Wakulla County consultants recommend recreation and multimodal transportation impact fees

Consultants from Kimberly Horn and Associates told the Wakulla County Commission that the firm recommends the county consider recreation and a flexible multimodal transportation (or mobility) impact fee to help fund growth-related infrastructure.

The presentation, made during the commission’s regular meeting, explained that impact fees are one-time charges on new development to pay for public infrastructure needs tied to growth and that they are governed by the Florida Impact Fee Act. Lindsay Slaughterback, a consultant with Kimberly Horn and Associates, said, “impact fees are a one-time fee that new development pays for public infrastructure that’s necessitated by growth.” Hadley Peterson, a colleague on the project team, described the study’s approach: comparative county reviews, growth analysis, and a review of the county’s capital program and level-of-service standards.

The consultants summarized Wakulla County’s background and constraints: impact fees for the county were adopted in 2009 and repealed in 2011; the county has substantial public-lands acreage and a mix of funding sources for capital projects. The study relies on growth projections and parcel-level characteristics; the consultants estimated the county could see several thousand additional dwelling units over the planning horizon (the consultants cited roughly 3,500 potential dwelling units tied to their population projections) but noted that raw parcel capacity does not account for development constraints such as setbacks, frontage, wetlands, and sewer availability.

Based on that analysis, the firm recommended two fee categories for the commission to consider first: recreation and a multimodal transportation or mobility fee. The recreation fee recommendation is tied to the county’s comprehensive-plan level-of-service standards and would fund amenities such as boat ramps, pools, athletic fields and courts. The transportation recommendation is for a flexible, plan-based fee that can fund roads, sidewalks, trails and bike lanes rather than a roadway-only fee, giving the county discretion to support multimodal projects.

The consultants did not recommend impact fees for wastewater, certain public-safety items, correctional facilities or the library at this time. For wastewater, the consultants reported the treatment plant is operating within current capacity and that much of recent wastewater capital spending has been grant-funded. For public safety, they said existing service levels are currently supported through the county’s funding mechanisms, including municipal service benefit units, and that many projected law-enforcement needs fall under operations or maintenance categories that impact fees cannot fund. The consultants noted the school district may eventually pursue its own capacity analyses; at present they did not recommend a school facilities fee.

After the presentation, a commissioner moved to proceed with further discussion; the motion was seconded and the commission moved into a discussion of next steps. The meeting transcript does not record a final vote or formal adoption of any fee schedule.

Commissioners and staff asked for further detail and follow-up studies, including a plan-based methodology for recreation and a data-driven approach to a mobility fee. The consultants offered to work with county staff on task 2 (the fee calculations and an implementation methodology) if the board directs staff to proceed.

The item will return for future action if the commission directs staff to move into the calculation and ordinance drafting phase.