County supervisors reject impact fees…for now

County supervisors reject impact fees…for now

Lisa Billings/Chesterfield Observer Roadwork on Hull Street Road causes traffic to back up near Woodlake. The county continues to struggle to find funding to make road improvements since less money is now available at the state level.

The Chesterfield Board of Supervisors took the possibility of enacting impact fees off the table last week, but there is some sympathy expressed for reviving the issue later. A proposal by county staff recommended implementing a $5,820 fee on about 9,000 residential lots countywide when a building permit is applied for. Impact fees would have applied only to lots that were rezoned prior to 1992 and did not pay a proffer. Residential lots already subdivided, those part of a CDA (Community Development Authority), workforce housing selling for less than $200,000, and properties subdivided into five or less family lots would have been exempted.

The board vote was unanimous, though some supervisors outlined conditions under which they might favor impact fees. If adopted, impact fees would have raised an estimated $50 million for road improvements over at least 10 years.

"This would be an opportunity to get some road money," said Matoaca Supervisor Marleen Durfee. "I favor impact fees…we cannot put this to rest forever."

Midlothian Supervisor Dan Gecker was bothered that "there was no plan" on how to spend the revenue generated. Gecker also favored imposing impact fees on commercial property that was rezoned prior to proffers.

"We should not move on impact fees," recommended Chairman Art Warren. "We should eliminate this from our consideration and take no action."

Warren surveyed the Virginia Association of Counties, which he serves on, and found few counties use impact fees. He expects the General Assembly to reconsider authorization for impact fees perhaps as early as next year.

The Chesterfield County Impact Fee Advisory Committee, set up by the previous board of supervisors, recommended against impact fees late last year on a 4-2 vote.

eld Planning Commission also unanimously recommended against enacting impact fees. The General Assembly approved legislation almost two years ago that allows counties to charge impact fees after study by a committee, a recommendation by the commission and final approval by the board of supervisors.

A Transportation Summit in November 2006 recommended impact fees as one way to fund part of the county's $1.2 billion estimated shortfall needed for road improvements. Since then, little new money has been earmarked for roads.