Urban planning community

+ Reply to thread
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Greenhouse gas impact fees

  1. #1
    Member P645N's avatar
    Registered
    May 2008
    Location
    Denver, Colorado
    Posts
    6

    Greenhouse gas impact fees

    Hey All,

    I'm working on a research project that is examining how impact fees can be used to address a project's associated greenhouse gas emissions (primarily related to VMT). There seems to be little research out there as this point, so I thought I would throw it out there and see if any of you have run across any proposals to this end, or possibly even municipalities that have implemented such fees.

    I may need to broaden it a bit and take a look at impact fees related to air quality, so links or info about that would be appreciated as well.

    Thanks much,

    Patrick

  2. #2
    Cyburbian Raf's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2007
    Location
    America's Happiest City
    Posts
    4,957
    Doesn't your local AQMD asses fees based on AQ impacts already?
    Men do dumb $hit... it is what they do to correct the problem that counts.

  3. #3
    Cyburbian Cardinal's avatar
    Registered
    Aug 2001
    Location
    The Cheese State
    Posts
    9,938
    Impact fees for greensouse gas emissions? That's a stretch. How can that be honestly evaluated and imposed given that emissions are highly dependent on individuals as well as technology and uses? That aside, you will find that all state enabling legislations will define those uses for which impact fees can be charged. Most are very specific in listing things like utilities, streets, parks, etc., and may not even leave open any option to levy a fee for greenhouse gas emissions.
    Anyone want to adopt a dog?

  4. #4
    Dan Staley's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Front Range, CO
    Posts
    294
    Quote Originally posted by P645N View post
    Hey All,

    I'm working on a research project that is examining how impact fees can be used to address a project's associated greenhouse gas emissions (primarily related to VMT). There seems to be little research out there as this point, so I thought I would throw it out there and see if any of you have run across any proposals to this end, or possibly even municipalities that have implemented such fees.

    I may need to broaden it a bit and take a look at impact fees related to air quality, so links or info about that would be appreciated as well.

    Thanks much,

    Patrick
    Good luck on that. I hope CA figures it out for the rest of us, because Colo sure needs it.

    I saw something on e2 the other night (rerun) that looked at Melbourne, AUS plans for GHG targets, but they were having issues on transport from outside the jurisdiction.

  5. #5
    Cyburbian Richi's avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Tallahassee, FL
    Posts
    409

    Florida Working on Mobility Fee based on VMT

    There are impact fees and "concurrency mitigation" charges in Florida. In one of the classis "seemed like a good idea at the time" moments, Florida implemented a concurrency scheme that said that local governments had to establish Levels of Service for water, wastewater, stormwater, parks, and roads. When all the capacity was used up no new development untill the supply could be provided concurrent to the demand.

    Urban cores quickly ran out of capacity on streets. Complex new things were dreamed up to allow growth if transit , etc, was established, but transportation concurrency still is a big sprawl inducer. Now the Florida DOT and Department of Community(State Land Planning Agency) are working out a Mobility fee that will acess new development a fee based on VMT that will be produced by the new development rather than either stop the project or pay for the mitigation which is typically too costly to allow the project to proceed.

  6. #6
    Member
    Registered
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    5

    Impact fees for GHG

    Imapact fees for GHG emissions.....isn't that essentially the same or equivelent concept as a toll?! Call it an impact fee/measurement fee/VMT fee, aren't you still in essence charging the system user (driver) to pay for using the system or pay for its impact which is used to maintain the system? This is called a toll people.

  7. #7
    Cyburbian Emeritus Chet's avatar
    Registered
    Aug 2001
    Location
    South Milwaukee
    Posts
    8,935
    This would simply encourage industry to move to the "Town Next Door" that has no such fees. I have a perfect case study here in Wisconsin where the EPA had a regional air quality standards.

    A City on the edge of the regulated area, located entirely within 1 County, had annexed hundreds of acres into the adjacent County where the EPA starndard was not impossed, in order to build a major industrial center. From a planning perspective, the industrial center should have been on the other side of the City, closer to regional resources. Federal regulations trumped good planning in the name of tax base and job creation.

  8. #8
    Cyburbian Plus
    Registered
    May 2008
    Location
    North America
    Posts
    1,814

    Increased Involvement of Federal Government

    NYTimes article, 3/10/09:
    E.P.A. Proposes Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
    Highlights:
    The Environmental Protection Agency today proposed a rule that would require a broad range of industries to tally and report their greenhouse gas emissions.

    The move was hailed by environmentalists as an important precursor to regulating greenhouse gas emissions, as the Obama administration is expected to do.

    “This is the foundation of any serious program to cap and reduce global warming pollution,” said David Doniger, the policy director for the climate center at the Natural Resources Defense Council. “You have to have source-by-source data on how much of global warming pollution is emitted and from where.”

    The rule, if enacted, would require some 13,000 facilities across the United States to report their emissions, and would cover manufacturers of chemicals, oil, cement, iron and steel, and automobiles, among other industries.

    According to the E.P.A., the proposed rule — which is promulgated under the Clean Air Act — would cover 85 percent to 90 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. The reporting requirements would not only include carbon dioxide, the most common greenhouse gas, but also other sources like methane, hydrofluorocarbons and nitrous oxide.

    . . .

    UPDATE: Auto manufacturers will be required to report the grams per mile of the vehicles that they make. Charles Territo, a spokesman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, said that this was not new for the automobile industry.

    “E.P.A. already knows the carbon dioxide emissions from automobiles because E.P.A. measures grams per mile of CO2 from automobiles,” he said.


    Power plants would also be required to report, although Mr. Doniger said that the United States currently has good data on carbon dioxide emissions from this sector due to the requirements related to the acid rain program instituted in the 1990s.

    If the rule is enacted on schedule, the E.P.A. says that the first reporting would come in 2011, after monitoring of 2010 emissions (manufacturers of vehicles and engines would need to begin reporting for model year 2011). The E.P.A. estimates that the cost to industry would be $160 million in the first year, falling to $127 million a year subsequently.

    . . .

    ...the proposal did not come as a surprise, as it was originally expected to come out last September. Congress had required the E.P.A. to move on the reporting issue in 2007 legislation.

    What the Obama administration and Lisa Jackson, the E.P.A. administrator, have done “is finish it up and move it out the door,” said Mr. Doniger...

  9. #9
    Member
    Registered
    May 2011
    Location
    Sonoma County, CA
    Posts
    1

    GHG Impact Fees

    Did you ever get any examples? I'm tasked with putting together an optional GHG impact feefor developers who don't want to mitigate to zero net on-site, using costs and reductions on public projects (bike paths, solar facilities etc). Is anyone else attempting this??

    Quote Originally posted by P645N View post
    Hey All,

    I'm working on a research project that is examining how impact fees can be used to address a project's associated greenhouse gas emissions (primarily related to VMT). There seems to be little research out there as this point, so I thought I would throw it out there and see if any of you have run across any proposals to this end, or possibly even municipalities that have implemented such fees.

    I may need to broaden it a bit and take a look at impact fees related to air quality, so links or info about that would be appreciated as well.

    Thanks much,

    Patrick

  10. #10
    Cyburbian ColoGI's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Colo Front Range
    Posts
    2,423
    Quote Originally posted by riley4183 View post
    Did you ever get any examples? I'm tasked with putting together an optional GHG impact feefor developers who don't want to mitigate to zero net on-site, using costs and reductions on public projects (bike paths, solar facilities etc). Is anyone else attempting this??
    SB375 is driving the boat. If there's anything, it would be in the CP&DR.

+ Reply to thread

More at Cyburbia

  1. Replies: 2
    Last post: 20 Jun 2007, 1:45 PM
  2. Impact fees
    Make No Small Plans
    Replies: 4
    Last post: 13 Jan 2006, 9:08 AM
  3. Law enforcement impact fees
    Make No Small Plans
    Replies: 7
    Last post: 28 Aug 2004, 6:29 PM
  4. Impact fees
    Land Use and Zoning
    Replies: 1
    Last post: 06 Jun 2000, 2:31 PM
  5. Development impact fees
    Make No Small Plans
    Replies: 1
    Last post: 03 Nov 1997, 2:45 PM