개발부담금의 형평성 이슈, 장단점, 법적 근거, 미국의 사례
Equity Issues, Advantage and Disadvantage, Legal Foundation, and Actual Practice of Impact Fees in the U.S.
0
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
본 논문은 개발부담금의 윤리적 이슈, 개발부담금의 장점 대 단점, 개발부담금의 법적 근거, 그리고 미국에서의 개발부담금 채택의 실제 사례에 대해 이론적으로 고찰하였다. 도시 성장의 비용과 관련하여 기존 거주자는 개발부담금을 지불하지 않는 반면에 신 거주자는 왜 개발부담금을 지불해야만 하는가와 같은 형평성 이슈가 제기될 수 있다. 개발부담금은 저소득 및 중소득 가구를 위한 주택 개발에 더 큰 부담을 줄 것이다. 개발부담금으로 인해 개발업자는 저소득 및 중소득 가구를 위한 주택을 보다 적게 건설하고 고가의 주택 개발에 집중할 수 있다. 이러한 움직임은 저가 및 중가 주택의 잠재적 공급량을 감소시킬 수 있다. 더 나아가 개발부담금이 기존의 주택에 미치는 영향이 보다 더 중요할 수 있다. 개발부담금으로 인해 신 주택은 보다 고가로 됨에 따라 기존 주택의 가격은 증가할 것이다. 궁극적으로 저가 및 중가 소득 가구를 위한 주택 공급은 감소할 것이다. 개발부담금이 저소득 가구의 주택 요구에 미칠 수 있는 영향에 대한 고찰이 이루어져야만 한다. 적정 가격의 주택 공급 부족 외에도 개발부담금 부과와 관련해서 예상 가능한 결과는 바로 주택가 인상으로 인해 일부의 잠재적 신 거주자가 주택 시장에 진입할 수 없게 되며, 결과적으로 경제적 배제가 영속화된다는 것이다. 이는 커뮤니티의 동질성을 조장하고 사회경제적 다양화를 억제하는 결과를 초래할 수 있다.
Abstract
This paper theoretically explores the ethical issues and advantage versus disadvantage of impact fees, the legal foundation of impact fees, and the actual practice of adopting impact fees in the U.S. Regarding the cost of past growth, it can be asked why new residents should bear impact fees when existing residents never had to do so. Impact fees will place greater burdens on developments that have low and moderate-income housing. Developers may be forced to build less low/moderate income housing and concentrate on more expensive development. Such moves may reduce the potential supplies of low/moderate housing. Furthermore, the effect of impact fees on the existing housing may be even more important. The prices of existing housing will increase as new housing become more expensive. Ultimately, the provision of low/moderate income housing will be reduced. Consideration should be given to the possible effect of impact fees on the housing needs of low-income people. Besides the lack of affordable housing provision, another prospective consequence of the imposition of impact fees is that some potential new residents are simply priced out of the housing market, thus perpetuate economic exclusion. This fact may result in encouraging homogeneity of community and discouraging socioeconomic diversification.
참고문헌 (31)
- Altshuler, A. A., "Regulation for Revenue: The Political Economy of Land Use Exactions" (1993), Brookings Institution
- Barnebey, M. P., "Paying for growth: community approaches to development impact fees", Journal of the American Planning Association, 54(1), pp.18~28 (1988)
- Been, V., "Impact fees and housing affordability", Cityscape, 8(1), pp.139~185 (2005)
- Bogard, A., "Impact fees in a small Texas city", Government Finance Review, 6, pp.15~18 (1990)
- Brueckner, J. K., "Infrastructure financing and urban development: the economics of impact fees", Journal of Public Economics, 66(3), pp.383~407 (1997)
- Burchell, R. W., "Development Impact Assessment Handbook" (1994), Urban Land Institute
- Burge, G., "The capitalization effects of school, residential, and commercial impact fees on undeveloped land values", Regional Science and Urban Economics, 44, pp.1~13 (2014)
- Burge, G., "Impact fees and singlefamily home construction", Journal of Urban Economics, 60(2), pp.284~306 (2006)
- Burge, G., "Promoting sustainable land development patterns through impact fee programs", Cityscape, 15(1), pp.83~105 (2013)
- Burge, G., "Effects of proportionate share impact fees", Housing Policy Debate, 18(4), pp.679~710 (2007)
- Burge, G., "Can development impact fees help mitigate urban sprawl?", Journal of the American Planning Association, 79(3), pp.235~248 (2013)
- Delaney, J. J., "The needs-nexus analysis: a unified test for validating subdivision exactions, user impact fees and linkage", Laws and Contemporary Problems, 50(1), pp.5~194 (1987)
- Finkle, J. A., "Development Fees: Sharing the Costs of Growth", National Council for Urban Economic Development, ~ (1988)
- Gowder, W., "Recent developments in exactions and impact fees: who pays for new schools, fair housing, and clean air?", The Urban Lawyer, 42(3), pp.615~625 (2010)
- Kelsey, T. W., "The fiscal impacts of alternative land uses: what do costs of community service studies really tell us?", Journal of the Community Development Society, 27(1), pp.78~89 (1996)
- Levine, J. C., "Equity in infrastructure finance: when are impact fees justified", Land Economics, 70(2), pp.210~222 (1994)
- Lillydahl, J. H., "The need for a standard state impact fee enabling act", Journal of the American Planning Association, 54(1), pp.7~15 (1988)
- Mathur, S., "Do impact fees raise the price of existing housing?", Housing Policy Debate, 18(4), pp.635~659 (2007)
- Mathur, S., "Do all impact fees affect housing prices the same?", Journal of Planning Education and Research, 33(4), pp.442~455 (2013)
- Mulcahy, C. C., "Impact fees for a developing Wisconsin", Marquette Law Review, 79(Spring), pp.759~817 (1996)
- National Association of Home Builders, "Impact Fee Handbook" (1997), Home Builder Press
- Nicholas, J. C., "A Practitioner’s Guide to Development Impact Fees" (1991), Planners Press
- O’Connell, L., "Exploring the contribution of state and local-level conditions to the adoption of different types of smart growth policies and impact fees in the United States", International Journal of Public Administration, 35(3), pp.194~203 (2012)
- 류연택, "도시 주택 및 거주지 분리에 관한 이론적 고찰", 한국도시지리학회지, 16(3), pp.195~211 (2013), 한국도시지리학회
- 류연택, "Theoretical Reflections on the Political Economy Perspectives on Urban Housing and Urbanization", 한국도시지리학회지, 17(2), pp.163~176 (2014), 한국도시지리학회
- 류연택, "Theoretical Reflections on New Urban Development, Financing Urban Public Facilities, and Impact Fees", 한국도시지리학회지, 18(3), pp.183~196 (2015), 한국도시지리학회
- Sheridan, P. G., "Development impact fees in the 1990s", The Real Estate Finance Journal, (Fall), pp.30~37 (1992)
- Stroud, N., "Legal considerations of development impact fees", Journal of the American Planning Association, 54(1), pp.29~37 (1988)
- Taub, T. C., "Exactions, linkage, and regulatory takings", The Urban Lawyer, 20(3), pp.515~540 (1988)
- Wellner, A. S., "Who’s Buying for the Home: Who Spends How Much on Products and Services for the Home" (1996), New Strategist
- Alternatives to Sprawl, "Young, D.", Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, ~ (1995)