Date: Fri 07-Feb-1997

Publication: Bee

Author: LIBRAR

Quick Words:

Lovegrove-impact-fees

Full Text:

Lovegrove Proposal Would Allow Development Impact Fees

BY STEVE BIGHAM

Fred Lovegrove and Bob Cascella believe they may have one solution to the

development woes that have plagued Newtown and its neighbors the past few

years.

Newtown's state senator and first selectmen were in Hartford Wednesday to

speak on behalf of Mr Lovegrove's proposed bill, which would authorize

municipalities to impose impact fees on homes put up in large developments.

This, they feel, would help offset increased costs to infrastructure caused by

the increased population, and, might "somewhat" deter developers from building

in Newtown or any other town that chooses to impose the fee.

Rep Julia Wasserman has also supported the bill.

"It will bring in money to the coffers; if in turn it deters some of the

growth, then fine," Mr Cascella explained. "It's not a perfect answer, but it

does offer some assistance."

As Mr Cascella points out, people have the right to develop their property,

but in doing so, they put added strain on such things as roads, schools, and

fire and police protection.

Newtown has seen an average of 200 new homes go up each year over the past

three years.

"That's a large impact. This is an opportunity to recoup some of the costs,"

said Mr Cascella, who only wishes such a bill had been proposed five to ten

years ago.

The proposed bill is still at the sub-committee level and would have to get by

numerous checkpoints before even making it to the floor of the State Senate.

Attorney Bob Hall, who represents several area developers, said impact fees

are usually imposed in states out west, where hundreds of homes are built in

one subdivision, forcing towns to build schools and increase services simply

for those people, alone. Connecticut, he noted, does not have that type of

mass growth. He had no further comment on the proposed bill.

James Wang, executive director of the Greater Bridgeport Regional Planning

Agency, said a town must show increased services are needed in order to

justify the impact fees.

Impact fees, normally about $2 per square foot for each house, typically apply

to development in states like Arizona and California (as well as Florida and

Massachusetts) where hundreds of homes are built at the same time in huge

subdivisions and/or towns offer more public utilities. For a new 3,000-square

foot house, a town could receive as much as $6,000 to be put in its general

revenue stream.

"The consumer would have to pay a bit more, but that would be the cost of

doing business in Newtown," said Mr Cascella, who said the bill would not

mandate that towns impose the fee, it would simply enable them to do it.

The impact fee would not affect the obligations of developers to meet all

applicable town land use regulations.

If passed, Mr Cascella said towns would be smart not to slap huge impact fees

on new businesses or massive houses that bring in large tax revenue by their

pure size alone. He said fees would not likely be levied on a family who

builds a single home outside of any subdivisions. It is simply meant to be

used on large developments where their construction will have an immediate

impact on the annual budget.