Wasatch County is nearly set to enact a new ordinance that would more than double impact fees for new developments in unincorporated areas of the county.
The Wasatch County Council had its first reading of the proposed ordinance on Wednesday and plans to revisit it later this month.
Under Utah state code, the county is allowed to enact impact fees for public facilities like public safety, transportation, trails, parks and recreation. This year, the county decided it would need to levy the impact fees in order to handle the incoming growth.
Impact fees are a one-time charge local governments impose on new development projects that are usually in response to new growth or otherwise specific cases. This specific ordinance is an amendment of a similar roads-oriented impact fee the county enacted in 2025.
These fees are proposed for development activity that creates additional demand for public facilities for public safety, plus transportation facilities. New or incoming industrial, residential multifamily homes, public education facilities, office facilities and commercial services will be affected. This does not apply to current developments or residents.
Right now, impact fees for new developments in Wasatch County sit at around $1,500 for single-family residential units and multi-family units or duplexes per equivalent residential unit, or ERU. That’s a standardized unit of measure used to equate the service demand of non-residential or multi-family properties to a typical single-family home.
One single-family home usually equals one ERU.
Wasatch County currently collects about $500,000 in impact fees per year. The proposed ordinance would more than double that number.
New single-family residential units will see just under $3,516 of impact fees per ERU. Duplex and multi-family units will see just under $3,444 of impact fees imposed per ERU.
“If the council is amenable, we could adopt this fee, and then work toward a broader consensus and look at the next time we do this,” Wasatch County Manager Dustin Grabau said on Wednesday. “Because, really, we want to be doing this on a regular basis to ensure that we’re reflecting accurate costs of this growth.”
Grabau said these impact fees are intended to “shift the burden” of maintaining parks and trails services away from existing residents and toward new residents.
“The idea is: Everyone pays their fair share,” Grabau said. “This is not them paying for 100% of the new facilities. It’s them paying for the appropriate share of, ‘What does it cost to provide these services to this percentage of new residents?’”
County Councilor Erik Rowland said it’s crucial to eventually loop in municipalities in the county, such as Heber City and Midway City.
Midway is currently collecting about $1,000 of impact fees primarily for trails, and Heber City is collecting about $4,000 for parks and trails, according to Grabau.
“This is an important discussion, but for us to adequately plan for parks and (recreation) in the future, how can we do that or have that conversation without buy-in from the other municipalities who are willing to contribute to those facilities that they’re all going to enjoy?” Rowland said.
Such facilities include countywide recreational aspects like pickleball courts, basketball courts and baseball fields.
“We would like to involve other municipalities, but this ordinance has no weight or bearing upon those at all,” Rowland said.
County Councilor Luke Searle said asking for help from municipalities is a reasonable way to get assistance for countywide services.
“It’s just a matter of the question — can you help in this new growth? Can the new homes that are built in your municipalities help pay for these facilities as well?” Searle said.
Grabau said the county really only has leverage in unincorporated areas.
“Just because we adopt (impact fees) in parks and recreation doesn’t automatically mean that the cities will procedurally incorporate it, but it does strengthen our stance that they should,” Grabau said.
The County Council voted to resurface the discussion at its upcoming council meeting on May 20.