Let's say you, "bill" are develepor "B" in the following oversimplified scenario.
owner/developer A (contiguous to you) owns many acres on a two-lane road, and seeks to build a number of homes.
it is determined by the governing municipality that the shoulders must be widened, sidewalks added, additonal overhead lighting and perhaps a signalized intersection, and a central turn lane all must be added.
under the so-called "fair-share" method of assessisng impact fees,
YOU developer Bill would benefit from immediately adjacent roadway improvements.
Let's say your line of work is farming.
Developer C also contiguous to you decides they would like to sell a large portion of their land as well to a builder who wants to construct a small senior citizen condo community.
more impact fees.
later on, after the once two-lane road has become a bustling thoroughfare, you decide to retain your littoral or riparian rights, yet you now also have caught the bug to add housing/retail/etc.,
the road now has sidewalks, a central turn lane, improved drainage, lighting, signalized intersections,
hmmmm, you pay no impact fee.
I will guess you would say so.
Well it isn't
In a time when very services we rely on such as rescue, fire, police are being strained and stretched beyond capacity and we cannot afford to fund the sprawl OR retirement accounts for these folks,
Why NOT encourage re-using EXISTING structures, and PROMOTE sustainability as a model for ALL future "growth"?