Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Impact Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Flagstaff staff to study expanding development‑impact fees; council asks for affordability protections
Summary
Staff proposed a mandated five‑year review of development impact fees and asked whether council wants an expanded study beyond public‑safety fees to include streets, parks and libraries. Council supported studying expanded fees while asking staff to return with affordability‑focused options and the interaction with water capacity charges.
City staff asked the City Council at the Feb. 14 retreat whether to expand the city’s required five‑year review of development‑impact fees beyond the current public‑safety (police and fire) fee to include potential fees for streets, parks, recreation and libraries.
Staff outlined how development‑impact fees work: they must be tied to an adopted infrastructure improvement plan and the city may only use collected fees for projects proportionally connected to new development. A staff presenter noted Arizona law requires reviews and that development impact fees cannot be used for routine maintenance or for facilities and improvements not included in the adopted plan.
Michelle (planning staff) summarized Flagstaff’s history: a 2005 consultant study projected a combined per‑single‑family‑home public‑facility cost of about $15,200, but the council at that time chose to adopt only a public‑safety fee (about $700 for a single‑family home in the earlier methodology). Staff asked whether the council wanted the consultant to expand the scope and examine fees for transportation, parks and libraries so councilers could see itemized, per‑unit numbers and tradeoffs.
Council members generally supported pursuing the broader study, but several asked staff to show how additional development fees would interact with existing capacity and utility charges (for example water capacity fees) and requested explicit options that protect housing affordability. The mayor specifically asked staff to return with strategies for addressing affordability if the council chose to expand fee authority.
Staff said a full study typically takes six to 12 months to complete (consultant‑driven), and that it would return with a detailed infrastructure improvement plan, growth assumptions, proposed fee schedules and legal compliance checks. The council did not adopt new fees at the retreat; staff sought direction to proceed with the study and to include affordability and water‑capacity interactions in the scope.
