Impact fees only serve to worsen sprawl
Monday, December 15, 2003
Columbus city officials should use the impending discussions of whether to implement impact fees as a dialogue on regional growth issues. If the city implements growth-related impact fees, many other central Ohio communities are sure to follow suit. We need to consider the regional implication of this change in policy and how it will change central Ohio.
Impact fees will accomplish two things: They will raise money for new growth, and they will increase the cost of housing throughout central Ohio. The federal courts consistently have ruled that impact fees must be used to the benefit of those who pay the fees. Impact fees are not taxes that can be spent throughout the city that collects them. So the fees will be spent, by and large, in the newer areas of the city.
The second point is that impact fees increase the cost of housing. Headline writers always get this point wrong when they state in 36-point type, ''Builders to pay impact fees.'' Builders are providing a product for a profit. They roll all their costs into producing that product and set a price. So when the fees go up, so does the price of the new house.
So, as an example, when Columbus implements a $600-per-house fee, Dublin, Westerville and Hilliard are sure to follow with even higher impact fees. Each of those communities will then have the money to build nice roads on the outskirts of town. Commercial development will come soon after the new homes. This sounds a lot like what anti-growth advocates call sprawl.
There is a need for infrastructure capital in central Ohio. But impact fees can be a hurtful tool if they are not a part of a central Ohio growth strategy. Transportation issues, diversity issues, economic development, keeping for-sale and rental housing affordable near employment centers and numerous environmental issues are but a few of the items to be considered when changing a region?’s growth policy.
If these issues are not considered, then impact fees can simply become a way to take care of the more affluent members of society while hurting the less fortunate. I would encourage Columbus leaders to reach out to suburban communities when considering impact fees. It is the perfect time to consider not only how we fund growth but also how we grow as a region.
JOHN McGORY
Westerville
Monday, December 15, 2003
Columbus city officials should use the impending discussions of whether to implement impact fees as a dialogue on regional growth issues. If the city implements growth-related impact fees, many other central Ohio communities are sure to follow suit. We need to consider the regional implication of this change in policy and how it will change central Ohio.
Impact fees will accomplish two things: They will raise money for new growth, and they will increase the cost of housing throughout central Ohio. The federal courts consistently have ruled that impact fees must be used to the benefit of those who pay the fees. Impact fees are not taxes that can be spent throughout the city that collects them. So the fees will be spent, by and large, in the newer areas of the city.
The second point is that impact fees increase the cost of housing. Headline writers always get this point wrong when they state in 36-point type, ''Builders to pay impact fees.'' Builders are providing a product for a profit. They roll all their costs into producing that product and set a price. So when the fees go up, so does the price of the new house.
So, as an example, when Columbus implements a $600-per-house fee, Dublin, Westerville and Hilliard are sure to follow with even higher impact fees. Each of those communities will then have the money to build nice roads on the outskirts of town. Commercial development will come soon after the new homes. This sounds a lot like what anti-growth advocates call sprawl.
There is a need for infrastructure capital in central Ohio. But impact fees can be a hurtful tool if they are not a part of a central Ohio growth strategy. Transportation issues, diversity issues, economic development, keeping for-sale and rental housing affordable near employment centers and numerous environmental issues are but a few of the items to be considered when changing a region?’s growth policy.
If these issues are not considered, then impact fees can simply become a way to take care of the more affluent members of society while hurting the less fortunate. I would encourage Columbus leaders to reach out to suburban communities when considering impact fees. It is the perfect time to consider not only how we fund growth but also how we grow as a region.
JOHN McGORY
Westerville
