Transportation Impact Fees and Excise Taxes (PAS 493)

A Survey of 16 Jurisdictions

By Connie Cooper, FAICP

Product Image

Impact fees, when based on a comprehensive plan and linked to a sound capital improvement plan, can be an effective tool for ensuring adequate infrastructure to accommodate growth where and when it is anticipated. Local government experimentation with impact fees has been paralleled by increasing state court involvement in the review of these fees. A general trend in the state courts has been t...

Read More

Subscriber sale
PAS subscriber
Nonmember sale
Member sale
List Price

Product Details

Page Count
Date Published
Oct. 1, 2000
APA Planning Advisory Service

About the Authors

Connie Cooper

Table of Contents

Introduction: A historic and legal perspective on development exactions
Early exactions • Advent of the impact fee exaction • Early court challenges • Rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court • Recent state court decisions on impact fees • Summary

1. Background and summary of findings
Summary of findings

2. Jurisdictions that employ impact fees
Arlington, Texas • Atlanta, Georgia • Boise/Ada County, Idaho • Bozeman, Montana • Cary, North Carolina • Franklin, Tennessee • Leawood, Kansas • Orlando, Florida • Phoenix, Arizona • Portland, Oregon • Reno/Sparks Metropolitan Area, Nevada • San Diego, California • West Valley City, Utah

3. Jurisdictions that employ excise taxes
Boulder, Colorado • Lee's Summit, Missouri • Overland Park, Kansas

4. Summary tables
Table 1: Road financing technique characteristics • Table 2: Road financing impact fee comparison

Appendix. Additional reference materials addressing impact fee issues
The American Planning Association policy guide on impact fees • Draft of a model development impact fee statute • Additional reading