090825 Public Hearing & Study Session Mins AdoptedPage 1 of 3
MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 8, 2025
Briton S. Williams, Mayor
Kevin W. Toole, Councilmember – Mayor Pro Tem
Dennis C. Briatico, Councilmember
David B. Buck, Councilmember
Pat C. Carpenter, Councilmember
John M. Felak, Councilmember
Robert L. Freitas, Councilmember
ORDER OF BUSINESS
The Public Hearing was streamed for public viewing online at: “City of North Augusta – Public Information” on
www.Facebook.com and “City of North Augusta Public Information” on www.YouTube.com.
PUBLIC HEARING
Proposed Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fees
The Public Hearing for the Proposed Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fees began at
6:00pm.
Members present were Mayor Williams, Councilmembers Briatico, Buck, Carpenter, Felak, Freitas, and Toole.
Also in attendance were James S. Clifford, City Administrator; J.D. McCauley, Assistant Administrator; Kelly F.
Zier, City Attorney; Chief Junior Johnson, Director of Public Safety; Tommy Paradise, Director of Planning &
Development; Jamie Paul, City Clerk; and Ricky Jones, Manager of Information Technology.
Director of Planning & Development Paradise highlighted on the process regarding the Proposed Capital
Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fees study that started back in 2022 to current. (See Attachment
#PH Draft Study)
Public Comments:
Tiffany Heitzman, Executive Officer of the Home Builders Association Greater Aiken-Augusta Region,
commented on behalf of the Home Builders Association members and requested that Council vote no to the
impact fees. She spoke on housing affordability, economic growth, and fairness. (See Attachment #PH – 1)
Page 2 of 3
Jason Whinghter, Ivey Development, LLC; stated that the increase in home prices as noted by Ms. Heitzman is
not just profit it is due to labor costs, material costs, etc. He explained in detail the fees that a developer pays
throughout a project such as costs of engineering plans, business license for site contractor, water and sewer
tap fees, etc. He asked when do the charges stop as the City has property taxes, business license fees, one-cent
sales tax, and now requesting impact fees. He noted that their industries are about tapped out. He concluded
by asking if the impact fees pass when would the impact fees take effect.
Lauren McCarthy, Stanley Martin Homes, spoke upon the rise of interest rate of 6% whereas it would cost a
homeowner $11,000 over a 30-year mortgage. She commented that in order to sell new homes they had to
reduce their pricing for affordability which is a concern. She stated that impact fees place a burden on the
builders and home buyers which exasperates affordability. She pointed out that the costs should be spread
out amongst the community.
Tabitha Waldrop, resident, stated that she is for impact fees and knows the high cost for development. She
stated by having the impact fees, it helps balance the costs to the current citizens. She commented on the
aging infrastructure throughout the city that need updating with the coming developments in the city.
The Public Hearing concluded at 6:24pm.
STUDY SESSION
The Study Session of September 8, 2025 for the City Council of the City of North Augusta, having been duly
publicized, was called to order by Mayor Williams at 6:25pm and also streamed online for public viewing at the
City Facebook page: “City of North Augusta – Public Information” and City YouTube page: “City of North Augusta
Public Information.”
Per Section 30-4-80(e) notice of the meetings was sent out by email to the current maintained “Agenda Mailout”
list consisting of news media outlets and individuals or companies requesting notification. Notice of the
meetings was also posted on the outside doors of the Municipal Center, the main bulletin board of the Municipal
Center located on the first floor, and the City of North Augusta website.
Members present were Mayor Williams, Councilmembers Buck, Briatico, Carpenter, Felak, Freitas, and Toole.
Also in attendance were James S. Clifford, City Administrator; J.D. McCauley, Assistant Administrator; Kelly F.
Zier, City Attorney; Chief Junior Johnson, Director of Public Safety; Tommy Paradise, Director of Planning &
Development; Jamie Paul, City Clerk; and Ricky Jones, Manager of Information Technology.
ITEM 1. CITY COUNCIL MEETING:
Administrator Clifford led Council’s discussion of items for the September 15, 2025 regular meeting. (See
Attachment #1)
Planning and Development Director Paradise stated that for Item #6 - Ordinance No. 2025-13 on the impact
fees that if approved the effective date is stated as November 1, 2025.
Assistant Administrator McCauley displayed for Item #14 – Resolution No. 2025-32 on the Riverside Village
Bollards project the look of the potential bollards and area they would cover. (See Attachment #1a)
ITEM 2. DEPARTMENT DETAILS:
Administrator Clifford stated that the department details were provided for their information. (See
Attachment #2)
DR
A
F
T
i
Capital Improvement Plan and
Development Impact Fee Study
Prepared for:
North Augusta, South Carolina
January 7, 2025
Prepared by:
4701 Sangamore Road
Suite S240
Bethesda, Maryland 20816
800.424.4318
www.tischlerbise.com
DRAFT
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 1 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
i
TischlerBise
4701 Sangamore Road
Suite S240
Bethesda, Maryland 20816
800.424.4318
www.tischlerbise.com
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 2 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
ii
Development Impact Fee Study
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................... 1
SOUTH CAROLINA DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE ACT ............................................................................................ 1
CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE CALCULATION ..................................................................................... 2
GENERAL METHODOLOGIES ............................................................................................................................ 2
Cost Recovery (Past Improvements) .................................................................................................................... 3
Incremental Expansion (Concurrent Improvements) ........................................................................................... 3
Plan-Based Fee (Future Improvements) .............................................................................................................. 3
Credits .................................................................................................................................................................. 3
PROPOSED FEE METHODS AND COST COMPONENTS ........................................................................................... 4
Figure 1. Proposed Fee Methods and Cost Components .................................................................................................... 4
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE SCHEDULE ............................................................................................. 4
Figure 2. Maximum Supportable Development Impact Fees: All Categories Except Water and Wastewater ................... 5
Figure 3. Maximum Supportable Development Impact Fees: Water and Wastewater ...................................................... 5
PROJECTED DEMAND ..................................................................................................................................... 6
Figure 4. North Augusta Development Projections ............................................................................................................ 6
PARKS AND RECREATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS ................................................ 7
METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................................................ 7
SERVICE UNITS FOR PARK AND RECREATION ANALYSIS ......................................................................................... 8
Figure PR1: Residential Service Units .................................................................................................................................. 8
PARKS AND RECREATION LEVEL OF SERVICE AND COST ANALYSIS ........................................................................... 8
Park Land – Incremental Expansion ..................................................................................................................... 8
Figure PR2: Park Land Level of Service and Cost Allocation ................................................................................................ 9
Park Improvements – Incremental Expansion ................................................................................................... 10
Figure PR3: Park Improvement Level of Service and Cost Allocation ............................................................................... 10
PROJECTION OF PARKS AND RECREATION GROWTH-RELATED FACILITY NEEDS ....................................................... 11
Park Land ............................................................................................................................................................ 11
Figure PR4: Projected Demand for Park Land ................................................................................................................... 11
Park Improvements ............................................................................................................................................ 12
Figure PR5: Projected Demand for Park Improvements ................................................................................................... 12
CREDITS .................................................................................................................................................... 13
MAXIMUM SUPPORTABLE PARKS AND RECREATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE ................................................... 13
Figure PR6: Maximum Supportable Parks and Recreation Development Impact Fee ...................................................... 13
PROJECTED REVENUE FROM PARKS AND RECREATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE ................................................. 14
Figure PR7: Projected Revenue from the Parks and Recreation Development Impact Fee .............................................. 14
SANITATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS ........................................................................... 15
METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................................................................... 15
SANITATION SERVICE UNITS .......................................................................................................................... 15
Figure S1: Residential Service Units .................................................................................................................................. 16
SANITATION PROPORTIONATE SHARE ............................................................................................................. 16
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 3 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
iii
SANITATION LEVEL OF SERVICE & COST ANALYSIS ............................................................................................. 16
Figure S2: Sanitation Vehicle Level of Service and Cost Factors ....................................................................................... 16
PROJECTION OF SANITATION GROWTH-RELATED INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS ........................................................... 17
Figure S3: 10-Year Sanitation Vehicle Needs to Accommodate Growth ........................................................................... 17
MAXIMUM SUPPORTABLE SANITATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE .................................................................... 18
Figure S4: Maximum Supportable Sanitation Development Impact Fee .......................................................................... 18
REVENUE FROM SANITATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE .................................................................................. 19
Figure S5: Estimated Revenue from Sanitation Development Impact Fee ....................................................................... 19
TRANSPORTATION CIP AND DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE ................................................................... 20
METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................................................................... 20
TRANSPORTATION SERVICE UNITS .................................................................................................................. 20
Service Units ...................................................................................................................................................... 21
Residential Vehicle Trip Generation Rates ......................................................................................................... 21
Figure T1: Average Weekday Vehicle Trip Ends by Housing Type ..................................................................................... 22
Nonresidential Vehicle Trip Generation Rates ................................................................................................... 22
Figure T2: Average Weekday Vehicle Trip Ends by Land Use ............................................................................................ 22
Trip Rate Adjustments ....................................................................................................................................... 23
Figure T3: Commuter Trip Adjustment ............................................................................................................................. 23
Average Weekday Vehicle Trip Estimates .......................................................................................................... 24
Figure T4: Average Weekday Vehicle Trip Estimates ........................................................................................................ 24
Vehicle Trip Projections ..................................................................................................................................... 25
Figure T5: Average Weekday Vehicle Trip Projections ...................................................................................................... 25
TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE COMPONENTS ............................................................................ 25
Street Improvements Cost Factors .................................................................................................................... 25
Figure T6: Streets Cost Factors .......................................................................................................................................... 26
Street Sweeper Cost Factors .............................................................................................................................. 26
Figure T7: Street Sweeper Cost Factors ............................................................................................................................ 27
MAXIMUM SUPPORTABLE TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE ............................................................ 27
Figure T8: Maximum Supportable Transportation Development Impact Fee .................................................................. 28
REVENUE FROM TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE .......................................................................... 29
Figure T9: Estimated Revenue from Transportation Development Impact Fee ............................................................... 29
WATER CIP AND DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE ..................................................................................... 30
METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................................................................... 30
SERVICE UNITS FOR WATER ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................ 30
Figure W1: Water Demand Factors ................................................................................................................................... 31
Figure W2: Water Ratio of Service Units to Development Units ...................................................................................... 31
WATER SERVICE AREA ................................................................................................................................. 32
Figure W3: North Augusta Water Service Area ................................................................................................................. 32
PROJECTION OF WATER GROWTH-RELATED INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS .................................................................. 33
Water Treatment Plant Buy-In ........................................................................................................................... 33
Figure W4: Planned Water Transmission Cost .................................................................................................................. 33
CREDITS .................................................................................................................................................... 33
MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE WATER DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES ............................................................................ 34
Figure W5: Maximum Allowable Water Development Impact Fee .................................................................................. 34
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 4 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
iv
WASTEWATER CIP AND DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE .......................................................................... 35
METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................................................................... 35
SERVICE UNITS FOR WASTEWATER ANALYSIS ................................................................................................... 35
Figure WW1: Wastewater Demand Factors ...................................................................................................................... 36
Figure WW2: Wastewater Ratio of Service Units to Development Units ......................................................................... 36
WASTEWATER SERVICE AREA ........................................................................................................................ 37
Figure WW3: North Augusta Wastewater Service Area .................................................................................................... 37
PROJECTION OF WASTEWATER GROWTH-RELATED INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS ........................................................ 38
Wastewater Treatment Plant Buy-In ................................................................................................................. 38
Figure WW4: Planned Water Transmission Cost .............................................................................................................. 38
CREDITS .................................................................................................................................................... 38
MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE WATER DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES ............................................................................ 39
Figure WW5: Maximum Allowable Water Development Impact Fee ............................................................................... 39
SUMMARY OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES ...................................................................................... 40
Figure 5. Maximum Supportable Development Impact Fees: All Categories Except Water and Wastewater ................. 40
Figure 6. Maximum Supportable Development Impact Fees: Water and Wastewater .................................................... 40
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM .................................................................................................... 1
Figure CIP1: Parks & Recreation Capital Improvement Plan ............................................................................................... 1
Figure CIP2: Sanitation Capital Improvement Plan ............................................................................................................. 2
Figure CIP3: Sanitation Capital Improvement Plan ............................................................................................................. 2
IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION .......................................................................................... 3
CREDITS AND REIMBURSEMENTS ..................................................................................................................... 3
SERVICE AREA .............................................................................................................................................. 3
APPENDIX A: HOUSING AFFORDABILITY ANALYSIS ............................................................................... 4
Maximum Supportable Development Impact Fee ............................................................................................... 4
Figure A1. Maximum Supportable Development Impact Fee ............................................................................................. 5
Impact on Monthly Mortgage .............................................................................................................................. 5
Figure A2. Monthly Payment Sensitivity Analysis ............................................................................................................... 5
APPENDIX B: LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS ................................................................................................ 6
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ........................................................................................................................... 7
Housing Unit Size ................................................................................................................................................. 7
Figure B1: Persons per Housing Unit ................................................................................................................................... 7
Residential Estimates ........................................................................................................................................... 8
Figure B2: Residential Estimates ......................................................................................................................................... 8
Residential Projections ......................................................................................................................................... 8
Figure B3: Residential Projections ....................................................................................................................................... 8
NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT .................................................................................................................... 9
Nonresidential Demand Units .............................................................................................................................. 9
Figure B4: Nonresidential Demand Units ............................................................................................................................ 9
Nonresidential Estimates ................................................................................................................................... 10
Figure B5: Nonresidential Estimates ................................................................................................................................. 10
Nonresidential Projections ................................................................................................................................. 11
Figure B6: Nonresidential Projections ............................................................................................................................... 11
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 5 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
v
DEVELOPMENT PROJECTIONS ........................................................................................................................ 12
Figure B10: Development Projections .............................................................................................................................. 12
APPENDIX C: LAND USE DEFINITIONS ................................................................................................. 13
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ......................................................................................................................... 13
NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT .................................................................................................................. 14
APPENDIX D: SOUTH CAROLINA DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE ACT ...................................................... 15
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 6 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
North Augusta, South Carolina, retained TischlerBise to prepare a Capital Improvement Plan and
Development Impact Fee study. Development impact fees are collected from new construction at the
time a building permit is issued. The fees are one-time payments for new development’s proportionate
share of the capital cost of infrastructure.
The following study addresses North Augusta’s Sanitation, Parks and Recreation, Transportation, Water,
and Wastewater facilities. Development impact fees do have limitations and should not be regarded as
the total solution for infrastructure funding. Rather, they are one component of a comprehensive funding
strategy to ensure provision of adequate public facilities. Development impact fees may only be used for
capital improvements or debt service for growth-related infrastructure. Under South Carolina
Development Impact Fee enabling legislation (Section 6-1-910), fees may not be used for operations,
maintenance, replacement of infrastructure, or to correct existing deficiencies.
South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act1
The State of South Carolina grants the power for cities and counties to collect development impact fees
on new development pursuant to the rules and regulations set forth in the South Carolina Development
Impact Fee Act (Code of Laws of South Carolina, Section 6-1-910 et seq.). The process to create a local
impact fee system begins with a resolution by the City Council directing the Planning Commission to
conduct an impact fee study and recommend a development impact fee ordinance for legislative action.
Generally, a governmental entity must have an adopted comprehensive plan to enact development
impact fees; however, certain provisions in State law allow counties, cities, and towns that have not
adopted a comprehensive plan to impose development impact fees. Those jurisdictions must prepare a
capital improvement plan as well as prepare an impact fee study that substantially complies with Section
6-1-960(B) of the Code of Laws of South Carolina.
All counties, cities, and towns are also required to prepare a report that estimates the effect of
development impact fees on the availability of affordable housing before imposing development impact
fees on residential dwelling units. Based on the findings of the study, certain developments may be
exempt from development impact fees when all or part of the project is determined to create affordable
housing, and the exempt development’s proportionate share of system improvements is funded through
a revenue source other than impact fees. A housing affordability analysis in support of the development
impact fee study is published as a separate report.
Eligible costs may include design, acquisition, engineering, and financing attributable to those
improvements recommended in the local capital improvements plan that qualify for impact fee funding.
Revenues collected by the county, city, or town may not be used for administrative or operating costs
1 See Appendix D for a copy of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act.
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 7 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
2
associated with imposing the impact fee. All revenues from development impact fees must be maintained
in an interest-bearing account prior to expenditure on recommended improvements. Monies must be
returned to the owner of record of the property for which the impact fee was collected if they are not
spent within three years from the date they are scheduled to be encumbered in the local capital
improvements plan. All refunds to private landowners must include the pro rata portion of interest earned
while on deposit in the impact fee account.
North Augusta is also responsible for preparing and publishing an annual report describing the amount of
impact fees collected, appropriated, and spent during the preceding year. These updates must occur at
least once every five years. If capital improvement program changes significantly then North Augusta
should revisit the development impact fee study in compliance with existing state law.
Conceptual Development Impact Fee Calculation
In contrast to project-level improvements, development impact fees fund growth-related infrastructure
that will benefit multiple development projects, or the entire jurisdiction (referred to as system
improvements). The first step is to determine an appropriate service demand indicator for the particular
type of infrastructure. The service indicator measures the number of service units for each unit of
development. For example, an appropriate indicator of the demand for park facilities is population
growth, and the increase in population can be estimated from the average number of residents per
housing unit. The second step in the development impact fee formula is to determine infrastructure units
per service unit, typically called level-of-service (LOS) standards. In keeping with the parks example, a
common LOS standard is number of park acres per resident. The third step in the development impact fee
formula is the cost of various system improvements. To complete the parks example, this part of the
formula would establish the cost per acre for acquiring new parkland.
General Methodologies
There are three general methods for calculating development impact fees. The choice of a particular
method depends primarily on the timing of infrastructure construction (past, concurrent, or future) and
service characteristics of the facility type being addressed. Each method has advantages and
disadvantages in a particular situation and can be used simultaneously for different cost components.
Reduced to its simplest terms, the process of calculating development impact fees involves two main
steps: (1) determining the cost of development-related system capital improvements and (2) allocating
those costs equitably to various types of development. In practice, though, the calculation of development
impact fees can become quite complicated because of the many variables involved in defining the
relationship between development and the need for facilities within the designated service area. The
following paragraphs discuss three basic methods for calculating development impact fees and how those
methods can be applied.
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 8 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
3
Cost Recovery (Past Improvements)
The rationale for recoupment, often called cost recovery, is that new development is paying for its share
of the useful life and remaining capacity of facilities already built, or land already purchased, from which
new growth will benefit. This methodology is often used for utility systems that must provide adequate
capacity before new development can take place. This methodology is based on an existing level of
service.
Incremental Expansion (Concurrent Improvements)
The incremental expansion method documents existing level-of-service (LOS) standards for each type of
public facility, using both quantitative and qualitative measures. This approach ensures that there are no
existing infrastructure deficiencies or surplus capacity in infrastructure. New development is only paying
its proportionate share for growth-related infrastructure. Revenue will be used to expand or provide
additional facilities, as needed, to accommodate new development. An incremental expansion cost
method is best suited for public facilities that will be expanded in regular increment to keep pace with
development.
Plan-Based Fee (Future Improvements)
The plan-based method allocates costs for a specified set of improvements to a specified amount of
development. Improvements are typically identified in a long-range facility plan and development
potential is identified by a land use plan. There are two options for determining the cost per service unit:
(1) total cost of a public facility can be divided by total service units (average cost), or (2) the growth-share
of the public facility cost can be divided by the net increase in service units over the planning timeframe
(marginal cost). Both approaches reflect the existing level of service.
Credits
Regardless of the methodology, a consideration of “credits” is integral to the development of a legally
defensible development impact fee methodology. There are two types of “credits” with specific
characteristics, both of which should be addressed in development impact fee studies and ordinances.
• First, a revenue credit might be necessary if there is a double payment situation and other
revenues are contributing to the capital costs of infrastructure to be funded by development
impact fees. This type of credit is integrated into the development impact fee calculation, thus
reducing the fee amount.
• Second, a site-specific credit or developer reimbursement might be necessary for dedication of
land or construction of system improvements funded by development impact fees. This type of
credit is addressed in the administration and implementation of the development impact fee
program.
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 9 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
4
Proposed Fee Methods and Cost Components
Figure 1 summarizes the methods and cost allocation components used for each infrastructure
category in North Augusta’s development impact fee study.
Figure 1. Proposed Fee Methods and Cost Components
Proposed Development Impact Fee Schedule
As documented in this report, North Augusta has complied with the South Carolina Development
Impact Fee Act and applicable legal precedents. Development impact fees are proportionate and
reasonably related to capital improvement demands from new development. Specific costs have been
identified using local data and current dollars. This report documents the formulas and input variables
used to calculate the development impact fees. The development impact fee methodologies also
identify the extent to which new development is entitled to various types of credits to avoid potential
double payment of growth-related capital costs.
For residential development, proposed fees are assessed per housing unit by type of unit. The
proposed residential fee categories include single family and multifamily units. Single family units
include detached, attached (i.e., “townhouse”). Multifamily units include duplexes, condominiums,
apartments with two or more units, and mobile home units. For nonresidential development, fees are
assessed per 1,000 square feet of floor area. The proposed fee schedule for nonresidential
development is designed to provide a reasonable development impact fee determination for broad
property classes—retail, office, industrial, and institutional.
Figure 2 summarizes proposed development impact fees for new development in North Augusta. The
amounts shown are “maximum allowable” amounts based on the methodologies, levels of service,
and costs for the capital improvements identified herein. The fees represent the highest amount
feasible for each type of applicable development, which reflects the full proportional amount that
represents new growth’s fair share of the system improvement costs detailed in this report. The City
can adopt amounts that are lower than the maximum amounts shown; however, a reduction in fee
!"#$%&’$()’($*+
,%’*-.$I
0*$12)*+
3$*%
,.&’+
4*).1*$I
!")$*5*"’%6
789%"&2.":6%";<%&*=,.&’+
366.)%’2."
:%$L&,2’I?2=*@A3 :%$L+B%"=C+:%$L+
!59$.1*5*"’&@A3 :.9(6%’2."
0%"2’%’2.",2’I?2=*@A3 0%"2’%’2."+D*N2)6*&@A3 :.9(6%’2."
F$%"&9.$’%’2.",2’I?2=*@A3 0’$**’+0?**9*$&0’$**’+!59$.1*5*"’&3GDF7
G%’*$G%’*$+0*$12)*+
3$*%
F$*%’5*"’+
!"1*&’5*"’@A3 @A3 7HI
G%&’*?%’*$G%&’*?%’*$+
0*$12)*+3$*%GGF:+<(I;!"@A3 @A3 7HI
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 10 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
5
revenue will necessitate an increase in other revenues, a decrease in planned capital expenditures,
and/or a decrease in the City’s level of service.
Figure 2. Maximum Supportable Development Impact Fees: All Categories Except Water and
Wastewater
It is preferable to base Water and Wastewater Impact Fees on meter size rather than on a per unit or
square foot basis because the fee will increase or decrease according to the intensity of an individual
project. Maximum water and wastewater impact fees are listed in Figure 3.
Figure 3. Maximum Supportable Development Impact Fees: Water and Wastewater
!"#$%"F’$()*+",")-./"F’
!"#$%F’()*"%+,-.I01 ,2.302 ,-45 012345
67%8"9()*"%+,4-0 ,441 ,-04 052463
7-F8"#$%"F’$()*+",")-./"F’
:#;7<8=")%,0 ,4->,0 0961
?@**F=A")%,0 ,>.I44 ,0 012399
BCC"AF’M’B8EF=’!F=F"AF ,0 ,2.03G ,0 0524:;
:#<8"878"@#)%,0 ,-.5I1 ,0 062<3=
>""#*?"8*@F$’
>""#*."8*62444*ABC(8"*>""’
D-’()+",")-./"F’*DN."
+",")-./"F’*DN."
D8(F#.-8’(’$-F
D8(F#.-8’(’$-F
A(F$’(’$-F
A(F$’(’$-F
?(8F#
?(8F#D-’()
!"#$%!"&#$’"#$%()#"*
+,-./0&1*"2$3$4#56+7 58+9
8,++/0&1*"2$3$4#57-9 58:;
8,.+/0&1*"2$3$4#58<=.6 5=7=
;,++/0&1*"2$3$4#5;<877 5.:8
=,++>04?*$@$#56<==-58<876
=,++A)31)B4C 56<==-58<876
=,++(B%M04$56<-66 58<;-=
6,++>04?*$@$#57<--7 58<:8:
6,++A)31)B4C 57<--7 58<:8:
6,++(B%M04$5:<.=7 5;<;98
7,++>04?*$@$#58=<.6:5=<7=7
7,++A)31)B4C 58=<.6:5=<7=7
7,++(B%M04$58-<78;56<-;7
:,++A)31)B4C 5;8<7--5.<:8-
:,++(B%M04$5=-<9=7 58+<8:+
8+,++(B%M04$5.7<9+7 58.<;-8
8;,++(B%M04$5-8<:88 589<;-8
8,EF!!FEG"4B"*E)HE!"#$%E>B11*IEJ%"2#02$&EGK8<E-#LEMC0#0)4
G$#$%E>0N$E"4CE(I1$
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 11 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
6
Projected Demand
Section 6-1-960(6) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act requires:
“the total number of service units necessitated by and attributable to new development within the service area, based on the land use
assumptions and calculated in accordance with generally accepted engineering or planning criteria.”
Based on the Land Use Assumptions discussed in Appendix B, both residential and nonresidential development is expected to continue in
North Augusta over the next ten years. The following figures illustrate the projected population, housing units, jobs, and nonresidential floor
area over the next ten years.
Figure 4. North Augusta Development Projections
A note on rounding: Calculations throughout this report are based on an analysis conducted using Excel software. Most results are discussed
in the report using one, two, and three digit places, which represent rounded figures. However, the analysis itself uses figures carried to their
ultimate decimal places; therefore, the sums and products generated in the analysis may not equal the sum or product if the reader replicates
the calculation with the factors shown in the report (due to the rounding of figures shown, not in the analysis).
!"!#!"!$!"!%!"!F !"!’!"!(!")"!")*!")!!"))!")#
+,-.I0.,1 *!)#$%F ’(*"
!"#$%F’(")*+H+-+*.H/-+*.H+-+*0H/-+*0H+-+*1H/-.*1H+-.-2H/-.-2H+-.-/H/-.-/H+-.3H22*
4"$5()678)(’5
23456.I7,8369 *":)($*":%"$*":’*$**:"!$**:!)$**:##$**:%$%**:’%%*!:"F%*!:!’%*!:#(%*H/2*
;<6=3>?,8369 !:*’(!:!)$!:!’"!:)!%!:)F*!:#*F !:#%!!:$"’!:$$)!:$((!:%##933
:"’F%74"$5()678)(’5 /*H309 /*H092 /-H213 /-H-3//-H+2./-H0+*/9H//0 /9H-.9 /9H+*1 /9H003 /3H/9/*H33.
;<#%"=<>)’
@4A<-=13,6 F*(F)#F#’F%)FF’F(!’"F ’!*’)%’$*’%$/9+
BC88.1M3,6 #:)*%#:#")#:#(*#:$F(#:%%%#:F$##:’#!#:(!($:"*F $:*"$$:*()0..
E??3M.IFIE=G.1I2.1H3M.!:!!*!:!%%!:)**!:)$%!:#"*!:##F !:#(!!:$)F !:$’!!:%!F !:%F!93/
@4-=3=<=3C4,6 *:(!(*:(%’!:""F !:"#%!:"’$!:*!#!:*%#!:!")!:!#!!:!’*!:)!"-1*
:"’F%7;<#%"=<>)’1H/09 1H-./1H330 1H.99 1H1-//2H//./2H-29 /2H91//2H+../2H0+9 //H232 /H0++
?")@>5A7B%""@7C@>F7DN/H222F
@4A<-=13,6 )’")’F )($#")#**#*’#!%#)###*##(#$F ..
BC88.1M3,6 !:")*!:"F)!:**#!:*$$!:*(%!:!)’!:!F(!:)!"!:)%*!:#")!:###9/-
E??3M.IFIE=G.1I2.1H3M.%’!%(%F*"F!#F)’F$!F%$FF(F()’"F ’!*/-1
@4-=3=<=3C4,6 %F$%’(F")F*%F)"F##F$F FF*F’$F((’*!/-.
:"’F%7?")@>5A7B%""@7C@>F -H.+0 -H093 -H1**-H110 9H2.3 9H/3/9H**0 9H-29 9H-0/9H93.9H3-9 .++
*">0.,1I
@4M1.,-.?"@’G7C$6$5’F
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 12 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
7
PARKS AND RECREATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS
Methodology
Section 6-1-920(18h) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act states that a development impact
fee may be imposed on public facilities including:
“…parks, libraries, and recreational facilities.”
Section 6-1-960(B)(1) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act requires:
“a general description of all existing facilities and their existing deficiencies, within the service area
or areas of the governmental entity, a reasonable estimate of all costs, and a plan to develop the
funding resources, including existing sources of revenues, related to curing existing deficiencies
including, but not limited to, the upgrading, updating, improving, expanding, or replacing of these
facilities to meet existing needs and usage.”
Section 6-1-960(B)(2) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act requires:
“an analysis of total capacity, the level of current usage, and commitments for usage of capacity
of existing public facilities, which must be prepared by qualified a professional using generally
accepted principles and professional standards.”
It is assumed that only residential growth creates additional demand on Parks and Recreation facilities.
Furthermore, the level of service for all infrastructure components is calculated at a Citywide basis.
Residential development impact fees are calculated on a per capita basis, then converted to an
appropriate amount for each type of housing unit based on persons per housing unit factors.
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 13 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
8
Service Units for Park and Recreation Analysis
Section 6-1-960(B)(4) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act requires:
“a definitive table establishing the specific service unit for each category of system improvements
and an equivalency or conversion table establishing the ratio of a service unit to various types of
land uses, including residential, commercial, agricultural, and industrial, as appropriate.”
The “service unit” used for residential development is persons per housing unit (PPHU). This is a measure
of, on average, the number of persons residing in each housing unit. As shown in Figure PR1, there are
2.12 persons per single family unit and 1.20 persons per multifamily unit. Factors have been calculate
based on data provided by the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2022 ACS 5-year estimates (further discussed in
Appendix B).
Figure PR1: Residential Service Units
Parks and Recreation Level of Service and Cost Analysis
Park Land – Incremental Expansion
As shown in Figure PR2, the City of North Augusta has 166.4 acres of park land. The City plans to maintain
current levels of service by incrementally expanding park land to serve new development. When the
existing inventory of park land is compared to the existing residential population, the City’s existing level
of service is 0.0062 acres per person (166.4 acres X 100 percent residential share / 26,636 persons).
After surveying land listed on Zillow that is currently for sale in North Augusta, this analysis uses a land
acquisition cost of $25,000 per acre. For park land, the cost is $156.18 per person (0.0062 acres per person
X $25,000 per acre).
!"#$%F’()*"%+H-.H
/0%1"2()*"%+.-H3
.-’!FF’4)#5’67F’8770*91":#7
;F<F%:9*F#1’=+9F LF?7:#7’9F?’
@:07"#$’6#"1.
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 14 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
9
Figure PR2: Park Land Level of Service and Cost Allocation
!"#$%F’(F)*+$%"#
HF-"%-F"./01%2 334566
78*(F*9/01%2 65J;
<%"F9=()*/01%2 35L;
?18@"/A@"*BF"C@/01%2 345JJ
M=1%)*/N)*"#/+F’=F(="1("%35G;
M8FF"%BF"C@/01%2 J563
H1@"/I1F’()*/J"("%1*#/01%2 353;
<)C5/O"%)L/I1FF)*@/01%2 45M;
I1FF)*@#/N"%%L/M)$$"%/<)F’C"O 3;563
OF)*#/?"F)%F1C/NF"C@ J56L
H1C*8(/O1*"/01%2 35MM
P)(1C 3;;5Q6
<)#(/’"%/+$%"R4ST666
AOF#(F*9/+$%"#3;;5Q6
464Q/0)’8C1(F)*4;T;M;
+$%"#/’"%/0"%#)*6566;4
<)#(/’"%/0"%#)*R3S;53J
<)#(/N1$()%#
O"-"CU)BUM"%-F$"/VOPMX/M(1*@1%@#
M)8%$"Y/R)%(=/+898#(1/01%2#/1*@/H"$%"1(F)*/?1#("%/0C1*/
[’@1("T/PF#$=C"%7F#"/A#(FF1("#
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 15 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
10
Park Improvements – Incremental Expansion
As indicated in Figure PR3, North Augusta currently provides 65 park improvements within its park system
with an estimated value of $16,028,786, which results in an average cost per improvement of $246,597
($16,028,786 / 65 improvements). As is the case with park land, the City plans to construct additional park
improvements to serve future development.
When the City’s inventory of 65 park improvements is compared to current population, the City’s existing
level of service is 0.0024 improvements per person (65 improvements X 100 percent residential share /
26,636 persons). Using the average cost per improvement of $246,597, the cost per demand unit is
$601.78 per person (0.0024 improvements per person X $246,597 per improvement).
Figure PR3: Park Improvement Level of Service and Cost Allocation
!"#$%FG(F)*+*F(#+*F(,-)#(.)(/0,-)#(
10/23%)4*5 67 899:;<<<8=;<97;<<<
>/#?"(@/00,-)4%(9 86A=;B7:8C7=;=AA
>/#"@/00MN)F(@/00,GF"05 6<89::;A:B 89;::A;:B9
H40(FG4%G)#",GF"05 A 8=9B;6AC 89;<:A;77:
!)3,1/%?6 87AC;<<<87AC;<<<
."**F#,-)4%(66 8669;<<<86;7=9;<<<
N)$$"%,GF"05 A 8B<;<<<8C:<;<<<
G))(@/00,GF"05 6 8C7C;<<<8C7C;<<<
NG0/#I,1/5 7 8:==;A<<86;7BJ;=<<
G%F#@"",K)0F,-)4%#"6 87C;<<<87C;<<<
NI/5",N(%4$(4%"6 87<;<<<87<;<<<
1F$*F$,NI"0("%C 8:B;<<<89=<;<<<
L"#(%))M 9 86C<;<<<8=C<;<<<
N)00"2@/00,-)4%(6 86<;<<<86<;<<<
.)(/0 :C 87=:;CJA 86:;<7B;AB:
N)4%$"O,P)%(I,Q434#(/,1/%?#,/*5,L"$%"/(F)*,H/#("%,10/*,+G5/(";,.F#$I0"%>F#",R#(FM/("#
!"#$%F#’()*+’,-.+/0123456
78*.+*)F’()*+.24
0901’:-;<=%+*-)0232L2
()*+.’;#$’:#$.-)9?9901
,-.+’;#$’:#$.-)/29@?6A
B#"#=C-DCE#$"*F#’GBHEI’E+%)J%$J.
,-.+’O%F+-$.
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 16 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
11
Projection of Parks and Recreation Growth-Related Facility Needs
Section 6-1-960(B)(5) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act requires:
“a description of all system improvements and their costs necessitated by and attributable to new
development in the service area, based on the approved land use assumptions, to provide a level
of service not to exceed the level of service currently existing in the community or service area,
unless a different or higher level of service is required by law, court order, or safety consideration.”
Section 6-1-960(B)(7) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act requires:
“the projected demand for system improvements required by new service units projected over a
reasonable period of time not to exceed twenty years.”
Park Land
Figure PR4 projects the growth-related demand for park land over the next 10 years. Based on a projected
population increase of 5,002 persons, future residential development demands 31.25 acres of park land
(5,002 additional persons X 0.0062 acres per person) at a cost of $781,143 (31.25 acres X $25,000 per
acre).
Figure PR4: Projected Demand for Park Land
!"#$%&G(%)*+,-*G."IG01I"
232245 01I"-."IG6"I-,%
232222 01I"-."IG7,8
9"-)&"%*)$J ;,%I"-)&"%*)$J <,*$J
525=54L4?4 @ A443=2 @ A443=2
525B 5CLA?4 @ A4D3B5 @ A4D3B5
5254 5CL4?4 @ AC534B @ AC534B
525C 5NLA?4 @ ACB3CC @ ACB3CC
525N 5NL4?4 @ ACN3D2 @ ACN3D2
525D 5DLA?C @ AN5325 @ AN5325
52?2 5DL4?C @ ANB3AB @ ANB3AB
52?A ?2LA?C @ ANN35C @ ANN35C
52?5 ?2L4?C @ ADA3=2 @ ADA3=2
52???ALA?C @ AD=3B5 @ AD=3B5
52?=?AL4?C @ ADC34B @ ADC34B
A2@FIGG%1I"$-"BL225 @ ?A35B @ ?A35B
HCNALA=?G H2G HCNALA=?GII,J*K@9"J$*"&GLM."%&)*NI"-
!"#$%&GO,IG6$IPGQ$%&
F"$I G6,.NJ$*),%7,8-01I"-
6$IPGQ$%&H5BL222
<R."G,OGG%OI$-*IN1*NI"Q"S"JG,OGT"IS)1"
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 17 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
12
Park Improvements
Figure PR5 projects the growth-related demand for park improvements over the next 10 years. Based on
a projected population increase of 5,002 persons, future residential development demands approximately
12.2 park improvements (5,002 additional persons X 0.0024 improvements per person) at a cost of
$3,009,803 (12.2 park improvements X $246,597 per improvement).
Figure PR5: Projected Demand for Park Improvements
!"#$%&G(%)*+,-*G."IG(%)*
010023 (%)*-."IG4"I-,%
010000 (%)*-."IG5,6
7"-)&"%*)$8 9,%I"-)&"%*)$8 J,*$8
2023 2;<;=;L ;?10 L ;?10
202?2@<A=;L ;;12 L ;;12
202;2@<;=;L ;@13 L ;@13
202@ 2B<A=;L ;B1@ L ;B1@
202B 2B<;=;L ;C1C L ;C1C
202C 2C<A=@ L @A1A L @A1A
20=0 2C<;=@ L @21=L @21=
20=A =0<A=@ L @=1?L @=1?
20=2 =0<;=@ L @31B L @31B
20===A<A=@ L @;10 L @;10
20=3 =A<;=@ L @@12 L @@12
A0LDIGN%FI"$-"?<002 L A212 L A212
G=<00C<B0=G G0G G=<00C<B0=GHI,I*JL7"8$*"&GKL."%&)*MI"-
5,6-(%)*-
!"#$%&GN,IG4$IOGP#"%)*)"-
D"$I 4,.M8$*),%
4$IOGP#"%)*)"-G23;<?C@
JQ."G,NGN%NI$-*IMF*MI"R"S"8G,NGT"IS)F"
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 18 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
13
Credits
As the City has no outstanding debt on its Parks and Recreation facilities, a credit for future principal
payments is not included. If elected officials make a legislative policy decision to fully fund growth-related
costs from impact fees, there will be no potential double-payment from other revenue sources.
Maximum Supportable Parks and Recreation Development Impact Fee
The following figure lists the maximum supportable Parks and Recreation development impact fee for the
City of North Augusta. Development impact fees for Parks and Recreation are only assessed on residential
development and based on household size (i.e., persons per housing unit). Differentiating the fee by
housing type allows the results to be more exact about the level of demand (persons per housing unit) a
residential development will place on the current infrastructure based on level of service standards. For
residential development, the total cost per person is multiplied by the housing unit size to calculate the
proposed fee. For example, there is a total cost per person of $757.96. There is an average of 2.12 persons
per single family housing unit, resulting in a fee of $1,607 per unit ($757.96 cost per person x 2.12 persons
per unit = $1,607 per unit).
The fees represent the highest amount supportable for each type of development, which represents new
growth’s fair share of the cost for capital facilities. The City may adopt fees that are less than the amounts
shown. However, a reduction in development impact fee revenue will necessitate an increase in other
revenues, a decrease in planned capital expenditures, and/or a decrease in levels of service.
Figure PR6: Maximum Supportable Parks and Recreation Development Impact Fee
!""#$%F’%("()$%*)#’"+#H"+*%(
H-+.#/-(0 1234526
H-+.#7F"(8)8"*14925:6
;%)-<1:3:5=4
L8(?<"#!-F8<@ A52A 12B49:
CM<)8E!-F8<@ 25A9 1=29
25#L""#/-(0#F*"#7**MF’)8%(*
G"H"<%’F"()#;@’"H"+*%(*#’"+#
I%M*8(?#F(8)2
H+%’%*"0
!""*
J"*80"()8-<#!""*#’"+#F(8)
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 19 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
14
Projected Revenue from Parks and Recreation Development Impact Fee
Revenue from the Parks and Recreation development impact fee is estimated in Figure PR7 by applying
the maximum supportable fees to the projected growth. As a result, the development impact fee revenue
over the next ten years is projected at $3.79 million, which is enough revenue to cover the projected $3.79
million of estimated growth-related costs.
Figure PR7: Projected Revenue from the Parks and Recreation Development Impact Fee
!"#$%FG(F)"*+H-.%-I0G(F)"*1#%)2
3)"4G5)I6 789:;:<=7L 789:;:<=
3)"4G?@*I-%-*.7=;LLA;9L=7L 7=;LLA;9L=
1#%)2 7=;8AL;A<B 7L 7=;8AL;A<B
(-I02*GC)@-2M EF2%-GC)@-2M
7:;BL8 7A:L
H*"GFI-%H*"GFI-%
I*)"J.0GKI-%J.0GKI-%
L).*MLM<:L;=AN M;:9A
I*)"G:MLMN :L;BLN M;M=N
I*)"GM MLMB :L;9:N M;M9L
I*)"G=MLM8 ::;LMN M;=MB
I*)"G<MLM9 ::;M=N M;=8:
I*)"GN MLMA ::;<<N M;<:8
I*)"GB ML=L ::;BNB M;<BM
I*)"G8 ML=:::;9BB M;NL9
I*)"G9 ML=M :M;L8B M;NN=
I*)"GA ML==:M;M9B M;NAA
I*)"G:L ML=<:M;<AB M;B<<
M;:LM <NN
7=;=88;:LM 7<:=;9<<
3"#O*P%*6GC**GQ*R*IF*7=;8AL;A<B
1#%)2G+HH*I6-%F"*.7=;8AL;A<B
:LGI*)"GSIP"*).*
3"#O*P%*6GQ*R*IF*
C**GT#@H#I*I%
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 20 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
15
SANITATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS
Methodology
Section 6-1-920(18c) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act states that a development impact
fee may be imposed on public facilities including:
“…solid waste and recycling collection, treatment, and disposal facilities.”
The Sanitation Development Impact Fee includes components:
• Sanitation vehicles
An incremental expansion methodology is utilized in the Sanitation Development impact Fee. Costs are
allocated to residential development using different demand indicators for each type of development.
Section 6-1-960(1) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act requires:
“a general description of all existing facilities and their existing deficiencies, within the service area
or areas of the governmental entity, a reasonable estimate of all costs, and a plan to develop the
funding resources, including existing sources of revenues, related to curing existing deficiencies
including, but not limited to, the upgrading, updating, improving, expanding, or replacing of these
facilities to meet existing needs and usage.”
Section 6-1-960(2) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act requires:
“an analysis of total capacity, the level of current usage, and commitments for usage of capacity
of existing public facilities, which must be prepared by a qualified professional using generally
accepted principles and professional standards.”
Residential development impact fees are calculated on a per capita basis, then converted to an
appropriate amount for each type of housing unit based on persons per housing unit factors.
Sanitation Service Units
Section 6-1-960(4) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act requires:
“a definitive table establishing the specific service unit for each category of system improvements
and an equivalency or conversion table establishing the ratio of a service unit to various types of
land uses, including residential, commercial, agricultural, and industrial, as appropriate.”
The “service unit” used for residential development is persons per housing unit (PPHU). This is a measure
of, on average, the number of persons residing in each housing unit. As shown in Figure S1, there are 2.12
persons per single family detached unit, and 1.20 persons per multifamily unit.
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 21 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
16
Figure S1: Residential Service Units
Sanitation Proportionate Share
North Augusta’s sanitation vehicles only service residential development. Because of this, 100% of the
demand for sanitation vehicles has been allocated to residential development.
Sanitation Level of Service & Cost Analysis
The level of service is found by dividing the allocated vehicles by the 2024 population of North Augusta.
This results in a level of service of 0.00034 vehicles per person (9 vehicles / 26,636 persons).
From the Sanitation Department, the average replacement cost of a vehicle is $269,568. To find the capital
cost per person, the level of service standard is applied to the average cost per vehicle. The cost per person
is $91.08 (0.00034 vehicles per person x $269,568).
Figure S2: Sanitation Vehicle Level of Service and Cost Factors
!"#$%F’()*"%+H-.H
/0%1"2()*"%+.-H3
.-’!FF’4)#5’67F’8770*91":#7
;F<F%:9*F#1’=+9F LF?7:#7’9F?’
@:07"#$’6#"1.
!"#$%F’(F)*+*F(#+*F(,-)#(.)(/0,-)#(
1"/2,3/$445,.%4$6 7 89:;<;;;89:;<;;;
="/%,1)/L,.%4$6 9 89:?<?;;8:;@<@;;
A))5,.%4$6 9 87BB<C:D 8CB@<N79
FFL",1)/L,.%4$6 9 8CNB<B;;8N:B<@;;
="/%,1)/L,.%4$6 9 89:?<?;;8:;@<@;;
!"#$%&’()&*+),’(*-()*..(
GH"%/I",-)#(,’"%,+*F(89DB<:D@
JOF#(F*I,3"LF$0"#B
="#FL"*(F/0
="#FL"*(F/0,FL/%"7;;M
9;9?,N)’40/(F)*9D<DCD
3"LF$0"#,’"%,N"%#)*;O;;;C?
/"0#123415340"6 ’&.78,
F)4%$"P,Q)%(L,G4I4#(/<,F)4(L,-/%)0F*/
1"H"0R)2RF"%HF$",S1TFU,F(/*L/%L#
-)#(,G00)$/(F)*,V/$()%#
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 22 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
17
Projection of Sanitation Growth-Related Infrastructure Needs
Section 6-1-960(5) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act requires:
“a description of all system improvements and their costs necessitated by and attributable to new
development in the service area, based on the approved land use assumptions, to provide a level
of service not to exceed the level of service currently existing in the community or service area,
unless a different or higher level of service is required by law, court order, or safety consideration.”
Section 6-1-960(7) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act requires:
“the projected demand for system improvements required by new service units projected over a
reasonable period of time not to exceed twenty years.”
To estimate the 10-year growth needs for Sanitation vehicles, the current level of service (0.00034 units
per person) is applied to the residential growth projected for North Augusta. The City is projected to
increase by 5,002 residents over the next ten years (see Appendix B). Shown in Figure S3, there will be a
need for 1.7 new vehicles to accommodate future demands. By applying the average cost of a vehicle, the
total expected cost is $455,563 (1.7 vehicles x $269,568 per vehicle).
Figure S3: 10-Year Sanitation Vehicle Needs to Accommodate Growth
!"#$%&G(%)*+,-*G."IG(%)*
0102 034353 671
0108 094:53 670
0103 094353 675
0109 0;4:53 678
010;0;4353 679
0106 064:59 67;
0151 064359 :171
015:514:59 :170
0150 514359 :172
0155 5:4:59 :178
0152 5:4359 :179
!"#$%&’()%*+,*-.""I !01
<2884835G=I,L*?@A"B$*"&GCD."%&)*EI"-
!"#$%&GF,IGG$%)*$*),%GH"?)IB"-
JK."G,FGL%FI$-*IEI*EI"M"N"BG,FGG"IN)I"
G$%)*$*),%GH"?)IB"-1711152 (%)*-."IGO"I-,%<036483;
P"$I O,.EB$*),%(%)*-
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 23 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
18
Maximum Supportable Sanitation Development Impact Fee
Figure S4 shows the maximum supportable Sanitation Development Impact Fee. Development impact fees
for Sanitation are based on household sizes for residential development. Differentiating the fee by
housing type allows the results to be more exact about the level of demand (persons per housing unit) a
residential development will place on the current infrastructure based on level of service standards. For
residential development, the total cost per person is multiplied by the household size to calculate the
proposed fee.
The fees represent the highest amount supportable for each type of development, which represents new
growth’s fair share of the cost for capital facilities. The City may adopt fees that are less than the amounts
shown. However, a reduction in development impact fee revenue will necessitate an increase in other
revenues, a decrease in planned capital expenditures, and/or a decrease in levels of service.
Figure S4: Maximum Supportable Sanitation Development Impact Fee
!""#$%F’%("()$%*)#’"+#H"+*%(
!"#$%"%$F#’()*$+,)-./0123
-%)./012345
6"*78"()7./#9":"/%’F"()
!$#4,)’5"6$,7 8108 021;
9:,%$;5"6$,7 0182 0241
01’!))’<"#=’L-)’?--:6@%$F#-
!""*#’"+#<(7)
9":"/%’F"()#-=’"
H"+*%(*#’"+#
>%?*7(@#<(7)2
H+%’%*"8
!""*
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 24 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
19
Revenue from Sanitation Development Impact Fee
Revenue from the Sanitation development impact fee is estimated in Figure S5 by applying the maximum
supportable fees to the projected growth. As a result, the development impact fee revenue over the next
ten years is projected at $455,563, which is enough revenue to cover the projected $455,563 of estimated
growth-related costs.
Figure S5: Estimated Revenue from Sanitation Development Impact Fee
!"#$%FG(F)"*+H-.%-I0G(F)"*1#%)2
()I-%)%-#IG3*F-42*.5677879:G 5;G 5677879:G
!"#$%&’(()(*+,&-,&’(()(*+,
(-I02*G<)=-2>?@2%-A<)=-2>
5BC:5B;C
M*"G@I-%M*"G@I-%
E.0GFI-%E.0GFI-%
G).*H;H6 B;8:C7 H8BIC
J*)"GB H;H7 B;89;7 H8H:7
J*)"GH H;H9 B;8IB7 H8HI;
J*)"G:H;HK BB8;H7 H8:H9
J*)"G6 H;HI BB8H:7 H8:KB
J*)"G7 H;HC BB8667 H86BK
J*)"G9 H;:;BB8979 H869H
J*)"GK H;:B BB8I99 H87;I
J*)"GI H;:H BH8;K9 H877:
J*)"GC H;::BH8HI9 H87CC
J*)"GB;H;:6 BH86C9 H8966
H8B;H 677
&’-().+/&’0)1+2
5677879:
5;
L"#M*4%*NG<**GO*P*I@*
+H-.%-I0GQ*P*2#M=*I%G(F)"*
J*)"
<**GR#=M#I*I%
B;AJ*)"GSI4"*).*
34"567#68,96:6;<6
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 25 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
20
TRANSPORTATION CIP AND DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
Methodology
Section 6-1-920(18d) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act states that a development impact
fee may be imposed on public facilities including:
“…roads, streets, and bridges including, but not limited to, rights-of-way and traffic signals.”
To determine the North Augusta Transportation Development Impact Fee, a planned based approach is
used for street improvements, and an incremental expansion approach methodology is used for street
sweepers. The fee amounts for residential and nonresidential development are calculated by multiplying
the vehicle trip generation rates by the capital cost per vehicle trip. The methodology includes trip
adjustment for pass-by trips, average trip length, and trip length adjustment factors.
Section 6-1-960(1) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act requires:
“a general description of all existing facilities and their existing deficiencies, within the service area
or areas of the governmental entity, a reasonable estimate of all costs, and a plan to develop the
funding resources, including existing sources of revenues, related to curing existing deficiencies
including, but not limited to, the upgrading, updating, improving, expanding, or replacing of these
facilities to meet existing needs and usage.”
Section 6-1-960(2) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act requires:
“an analysis of total capacity, the level of current usage, and commitments for usage of capacity
of existing public facilities, which must be prepared by qualified a professional using generally
accepted principles and professional standards.”
Residential and nonresidential development impact fees are calculated on a per vehicle trip basis, then
converted to an appropriate amount for each type of development using average weekday vehicle trip
ends from the reference book, Trip Generation, 11th Edition, published by the Institute of Transportation
Engineers (ITE) in 2021. Vehicle trip generation rates for different development types.
Transportation Service Units
Section 6-1-960(4) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act requires:
“a definitive table establishing the specific service unit for each category of system improvements
and an equivalency or conversion table establishing the ratio of a service unit to various types of
land uses, including residential, commercial, agricultural, and industrial, as appropriate.”
The “service unit” used in the analysis of the Transportation fee for residential and nonresidential
development is average weekday vehicle trips. The analysis includes adjustments for commuting patterns
and pass-by trips. Trip generation rates are estimated using average weekday vehicle trip ends from the
reference book, Trip Generation, 11th Edition, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 26 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
21
in 2021. A vehicle trip end represents a vehicle either entering or exiting a development (as if a traffic
counter were placed across a driveway). To avoid double counting a single vehicle trip at both the origin
and destination points, the basic trip adjustment factor is 50 percent, to reflect the allocation of the trip
to either the origin or destination point. As discussed in Appendix B, the development fee methodology
includes additional adjustments to make the fees proportionate to the infrastructure demand for
particular types of development.
Service Units
The analysis uses vehicle trips as the demand units for transportation development impact fees.
Components used to calculate person trips include average weekday vehicle trip generation rates and trip
adjustment factors.
Residential Vehicle Trip Generation Rates
As an alternative to simply using the national average trip generation rate for residential development,
the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) publishes regression curve formulas that may be used to
derive custom trip generation rates, using local demographic data. Key independent variables needed for
the analysis (i.e., vehicles available, housing units, households, and persons) are available from American
Community Survey data. Shown in Figure T1, custom trip generation rates in North Augusta differ from
the national averages. For example, single-family residential development is expected to generate 11.38
average weekday vehicle trip ends per dwelling – compared to the national average of 9.43 (ITE 2021).
Multi-family residential development is expected to generate 4.05 average weekday vehicle trip ends per
dwelling, compared to the national average of 4.54 (ITE 2021).
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 27 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
22
Figure T1: Average Weekday Vehicle Trip Ends by Housing Type
Nonresidential Vehicle Trip Generation Rates
For nonresidential development, TischlerBise uses trip generation rates published in Trip Generation,
Institute of Transportation Engineers, 11th Edition (2021). The prototype for industrial/warehouse
development is Manufacturing (ITE 140) which generates 4.75 average weekday vehicle trip ends per
1,000 square feet of floor area. The prototype for office development is General Office (ITE 710), and it
generates 10.84 average weekday vehicle trip ends per 1,000 square feet of floor area. Public/Institutional
development uses Hospital (ITE 610) and generates 10.77 average weekday vehicle trip ends per 1,000
square feet of floor area. The prototype for retail/commercial development is Shopping Center (ITE 820)
which generates 37.01 average weekday vehicle trip ends per 1,000 square feet of floor area.
Figure T2: Average Weekday Vehicle Trip Ends by Land Use
!"#$%F!GG()*$+H-.HI0 1.2H3 0H4 1.150 06I3
7$#8$%F!GG()*$+4.2H3 H.209 H.-H4 5.H45 H644
:;8<=0I.-0I 9.I41 H.303 HI.312 H69I
9.903 0.451 H0.5-2
L$%?;#?@*#:%*)A$B*G=$?@CM :%*)NF$%<G$H<8*;#<=@:%*)
I;(?$B;=+?4 J#+?2 :M)$@;O@L#*8 J#+?-:%*)@J#+?J#+?@)$%@L#*81
M*#G=$FN<O*=M 0H.I94 23.132 H1.324 H-1.H22 HH0.91I 9645
P(=8*FN<O*=M 0.9H5 -.-I-0.1--H5.H4-9.31-4624
:;8<=04.II1 -2.59H 0I.-0I H3I.5IH H00.34-
H6@A$B*G=$?@<F<*=<C=$@CM@8$#(%$@O%;O@:<C=$@Q02I4-.@NO$%*G<#@R;OO(#*8M@M(%F$M.@0IH3F0I00@2FS$<%@J?8*O<8$?6
06@I;(?$B;=+?@CM@8$#(%$@<#+@(#*8?@*#@?8%(G8(%$@O%;O@:<C=$@Q02I50.@NO$%*G<#@R;OO(#*8M@M(%F$M.@0IH3F0I00@2FS$<%@J?8*O<8$?6@
56@I;(?*#G@(#*8?@O%;O@:<C=$@Q02I04.@NO$%*G<#@R;OO(#*8M@M(%F$M.@0IH3F0I00@2FS$<%@J?8*O<8$?6@
46@:;8<=@);)(=<8*;#@*#@B;(?$B;=+?@O%;O@:<C=$@Q02I55.@NO$%*G<#@R;OO(#*8M@M(%F$M.@0IH3F0I00@2FS$<%@J?8*O<8$?6
16@:%*)@T$#$%<8*;#.@U#?8*8(8$@;O@:%<#?);%8<8*;#@J#G*#$$%?.@HH8B@J+*8*;#@V0I0HP6
I;(?$B;=+?@CM@M8%(G8(%$@:M)$0
:$#(%$@CM@L#*8?
*#@M8%(G8(%$A$B*G=$?@NF<*=<C=$H M*#G=$F
N<O*=M P(=8*FN<O*=M :;8<=
-6@A$B*G=$@8%*)@$#+?@C<?$+@;#@F$B*G=$?@<F<*=<C=$@(?*#G@O;%O(=<?@O%;O@:%*)@T$#$%<8*;#@VU:J@0I0HP6@N;%@?*#G=$FO<O*=M@B;(?*#G@VU:J@0HIP.@8B$@
O*88$+@G(%F$@$X(<8*;#@*?@JYLVI690R[HVF$B*G=$?P\06-3P6@:;@<))%;]*O<8$@8B$@<F$%<G$@#(OC$%@;O@F$B*G=$?@*#@8B$@U:J@?8(+*$?.@F$B*G=$?@<F<*=<C=$@
"$%$@+*F*+$+@CM@1I@<#+@8B$@$X(<8*;#@%$?(=8@O(=8*)=*$+@CM@1I6@N;%@O(=8*FO<O*=M@B;(?*#G@VU:J@00HP.@8B$@O*88$+@G(%F$@$X(<8*;#@*?@V4611RF$B*G=$?PF
4-64-@VU:J@0I0HP6
A$B*G=$?@)$%@
II@CM@:$#(%$
I;(?*#G@L#*8?5
L#*8?@*#@M8%(G8(%$[;G<=@:%*)@
J#+?@)$%@L#*8
26@A$B*G=$@8%*)?@$#+?@C<?$+@;#@)$%?;#?@(?*#G@O;%O(=<?@O%;O@:%*)@T$#$%<8*;#@VU:J@0I0HP6@N;%@?*#G=$FO<O*=M@B;(?*#G@VU:J@0HIP.@8B$@O*88$+@G(%F$@
$X(<8*;#@*?@JYLVI639R[HV)$%?;#?P\H610P6@:;@<))%;]*O<8$@8B$@<F$%<G$@);)(=<8*;#@;O@8B$@U:J@?8(+*$?.@)$%?;#?@"$%$@+*F*+$+@CM@53@<#+@8B$@
$X(<8*;#@%$?(=8@O(=8*)=*$+@CM@536@N;%@O(=8*FO<O*=M@B;(?*#G@VU:J@00HP.@8B$@O*88$+@G(%F$@$X(<8*;#@*?@V0609R)$%?;#?PF-4643@VU:J@0IH1P6
!"#$%FG()*+,-.I)0-"123-#()4 *+,-.I)0-"123-#()4 #F3560%%4-7%1 89:G1%-;%%<
=6)%L(2<7%1-$%FG()-L(2<?7%1-#F3560%%?$%FG()-L(2<7%1-#F3560%%
!"#$%FG(%)*G+HF-!.###I01I2*"345 635!!378 567
9!#:;<=H*%>!.###I01I2*!#344 ?344 6379 ?5#
4!#@AFA+%>IB((H)AIC%M-I<HEAF !.###I01I2*!#37"?3???369 ?#4
76#0G;==HF-IHAF*A+IC%M-I<HEAF !.###I01I2*?43#!!43"6 63!6 "4!
!3II+H=I@AFA+%*H;F.IJF<*H*G*AI;(II+%F<=;+*%*H;FIOF-HFAA+<.I!!*GIOLH*H;FIC6#6!F3
@G()-L4%-A16:3
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 28 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
23
Trip Rate Adjustments
Average weekday vehicle trip ends are used as a measure of demand by land use. Vehicle trips are
estimated using average weekday vehicle trip ends published in Trip Generation, Institute of
Transportation Engineers, 11th Edition (2021). A vehicle trip end represents a vehicle entering or exiting a
development (as if a traffic counter were placed across a driveway). To calculate the impact fees, trip
generation rates are adjusted to avoid double counting each trip at both the origin and destination points.
The basic trip adjustment factor is 50 percent. As discussed further below, the impact fee methodology
includes additional adjustments to make the fees proportionate to the infrastructure demand for
particular types of development.
Commuter Trip Adjustment
Residential development has a larger trip adjustment factor of 64 percent to account for commuters
leaving North Augusta for work. According to the 2009 National Household Travel Survey (see Table 30)
weekday work trips are typically 31 percent of production trips (i.e., all out-bound trips, which are 50
percent of all trip ends). As shown in Figure T3, the U.S. Census Bureau’s OnTheMap web application
indicates that 91 percent of resident workers traveled outside of North Augusta for work in 2021. In
combination, these factors (31 percent X 50 percent X 91 percent = 14 percent) support the additional 14
percent allocation of trips to residential development.
Figure T3: Commuter Trip Adjustment
!"#$%F’()*+H-.+%I01+2"%32"%42HH)+-"*5
%%6H$728-’%9-*#’-.+*5:;:<=
%%9-*#’-.+*%L#?#.@%0.’%A2"B#.@%#.%C2"+M%F)@)*+0 N=5
%%9-*#’-.+*%42HH)+#.@%F)+*#’-%C2"+M%F)@)*+0%32"%A2"B =;5GN
H-"1-.+%42HH)+#.@%2)+%23%C2"+M%F)@)*+0 =5I
F’’#+#2.07%H"2’)1+#2.%!"#$*J 5<I
9-*#’-.+#07%!"#$%F’()*+H-.+%I01+2"O<I
5L%MLNL%4-.*)*%O)"-0);%F.!M-P0$%F$$7#10+#2.%Q?-"*#2.%OL5L5R%0.’%L6ST%F"#@#.UT-*+#.0+#2.%
6H$728H-.+%N+0+#*+#1*;%J:J5L
JL%F112"’#.@%+2%+M-%C0+#2.07%S2)*-M27’%!"0?-7%N)"?-8%QJ::=RV;%$)P7#*M-’%#.%T-1-HP-"%J:55%
Q*--%!0P7-%X:R;%M2H-UP0*-’%Y2"B%+"#$*%0"-%+8$#10778%X:L==%$-"1-.+%23%R$"2’)1+#2.[%+"#$*;%#.%
2+M-"%Y2"’*;%2)+UP2).’%+"#$*%QYM#1M%0"-%G:%$-"1-.+%23%077%+"#$%-.’*RL%F7*2;%L6T%F.!M-P0$%’0+0%
3"2H%J:J5%#.’#10+-%+M0+%=5%$-"1-.+%23%C2"+M%F)@)*+0\*%Y2"B-"*%+"0?-7%2)+*#’-%+M-%1#+8%32"%Y2"BL%
].%12HP#.0+#2.;%+M-*-%301+2"*%Q:LX:==%S%:LG:%S%:L=5%_%:L5<R%0112).+%32"%5<%$-"1-.+%23%0’’#+#2.07%
$"2’)1+#2.%+"#$*L%!M-%+2+07%0’()*+H-.+%301+2"%32"%"-*#’-.+#07%#.17)’-*%0++"01+#2.%+"#$*%QG:%
$-"1-.+%23%+"#$%-.’*R%$7)*%+M-%(2)".-8U+2UY2"B%12HH)+#.@%0’()*+H-.+%Q5<%$-"1-.+%23%
$"2’)1+#2.%+"#$*R%32"%0%+2+07%23%O<%$-"1-.+L%%
VM++$‘aa.M+*L2".7L@2?a$)P7#10+#2.*L*M+H7%b%N)HH0"8%23%!"0?-7%!"-.’*%U%!0P7-%cT0#78%!"0?-7%
N+0+#*+#1*%P8%A--B’08%?*L%A--B-.’c
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 29 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
24
Adjustment for Pass-By Trips
For retail/commercial and public/institutional development, the trip adjustment factor is less than 50
percent because these types of development attract vehicles as they pass by on arterial and collector
roads. For example, when someone stops at a convenience store on the way home from work, the
convenience store is not the primary destination. For the average shopping center, ITE data indicate 34
percent of the vehicles that enter are passing by on their way to some other primary destination. The
remaining 66 percent of attraction trips have the commercial site as their primary destination. Because
attraction trips are half of all trips, the trip adjustment factor is 66 percent multiplied by 50 percent, or
approximately 33 percent of the trip ends.
Average Weekday Vehicle Trip Estimates
Figure T4 includes 2024 base year average weekday vehicle trip (AWVT) estimates for North Augusta
based on the demand indicators for residential and nonresidential land uses discussed in the previous
sections multiplied by base year development estimates. For residential development, the table displays
AWVT factors per housing unit. For nonresidential development, the table displays AWVT factors per
1,000 square feet of floor area. Existing single-family development generates approximately 75,706 AWVT
(11.38 average weekday vehicle trip ends per housing unit X 64 percent trip adjustment factor X 10,395
single-family housing units), and existing commercial development generates approximately 24,809
AWVT (37.01 average weekday vehicle trip ends per 1,000 square feet X 33 percent trip adjustment factor
X 2,031 KSF). Existing development in North Augusta generates 113,189 AWVT.
Figure T4: Average Weekday Vehicle Trip Estimates
!"#"$%F’"()!"#*+H -#.I01234 +56F 7879 7879
+4F":(6);%2"K+H -2=>?)’"()!"#I:(6)?K"@I+56F?
A6(.$"IB3’6$4 C:7M8 MMEFG H9I M8JFOL MLJM8H
N>$)6OB3’6$4 C:778 9E8L H9I 7JMGO LJHML
*(2>?)563$PAB M98 9EML L8I FG8 O87
;%’’"5Q63$PAB G78 FME8M FFI 7J8FM 79JG8O
RSS6Q"ITIR)@"5IA"5#6Q"?PAB MM8 M8EG9 L8I HG7 FJHOG
*(?)6)>)6%(3$PAB HM8 M8EMM FFI HML 7JFOO
+%)3$MMFJMGO
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 30 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
25
Vehicle Trip Projections
Shown below in Figure T5 are the 10-year vehicle trip projections for North Augusta. Residential
development is expected to generate an additional 16,486 average weekday vehicle trips in the next 10
years, and nonresidential development is expected to generate an additional 6,462 average weekday
vehicle trips.
Figure T5: Average Weekday Vehicle Trip Projections
Transportation Development Impact Fee Components
Street Improvements Cost Factors
The first component included in the Transportation development impact fee is for streets improvements,
which utilizes a plan-based methodology. As shown in Figure T6, the City plans to construct $51,734,429
of improvements in the next 10 years. TischlerBise is allocating the cost of this planned program to total
vehicle trips in 2034 (136,138) to ensure that all development is treated equally, thereby ensuring new
development is not charged for a higher level of service than what exists today. This results in a cost per
vehicle trip of $380.02.
!"#$%F ’()%*%*+,$"-
F*F(F*F)F*F.F*FI F*F0 F*F1 F*’(234-$"#$
56378$9:";68K9=36>#%*?’1)%*?.*)%*?0%)%%?*F)%%?F’)%%?(()%F?(1.F?%*F
@A8>6+:";68K9=36>#F?%01 F?F’)F?F0*F?’F.F?’I%F?(%I F?.((())
23BA#>-6"89C5:’0*’0I ’1)(*’(%%(%0 ()I II
MN;;$-46"89C5:F?*’%F?*I’F?%%(F?%))F?%1.F?F’0 F?((((%’
FGG64$9H9F>I$-95$-J64$#9C5:.0F .1.I%*IF(I’0 I)F 0F%%’1
23#>6>A>6N3"89C5:.I).01 I*’I%.I’*I((0%F %’I
56378$+:";68K9O-6L#I)?I*.II?F’I I0?I.I 0*?F10 0%?0F1 0’?’)1 1%?*%’%)?’*I
@A8>6+:";68K9O-6L#)?.I))?I1’)?1%%.?*F1 .?%(I .?F.).?0)(%?%I1
M$#6B$3>6"89O-6L#0%?’0%0’?*F1 0(?.I0 0.?’FI 0I?1I)01?.F(1I?0.I %.?(0.
23BA#>-6"89O-6L#1*F 1F*1’0 1)I 1I)11’%?*0)%0’
MN;;$-46"89O-6L#F(?0*1 F)?’%’F)?0%I F.?’F%F.?0F.FI?’’*F1?0)*)?*(*
FGG64$9H9F>I$-95$-J64$#9O-6L#’?.10 ’?II’’?0(0 ’?1F’’?110 (?*I((?((1 I)%
23#>6>A>6N3"89O-6L#F?’11 F?((0 F?(1I F?)(.F?)1(F?.(’F?00I (0I
NN3-$#6B$3>6"89O-6L#’%?0*0 ’F?())’’?%*%’’?I(I ’(?’1’’)?*(*’0?FI%.?(.F
!"#$%&’()*+%(&!,*-.//01/23 //41525 //61663 /781865 /771093 /751990 /091/02 771353
NN->I9OA7A#>"?95NA>I9
M"-N863"
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 31 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
26
Figure T6: Streets Cost Factors
Street Sweeper Cost Factors
The second component included in the Transportation development impact fee is for additional street
sweepers. As previously stated, an incremental methodology is used to determine this component of the
transportation development impact fee. As shown in Figure T7, the fee study assesses level-of-service
standards based on 2024 vehicle trips. North Augusta currently has 2 street sweepers. This results in a
level of service of 0.00002 units per vehicle trip (2 units / 113,189 trips) in 2024. As shown in Figure T7,
the cost of a new street sweeper $268,850. For street sweepers, the cost is $4.75 per vehicle trip (0.00002
units per X $268,850 per lane unit).
!"#$%FG(F)*+,)(-.+/)#(
0#$-12-+34+5"(6""*+78+9:;+<42"=F".4+34+L+5.-*$?-%4+34@+
AF4"*+=%)B+9;C+()+M+N-*"#FG@GC:@H9I
5"%2"*+JFO"+L)($?+/).."$()%+=%)B+5"%2"*+34+()+M%"2)%N+N-O"+34 FP@Q:H@GRR
JFO"+L)($?+34+=%)B+78+9:+51#F*"##+34+SM")%2F-+0O"*1"T+()+
A-.*1(+N-*"@+AF4"*+=%)B+9+()+M+N-*"#F9P@CHH@QRR
M(?+N"2+/)**"$(F*2+()+U.4+V.-*(-(F)*+3)-4 FPRR@RRR
P-%(F*()6*+3)-4+-*4+M%"2)%N+N-O"+3)-4+,%-==F$+8F2*-.FIRR@RRR
P-%(F*()6*+34+=%)B+QX9R+()+U.4+P-%(F*()6*+34@+AF4"*+=%)B+9+
()+M+N-*"#FG@PGM@RRR
!"!#$%&’()*+(+,-
8)1%$"Y+03,8+!%-=(+9R:R+P,V@+/F(N+)=+0121#(-
,)(-.+/)#(F:Q@HCM@M9I
R+9RCM+,)(-.+,%FG#QCG@QCP
./0123452!563 %*7898,
N"O".X)=X8"%OF$"+SNU8T+8(-*4-%4#
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 32 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
27
Figure T7: Street Sweeper Cost Factors
Maximum Supportable Transportation Development Impact Fee
The cost factors for each component of North Augusta’s Transportation Development Impact Fee are
listed in the following figure. The development impact fees for transportation projects are based on
average weekday vehicle trip (AWVT) per housing unit for residential development and AWVT per 1,000
square feet for nonresidential development.
The fee components are calculated per AWVT: the maximum supportable fee is calculated by multiplying
the total net cost per AWVT by the AWVT generation factor for each land use. For example, the maximum
supportable fee for a single family housing unit is $2,802 ($384.77 per AWVT x 7.28 = $2,802).
The fees represent the highest amount allowable for residential and nonresidential development,
reflecting new growth’s share of capital facilities’ costs. The City may adopt fees that are less than the
amounts shown. However, a reduction in development impact fee revenue will necessitate an increase in
other revenues, a decrease in planned capital expenditures, and/or a decrease in levels of service.
!"#$%F’(F)*+*F(#+*F(,-)#(.)(/0,-)#(
12""’"%3 43567689 48:;7;99
!"#$%&’&()*)+,’+-.*.,,
<"F=L("?,@A"%/=",-)#(,’"%,+*F(43567689
BCF#(F*=,+*F(#3
393D,N"LF$0",.%F’#FF:7F6G
+*F(#,’"%,.%F’9H99993
/"0#12341!452 ’67.+
1)I%$"J,O)%(L,@I=I#(/7,1)I(L,-/%)0F*/
-)#(,@00)$/(F)*,L/$()%#
M"A"0N)ON1"%AF$",PMQ1R,1(/*?/%?#
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 33 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
28
Figure T8: Maximum Supportable Transportation Development Impact Fee
!""#$%F’%("()$%*)#’"+#,-.I0
1)+"")#2F’+%3"F"()*4567879
1)+"")#1:""’"+*4;8<=
I%)L?456;8<<
@"*AB"()AL?#C"3"?%’F"()
,3M#-NBLF#.I0
’"+#G(A)H
1A(M?"#!LFA?F <896 49I679
JO?)AL!LFA?F 98=M 4MM<
N%(+"*AB"()AL?#C"3"?%’F"()
,3M#-NBLF#.I0
’"+#HI777#1O#!)H
2(BO*)+AL?9856 4MH;
$%FF"+PAL?H989H 4;IQMM
RSSAP"#T#R)U"+#1"+3AP"*=8;9 49I76=
2(*)A)O)A%(L?58==4HI5Q<
H8#1""#VL(B#G*"#,**OF’)A%(*
C"3"?%’F"()#IF’"P+%’%*"B
!""*
C"3"?%’F"()#IF’"P+%’%*"B
!""*
!""*#’"+#G(A)
!""*#’"+#HI777#1OOL+"#!"")
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 34 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
29
Revenue from Transportation Development Impact Fee
The total transportation capital costs for impact fee eligible projects and estimated revenue from the
Transportation Development Impact Fee is listed below in Figure T9.
Revenue generated from development impact fees is derived by multiplying projected growth in the City
by the respective development impact fee. The maximum supportable impact fees are projected to
generate $8.8 million over the next ten years. Offsetting the anticipated growth-related roadway
improvements eligible for impact fees.
Figure T9: Estimated Revenue from Transportation Development Impact Fee
!"#$%FG(F)"*+H-.%-I0G(F)"*1#%)2
(%"**%G345"#6*4*I%.789:;K98=8 7>=9K?=9@A?7@?9:=>9>;A
(%"**%G($**5*".7?KA9K?:7K 7?KA9K?:
1#%)2 7898;A98@@ 7>=9K?=9@A?7@?98>=9>>B
(-I02*GC)4-2M EF2%-GC)4-2M 3IHF.%"-)2 I#44*"J-)2 OLL-J*GMGO%F*"3I.%-%F%-#I)2
7;98K;7AA:7A?>7>9BAA 7;9K8@ 7?9=B:
5*"GFI-%5*"GFI-%5*"G.NGL%5*"G.NGL%5*"G.NGL%5*"G.NGL%
O.0GPI-%O.0GPI-%Q(C Q(C Q(C Q(C
R).*;K;>?K9=A@ ;9?8A =8K ;9K=?B8;B:@
S*)"G?;K;@ ?K9BK@ ;9;=@ =8:;9K:=BAB B8A
S*)"G;;K;B ?K98?@ ;9;8K =A@ ;9??>:?K :K=
S*)"G=;K;:??9K;@ ;9=;B >K=;9?@@ :;>:?B
S*)"G>;K;8 ??9;=@ ;9=:?>??;9?AB :=8 :=K
S*)"G@ ;K;A ??9>>@ ;9>?:>?8 ;9;=8 :@;:>>
S*)"GB ;K=K ??9B@B ;9>B;>;B ;9;:A :B@ :@:
S*)"G:;K=???98BB ;9@K8 >=>;9=;K ::A ::?
S*)"G8 ;K=;?;9K:B ;9@@=>>?;9=B?:A=:8@
S*)"GA ;K==?;9;8B ;9@AA >>A ;9>K=8K::AA
S*)"G?K ;K=>?;9>AB ;9B>>>@:;9>>>8;?8?;
;9?K;>@@ ::>?=?=A ?=:
7@988A9@@>7>@=9:::7:K9>A=7?9A=A9=A:7;8A9K:?7?8:9@B;
7898;A98@@
7@?98>=9>>B
C**GI#45#I*I%
S*)"
1#%)2G+H5*IH-%F"*.
?KGS*)"G3IJ"*).*
T"#U*J%*HGV*6*IF*
T"#U*J%*HGC**GV*6*IF*
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 35 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
30
WATER CIP AND DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
Methodology
Section 6-1-920(18a) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act states that a development impact
fee may be imposed on public facilities including:
“…water supply production, treatment, laboratory, engineering, administration, storage, and
transmission facilities.”
Section 6-1-960(B)(1) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act requires:
“a general description of all existing facilities and their existing deficiencies, within the service area
or areas of the governmental entity, a reasonable estimate of all costs, and a plan to develop the
funding resources, including existing sources of revenues, related to curing existing deficiencies
including, but not limited to, the upgrading, updating, improving, expanding, or replacing of these
facilities to meet existing needs and usage.”
Section 6-1-960(B)(2) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act requires:
“an analysis of total capacity, the level of current usage, and commitments for usage of capacity
of existing public facilities, which must be prepared by qualified a professional using generally
accepted principles and professional standards.”
Service Units for Water Analysis
Section 6-1-960(B)(4) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act requires:
“a definitive table establishing the specific service unit for each category of system improvements
and an equivalency or conversion table establishing the ratio of a service unit to various types of
land uses, including residential, commercial, agricultural, and industrial, as appropriate.”
The “service unit” used for water development impact fee is equivalent dwelling unit (EDU). The Water
impact fees are assessed on both residential and nonresidential development, using an EDU approach. In
order to determine water system demand from an equivalent single family dwelling unit, TischlerBise
obtained water billing data for 2023. Billing data indicates the 12,250 residential customers served by the
City accounted for 841.1 million gallons in 2023, or 2.3 million gallons daily. The City’s 761 nonresidential
customers are estimated to have accounted for 311.6 million gallons, or 853,742 gallons daily. To
determine an EDU for the water system, the 12,250 residential customers are compared to the average
daily consumption (2,305,216 gallons), for an average of 188 gallons a day.
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 36 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
31
Figure W1: Water Demand Factors
As discussed above, Water impact fees are calculated by multiplying the number of gallons per single
family unit equivalent (EDU) by the capacity ratio for the corresponding size and type of meter multiplied
by the cost per EDU. The City’s demand for a single-family equivalent dwelling unit is 188 gallons per day.
Figure W2 shows the capacity ratio by meter size from the AWWA Manual of Water Supply Practices,
which is used for water meters larger than .75 inches.
Figure W2: Water Ratio of Service Units to Development Units
Annual
Consumption
Daily
Consumption Avg. Daily Usage
Residential 12,250 841,403,800 2,305,216 188
Commercial 761 311,615,900 853,742 1,122
Total 13,011 1,153,019,700 3,158,958 243
Source: City of North Augusta
Account Type
!"#$%&’()*+,-,./0"!!
0"!!%&’()*+,-,./0"1#
0"$!%&’()*+,-,./2"22
3"!!%&’()*+,-,./$"22
2"!!4&.5),6,/0!"1#
2"!!78-(89.:0!"1#
2"!!;9<=&.,00"1#
>"!!4&.5),6,/01"1#
>"!!78-(89.:01"1#
>"!!;9<=&.,30"!!
1"!!4&.5),6,/22"22
1"!!78-(89.:22"22
1"!!;9<=&.,>2"22
?"!!78-(89.:$2"22
?"!!;9<=&.,@2"22
0!"!!;9<=&.,0>!"!!
03"!!;9<=&.,0#1"1#
0"ABCCBAM*.9*)A8EAC*/,<A49(()FAG<*+/&+,’AMH0IA#/JAK:&/&8.
M,/,<A4&L,A*.:A;F(,7*(*+&/FA
M*/&80
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 37 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
32
Water Service Area
Because North Augusta provides water to areas outside of the city limits, the current water service area
shown below in Figure W3 will be used as the impact fee service area.
Figure W3: North Augusta Water Service Area
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 38 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
33
Projection of Water Growth-Related Infrastructure Needs
Section 6-1-960(B)(5) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act requires:
“a description of all system improvements and their costs necessitated by and attributable to new
development in the service area, based on the approved land use assumptions, to provide a level
of service not to exceed the level of service currently existing in the community or service area,
unless a different or higher level of service is required by law, court order, or safety consideration.”
Section 6-1-960(B)(7) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act requires:
“the projected demand for system improvements required by new service units projected over a
reasonable period of time not to exceed twenty years.”
Water Treatment Plant Buy-In
The Water impact fee contains a buy-in component for the City’s investment (original cost, no inflation
included) in the water treatment facility. As shown in Figure W4, this investment is $25,906,822. The City
has the capacity to treat 12 million gallons a day. This results in a cost per gallon of $2.16 ($25,906,822 /
12,000,000 gallons).
Figure W4: Planned Water Transmission Cost
Credits
Since the capital projects included in the Water impact fee are not being paid for by rates, there is no
double payment situation from both impact fees and rates. Therefore, a credit is not included in the
impact fee calculation.
!"#$
!"#$%FG$"F()"(*+F$,(-,$+FG$"F(.+I)0)F1 23456785933
%"$&’(!"#$)*+,-./,0**
-,$+FG$"F(:+;+I)F1(<=+00>"%?@357775777
!"#$%C’(%)G++",%"-%!GCG./$0 12345
12#3456$5"7
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 39 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
34
Maximum Allowable Water Development Impact Fees
The proposed Water impact fees are shown in Figure W5. As shown in Figure W5, the cost of the Water
system buy-in totals $2.16 per gallon. Fees are calculated per Equivalent Development Unit (EDU), which
has an average daily consumption of 188 gallons.
Figure W5: Maximum Allowable Water Development Impact Fee
!"#$%FG(%)*++",
!"#$%&#G%()G*#+%&#G%,-.I0
!1%$2 ,-.I0
3*#"$4#(5$6(7$221G+I88
!*F*-.$/%0("F"#G1
9.:;5<+=2$>#&#G%I.99 2345
I.99 5<+=2$>#&#G%I.0:2567
I.;9 5<+=2$>#&#G%?.??289:;3
-.99 5<+=2$>#&#G%;.??2<9855
?.99 @<G42#A#%I9.0:239::6
?.99 B1&=1CGM I9.0:239::6
?.99 !C"E<G#II.0:239633
F.99 @<G42#A#%I0.0:259665
F.99 B1&=1CGM I0.0:259665
F.99 !C"E<G#-I.99 2=9;:5
0.99 @<G42#A#%??.??28:9;3=
0.99 B1&=1CGM ??.??28:9;3=
0.99 !C"E<G#F?.??286958<
8.99 B1&=1CGM ;?.??2<89566
8.99 !C"E<G#G?.??2:697:5
I9.99 !C"E<G#IF9.99 2;59745
I-.99 !C"E<G#I:0.0:2689=88
I.(3HH3(I$GC$2(1J(H$%#"(@C==26(K"$>%<>#+(ILIM(:%N(OM<%<1G
>GG%!"?F",G,$
@G$G(%A.BG%*,1%C/FG
MG#.1G,$.*+%EFG.H*+G,$%I,.$%JG?*,1%>*-$"(#
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 40 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
35
WASTEWATER CIP AND DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
Methodology
Section 6-1-920(18b) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act states that a development impact
fee may be imposed on public facilities including:
“…wastewater collection, treatment, laboratory, engineering, administration, and disposal
facilities.”
Section 6-1-960(B)(1) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act requires:
“a general description of all existing facilities and their existing deficiencies, within the service area
or areas of the governmental entity, a reasonable estimate of all costs, and a plan to develop the
funding resources, including existing sources of revenues, related to curing existing deficiencies
including, but not limited to, the upgrading, updating, improving, expanding, or replacing of these
facilities to meet existing needs and usage.”
Section 6-1-960(B)(2) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act requires:
“an analysis of total capacity, the level of current usage, and commitments for usage of capacity
of existing public facilities, which must be prepared by qualified a professional using generally
accepted principles and professional standards.”
Service Units for Wastewater Analysis
Section 6-1-960(B)(4) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act requires:
“a definitive table establishing the specific service unit for each category of system improvements
and an equivalency or conversion table establishing the ratio of a service unit to various types of
land uses, including residential, commercial, agricultural, and industrial, as appropriate.”
The “service unit” used for wastewater development impact fee is equivalent dwelling unit (EDU). The
Wastewater impact fees are assessed on both residential and nonresidential development, using an EDU
approach. In order to determine wastewater system demand from an equivalent single family dwelling
unit, TischlerBise obtained wastewater billing data for 2023. Billing data indicates the 12,498 residential
customers served by the City accounted for 655.6 million gallons in 2023, or 1.79 million gallons daily. The
City’s 629 nonresidential customers are estimated to have accounted for 297.7 million gallons, or 815,748
gallons daily. To determine an EDU for the wastewater system, the 12,498 residential customers are
compared to the average daily consumption (1,796,320 gallons), for an average of 144 gallons a day.
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 41 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
36
Figure WW1: Wastewater Demand Factors
As discussed above, Wastewater impact fees are calculated by multiplying the number of gallons per
single family unit equivalent (EDU) by the capacity ratio for the corresponding size and type of meter
multiplied by the cost per EDU. The City’s demand for a single-family equivalent dwelling unit is 144
gallons per day. Figure WW2 shows the capacity ratio by meter size from the AWWA Manual of Water
Supply Practices, which is used for water meters larger than .75 inches.
Figure WW2: Wastewater Ratio of Service Units to Development Units
Annual
Consumption
Daily
Consumption Avg. Daily Usage
Residential 12,498 655,656,671 1,796,320 144
Commercial 629 297,748,178 815,748 1,297
Total 13,127 953,404,849 2,612,068 199
Source: City of North Augusta
Account Type
!"#$%&’()*+,-,./0"!!
0"!!%&’()*+,-,./0"1#
0"$!%&’()*+,-,./2"22
3"!!%&’()*+,-,./$"22
2"!!4&.5),6,/0!"1#
2"!!78-(89.:0!"1#
2"!!;9<=&.,00"1#
>"!!4&.5),6,/01"1#
>"!!78-(89.:01"1#
>"!!;9<=&.,30"!!
1"!!4&.5),6,/22"22
1"!!78-(89.:22"22
1"!!;9<=&.,>2"22
?"!!78-(89.:$2"22
?"!!;9<=&.,@2"22
0!"!!;9<=&.,0>!"!!
03"!!;9<=&.,0#1"1#
0"ABCCBAM*.9*)A8EAC*/,<A49(()FAG<*+/&+,’AMH0IA#/JAK:&/&8.
M,/,<A4&L,A*.:A;F(,7*(*+&/FA
M*/&80
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 42 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
37
Wastewater Service Area
Because North Augusta provides wastewater service to areas outside of the city limits, the current
wastewater service area shown below in Figure WW3 will be used as the impact fee service area.
Figure WW3: North Augusta Wastewater Service Area
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 43 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
38
Projection of Wastewater Growth-Related Infrastructure Needs
Section 6-1-960(B)(5) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act requires:
“a description of all system improvements and their costs necessitated by and attributable to new
development in the service area, based on the approved land use assumptions, to provide a level
of service not to exceed the level of service currently existing in the community or service area,
unless a different or higher level of service is required by law, court order, or safety consideration.”
Section 6-1-960(B)(7) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act requires:
“the projected demand for system improvements required by new service units projected over a
reasonable period of time not to exceed twenty years.”
Wastewater Treatment Plant Buy-In
The Wastewater impact fee contains a buy-in component for the City’s share (original cost, no inflation
included) in the Aiken County Public Service Authority’s wastewater treatment plant. As shown in Figure
WW4, this investment is $6,581,434. The City has an allocated capacity of 8,672,000 gallons per day. This
results in a cost per gallon of $0.76 ($6,581,434 / 8,672,000 gallons).
Figure WW4: Planned Water Transmission Cost
Credits
Since the capital projects included in the Wastewater impact fee are not being paid for by rates, there is
no double payment situation from both impact fees and rates. Therefore, a credit is not included in the
impact fee calculation.
!"#$
!"#$%&#’(’
)**+,-./012-3-,4.5 %#"67#888
!"#$%C’(%)G++",-./01
%&#’()*$)"+
9+:.;1)<=<>.-1?;-:/1+@1)4A/B12+C1D<N*4,1?/:F4,/1)<.;+:4.51GGHD
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 44 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
39
Maximum Allowable Water Development Impact Fees
The proposed Wastewater impact fees are shown in Figure WW5. As shown in Figure WW5, the cost of
the Wastewater system buy-in totals $0.76 per gallon. Fees are calculated per Equivalent Development
Unit (EDU), which has an average daily consumption of 144 gallons.
Figure WW5: Maximum Allowable Water Development Impact Fee
!"#$%FG(%)*++",
!!"#$%&G()*+,-.I
-"$*+./012
0123452$64G$74889*:;<<
!*F*34$5%
6*$4"7
8("F"#G9
:GG#
,-.=6>:?84@2A2*B ;-,,.7/;
;-,,6>:?84@2A2*B ;-I..7<=
;-=,6>:?84@2A2*B C-CC .>2>
M-,,6>:?84@2A2*B =-CC .?<7
C-,,E>*582F2B ;,-I..7@72A
C-,,G9A?9&*H ;,-I..7@72A
C-,,"&3I>*2 ;;-I..7@=1>
<-,,E>*582F2B ;I-I..7@<7<
<-,,G9A?9&*H ;I-I..7@<7<
<-,,"&3I>*2 M;-,,.=@=;7
I-,,E>*582F2B CC-CC .>@2>2
I-,,G9A?9&*H CC-CC .>@2>2
I-,,"&3I>*2 <C-CC .A@1=2
J-,,G9A?9&*H =C-CC .?@<71
J-,,"&3I>*2 KC-CC .7/@7</
;,-,,"&3I>*2 ;<,-,,.7?@=17
;M-,,"&3I>*2 ;.I-I..7;@=17
;-$0!!0$L4*&48$9M$!4B23$E&??8G$#34@B>@2:$L(;N$.BO$PH>B>9*
:GG%!"BF",G,$
CG$G(%M4EG%*,9%-5FG
6G#49G,$4*+%FGH4I*+G,$%J,4$%KGB*,9%:*3$"(
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 45 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
40
SUMMARY OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
The residential fee is assessed per housing unit, while the nonresidential fee is assessed per 1,000 square
feet of floor area. Water and Wastewater Development Impact Fees are summarized separately below.
Figure 5. Maximum Supportable Development Impact Fees: All Categories Except Water and
Wastewater
Figure 6. Maximum Supportable Development Impact Fees: Water and Wastewater
!"#$%"F’$()*+",")-./"F’
!"#$%F’()*"%+,-.I01 ,2.302 ,-45 012345
67%8"9()*"%+,4-0 ,441 ,-04 052463
7-F8"#$%"F’$()*+",")-./"F’
:#;7<8=")%,0 ,4->,0 0961
?@**F=A")%,0 ,>.I44 ,0 012399
BCC"AF’M’B8EF=’!F=F"AF ,0 ,2.03G ,0 0524:;
:#<8"878"@#)%,0 ,-.5I1 ,0 062<3=
>""#*?"8*@F$’
>""#*."8*62444*ABC(8"*>""’
D-’()+",")-./"F’*DN."
+",")-./"F’*DN."
D8(F#.-8’(’$-F
D8(F#.-8’(’$-F
A(F$’(’$-F
A(F$’(’$-F
?(8F#
?(8F#D-’()
!"#$%!"&#$’"#$%()#"*
+,-./0&1*"2$3$4#56+7 58+9
8,++/0&1*"2$3$4#57-9 58:;
8,.+/0&1*"2$3$4#58<=.6 5=7=
;,++/0&1*"2$3$4#5;<877 5.:8
=,++>04?*$@$#56<==-58<876
=,++A)31)B4C 56<==-58<876
=,++(B%M04$56<-66 58<;-=
6,++>04?*$@$#57<--7 58<:8:
6,++A)31)B4C 57<--7 58<:8:
6,++(B%M04$5:<.=7 5;<;98
7,++>04?*$@$#58=<.6:5=<7=7
7,++A)31)B4C 58=<.6:5=<7=7
7,++(B%M04$58-<78;56<-;7
:,++A)31)B4C 5;8<7--5.<:8-
:,++(B%M04$5=-<9=7 58+<8:+
8+,++(B%M04$5.7<9+7 58.<;-8
8;,++(B%M04$5-8<:88 589<;-8
8,EF!!FEG"4B"*E)HE!"#$%E>B11*IEJ%"2#02$&EGK8<E-#LEMC0#0)4
G$#$%E>0N$E"4CE(I1$8
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 46 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
1
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Section 6-1-930(A) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act requires:
“If a governmental entity has not adopted a comprehensive plan, but has adopted a capital
improvements plan which substantially complies with the requirements of Section 6-1-960(B), then
it may impose a development impact fee.”
Section 6-1-960(B5) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act requires:
“a description of all system improvements and their costs necessitated by and attributable to new
development in the service area, based on the approved land use assumptions, to provide a level
of service not to exceed the level of service currently existing in the community or service area,
unless a different or higher level of service is required by law, court order, or safety consideration.”
Along with the impact fee analysis, this report represents North Agusta’s Capital Improvement Plan. The
Plan includes a list of 10-year capital facility needs for Parks & Recreation facilities, Sanitation facilities, ,
and Transportation system improvements. The 10-year facility needs list represents the additional capital
improvements necessary to accommodate the projected growth at the levels of service established in the
impact fee analysis. Further details about the levels of service and calculations can be found in their
respective chapters.
To respond to demand for Parks and Recreation facilities, the North Augusta plans to incrementally
construct new park land and improvements. As shown in Figure CIP1, the estimated total cost is $3.7
million. The analysis indicates that 100 percent of the need for this is growth-related.
Figure CIP1: Parks & Recreation Capital Improvement Plan
!"#$%F’%()’*+,-*.I-.*$0)1-,2345$+*%6$$781-"%8F,-
9+*:,%;%<$I*$+-1F)%=$#+*->$)-
!"#$%&"’()*#+,-./0123.4.5-
!"#$%)6+’787+,9’78,.0/0.1-4::;43:-
!F-+?%9+*:,%;%<$I*$+-1F)%8F,-1-42;:4;5<
9*F@$I-$7%(>#+I-%A$$%<$B$).$1-42;:4;5<
6F)4(>#+I-%A$$%A.)71)C 1:
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 47 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
2
To respond to demand for Sanitation infrastructure, the North Augusta plans to incrementally purchase
new sanitation vehicles. As shown in Figure CIP2, the estimated cost is $455,563. The analysis indicates
that 100 percent of the need for this is growth-related.
Figure CIP2: Sanitation Capital Improvement Plan
To respond to demand for Transportation infrastructure, the North Augusta has $51,734,429 in planned
street improvements and plans to incrementally purchase new sanitation vehicles. As shown in Figure
CIP3, the estimated total cost is $51,843,446. The analysis indicates that 17 percent of the need for this is
growth-related.
Figure CIP3: Sanitation Capital Improvement Plan
!"#$%F’%()’*+,-*.I-.*$0)1-,2345$+*%6$$781-"%8F,-
!"#$%"%$&#’()*$+,)-()*$+,)-./0123445406
!F-+9%:+)1-+-1F)%8F,-23445406
;*F<$I-$7%(=#+I-%>$$%?$@$).$23445406
6F)4(=#+I-%>$$%>.)71)A 27
:+)1-+-1F)%B$#+*-=$)-
!"#$%F’%()’*+,-*.I-.*$0)1-,2345$+*%6$$781-"%8F,-
!"#$$"%&’(#)*$’$+",--.I012341456
!"#$$"%!7$$($#,8$9:;<$,=>40.0=61=02
!F-+9%:+)1-+-1F)%8F,-.I01?43144@
;*F<$I-$7%(=#+I-%>$$%?$@$).$.?1?561?II
6F)4(=#+I-%>$$%>.)71)A .431=031I60
!*+),#F*-+-1F)
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 48 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
3
IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION
Development impact fees should be periodically evaluated and updated to reflect recent data. North
Augusta should adjust development impact fees for inflation using a construction cost index such as
Engineering News Record or Marshall Swift. If cost estimates or demand indicators change significantly,
the City should redo the fee calculations. South Carolina’s enabling legislation exempts a project from
development impact fees if it is determined to create affordable housing.
Credits and Reimbursements
A general requirement that is common to development impact fee methodologies is the evaluation of
credits. A revenue credit may be necessary to avoid potential double payment situations arising from one-
time development impact fees plus on-going payment of other revenues that may also fund growth-
related capital improvements. The determination of revenue credits is dependent upon the development
impact fee methodology used in the cost analysis and local government policies.
Policies and procedures related to site-specific credits should be addressed in the resolution or ordinance
that establishes the development impact fees. Project-level improvements, required as part of the
development approval process, are not eligible for credits against development impact fees. If a developer
constructs a system improvement included in the fee calculations, it will be necessary to either reimburse
the developer or provide a credit against the fees due from that particular development. The latter option
is more difficult to administer because it creates unique fees for specific geographic areas.
Service Area
A development impact fee service area is a region in which a defined set of improvements provide benefit
to an identifiable amount of new development. Within a service area, all new development of a type
(single family, commercial, etc.) is assessed at the same development impact fee rate. Land use
assumptions and development impact fees are each defined in terms of this geography, so that capital
facility demand, projects needed to meet that demand, and capital facility cost are all quantified in the
same terms. Development impact fee revenue collected within a service area is required to be spent
within that service area.
Implementation of a large number of small service areas is problematic. Administration is complicated
and, because funds collected within the service area must be spent within that area multiple service areas
may make it impossible to accumulate sufficient revenue to fund any projects within the time allowed.
As part of our analysis of the City and the type of facilities and improvements included in the development
impact fee calculation, TischlerBise has determined that a Citywide service area is appropriate for all
categories except Water and Wastewater. For Water and Wastewater, the impact fee service area is
shown in Figure W3 and Figure WW3.
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 49 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
4
APPENDIX A: HOUSING AFFORDABILITY ANALYSIS
Section 6-1-930(2) of the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act requires:
“Before imposing a development impact fee on residential units, a governmental entity shall
prepare a report which estimates the effect of recovering capital costs through impact fees on the
availability of affordable housing within the political jurisdiction of the governmental entity.”
In accordance with the South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act, this chapter estimates the effects of
imposing the maximum supportable development impact fees on the affordability of housing in North
Augusta. The maximum supportable development impact fee will be included in a cost burden analysis to
identify the effect the proposed development impact fees will have on affordable housing.
Maximum Supportable Development Impact Fee
The development impact fees found in Figure A1 represent the highest amount supportable for housing
units by housing type, which represents new growth’s fair share of the cost for capital facilities. The City
may adopt fees that are less than the amounts shown. However, a reduction in development impact fee
revenue will necessitate an increase in other revenues, a decrease in planned capital expenditures, and/or
a decrease in levels of service. This analysis will use the Single Family impact fee along with the Water and
Wastewater Impact Fees for a 0.75 Displacement meter, which comes to a total of $5,118. The housing
affordability analysis will assume a conservative condition for assessing the effect of the development
impact fee on monthly mortgages in North Augusta (i.e., the maximum supportable development impact
fee amount). If the City Council were to choose a lower development impact fee amount, the results
presented in this section of the report would improve.
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 50 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
5
Figure A1. Maximum Supportable Development Impact Fee
Impact on Monthly Mortgage
The South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act requires preparation of a report that estimates the effect
of imposing development impact fees on housing affordability in the jurisdiction. As shown in Figure A2,
TischlerBise calculated the effect of the maximum allowable development impact fee on a monthly
mortgage at different interest rates. For example, the total proposed single-family development impact
fee of $5,118 increases a mortgage with an interest rate of 2.5 percent by $20.22 per month. For a
mortgage with an interest rate of 8.0 percent, the cost increase is $37.55 per month.
Figure A2. Monthly Payment Sensitivity Analysis
!"#$%"F’$()*+",")-./"F’
!"#$%F’()*"%+,-./01 ,2.302 ,-45 012345
67%8"9()*"%+,4-0 ,441 ,-04 052463
7""#*8"9*:F$’
;-’()+",")-./"F’*;<.";9(F#.-9’(’$-F =(F$’(’$-F8(9>#
!"#$%!"&#$’"#$%()#"*
+,-./0&1*"2$3$4#56+7 58+9
8,++/0&1*"2$3$4#57-9 58:;
8,.+/0&1*"2$3$4#58<=.6 5=7=
;,++/0&1*"2$3$4#5;<877 5.:8
=,++>04?*$@$#56<==-58<876
=,++A)31)B4C 56<==-58<876
=,++(B%M04$56<-66 58<;-=
6,++>04?*$@$#57<--7 58<:8:
6,++A)31)B4C 57<--7 58<:8:
6,++(B%M04$5:<.=7 5;<;98
7,++>04?*$@$#58=<.6:5=<7=7
7,++A)31)B4C 58=<.6:5=<7=7
7,++(B%M04$58-<78;56<-;7
:,++A)31)B4C 5;8<7--5.<:8-
:,++(B%M04$5=-<9=7 58+<8:+
8+,++(B%M04$5.7<9+7 58.<;-8
8;,++(B%M04$5-8<:88 589<;-8
8,EF!!FEG"4B"*E)HE!"#$%E>B11*IEJ%"2#02$&EGK8<E-#LEMC0#0)4
G$#$%E>0N$E"4CE(I1$8
!"#$%C’(F*"%+,-#".!/C#FM"1,2!/C#FM"1,P!/C#FM"1,4!/C#FM"1,5!/C#FM"1,S!/C#FM"1,7!/C#FM"1,U
!"#A%&%’(FF*+"IF-’.--LM1223LM1223LM1223LM1223LM1223LM1223LM1223
4*"R’6-T%’89-"T:;Y=Y=Y=Y=Y=Y=Y=
>R?-T-:?’@"?-’8(RR&"F;ABM=CYB==CaB==CMB==CbB==CFB==C3B==C
91#.:%+,;1<.=P>?PP=P2?S@=P5?54=PU?5U=4>?7@=45?>S=4U?SS
91#.:%+,AF+*C#.,;F%/B%F."1#
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 51 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
6
APPENDIX B: LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
As part of our Work Scope, TischlerBise has prepared documentation on land use assumptions and
development projections to be used in the North Augusta Development Impact Fee Study. The data
estimates and projections are used in the study’s calculations and to illustrate the possible future pace of
service demands on the City’s infrastructure. Furthermore, the memo demonstrates the history of
development and base year development levels in North Augusta. The base year assumptions are used in
the impact fee calculations to determine current levels of service.
This chapter includes discussion and findings on:
• Household/housing unit size
• Current population and housing unit estimates
• Residential projections
• Current employment and nonresidential floor area estimates
• Nonresidential projections
Note: calculations throughout this technical memo are based on an analysis conducted using Excel
software. Results are discussed in the memo using one-and two-digit places (in most cases), which
represent rounded figures. However, the analysis itself uses figures carried to their ultimate decimal
places; therefore, the sums and products generated in the analysis may not equal the sum or product if
the reader replicates the calculation with the factors shown in the report (due to the rounding of figures
shown, not in the analysis).
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 52 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
7
Residential Development
This section details current estimates and future projections of residential development including
population and housing units.
Housing Unit Size
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, a household is a housing unit occupied by year-round residents.
Impact fees often use per capita standards and persons per housing unit (PPHU) or persons per household
(PPHH) to derive proportionate share fee amounts. When PPHU is used in the fee calculations,
infrastructure standards are derived using year-round population. When PPHH is used in the fee
calculations, the impact fee methodology assumes a higher percentage of housing units will be occupied,
thus requiring seasonal or peak population to be used when deriving infrastructure standards. TischlerBise
recommends North Augusta impose impact fees for residential development according to the number of
persons per housing unit.
Occupancy calculations require data on population and the types of units by structure. The 2010 census
did not obtain detailed information using a “long-form” questionnaire. Instead, the U.S. Census Bureau
switched to a continuous monthly mailing of surveys, known as the American Community Survey (ACS),
which has limitations due to sample-size constraints. For example, data on detached housing units are
now combined with attached single units (commonly known as townhouses, which share a common
sidewall, but are constructed on an individual parcel of land). For impact fees in North Augusta, detached,
stick-built units and attached units are included in the “Single-Family” category. The “Multi-Family”
category includes duplexes, structures with two or more units on an individual parcel of land, mobile
homes, boats, RVs, and vans.
Figure B1 below shows the occupancy estimates for North Augusta. Single-family units average 2.12
persons per housing unit and multi-family units average 1.20 persons per housing units.
Figure B1: Persons per Housing Unit
!"#$%F’()*"%+H -H.I01222222 0.I13222222222 -455 0.0-6222222222 6I457 64637
89%:"’()*"%+--.0H5222222222 H.6-6222222222 H4;0 -.153222222222 H0437 -14007
<=:)%-1.II3222222 HI.63;222222 -4-H H-.5>;222222 HII4I7 H-4I;7
!=9?@FA2B4!42CF#M9M2E9?F)9.2-IH6’-I--2F*F?"@)#2C=**9#":+2!9?GF+2;’HF)?2IM:"*):FM
H42J#@%9KFM2KF:)@LFK2)#K2)::)@LFK2M"4F4.2:=N#L=9MFMO29#":M4
-42J#@%9KFM2KNF%%"#$M2"#2M:?9@:9?FM2N":L2:N=2=?2*=?F29#":M.2*=P"%F2L=*FM.2QRM.2)#K2)%%2=:LF?29#":M4
SF?M=#M2TF?2
U=9M"#$2B#":
U=9M"#$
8"V
R)@)#@+2
Q):FU=9M"#$2<+TF SF?M=#M U=9MFL=%KM SF?M=#M2TF?2
U=9MFL=%K
U=9M"#$2
B#":M
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 53 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
8
Residential Estimates
For 2020, data published by the U.S. Census Bureau includes 24,379 persons living in 11,401 housing units
citywide. Applying the occupancy factors shown in Figure B1 to recent building permit data, North
Augusta’s 2024 residential development base includes 26,636 persons living in 12,584 housing units.
Figure B2: Residential Estimates
Residential Projections
Population and housing unit projections are used to illustrate the possible future pace of service demands,
revenues, and expenditures. To the extent these factors change, the projected need for infrastructure will
also change. If development occurs at a more rapid rate than projected, the demand for infrastructure
will increase at a corresponding rate. If development occurs at a slower rate than is projected, the demand
for infrastructure will also decrease.
Based on building permit from 2019 to 2023 provided by North Augusta staff, in the next 10 years
residential development is estimated at approximately 210 single family units per year and 46 multifamily
units per year. Based on these projections, North Augusta can expect 2,557 additional housing units over
the next 10 years. For this study, the analysis assumes the occupancy factors shown in Figure B1 will
remain constant. Converting projected housing units to population, based on the PPHU factors in Figure
B1, results in a 10-year population increase of 5,002 persons.
Figure B3: Residential Projections
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Base Year
Population 24,379 24,822 25,424 26,090 26,636
Housing Units
Single Family 9,485 9,694 9,978 10,215 10,395
Multi-Family 1,916 1,916 1,916 2,052 2,189
Total 11,401 11,610 11,894 12,267 12,584
North Augusta
!"!#!"!$!"!%!"!F !"!’!"!(!")#
*+,-.I-+0 1 !)#$1"
!"#$%&’(")*+H+-+*.H/-+*.H+-+*0H/-+*0H+-+*1H/-.-/H+-.2H33*
4"$5()678)(’5
23456-.7+8369 1":)($1":%"$1":’1$11:"!$11:!)$11:##$1!:#(%*H/3*
;<6=3>7+8369 !:1’(!:!)$!:!’"!:)!%!:)F1 !:#1F !:%##922
:"’&%/*H209 /*H093 /-H312 /-H-2//-H+3./-H0+*/2H/9/*H22.
1">I-+0.
?4@0-+,-;"<’=7>$6$5’&
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 54 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
9
Nonresidential Development
This section details current estimates and future projections of nonresidential development including jobs
and nonresidential floor area.
Nonresidential Demand Units
In Figure B4, gray shading indicates the nonresidential development prototypes used by TischlerBise to
derive employment densities and average weekday vehicle trip ends. For nonresidential development,
TischlerBise uses data published in Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 11th Edition
(2021). The prototype for industrial development is Manufacturing (ITE 140) which generates 4.75 average
weekday vehicle trip ends per 1,000 square feet of floor area and has 528 square feet of floor area per
employee. Institutional development uses Hospital (ITE 610) and generates 10.77 average weekday
vehicle trip ends per 1,000 square feet of floor area and has 350 square feet of floor area per employee.
For office & other services development, the proxy is General Office (ITE 710); it generates 10.84 average
weekday vehicle trip ends per 1,000 square feet of floor area and has 307 square feet of floor area per
employee. The prototype for commercial development is Shopping Center (ITE 820) which generates
37.01 average weekday vehicle trips per 1,000 square feet of floor area and has 471 square feet of floor
area per employee.
Figure B4: Nonresidential Demand Units
!"#$%FG()*+,-.I)0-"123-#()4 *+,-.I)0-"123-#()4 #F3560%%4-7%1 89:G1%-;%%<
=6)%L(2<7%1-$%FG()-L(2<?7%1-#F3560%%?$%FG()-L(2<7%1-#F3560%%
!!"#$%FG()*+H-G.$I0 !1"""(23(4G 5678 96!"!6:8 ;98
!9")*+H-G.$I0(<I.=!1"""(23(4G 9698 L6?!!6!;7;5
!5"@I*HAIBGH.$*%!1"""(23(4G 568:L6:!!67?:L7
!:"CI.MFNH-$*%!1"""(23(4G !68!:6":"695 L1?:9
L:5 F--$-GM+(#$G$*%HM+L6;"56L5 "6;!*I
9!"INGM0 .NNJ 86??!5695 "6:;*I
:;:OIL(MI.M -GH+M*G 56"?L!697 "6!?*I
;!"IN-N$GI0 !1"""(23(4G !"688 9688 L67;9:"
;L"OH.-$*%(INJM HM+96";969!"6?L *I
8!"PM*M.I0(QAA$BM(RIG%(-$SMT !1"""(23(4G !"675 9699 96L;9"8
8L"@M+$BI0UOM*GI0(QAA$BM !1"""(23(4G 9;6""768!56!9 L5L
89"PNGM.*JM*G(QAA$BM !1"""(23(4G LL6:?865:96"9 99"
8:"QAA$BM(<I.=!1"""(23(4G !!6"8 96:5 96!9 9L"
7L"2FNNN$*%(MM*GM.(RIG%(-$SMT !1"""(23(4G 986"!!865L L6!L 58!
!6(V.$N(PM*M.IG$N*1()*-G$GHGM(NA(V.I*-NN.GIG$N*(P*%$*MM.-1(!!GF(P+$G$N*(RL"L!T6
@G()-L4%-A16:3
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 55 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
10
Nonresidential Estimates
TischlerBise uses the term jobs to refer to employment by place of work. Shown below in Figure B5, Esri
Business Analyst estimates 2023 employment equal to 8,953 jobs. TischlerBise estimates 2023
nonresidential floor area equals 3,673,459 square feet. To estimate nonresidential floor area and
employment in the 2024 base year, TischlerBise utilizes the residential development estimates that were
previously discussed to get a housing unit to jobs ratio, and then applies this ratio to 2024 housing unit
estimate. As shown at the bottom of Figure B5, the 2024 estimate includes 9,184 jobs. Applying the
employment multipliers shown in Figure B4 to the jobs results in a nonresidential floor area increase of
94,929 square feet. The 2024 base year nonresidential floor area estimate equals 3,769,388 square feet
(3,673,459 square feet in 2023 + 94,929 additional square feet).
Figure B5: Nonresidential Estimates
!"!#$%FG%()*+H -.I0F%*1%%)!"!#*23)450)%6 7+83*9%F
7+83J ;+)0<*7+83 9%F*7+8!1<++F*=F%0#JL"""*-.?*1)?!
@(6I3)F40<A B"J CM N!C #B"LJ!C J?CF
G+55%FG40<N AL!"B ABM ABJ JLFC"LJHH !?J!
IHH4G%*J*I)O%F*-%FL4G%H !LJHN !AM #"B HHNL"BC #?!H
@(3)4)I)4+(0<B JLCC"!JM #N"HNCL"CB !?CH
;+)0<CLFN#J""M #LHB#LANF !?AA
J?*23F4*MI34(%33*=(0<N3)*I(<4(%L*MI34(%33*-I550FNL*!"!#?
!?*;F49*O%(%F0)4+(L*@(3)4)I)%*+H*;F0(39+F)0)4+(*2(P4(%%F3L*JJ)O*264)4+(*Q!"!JR?
#?*;43GO<%FM43%*G0<GI<0)4+(*Q!"!#*S+83*T*3.I0F%*H%%)*9%F*S+8R?
A?*U0S+F*3%G)+F3*0F%*G+(3)FIG)4+(V*U0(IH0G)IF4(P?
N?*U0S+F*3%G)+F3*0F%*P%)04<*;F06%V*=GG+55+60)4+(*J*1++6*-%FL4G%3?
H?*U0S+F*3%G)+F3*0F%*I)O%F*-%FL4G%3V*P%0<*23)0)%L*P%()0<*J*X%034(P?
B?*U0S+F*3%G)+F3*0F%*Y%0<)O*G0F%L*-+G40<*=3343)0(G%V*$I8<4G*=654(43)F0)4+(?
!"!A $%FG%()*+H -.I0F%*1%%)!"!A*23)450)%6 7+83*9%F
7+83J ;+)0<*7+83 9%F*7+8!1<++F*=F%0#JL"""*-.?*1)?!
@(6I3)F40<A BJF CM N!C #BFLHF#J?CF
G+55%FG40<N AL#JH ABM ABJ !L"#JL##B !?J!
IHH4G%*J*I)O%F*-%FL4G%H !L!!J !AM #"B HC!L!HN #?!H
@(3)4)I)4+(0<B JLF!F !JM #N"HBNL"F#!?CH
;+)0<FLJCA J""M #LBHCL#CC !?AA
J?*;43GO<%FM43%*G0<GI<0)4+(*803%6*+(*!"!#*S+83*)+*O+I34(P*I(4)*F0)4+?
!?*;F49*O%(%F0)4+(L*@(3)4)I)%*+H*;F0(39+F)0)4+(*2(P4(%%F3L*JJ)O*264)4+(*Q!"!JR?
#?*;43GO<%FM43%*G0<GI<0)4+(*Q!"!A*S+83*T*3.I0F%*H%%)*9%F*S+8R?
A?*U0S+F*3%G)+F3*0F%*G+(3)FIG)4+(V*U0(IH0G)IF4(P?
N?*U0S+F*3%G)+F3*0F%*P%)04<*;F06%V*=GG+55+60)4+(*J*1++6*-%FL4G%3?
H?*U0S+F*3%G)+F3*0F%*I)O%F*-%FL4G%3V*P%0<*23)0)%L*P%()0<*J*X%034(P?
B?*U0S+F*3%G)+F3*0F%*Y%0<)O*G0F%L*-+G40<*=3343)0(G%V*$I8<4G*=654(43)F0)4+(?
R+(F%346%()40<
G0)%P+FN
R+(F%346%()40<
G0)%P+FN
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 56 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
11
Nonresidential Projections
This analysis projects jobs based off the projected increase in housing units. Shown below in Figure B6,
this results in a 10-year increase of 1,866 jobs.
To project nonresidential floor area, TischlerBise divides the projected employment by the square feet
per employee factors shown in Figure B4. Over the next 10 years, North Augusta is projected to gain 1,866
jobs and approximately 766,000 square feet of nonresidential floor area.
Figure B6: Nonresidential Projections
!"!#!"!$!"!%!"!&!"!’!"!(!")#
*+H-.I-+0 1 !)#$1"
234H567.8659H 1!:$’#1!:’#"1):"($1):)$1 1):%"&1):’%!1$:1#1 !"##$
%F’()*F+,-
;6<4H905+=&1(&)#&#’&%)&&’&(!’%$./0
>3??-0@5+=#:)1%#:#")#:#(1 #:$&(#:%%%#:&$#$:1()1$$
ABB5@-.C.A9D-0.E-0F5@-H !:!!1 !:!%%!:)11 !:)$%!:#"1 !:##&!:%&!/#.
;6H95949536+=1:(!(1:(%’!:""&!:"#%!:"’$!:1!#!:)!"23!
4)-5(3".1/3"2$.3"##1 3"$//3"32..6"..$.."6#6 ."100
7),8+9:;+,-:5(<=><?-<@A."666B
;6<4H905+=)’")’&)($#")#11 #1’#$&$$
>3??-0@5+=!:")1 !:"&)!:11#!:1$$!:1(%!:!)’!:###/.2
ABB5@-.C.A9D-0.E-0F5@-H %’!%(%&1"&!#&)’&$!’!1 .23
;6H95949536+=%&$%’(&")&1%&)"&##’1!.2$
4)-5(2"$01 2"1/#2"3!!2"331 /"6$#/".#./"#2/$00
7)8-C<DNFN9-5 1"GI-+0.
;6@0-+H-
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 57 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
12
Development Projections
Provided below are summaries of development projections used in the Impact Fee Study. Development projections are used to illustrate a possible
future pace of demand for infrastructure and cash flows resulting from revenues and expenditures associated with those demands.
Figure B7: Development Projections
!"!!!"!#!"!$!"!%!"!F !"!’!"!(!"!)!"#"!"#*!"#!
+,-.I0.,1 *!#$%F ’()*"
!"#$%F’(")*+H+-+*.H/-+*.H+-+*0H/-+*0H+-+*1H/-.*1H+-.-2H/-.-2H+-.-/H/-.-/H+-.3H22*
4"$5()678)(’5
23456.I7,8369 *":#)%*":F"%*":(*%**:"!%**:!#%**:$$%**:F%F **:(FF *!:"’F *!:!(F *!:$)F *H/2*
;<6=3>?,8369 !:*()!:!#%!:!("!:#!F !:#’*!:$*’!:$F!!:%"(!:%%#!:%))!:F$$933
:"’F%74"$5()678)(’5 /*H309 /*H092 /-H213 /-H-3//-H+2./-H0+*/9H//0 /9H-.9 /9H+*1 /9H003 /3H/9/*H33.
;<#%"=<>)’
@4A<-=13,6 ’*)’#$’$(’F#’’(’)!("’(!*(#F (%*(F%/9+
BC88.1M3,6 $:#*F $:$"#$:$)*$:%’)$:FFF $:’%$$:($!$:)!)%:"*’%:*"%%:*)#0..
E??3M.IFIE=G.1I2.1H3M.!:!!*!:!FF !:#**!:#%F !:$"*!:$$’!:$)!!:%#’!:%(!!:F!’!:F’!93/
@4-=3=<=3C4,6 *:)!)*:)F(!:""’!:"$F !:"(%!:*!$!:*F$!:!"#!:!$!!:!(*!:#!"-1*
:"’F%7;<#%"=<>)’1H/09 1H-./1H330 1H.99 1H1-//2H//./2H-29 /2H91//2H+../2H0+9 //H232 /H0++
?")@>5A7B%""@7C@>F7DN/H222F
@4A<-=13,6 #("#(’#)%$"#$**$*($!F $#$$$*$$)$%’..
BC88.1M3,6 !:"#*!:"’#!:**$!:*%%!:*)F !:!#(!:!’)!:#!"!:#F*!:$"#!:$$$9/-
E??3M.IFIE=G.1I2.1H3M.F(!F)F ’*"’!$’#(’%!’F%’’)’)#("’(!*/-1
@4-=3=<=3C4,6 F’%F()’"#’*F ’#"’$$’%’’’*’(%’))(*!/-.
:"’F%7?")@>5A7B%""@7C@>F -H.+0 -H093 -H1**-H110 9H2.3 9H/3/9H**0 9H-29 9H-0/9H93.9H3-9 .++
*">0.,1I
@4M1.,-.?"@’G7C$6$5’F
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 58 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
13
APPENDIX C: LAND USE DEFINITIONS
Residential Development
As discussed below, residential development categories are based on data from the U.S. Census Bureau,
American Community Survey. North Augusta will collect development fees from all new residential units.
One-time development fees are determined by site capacity (i.e., number of residential units). See detail
on the next several pages from the North Augusta Zoning Ordinance.
Single Family and duplexes/semidetached:
1. Single family detached is a one-unit structure detached from any other house, that is, with open
space on all four sides. Such structures are considered detached even if they have an adjoining
shed or garage. A one-family house that contains a business is considered detached as long as the
building has open space on all four sides.
2. Single family attached (townhouse) is a one-unit structure that has one or more walls extending
from ground to roof separating it from adjoining structures. In row houses (sometimes called
townhouses), double houses, or houses attached to nonresidential structures, each house is a
separate, attached structure if the dividing or common wall goes from ground to roof.
Multifamily:
1. Two or more units (apartments) are units in structures containing two or more housing units,
further categorized as units in structures with “2, 3 or 4, 5 to 9, 10 to 19, 20 to 49, and 50 or more
apartments.”
2. Mobile home includes both occupied and vacant mobile homes, to which no permanent rooms
have been added, are counted in this category. Mobile homes used only for business purposes or
for extra sleeping space and mobile homes for sale on a dealer's lot, at the factory, or in storage
are not counted in the housing inventory.
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 59 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
14
Nonresidential Development
The proposed general nonresidential development categories (defined below) can be used for all new
construction within North Augusta. Nonresidential development categories represent general groups of
land uses that share similar average weekday vehicle trip generation rates and employment densities (i.e.,
jobs per thousand square feet of floor area).
Retail: Establishments primarily selling merchandise, eating/drinking places, and entertainment uses. By
way of example, Retail includes shopping centers, supermarkets, pharmacies, restaurants, bars,
nightclubs, automobile dealerships, and movie theaters, auto repair/service station.
Office: Establishments providing management, administrative, professional, or business services; By way
of example, Office/Service includes banks, business offices, headquarter buildings, business parks, and
research and development centers.
Industrial: Establishments primarily engaged in the production, transportation, or storage of goods. By
way of example, Industrial includes manufacturing plants, distribution warehouses, trucking companies,
utility substations, power generation facilities, telecommunications buildings, trade shops, and
contractors.
Institutional: Establishments providing management, administrative, professional, or business services;
By way of example, Institutional includes assisted living facilities, nursing homes, hospitals, medical
offices, veterinarian clinics, schools, universities, churches, daycare facilities, government buildings, and
prisons.
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 60 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
15
APPENDIX D: SOUTH CAROLINA DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE ACT
https://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/title6.php
March 22, 2019
CHAPTER 1
General Provisions
ARTICLE 9
Development Impact Fees
SECTION 6-1-910. Short title.
This article may be cited as the “South Carolina Development Impact Fee Act”.
HISTORY: 1999 Act No. 118, Section 1.
SECTION 6-1-920. Definitions.
As used in this article:
(1) “Affordable housing” means housing affordable to families whose incomes do not exceed eighty
percent of the median income for the service area or areas within the jurisdiction of the governmental
entity.
(2) “Capital improvements” means improvements with a useful life of five years or more, by new
construction or other action, which increase or increased the service capacity of a public facility.
(3) “Capital improvements plan” means a plan that identifies capital improvements for which
development impact fees may be used as a funding source.
(4) “Connection charges” and “hookup charges” mean charges for the actual cost of connecting a
property to a public water or public sewer system, limited to labor and materials involved in making pipe
connections, installation of water meters, and other actual costs.
(5) “Developer” means an individual or corporation, partnership, or other entity undertaking
development.
(6) “Development” means construction or installation of a new building or structure, or a change in use
of a building or structure, any of which creates additional demand and need for public facilities. A building
or structure shall include, but not be limited to, modular buildings and manufactured housing.
“Development” does not include alterations made to existing single-family homes.
(7) “Development approval” means a document from a governmental entity which authorizes the
commencement of a development.
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 61 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
16
(8) “Development impact fee” or “impact fee” means a payment of money imposed as a condition of
development approval to pay a proportionate share of the cost of system improvements needed to serve
the people utilizing the improvements. The term does not include:
(a) a charge or fee to pay the administrative, plan review, or inspection costs associated with permits
required for development;
(b) connection or hookup charges;
(c) amounts collected from a developer in a transaction in which the governmental entity has
incurred expenses in constructing capital improvements for the development if the owner or developer
has agreed to be financially responsible for the construction or installation of the capital improvements;
(d) fees authorized by Article 3 of this chapter.
(9) “Development permit” means a permit issued for construction on or development of land when no
subsequent building permit issued pursuant to Chapter 9 of Title 6 is required.
(10) “Fee payor” means the individual or legal entity that pays or is required to pay a development
impact fee.
(11) “Governmental entity” means a county, as provided in Chapter 9, Title 4, and a municipality, as
defined in Section 5-1-20.
(12) “Incidental benefits” are benefits which accrue to a property as a secondary result or as a minor
consequence of the provision of public facilities to another property.
(13) “Land use assumptions” means a description of the service area and projections of land uses,
densities, intensities, and population in the service area over at least a ten-year period.
(14) “Level of service” means a measure of the relationship between service capacity and service
demand for public facilities.
(15) “Local planning commission” means the entity created pursuant to Article 1, Chapter 29, Title 6.
(16) “Project” means a particular development on an identified parcel of land.
(17) “Proportionate share” means that portion of the cost of system improvements determined
pursuant to Section 6-1-990 which reasonably relates to the service demands and needs of the project.
(18) “Public facilities” means:
(a) water supply production, treatment, laboratory, engineering, administration, storage, and
transmission facilities;
(b) wastewater collection, treatment, laboratory, engineering, administration, and disposal facilities;
(c) solid waste and recycling collection, treatment, and disposal facilities;
(d) roads, streets, and bridges including, but not limited to, rights-of-way and traffic signals;
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 62 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
17
(e) storm water transmission, retention, detention, treatment, and disposal facilities and flood
control facilities;
(f) public safety facilities, including law enforcement, fire, emergency medical and rescue, and street
lighting facilities;
(g) capital equipment and vehicles, with an individual unit purchase price of not less than one
hundred thousand dollars including, but not limited to, equipment and vehicles used in the delivery of
public safety services, emergency preparedness services, collection and disposal of solid waste, and storm
water management and control;
(h) parks, libraries, and recreational facilities;
(i) public education facilities for grades K-12 including, but not limited to, schools, offices, classrooms,
parking areas, playgrounds, libraries, cafeterias, gymnasiums, health and music rooms, computer and
science laboratories, and other facilities considered necessary for the proper public education of the
state’s children.
(19) “Service area” means, based on sound planning or engineering principles, or both, a defined
geographic area in which specific public facilities provide service to development within the area defined.
Provided, however, that no provision in this article may be interpreted to alter, enlarge, or reduce the
service area or boundaries of a political subdivision which is authorized or set by law.
(20) “Service unit” means a standardized measure of consumption, use, generation, or discharge
attributable to an individual unit of development calculated in accordance with generally accepted
engineering or planning standards for a particular category of capital improvements.
(21) “System improvements” means capital improvements to public facilities which are designed to
provide service to a service area.
(22) “System improvement costs” means costs incurred for construction or reconstruction of system
improvements, including design, acquisition, engineering, and other costs attributable to the
improvements, and also including the costs of providing additional public facilities needed to serve new
growth and development. System improvement costs do not include:
(a) construction, acquisition, or expansion of public facilities other than capital improvements
identified in the capital improvements plan;
(b) repair, operation, or maintenance of existing or new capital improvements;
(c) upgrading, updating, expanding, or replacing existing capital improvements to serve existing
development in order to meet stricter safety, efficiency, environmental, or regulatory standards;
(d) upgrading, updating, expanding, or replacing existing capital improvements to provide better
service to existing development;
(e) administrative and operating costs of the governmental entity; or
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 63 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
18
(f) principal payments and interest or other finance charges on bonds or other indebtedness except
financial obligations issued by or on behalf of the governmental entity to finance capital improvements
identified in the capital improvements plan.
HISTORY: 1999 Act No. 118, Section 1; 2016 Act No. 229 (H.4416), Section 2, eff June 3, 2016.
Effect of Amendment
2016 Act No. 229, Section 2, added (18)(i), relating to certain public education facilities.
SECTION 6-1-930. Developmental impact fee.
(A)(1) Only a governmental entity that has a comprehensive plan, as provided in Chapter 29 of this title,
and which complies with the requirements of this article may impose a development impact fee. If a
governmental entity has not adopted a comprehensive plan, but has adopted a capital improvements plan
which substantially complies with the requirements of Section 6-1-960(B), then it may impose a
development impact fee. A governmental entity may not impose an impact fee, regardless of how it is
designated, except as provided in this article. However, a special purpose district or public service district
which (a) provides fire protection services or recreation services, (b) was created by act of the General
Assembly prior to 1973, and (c) had the power to impose development impact fees prior to the effective
date of this section is not prohibited from imposing development impact fees.
(2) Before imposing a development impact fee on residential units, a governmental entity shall
prepare a report which estimates the effect of recovering capital costs through impact fees on the
availability of affordable housing within the political jurisdiction of the governmental entity.
(B)(1) An impact fee may be imposed and collected by the governmental entity only upon the passage
of an ordinance approved by a positive majority, as defined in Article 3 of this chapter.
(2) The amount of the development impact fee must be based on actual improvement costs or
reasonable estimates of the costs, supported by sound engineering studies.
(3) An ordinance authorizing the imposition of a development impact fee must:
(a) establish a procedure for timely processing of applications for determinations by the
governmental entity of development impact fees applicable to all property subject to impact fees and for
the timely processing of applications for individual assessment of development impact fees, credits, or
reimbursements allowed or paid under this article;
(b) include a description of acceptable levels of service for system improvements; and
(c) provide for the termination of the impact fee.
(C) A governmental entity shall prepare and publish an annual report describing the amount of all
impact fees collected, appropriated, or spent during the preceding year by category of public facility and
service area.
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 64 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
19
(D) Payment of an impact fee may result in an incidental benefit to property owners or developers
within the service area other than the fee payor, except that an impact fee that results in benefits to
property owners or developers within the service area, other than the fee payor, in an amount which is
greater than incidental benefits is prohibited.
HISTORY: 1999 Act No. 118, Section 1.
SECTION 6-1-940. Amount of impact fee.
A governmental entity imposing an impact fee must provide in the impact fee ordinance the amount of
impact fee due for each unit of development in a project for which an individual building permit or
certificate of occupancy is issued. The governmental entity is bound by the amount of impact fee specified
in the ordinance and may not charge higher or additional impact fees for the same purpose unless the
number of service units increases or the scope of the development changes and the amount of additional
impact fees is limited to the amount attributable to the additional service units or change in scope of the
development. The impact fee ordinance must:
(1) include an explanation of the calculation of the impact fee, including an explanation of the factors
considered pursuant to this article;
(2) specify the system improvements for which the impact fee is intended to be used;
(3) inform the developer that he may pay a project’s proportionate share of system improvement costs
by payment of impact fees according to the fee schedule as full and complete payment of the developer’s
proportionate share of system improvements costs;
(4) inform the fee payor that:
(a) he may negotiate and contract for facilities or services with the governmental entity in lieu of the
development impact fee as defined in Section 6-1-1050;
(b) he has the right of appeal, as provided in Section 6-1-1030;
(c) the impact fee must be paid no earlier than the time of issuance of the building permit or issuance
of a development permit if no building permit is required.
HISTORY: 1999 Act No. 118, Section 1.
SECTION 6-1-950. Procedure for adoption of ordinance imposing impact fees.
(A) The governing body of a governmental entity begins the process for adoption of an ordinance
imposing an impact fee by enacting a resolution directing the local planning commission to conduct the
studies and to recommend an impact fee ordinance, developed in accordance with the requirements of
this article. Under no circumstances may the governing body of a governmental entity impose an impact
fee for any public facility which has been paid for entirely by the developer.
(B) Upon receipt of the resolution enacted pursuant to subsection (A), the local planning commission
shall develop, within the time designated in the resolution, and make recommendations to the
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 65 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
20
governmental entity for a capital improvements plan and impact fees by service unit. The local planning
commission shall prepare and adopt its recommendations in the same manner and using the same
procedures as those used for developing recommendations for a comprehensive plan as provided in
Article 3, Chapter 29, Title 6, except as otherwise provided in this article. The commission shall review and
update the capital improvements plan and impact fees in the same manner and on the same review cycle
as the governmental entity’s comprehensive plan or elements of it.
HISTORY: 1999 Act No. 118, Section 1.
SECTION 6-1-960. Recommended capital improvements plan; notice; contents of plan.
(A) The local planning commission shall recommend to the governmental entity a capital improvements
plan which may be adopted by the governmental entity by ordinance. The recommendations of the
commission are not binding on the governmental entity, which may amend or alter the plan. After
reasonable public notice, a public hearing must be held before final action to adopt the ordinance
approving the capital improvements plan. The notice must be published not less than thirty days before
the time of the hearing in at least one newspaper of general circulation in the county. The notice must
advise the public of the time and place of the hearing, that a copy of the capital improvements plan is
available for public inspection in the offices of the governmental entity, and that members of the public
will be given an opportunity to be heard.
(B) The capital improvements plan must contain:
(1) a general description of all existing public facilities, and their existing deficiencies, within the
service area or areas of the governmental entity, a reasonable estimate of all costs, and a plan to develop
the funding resources, including existing sources of revenues, related to curing the existing deficiencies
including, but not limited to, the upgrading, updating, improving, expanding, or replacing of these facilities
to meet existing needs and usage;
(2) an analysis of the total capacity, the level of current usage, and commitments for usage of capacity
of existing public facilities, which must be prepared by a qualified professional using generally accepted
principles and professional standards;
(3) a description of the land use assumptions;
(4) a definitive table establishing the specific service unit for each category of system improvements
and an equivalency or conversion table establishing the ratio of a service unit to various types of land
uses, including residential, commercial, agricultural, and industrial, as appropriate;
(5) a description of all system improvements and their costs necessitated by and attributable to new
development in the service area, based on the approved land use assumptions, to provide a level of
service not to exceed the level of service currently existing in the community or service area, unless a
different or higher level of service is required by law, court order, or safety consideration;
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 66 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
21
(6) the total number of service units necessitated by and attributable to new development within the
service area based on the land use assumptions and calculated in accordance with generally accepted
engineering or planning criteria;
(7) the projected demand for system improvements required by new service units projected over a
reasonable period of time not to exceed twenty years;
(8) identification of all sources and levels of funding available to the governmental entity for the
financing of the system improvements; and
(9) a schedule setting forth estimated dates for commencing and completing construction of all
improvements identified in the capital improvements plan.
(C) Changes in the capital improvements plan must be approved in the same manner as approval of the
original plan.
HISTORY: 1999 Act No. 118, Section 1.
SECTION 6-1-970. Exemptions from impact fees.
The following structures or activities are exempt from impact fees:
(1) rebuilding the same amount of floor space of a structure that was destroyed by fire or other
catastrophe;
(2) remodeling or repairing a structure that does not result in an increase in the number of service units;
(3) replacing a residential unit, including a manufactured home, with another residential unit on the
same lot, if the number of service units does not increase;
(4) placing a construction trailer or office on a lot during the period of construction on the lot;
(5) constructing an addition on a residential structure which does not increase the number of service
units;
(6) adding uses that are typically accessory to residential uses, such as a tennis court or a clubhouse,
unless it is demonstrated clearly that the use creates a significant impact on the system’s capacity;
(7) all or part of a particular development project if:
(a) the project is determined to create affordable housing; and
(b) the exempt development’s proportionate share of system improvements is funded through a
revenue source other than development impact fees;
(8) constructing a new elementary, middle, or secondary school; and
(9) constructing a new volunteer fire department.
HISTORY: 1999 Act No. 118, Section 1; 2016 Act No. 229 (H.4416), Section 1, eff June 3, 2016.
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 67 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
22
Effect of Amendment
2016 Act No. 229, Section 1, added (8) and (9), relating to certain schools and volunteer fire departments.
SECTION 6-1-980. Calculation of impact fees.
(A) The impact fee for each service unit may not exceed the amount determined by dividing the costs
of the capital improvements by the total number of projected service units that potentially could use the
capital improvement. If the number of new service units projected over a reasonable period of time is less
than the total number of new service units shown by the approved land use assumptions at full
development of the service area, the maximum impact fee for each service unit must be calculated by
dividing the costs of the part of the capital improvements necessitated by and attributable to the
projected new service units by the total projected new service units.
(B) An impact fee must be calculated in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
HISTORY: 1999 Act No. 118, Section 1.
SECTION 6-1-990. Maximum impact fee; proportionate share of costs of improvements to serve new
development.
(A) The impact fee imposed upon a fee payor may not exceed a proportionate share of the costs
incurred by the governmental entity in providing system improvements to serve the new development.
The proportionate share is the cost attributable to the development after the governmental entity
reduces the amount to be imposed by the following factors:
(1) appropriate credit, offset, or contribution of money, dedication of land, or construction of system
improvements; and
(2) all other sources of funding the system improvements including funds obtained from economic
development incentives or grants secured which are not required to be repaid.
(B) In determining the proportionate share of the cost of system improvements to be paid, the
governmental entity imposing the impact fee must consider the:
(1) cost of existing system improvements resulting from new development within the service area or
areas;
(2) means by which existing system improvements have been financed;
(3) extent to which the new development contributes to the cost of system improvements;
(4) extent to which the new development is required to contribute to the cost of existing system
improvements in the future;
(5) extent to which the new development is required to provide system improvements, without
charge to other properties within the service area or areas;
(6) time and price differentials inherent in a fair comparison of fees paid at different times; and
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 68 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
23
(7) availability of other sources of funding system improvements including, but not limited to, user
charges, general tax levies, intergovernmental transfers, and special taxation.
HISTORY: 1999 Act No. 118, Section 1.
SECTION 6-1-1000. Fair compensation or reimbursement of developers for costs, dedication of land or
oversize facilities.
A developer required to pay a development impact fee may not be required to pay more than his
proportionate share of the costs of the project, including the payment of money or contribution or
dedication of land, or to oversize his facilities for use of others outside of the project without fair
compensation or reimbursement.
HISTORY: 1999 Act No. 118, Section 1.
SECTION 6-1-1010. Accounting; expenditures.
(A) Revenues from all development impact fees must be maintained in one or more interest-bearing
accounts. Accounting records must be maintained for each category of system improvements and the
service area in which the fees are collected. Interest earned on development impact fees must be
considered funds of the account on which it is earned, and must be subject to all restrictions placed on
the use of impact fees pursuant to the provisions of this article.
(B) Expenditures of development impact fees must be made only for the category of system
improvements and within or for the benefit of the service area for which the impact fee was imposed as
shown by the capital improvements plan and as authorized in this article. Impact fees may not be used
for:
(1) a purpose other than system improvement costs to create additional improvements to serve new
growth;
(2) a category of system improvements other than that for which they were collected; or
(3) the benefit of service areas other than the area for which they were imposed.
HISTORY: 1999 Act No. 118, Section 1.
SECTION 6-1-1020. Refunds of impact fees.
(A) An impact fee must be refunded to the owner of record of property on which a development impact
fee has been paid if:
(1) the impact fees have not been expended within three years of the date they were scheduled to
be expended on a first-in, first-out basis; or
(2) a building permit or permit for installation of a manufactured home is denied.
(B) When the right to a refund exists, the governmental entity shall send a refund to the owner of record
within ninety days after it is determined by the entity that a refund is due.
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 69 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
24
(C) A refund must include the pro rata portion of interest earned while on deposit in the impact fee
account.
(D) A person entitled to a refund has standing to sue for a refund pursuant to this article if there has
not been a timely payment of a refund pursuant to subsection (B) of this section.
HISTORY: 1999 Act No. 118, Section 1.
SECTION 6-1-1030. Appeals.
(A) A governmental entity which adopts a development impact fee ordinance shall provide for
administrative appeals by the developer or fee payor.
(B) A fee payor may pay a development impact fee under protest. A fee payor making the payment is
not estopped from exercising the right of appeal provided in this article, nor is the fee payor estopped
from receiving a refund of an amount considered to have been illegally collected. Instead of making a
payment of an impact fee under protest, a fee payor, at his option, may post a bond or submit an
irrevocable letter of credit for the amount of impact fees due, pending the outcome of an appeal.
(C) A governmental entity which adopts a development impact fee ordinance shall provide for
mediation by a qualified independent party, upon voluntary agreement by both the fee payor and the
governmental entity, to address a disagreement related to the impact fee for proposed development.
Participation in mediation does not preclude the fee payor from pursuing other remedies provided for in
this section or otherwise available by law.
HISTORY: 1999 Act No. 118, Section 1.
SECTION 6-1-1040. Collection of development impact fees.
A governmental entity may provide in a development impact fee ordinance the method for collection
of development impact fees including, but not limited to:
(1) additions to the fee for reasonable interest and penalties for nonpayment or late payment;
(2) withholding of the certificate of occupancy, or building permit if no certificate of occupancy is
required, until the development impact fee is paid;
(3) withholding of utility services until the development impact fee is paid; and
(4) imposing liens for failure to pay timely a development impact fee.
HISTORY: 1999 Act No. 118, Section 1.
SECTION 6-1-1050. Permissible agreements for payments or construction or installation of improvements
by fee payors and developers; credits and reimbursements.
A fee payor and developer may enter into an agreement with a governmental entity, including an
agreement entered into pursuant to the South Carolina Local Government Development Agreement Act,
providing for payments instead of impact fees for facilities or services. That agreement may provide for
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 70 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
25
the construction or installation of system improvements by the fee payor or developer and for credits or
reimbursements for costs incurred by a fee payor or developer including interproject transfers of credits
or reimbursement for project improvements which are used or shared by more than one development
project. An impact fee may not be imposed on a fee payor or developer who has entered into an
agreement as described in this section.
HISTORY: 1999 Act No. 118, Section 1.
SECTION 6-1-1060. Article shall not affect existing laws.
(A) The provisions of this article do not repeal existing laws authorizing a governmental entity to impose
fees or require contributions or property dedications for capital improvements. A development impact
fee adopted in accordance with existing laws before the enactment of this article is not affected until
termination of the development impact fee. A subsequent change or reenactment of the development
impact fee must comply with the provisions of this article. Requirements for developers to pay in whole
or in part for system improvements may be imposed by governmental entities only by way of impact fees
imposed pursuant to the ordinance.
(B) Notwithstanding another provision of this article, property for which a valid building permit or
certificate of occupancy has been issued or construction has commenced before the effective date of a
development impact fee ordinance is not subject to additional development impact fees.
HISTORY: 1999 Act No. 118, Section 1.
SECTION 6-1-1070. Shared funding among units of government; agreements.
(A) If the proposed system improvements include the improvement of public facilities under the
jurisdiction of another unit of government including, but not limited to, a special purpose district that
does not provide water and wastewater utilities, a school district, and a public service district, an
agreement between the governmental entity and other unit of government must specify the reasonable
share of funding by each unit. The governmental entity authorized to impose impact fees may not assume
more than its reasonable share of funding joint improvements, nor may another unit of government which
is not authorized to impose impact fees do so unless the expenditure is pursuant to an agreement under
Section 6-1-1050 of this section.
(B) A governmental entity may enter into an agreement with another unit of government including, but
not limited to, a special purpose district that does not provide water and wastewater utilities, a school
district, and a public service district, that has the responsibility of providing the service for which an impact
fee may be imposed. The determination of the amount of the impact fee for the contracting governmental
entity must be made in the same manner and is subject to the same procedures and limitations as
provided in this article. The agreement must provide for the collection of the impact fee by the
governmental entity and for the expenditure of the impact fee by another unit of government including,
but not limited to, a special purpose district that does not provide water and wastewater utilities, a school
district, and a public services district unless otherwise provided by contract.
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 71 of 72
DR
A
F
T
Capital Improvement Plan and Development Impact Fee Study
North Augusta, South Carolina
26
HISTORY: 1999 Act No. 118, Section 1.
SECTION 6-1-1080. Exemptions; water or wastewater utilities.
The provisions of this chapter do not apply to a development impact fee for water or wastewater
utilities, or both, imposed by a city, county, commissioners of public works, special purpose district, or
nonprofit corporation organized pursuant to Chapter 35 or 36 of Title 33, except that in order to impose
a development impact fee for water or wastewater utilities, or both, the city, county, commissioners of
public works, special purpose district or nonprofit corporation organized pursuant to Chapter 35 or 36 of
Title 33 must:
(1) have a capital improvements plan before imposition of the development impact fee; and
(2) prepare a report to be made public before imposition of the development impact fee, which shall
include, but not be limited to, an explanation of the basis, use, calculation, and method of collection of
the development impact fee; and
(3) enact the fee in accordance with the requirements of Article 3 of this chapter.
HISTORY: 1999 Act No. 118, Section 1.
SECTION 6-1-1090. Annexations by municipalities.
A county development impact fee ordinance imposed in an area which is annexed by a municipality is
not affected by this article until the development impact fee terminates, unless the municipality assumes
any liability which is to be paid with the impact fee revenue.
HISTORY: 1999 Act No. 118, Section 1.
SECTION 6-1-2000. Taxation or revenue authority by political subdivisions.
This article shall not create, grant, or confer any new or additional taxing or revenue raising authority
to a political subdivision which was not specifically granted to that entity by a previous act of the General
Assembly.
HISTORY: 1999 Act No. 118, Section 1.
SECTION 6-1-2010. Compliance with public notice or public hearing requirements.
Compliance with any requirement for public notice or public hearing in this article is considered to be
in compliance with any other public notice or public hearing requirement otherwise applicable including,
but not limited to, the provisions of Chapter 4, Title 30, and Article 3 of this chapter.
HISTORY: 1999 Act No. 118, Section 1.
ATTACHMENT #PH Draft Study Page 72 of 72
ATTACHMENT #PH - 1
Page 1 of 8
ATTACHMENT #PH - 1
Page 2 of 8
ATTACHMENT #PH - 1
Page 3 of 8
ATTACHMENT #PH - 1
Page 4 of 8
ATTACHMENT #PH - 1
Page 5 of 8
ATTACHMENT #PH - 1
Page 6 of 8
ATTACHMENT #PH - 1
Page 7 of 8
ATTACHMENT #PH - 1
Page 8 of 8
Page 1 of 2
PUBLIC POWER HOUR
September 15, 2025 – 5:30 p.m. - Municipal Center – 100 Georgia Avenue, 3rd Floor - Council Chambers
DRAFT AGENDA: CITY OF NORTH AUGUSTA CITY COUNCIL MEETING
September 15, 2025 – 6:00 p.m. – Municipal Center – 100 Georgia Avenue, 3rd Floor - Council Chambers
The Public Power Hour and City Council meeting will be streamed for public viewing online at:
• “City of North Augusta – Public Information” on www.Facebook.com
• “City of North Augusta Public Information” on www.YouTube.com
CITIZEN COMMENTS: Citizens may speak to Mayor and City Council on each item listed on this agenda. The Mayor will call
for comments prior to Council’s discussion. Speakers shall give their name and address in an audible tone of voice. Speaker
Forms are provided on the credenza at the entrance for speakers desiring that the minutes indicate that they addressed Council
on a specific topic. The form will be included as part of the minutes of the meeting. Citizen comments are limited to five
minutes.
CITIZEN ASSISTANCE: Individuals needing special assistance or sign interpreter to participate in the meeting, please notify the
Administration Department 48 hours prior to the meeting.
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. ROLL CALL
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
• Regular City Council Meeting minutes of August 18, 2025
• Study Session minutes of September 8, 2025
5. PROCLAMATION(S):
a. Constitution Week – September 17-23, 2025
NEW BUSINESS
6. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT: Ordinance No. 2025-13 Adopting Procedures for the Imposition,
Calculation, Collection, Expenditure and Administration of Impact Fees to be Imposed on New
Development; Providing a Purpose and Intent; Providing Definitions; Providing General Provisions and
Applicability; Providing for the Establishment of Impact Fee Accounts; Providing for the Appropriation of
Impact Fee Funds; Providing for Refunds; Providing for Appeals; Providing for Conflict; Providing for
Severability; and Providing an Effective Date – First Reading
7. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT: Ordinance No. 2025-14 Establishment of Impact Fee Charges– First
Reading
ATTACHMENT #1 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2
8. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT: Ordinance No. 2025-15 To Amend Section 2-16 of the North Augusta City
Code Regarding Impact Fees for Properties with Utilities Provided Through Annexation Agreements –
First Reading
9. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT: Ordinance No. 2025-16 To Amend the Zoning Map of the City of North
Augusta, South Carolina by Rezoning ± 0.40 Acres of Land Owned by HF Developers, LLC, Tax Parcel No.
007-13-01-014 from PD, Planned Development to DTMU2, Downtown Mixed Use 2 – First Reading
10. PUBLIC SERVICES: Resolution No. 2025-28 Authorizing Multiple Expenditures from Fund 36 Ancillary to
the Regional Solid Waste Transfer Station Project
11. ADMINISTRATION: Resolution No. 2025-29 Authorizing Acceptance of Withdrawal of Awarded
Allocation of the Accommodations Tax Funding from the State of South Carolina for Tax Year 2023-2024
and Approval of Withdrawn Funds be Added to the Accommodations Tax Year 2024-2025
Accommodations Tax Funding Program
12. ADMINISTRATION: Resolution No. 2025-30 Committing the City of North Augusta to Providing a Local
Match for a Municipal Association of South Carolina Big Idea Grant and Following its Procurement Policy
when Securing Services and Products with Grant Funds
13. ADMINISTRATION: Resolution No. 2025-31 Authorizing Funding and Approval for Mural Crosswalks at
W. Pine Grove Avenue and West Avenue and Awarding Bid to Asphalt Concepts
14. ENGINEERING & PUBLIC WORKS: Resolution No. 2025-32 Authorizing the City of North Augusta to Enter
into a Construction Contract for the Riverside Village Bollards Project
15. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT(S):
a. Update on Utility Billing System Transition
16. PRESENTATIONS/COMMUNICATIONS/RECOGNITION OF VISITORS:
A. Citizen Comments: At this time, citizens may speak to Mayor and City Council regarding matters not
listed on the agenda. Speakers shall give their name and address for the records. Speaker Forms are
provided on the credenza for speakers desiring that the minutes indicate that they addressed Council
on a specific topic. The form will be included as part of the minutes of the meeting. Citizen comments
are limited to five minutes.
B. Council Comments
17. ADJOURNMENT
ATTACHMENT #1 Page 2 of 2
ATTACHMENT #1a Page 1 of 1
FINANCE:
• 250 Delinquent Tax Letters were sent by certified mail on September 2.
• Property postings will begin on September 22. The Tax Sale is scheduled for November 3.
• 230 Delinquent Business License notices were mailed September 5 for businesses that had a
business license in 2024 and have not yet renewed their license.
• Utility update will be covered under the Focus Item.
HUMAN RESOURCES:
• See the following page for the Employment Opportunities list
ENGINEERING AND PUBLIC WORKS:
• SAK will be re-lining storm pipe at 554 Dove Street on 9/10.
• Streets & Drains continues to work on Brick Pond Park boardwalk repairs.
• Installation of pavement markings for the new Center Street crosswalks will begin this week.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT:
• Planning Commission meeting Wednesday, September 17
PUBLIC SERVICES:
• Water System Flow & Pressure Test - North Augusta High School Area and Hidden Hills
Subdivision
• Wastewater Interceptor Rehabilitation Project: The City's contractor SAK will be re-lining the
wastewater main on Atomic Road between Buena Vista and Martintown Road.
o The work will require one lane to be closed from 7:00 AM until 7:00 PM September 8-
12.
PUBLIC SAFETY:
• The next Citizen's Academy will start on Tuesday, September 9.
• The Annual Public Safety Trunk or Treat will be held on Saturday, October 11 from 5-8pm at
Riverview Park.
PARKS AND RECREATION:
• Riverview Park Splash Pad & Summerfield Splash Pad are open through the month of
September. The splash pads will remain open until the temperatures consistently fall below 80
degrees.
• Fall Sports got started on Saturday with the first round of Kinderkicker soccer games. Football,
Cheerleading, Volleyball, and all other Soccer leagues began play tonight.
• The RECing Crew begins their fall adaptive basketball program this coming Saturday in Gym 1 of
the Activities Center.
• Senior Adult Softball 6 team league plays on Tuesday nights on Field A & B at Riverview Park.
TOURISM:
• The North Augusta Chamber of Commerce will host the Good Morning North Augusta breakfast
at the Community Center on Thursday, September 11 at 7:30am. This month’s event will honor
local First Responders.
• Explore North Augusta Fall Concert Series begins Saturday, September 13 at 7:00pm at the
Sharon Jones Amphitheater with 7 Summers, a Morgan Wallen Tribute Band, performing.
• Visit Explore North Augusta’s Website for more details and upcoming events:
o https://explorenorthaugusta.com
DEPARTMENT DETAILS
for September 8, 2025
ATTACHMENT #2 Page 1 of 2
To apply and to see full job descriptions please visit www.northaugustasc.gov/jobs. You may also contact Human Resources
for more information at 803-442-5712 or sking@northaugustasc.gov.
The City of North Augusta is an Equal Opportunity Employer
EMPLOYMENT
OPPORTUNITIES
Communications Technician I – Public Safety
Grade: 10
Salary/Pay Rate: $20.24 - $24.29/hour
Closing Date: Until Filled
Crew Leader – Property Maintenance
Grade: 9
Salary/Pay Rate: $19.24 – $23.09/hour
Closing Date: 08/12/2025
Environmental Systems Operator IV – Water Production
Grade: 15
Salary/Pay Rate: $25.23 - $30.28/hour
Closing Date: Until Filled
Firefighter – Public Safety
Grade: 4
Salary/Pay Rate: $14.25 - $17.11/hour
Closing Date: Until Filled
Grounds Worker III – Property Maintenance
Grade: 7
Salary/Pay Rate: $17.25 – $20.70/hour
Closing Date: Until Filled
Heavy Equipment Mechanic I – Sanitation
Grade: 9
Salary/Pay Rate: $19.24 – $23.09/hour
Closing Date: Until Filled
Public Safety Officer – Public Safety
Grade: 16
Salary/Pay Rate: $24.54 - $29.45/hour
Closing Date: Until Filled
Sanitation Worker I – Sanitation
Grade: 4
Salary/Pay Rate: $14.25 - $17.11/hour
Closing Date: Until Filled
Trades Worker – Streets and Drains
Grade: 8
Salary/Pay Rate: $18.25 - $21.90/hour
Closing Date: Until Filled
Utility Service Technician – Wastewater O&M
Grade: 13
Salary/Pay Rate: $23.24 - $27.88/hour
Closing Date: Until Filled
Vehicle Operator I – Sanitation
Grade: 6
Salary/Pay Rate: $16.25 - $19.50/hour
Closing Date: Until Filled
Vehicle Operator II – Sanitation
Grade: 9
Salary/Pay Rate: $19.24 – $23.09/hour
Closing Date: Until Filled
Vehicle Operator III – MRF
Grade: 10
Salary/Pay Rate: $20.24 - $24.29/hour
Closing Date: Until Filled
ATTACHMENT #2 Page 2 of 2
Animal Control Future
Study Session
September 8, 2025
ATTACHMENT #3Ai Page 1 of 12
Animal Control Future
•Purpose –To seek guidance for a resolution to decide on the best path
forward for the care of animals that are in custody of Animal Control.
•Facts
•Shelter established to handle dogs from police involved incidents
•State requires 5 day hold for strays
•Animals are taken to the shelter
•A series of initial medications are given to the animals by the Animal Control Officer
•The animals are evaluated as to their veterinarian needs and taken as necessary
•The animals are taken to a vet for rabies vaccinations when required for adoption.
ATTACHMENT #3Ai Page 2 of 12
Animal Control Future
Town Population ACOs Animal Shelter
Greenville 70,720 2Greenville County
Spartanburg 38,732 1(1)Spartanburg Humane Society
Aiken 32,025 1ASPCA
Conway 24,809 1Horry County
North Augusta 24,379 1North Augusta
Simpsonville 23,354 1Greenville County
Easley 22,921 0Pickens County
Greenwood 22,545 1Greenwood County
Batesburg-Leesville 5,270 0Lexington County
•Florence is the only other City in SC operating a shelter, and they do so in partnership with the ASPCA
•The staffing reflects transport functions to other shelters, not operating a shelter
ATTACHMENT #3Ai Page 3 of 12
Animal Control Future
•Funding Limitations
•Capital Project Sales Tax IV & V
•Voter referendum, City may not obligate funds for projects not on those referendums
•Department of Energy settlement funds
•Project list determined by the State Legislature with City input, and may not be altered
•American Rescue Plan Act
•Funds fully obligated
•Thirteen public actions to determine projects –focused largely on infrastructure and public safety
•Hospitality & Accommodations Tax
•State law dictates uses –primarily for Tourism
•Impact Fees (if collected)
•State law dictates uses –only what is in the study
_______________________________________________________________
•General Fund (Property Taxes)
•Capital Project Fund (Property Taxes)
________________________________________________________________
•Requests for State Legislature funds will compete better if for a regional use
ATTACHMENT #3Ai Page 4 of 12
Animal Control Future
•3 options
•1) Status Quo –Continue with same shelter
•2) Expand/Invest in shelter –Expand staffing for shelter
•3) City/County partnership at County Shelter
ATTACHMENT #3Ai Page 5 of 12
Animal Control Future
•Option 1) Status Quo –Continue with same shelter
•Shelter was built in the 1990’s
•Limited space
•No Natural light
•Needs updating for drains, dividers, and play access
•No on-site vet
•Not practical for release of animals
•Not practical for weekend visitations by volunteers
•One Animal Control Officer (ACO) not enough for 7 day a week requirements
ATTACHMENT #3Ai Page 6 of 12
Animal Control Future
•Option 2) Expand/Invest in shelter –Expand staffing for shelter
•Limited space in current location for expansion
•Expanded staffing will be needed, minimum one additional ACO
•Veterinarian care will still have to be solved (no vet on-site).
•Volunteer access in current facility still a problem
•No other viable locations identified for alternate facility
ATTACHMENT #3Ai Page 7 of 12
Animal Control Future
•Guidance from 2019 report by Team Shelter USA.
•“No funds should be invested in the current facility but rather programming
changed to decrease the number of pets entering the shelter and so funding
can be used for an alternative facility.”
ATTACHMENT #3Ai Page 8 of 12
Animal Control Future
•Option 3) City/County partnership at County Shelters
•Aiken ASPCA (Aiken City rates)
•$1,000,000 investment by City of Aiken in facility
•$20,000+ monthly operations cost to City of Aiken
•Additional costs for intakes, vaccines, disposition per dog
•25 dog kennels
•Aiken County Animal Shelter
•No current agreements in place
•At full capacity, moved Edgefield County animals out necessitating EC facility
•Geographically constrained to add more building space
•Aiken County examining feasibility of additional capacity
•Edgefield County Animal Shelter
•$52,000 capital one-time cost per kennel space ($520,000 for 10 spaces)
•EC requests 1 Kennel Tech & 1 Vet Tech for recurring annual cost of $137,000
•Up to $100,000 annually for animal care
•Benefits of outside partnership
•On site veterinarian care
•Larger enclosures for animals
•Natural light available
•More staff to allow outside activities
ATTACHMENT #3Ai Page 9 of 12
Animal Control Future
•Guidance from 2019 report by Team Shelter USA.
•Meet with Edgefield County to inquire about a partner shelter.
•Edgefield County stated they could expand their shelter for
approximately $50,000 per kennel which is a similar rate to what
Saluda County paid when they partnered.
•This would allow us 10 kennels.
•We would have to pay fees related to the housing and vet supplies used.
•On Site Veterinarian care.
ATTACHMENT #3Ai Page 10 of 12
Staff Recommendation
•Option 3) City/County partnership at County Shelters
•Aiken ASPCA (Aiken City rates)
•$1,000,000 investment by City of Aiken in facility
•$20,000+ monthly operations cost to City of Aiken
•Additional costs for intakes, vaccines, disposition per dog
•25 dog kennels
•Aiken County Animal Shelter
•No current agreements in place
•At full capacity, moved Edgefield County animals out necessitating EC facility
•Geographically constrained to add more building space
•Aiken County examining feasibility of additional capacity
•Edgefield County Animal Shelter
•$52,000 capital one-time cost per kennel space ($520,000 for 10 spaces)
•EC requests 1 Kennel Tech & 1 Vet Tech for recurring annual cost of $137,000
•Up to $100,000 annually for animal care
•Benefits of outside partnership
•On site veterinarian care
•Larger enclosures for animals
•Natural light available
•More staff to allow outside activities
ATTACHMENT #3Ai Page 11 of 12
Council Discussion
ATTACHMENT #3Ai Page 12 of 12