INCORPORATION OF STANDARDS: This section addresses the Development Impact
Fees collected for Meridian Park and Recreation Sewice Improvements. The Meridian
Comprehensive Plan as adopted by the Meridian City Council together with the land use,
acquisition and construction cost and service unit itssumptions upon which said plan is based
are hereby incorporated into this section by reference.
INCORPORATION OF MAPS: The maps contained within the Comprehensive Plan are
hereby incorporated into this section by reference. Copies of said maps may be obtained at
the office of the Meridian City Clerk or viewed and obtained at the Administrative ofEce of
Meridian Planning.
PARK IMPACT FEE - PURPOSE AND IMPLEMENTATION: All residential devetopment
is deemed to create an impact and therefore an increased demand for park and recreation
services. As s.rch the cost for new public park facilities should be borne by new users of park
and recreation faciLities to the extent new use requires new facilities. Therefore, any
application for a building permit enabling the construction on or after the effective date ofthis
D
E
F
A.
B
C
IMPACT FEE ORDINAI{CE - 19
D
impact fee ordinance shall be subject to the imposition ofpark and recreation impact fees in
the manner and amount set forth in this section.
P.{.YIVIENT OF PARK IIVIPACT FEE: Prior to receiving a building permit or commencing
construction of any building for which park impact fees are to be paid pursuant to this
chapter, whichwer first occurs, the applicant therefore must demonstrate that the appropriate
impaa fee has been paid to the Fee Administrator. The Fee .\dministrator and/or the Public
Works Department Director shall have the authoriry to withhold a building permit or stop
construction, as the case may be, until the appropriate impact fee has been collected.
IVIETHODOLOGY: The methodology adopted for the purpose ol determining park and
recreation impact fees shall be based upon the assumptions set forth in the Comprehensive
Plan that new neighborhood and community park facilities are needed in Meridian to serve
growth. Said assumptions, based upon the Existing and Future Facilities Approach, set
the edsting standard for park needs as set forth in the following table:
Park Descrintion Exi tins Standard
E
Neishborhood Parks
Community Parks
0.28 Ac/1,000 population based upon the existing
situation ofone five (5) acre neighborhood park per
18,000 population.
1.67 Adl,000 population based upon the existing
situation of two fifteen acre community parks per
18,000 population.
Parkl:nd Acorri n F-xistinp Cost (Oaober I I )
One acre (developable)$25,000
Parkla Imorovements F-xi Cost (October l- 1994)
Develop one acre $70,000
Total service cost per acre
Cost per person calculations:
$9s,000
$95,000 (existing value ofone acre of dweloped parkland) times 0.28 (existing neighborhood
park standard) dMded by 1000 population = $26.60 ($95,000 x 0.28 = t0OO =$26.60)
$95,000 (existing value ofone acre ofdeveloped parkland) times 1.67 (existing community
parkstandard)dividedby l@0population=$158.65 ($95,000x 1.67= IOOO=$158.65)
IMPACT FEE ORDINAITCE - 20
Additionalty the Comprehensive Plan and demographic data provided by the Ada Planning
Association during preparation ofthe Comprehensive Plan assumes the following average numbers
of people per dwelling unit.
F
Single Family Residential
Multi-Family Residential
Park Description Impact Fee S/Person
2.6 persons per dwelling unit
2.0 persons per dwelling unit
Single Family
$/Residence
$ 69.16
412.49
$48 r.65
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE SCHEDI-,LE FOR MERIDIAN PARKS: Pursuant to the
assumptions in the N[eridian Comprehensive Plan and demographic data provided by Ada
Planning Associatioq development impact fees for parks are set forth in the following table:
Neighborhood Parks
Community Parks
TOTAL
$26.60
158.65
$185.25
Multi Familv
$/Residence
$ 53.20
3r7.30
$370.50
G
(Example: $26.60 x 2.6 persons per average Single Family dwelling unit : $69.16)
IND[VIDUAL PROJECT ASSESSMENT: An individual project assessment of park impact
fees is permitted in situations where the fee payer can demonstrate by clear and convincing
evidence that the established impact fee is inappropriate.
(l) Written application for individual project assessment shall be made to the Fee
Administrator prior to receiving building permits or other necessary approvals. Late
applications for an individual project assessment ofpark impact fees may be considered for
a peiod of sixty (60) days after the receipt ofthe building permit only if the fee payer makes
a showing that the facts supporting such application were not known or discoverable prior
to receipt ofthe building p€rmit and that undue hardship would resr.rlt if said application is not
considered.
(2) The Fee Administrator shall render a written decision regarding the individual project
assessrnent ofPark Impact Fees within thirty (30) days ofthe date a complete application is
submitted. The decision of the Fee Administrator shall establish the Park Impact Fee for the
project in question for a period of one (l) year from the date said decision becomes final. The
decision ofthe Fee Administrator shall be forwarded to the Council for action. The Council
may accept, reject or revise the Fee Administrator's decision regarding individual project
assessment and shall provide written findings of fact and conclusions of law.
(3) Appeals ofthe Fee Administrator's determination of individual project assessment shall
be made to the City Council by the filing of an appeal with the Meridian City Clerk no later
than ten (10) days following the date of the decision ofthe Fee Administrator.
IMPACT FEE ORDINAT{CE - 21
H CERTIFICATION: Certification of the park impaa fee schedule for a particular project may
be applied for in the following manner.
(l) Written application may be made to the Fee Administrator not later than si,xtv (60) days
after preliminary plat approval by the Meridian City Council. Late applications for
cenification ofthe park impact fee schedule will not be considered uniess the fee payer makes
a showing that the facts supporting such application were not known or discoverable until
after the time had run and that undue hardship would result if said application is not
considered.
(2) The Fee Administrator shall provide the appLicant with a wfitten park impact fee schedule
for the particular project within thirty (30) days of the date of application. The certified
schedule provided by the Fee Administr"ator shall be based upon the Comprehensive Plan and
shall establish the park impact fee for the project in question for a period of one ( I ) year from
the date of certification.
(3) The certification ofthe park impact fee schedule may be appealed to the Meridian City
Council as provided in Section 2-12-16 ofthis Chapter.
2-12-14: ADMIMSTRATI!'E COSTS:
The City ofMoidian shall add a ten percent (10%) administrative charge to the impact fees
to administer this ordinance. The l0%o administrative fee will be added to the subtotal of all
applicable impact fees required by this ordinance.
2-12-15: SUMMARY OF IMPACT FEES
Description Cost per Person Single Family
$/Residence
$481 .65
48 17
Park
l0% Administrative
Fee
GRAND TOTAL s203.78 s529 82 $407.55
2-12-16: APPEALSOFADMIMSTRATTVEDECISIONS:
Except as otherwise provided h this Chapter, the decisions ofthe Fee Administrator may be appealed
by the fee payer to the City Council. Decisions of the City Council shall be final.
A. If a fee payer wishes to appeal, the fee payer shall fust file with the Meridian city cler( a
Notice of Adminisrative Appeal on the form provided by the Fee Administrator. All appeals
shall be filed with.in thirty (30) days after the earlier of (a) issuance ofa written decision by
the Fee Administrator; or (b) the Fee Administrator's acceptance of payment of the
IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE - 22
$ 185.25
18 53
MultiFamily
$/Residence
$370.50
37.05
B
c
development impact fee. When filing an appeal, the fee payer shall submit a letter providing
a full explanation of the request, the reason for the appeal, as well as all supporting
documentation. A fee payer may pay a development impact fee under protest in order to
obtain a dwelopment approval or building permit and shall not be estopped from exercising
the right of appeal provided herein, nor shall such fee payer be estopped from receiving a
refund ofany amount deemed to have been illegally collected.
The Meridian City Clerk shall schedule the appeal before the City Council as soon as
practical. The Ciry Council may afEnq reject or revise the decision of the Fee Administrator,
providing written findings of fact and conclusions of law. The written decision ofthe City
Council shall be mailed to the fee payer, certified mail, return receipt requested.
A party aggriwed by the decision of the City Council may, within twenty-eight (28) days of
the Ciry Council's decision, seek judicial rwiew by filing a petition in the District Court in the
manner provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code.
2-12-17: \'ESTEDRIGETS:
Nothing in this Chapter shall limit or modify the rights of any person to complete any construction
for which a lawful building permit was issued prior to the effective date of this ordinance and on
which there has been a good faith reliance and a substantial change ofposition.
2-12-tEz OTffiR POWERS AND RIGETS NOT AFFECTED:
Nothing in this Chapter shall prevent the City from requiring a developer to construct
reasonable project improvements in conjunction with a development project.
Nothing in this Chapter shall be construed to prevent or prohibit private agleements between
property owners or developers and the City in regard to the construction or installation of
system improvements or providing for credits or reimbursements for system improvunent
costs incurred by a developer hcluding inter-project transfers of credits or providing for
reimbursement for project improvements which are used or shared by more than one
development project.
Nothing in this Chapter shall obligate the City to approve dwelopment which resrlts in
exraordinary impact.
Nothing in this Chapter shall obligate the City to approve any development request which may
reasonably be expected to reduce levels of service below minimum acceptable lwels as
established herein.
Nothing in this Chapter shall be construed to create any additional right to develop real
property or diminish the power of the City in regulating the orderly development of real
property within the service area.
A.
B.
IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE. 23
c.
D.
E.
F Nothing in this Chapter shall work to limit the use by the City of the power of eminent
domain or supersede or conflict with requirements or procedures authorized in the -ldaho
Code for local improvement districts or general obligation bond issues.
2-12.19., SAVTNGS CLALISE:
Ifany seoiorl s.rbsectiorL sentence, clause or provision ofthis Chapter is held invalid, the remainder
ofthis Chapter shall not be affected by such hvalidity.
Section 2. It is the intention ofthe Nleridian City Councii, and it is hereby ordained that the provrsrons
ofthis ordinance shall become and be made a part ofthe Revised and Compiled Ordinances ofthe
City ofMeridian. The sections ofthis ordinance may be renumbered or relettered to accomplish such
intention, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section", "article" or other appropriate word.
Section 3 This ordinance shail be published within and become effective 30 days after the date of its
adoption.
PASSED and ADOPTED by the Council of the City of Meridiaru ldaho,this 1!Aday of
4/tcA- .rgsa
E-a^t
APPROVED
R
CITY CLERK
APPROVED by the City Council and the Mayor of the City ofMeridiarL Idaho, this
ot 44tch- .1996.
OF
I ts1 .
SEAL
IMPACT FEE ORDINAIICE - 24
ATTEST: