AG 1999 06 21 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

by, and benefits conferred upon, the subdivision.'"35 The principle implies that the developer may be expected to shoulder no more than a proportionate share of the costs of new facilities for which his or her development is responsible. A corollary of this principle is that new development may not be assigned the costs of bdnging substandard facilities serving the existing population up to the service level standards that apply to new facilities. Proportionality is also a feature of the third principle--the benefit principle. The public facilities and improvements funded by or provided by the developer must provide sufficient benefit to the development for which the exaction was imposed. In the case of impact fees, the coIl~cted fees must be earmarked to ensure that they are used for the particular type of public facility for which they were collected (for example, schools) and that the facility is geographically located close enough to the development to be truly beneficial. Another corollary is that impact fees must be spent soon enough after they are collected. There must be a temporal connection between their collection and the benefit that arises when they are actually expended for a public facility and the facility becomes available for use.3s The principles of the rational nexus test are no mere abstract legal constructs. They' establish the elements of a sound impact fee program and strongly influence the methodology for calculating the fees. Orange County's Impact Fee and the Methodology for Its Calculation The Impact Fee System as Part of a Comprehensive Plan 35. Batch, 92 N.C. App. al 610, 376 S.E.2d at 31, quoting Longridge Bldrs. v. Planning Bd. of Twp. of Princeton, 245 A 2d 936, 337 iN.J. 1968). 36. See, e.g., Cily of Fayetleville v. IBI, Inc. 659 S.W.2d 505 (Ark. 1983). 44 ~ 39