Cape Coral consultant outlines proposed mobility fee replacing road impact fee; builders warn of project impacts

Jonathan Paul, principal of New Urban Concepts and consultant to Cape Coral City, told a city workshop the mobility plan lays out a 20-year vision for how people will move around the city and provides the basis for a new mobility fee to replace the city’s existing road impact fee. “A mobility fee is intended to replace the city's existing road impact fees. It is a one-time fee paid by new development only,” Paul said.

Paul said the mobility plan groups projects into four components — a road and intersection plan, a multimodal plan, a transit circulation plan and implementation programs — and recommends four assessment areas within the city so fees vary by location and by expected projects. He described the fee methodology change for residential development from a per-dwelling-unit basis to a per‑square‑foot basis, saying that “if you build a smaller home, you pay a smaller fee. If you build a larger home, you would pay a larger fee.” Paul noted the typical Cape Coral house is roughly 2,000 square feet and gave a Central Cape example: the calculated mobility fee for a 2,000-square-foot home would be $12,600 compared with the city’s current road impact fee of $3,347.

Paul and staff emphasized that Florida law constrains how quickly a local government may raise existing fees. He summarized statutory requirements and a recent change that will take effect on Jan. 1, 2026, saying the law provides for an extraordinary‑circumstances finding that can allow an increase above 50 percent and a phased implementation; the amended statute will require unanimous elected‑official votes for extraordinary‑circumstances increases after that date.

Because some nearby jurisdictions have significantly higher calculated rates, Paul compared Cape Coral’s proposed fees to those in neighboring jurisdictions and recent county updates. He said some counties that updated fees after 2018 now show residential calculated rates approaching or exceeding $20,000 per dwelling unit and that rising construction costs justify reviewing Cape Coral’s rates. “These rates certainly are not out of the ordinary. They are reflecting the increased cost though to provide transportation infrastructure,” Paul said.

Paul outlined options for council review: accept the technical report, acknowledge the extraordinary‑circumstances study and phase increases per statute (capping near a 50 percent increase phased over four years), amend the project list to reduce fees, or adopt the fully calculated fee with a chosen phase‑in schedule. Using the Central Cape example he showed phased amounts: a two‑year phase would yield a 2026 rate of roughly $7,974 and the full $12,600 in 2027; a three‑year phase would spread the increase across 2026–2028.

Builder and stakeholder reactions at the workshop were sharply critical of a large, immediate increase. Ian Moore, who said he represents the Lee Building Industry Association and is owner of Compass Construction, warned the proposed commercial and North Cape residential increases could make projects infeasible. He said a modeled 48,000-square-foot grocery (Publix) in North Cape would face fee increases that jump from roughly $275,000 under the current schedule to about $2.2 million under the proposed schedule, which he called “a deal breaker.” Moore also said many North Cape lots already face high upfront costs for wells and septic and for utility assessments and that the city’s recent property purchase in Southgate could be rendered difficult to develop if fees are adopted at the fully calculated rates.

City staff and Paul responded that commercial rates in North Cape are being revisited in response to feedback and that phasing and discounts are options the council can adopt to reduce immediate impacts. Paul said the mobility project list will be refined and the fee schedule adjusted based on additional feedback and commercial‑use analysis. He also said the technical report and extraordinary‑circumstances study would be posted on the city’s and mobility websites for public review and that formal public hearings are required: a committee presentation (committee of the whole), a Planning and Zoning Board hearing on Aug. 6, and two public hearings before adoption likely in August–September.

No formal vote or adoption occurred at the workshop. The consultant and staff framed the workshop as part of ongoing public engagement and analysis, not a final decision: options remain to lower fees by removing or reprioritizing projects, to phase increases over two, three or four years per statutory rules, or to accept a finding of extraordinary circumstances and adopt higher rates. The city said it will continue to accept feedback and refine the mobility plan and fee schedule before ordinance hearings.

Ending: The mobility plan and extraordinary‑circumstances study will be published online and the city will hold additional briefings and required public hearings this summer; council action on any mobility fee ordinance has not yet been scheduled as a final vote.