HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/12/2002, SS-3 - IMPACT FEE STUDY RELATED TO UTILITIES' MASTER PLANS counci L March Mrch
12, 2002
acjcnaa wpoM ,��� ss -z
CITY O F SAN LUIS O B I S P O
FROM: John Moss,Utilities Director
Prepared By: Sue Baasch, AWninistrative Analyst!06
SUBJECT: IMPACT FEE STUDY RELATED TO UT]LlTIES' MASTER PLANS
CAO RECOMMENDATION
1. Review the Water and Wastewater AB 1600 Fee Study Update prepared by David
Taussig & Associates, Inc., and the recommended water and wastewater impact
mitigation fees included.therein; and
2. Direct staff to set a public hearing for adoption of these fees by resolution at the
April 16, 2002 Council meeting.
DISCUSSION
As part of the process of analyzing the water and wastewater infrastructure needs to meet the
City's adopted General Plan, the Utilities Department has investigated how to appropriately
charge new development for its fair share of these improvements. Utilities engaged the public
financing firm of David Taussig and Associates("DTA") to review the water and sewer master
plans, as well as the Airport Area Specific Plan public financing plan, and then to develop
recommendations for financing the improvements through impact fees. The DTA study
(Attachment 1) recommends that the water and wastewater impact fees be updated by adding fees
for additional city-wide facilities to the existing city-wide fee levels, as well as setting additional
local fees for water and wastewater facilities that provide local benefit to identified local areas.
(Tables 1 and 2 on pages 4 and 5 of this report identify the recommended fee increases.)
Based on the infrastructure master planning, city-wide water impact fees for single family homes
would increase by $340. City-wide wastewater impact fees for single family homes would
increase by$441. Depending on the development area, add-on fees would be required, if specific
infrastructure was identified to serve an identified expansion_ areas, such as the Airport or
Margarita areas.
As part of their study, Taussig and Associates reviewed the methodology and appropriateness of
the existing water and wastewater impact fee levels, with the exception of the source of supply
component of the water impact fee. That component is the study of a companion report to be
presented immediately following this report.
These two reports are intended to only present proposed new water and wastewater impact
mitigation fees. If Council directs staff to proceed, a resolution will be prepared and a public
hearing noticed for the second Council meeting in April for adoption of the new impact fees.
Following the required sixty days, the new impact fees would be effective July 1, 2002.
3- 1
i
Council Agenda Report—Impact Fee Study Related to Utilities' Master Plans
Page 2
Why are Impact Fees the Financing Strategy?
When Council adopted Ordinance 1200 implementing water and wastewater impact fees in 1991,
it established impact fees as the vehicle for new development to pay its appropriate share of the
costs for the facilities required to serve it. The DTA study was to assess the convect level of fees
required to finance the proposed master plan facilities and to correctly allocate them to the area
of benefit. DTA was charged with fully reviewing the master plan documents and the Airport
Area's Public Financing Plan to ensure congruence of assumptions and recommendations.
The improvements that will serve the existing population will be funded by revenue from water
and sewer rates. Generally, master plan improvements required in the next four years have been
included in the water and sewer capital improvement planning, and the costs have been made
part of the water and sewer fund analysis and rate forecast presented to Council each May.
What are the Master Plan Improvements?
Several years ago, in conjunction with the development of the Airport Area Specific Plan, the
City hired two engineering firms to identify the water and wastewater capital improvements
necessary to serve the community now and into the future. This long-range look (to
approximately 2020) included the Airport and Margarita Areas as well as the
Dalidio/Madonna/McBride, Edna-Islay, Irish Hills, and Orcutt areas. These six areas are referred
to as expansion areas in this report and separate wastewater add-on fees are recommended for
each. A water impact fee add-dn is recommended for only the Airport and Margarita area.
The Water Master Plan prepared by Boyle Engineering was used as the basis for water demand
projections and facility expansion requirements for future development. The facility
improvements to be funded by impact fees include a grid of main pipelines, two storage
reservoirs, new clearwell and sedimentation tanks at the water treatment plant, and various
booster station and pressure reducing station upgrades. The probable costs of the facilities are
identified in the Boyle Report. Allocations to future development are based upon its
proportionate share of build-out water demand,measured by Average Daily Demand("ADD").
The Wastewater Master Plan prepared by Brown and Caldwell was used as the basis for
wastewater production projections, facility costs and cost allocations to the six expansion areas.
The southern service area was divided into five "catchment" areas, based upon geographic flow
contributions to five key pumping stations identified in the report. Various new or upgraded
pump stations, force mains and collector mains were identified by catchment area, as well as
upgrades to the Water Reclamation Facility. For the most part, sewer collector mains serving
individual or smaller development areas were assumed to be the responsibility of the developers
and were not included in the fee analysis. Upgrades to the Water Reclamation Facility were
assumed to have city-wide benefit and new development's share was reflected in the updated
Wastewater Impact fee schedule.
3-2
Council Agenda Report—Impact Fee Study Related to Utilities' Master Plans
Page 3
Developing the Recommended Impact Fees based on Equivalent Dwelling Units
The recommended impact fees are based on the concept of equivalent dwelling units which
allocates costs between different types of uses by establishing a"common denominator"based on
a single family residential dwelling. Based on 1990 census data, the average single family
household was 2.7 persons; the average multi-family household was 2.1 persons and the average
mobile home household was 1.6 persons. (Final 2000 census data by dwelling type was not
available at the time the study was prepared.) Therefore, if a single family household was
equivalent to one dwelling unit, a multi-family household was equivalent to 0.8 dwelling units
(0.8 was obtained by dividing 2.1 by 2.7); and a mobile home was equivalent to 0.6 dwelling
units (0.6 was obtained by dividing 1.6 by 2.7).
Water Impact Fee Calculations
As indicated, the water impact fees were calculated employing the concept of equivalent
dwelling units ("EDUs") described above. EDUs allocated benefit among the three residential
land use classes after the gallons per day of demand for a single family household had been
established. Non-residential water impact fees were allocated based on meter size. The 5/8 inch
to % inch meter size is equivalent to one EDU or service unit. As meters increase in size and
capacity, the service units increase as ratios of the standard 5/8 inch meter. For example, a one
inch service is equivalent to two service units or EDUs, so the impact fee is double that of the 5/8
inch meter:
Wastewater Impact Fee Calculations
The wastewater fees were also apportioned by employing the EDU methodology. EDUs for
wastewater facilities were calculated based on the flow rate or number of gallons per day
generated by each of the six land use types identified in the Wastewater Master Plan. The
methodology used is described below:
CalculationSteps of Wastewater lmpact�Fee .
1 Tabulated the wastewater facility costs by expansion areas.
Z Calculated flow rates based upon the residential dwelling units and square footage of non-residential use
within each expansion area.
3 Divided the facility costs for each expansion area by the total contributing flow rate to determine the cost per
gallon per day of wastewater generated for a single family dwelling unit for each expansion area.
4 Determined the impact fee for a single family home in each expansionarea by multiplying the unit cost,in
dollars per gallon per day,by the level of service flow rate identified.
5 Calculated the impact fees for other land uses by applying the various EDUs for residential uses and
meter sizes to non-residential uses.
Allocated the.wastewater impact fees into city-wide fee increases,based upon city-wide benefit, and
6 area specific"add-on"fees, based upon pump stations and collection system improvements specific
to each annexation area.
3-3
i
Council Agenda Report—Impact Fee Study Related to Utilities' Master Plans
Page 4
Recommended Increases to the Water and Wastewater Impact Fees
The recommended increases to the general water and wastewater impact fees as well as the
"new"area specific add-on fees are shown below in Tables 1 and 2.
Table 1. Recommended Water Master Plan Impact Fee Add-ons
Area Specific
Add-On.Fee
Residential Fee Schedule
Census Data
Service Units in City-Wide Airport and
Land Use Category Equivalent dwelling Margarita
Persons/Household units "EDU" Add-On Areas Add-On
Single Family Residential 2.7 persons/household 1.0 340 746
Multi-Family Residential. 2.1 persons/household 0.8 272 597
Mobile Homes 1.6 persons/household 0.6 204 448
Nott Residential Fee,Schedule
Service Unit City-Wide Airport and
Meter Size&Type (EDUs) Add-On Margarita
Areas Add On
5/8 inch x'/4 inch meter 1.0 340 746
1 inch meter 2.0 680 1,492
1-1/2 inch meter 4.0 1,360 2,984
2inch meter 6.4 2,176 4,774
3 inch meter 14.0 4,760 10,444
4 inch meter 22.0 7,480 16,412
6 inch meter 45.0 15,300 11 33,570
A summary of the proposed new water impact fees, including the master plan add-ons shown
above, as well as the updated source of supply component, is provided in the companion report.
Table 2. Recommended Wastewater Master
Area Specific Add-On Fees
Residential Fee Schedule
Service Dalidio
City-Wide Edna Irish
Land Use Unit Add-On Airport Madonna Islay Hills Margarita Orcutt
(EDUs) McBride
Single Family 1.0 441 751 207 722 367 713 1,689
Multi-Family 0.80 353 600 166 578 294 570 1,351
Mobile Home 0.60 265 450 124 433 220 428 1,013
Non Residential Fee Schedule
Service Dalidio
City-Wide Edna Irish
Unit Add-0n Airport Madonna Islay Hills Margarita Orcutt
(EDUs) McBride
5/8 x'/4 in meter 1.0 441 751 207 722 367 713 1,689
3-4
Council Agenda Report-Impact Fee.Study Related to Utilities' Master Plans
Page 5
TableRecommended e . Add-ons
Area Specific Add-On Fees
I inch meter 2.0 882 1,501 414 1,444 734 1,425 3,378
1-1/2 inch meter. 4.0 1,764 3,002 828 2,888 1,468 2,850 6,756
2inch meter 6.40 2,822 4,803 1,315 4;621 2;348 4;560 10,810
3 inch meter 14.0 6,174 10,507 Z899 10,108 5,137 9,975 23,647
4 inch meter 22.0 9,702 16,511 4,556 15,884 8,073 15,675 37,160
6 inch meter 45.0 19,845 33,773 9,320 32,490 16,513 32,063 76,010
A summary of the proposed new wastewater impact fees, showing the current fee levels and
adding the proposed add-ons due to the wastewater master plan improvements, is provided in
Attachment 2 to this report.
CONCURRENCES
The Finance and Community Development Departments have reviewed the proposed fees and
concur with the recommendation.
FISCAL IMPACT
The goal of the DTA study was to assess new development's share of the proposed water and
wastewater master plan facilities and to correctly allocate them to the area of benefit through
city-wide and area specific impact fee increases. Adoption of these fees ensures that new
development pays its fair share of the costs of building the water and wastewater infrastructure
required to serve it.
Attachment 3 shows the recommended wastewater impact fees of three non-residential projects.
A similar illustration of the water impact fees for the same developments is provided in the
companion report.
ALTERNATIVES
There are two alternatives available to Council:
1. Approve impact fee levels less than recommended
The Council could approve fees that are less than those supported by the impact fee study.
However, with the "reasonable relationship" being established by the study and the costs
directly apportioned, this alternative would be inconsistent with adopted City policy, and,
therefore, not recommended.
2. Do not implement these impact fees
Based upon the City's long-tern financial needs and adopted Council policy regarding the
responsibility of new development to pay its fair share of constructing necessary public
facilities; this-altemative is not recommended.
Council Agenda Report—Impact Fee Study Related to Utilities' Master Plans
Page 6
ATTACHMENTS
1 - Water and Wastewater AB 1600 Fee Study Update by David Taussig&Associates, Inc.
2 - Wastewater Impact Fee Summary Including Recommended Fee Increases for Wastewater
Master Plan Improvements
3 - Examples of Wastewater Impact Fee Calculations for Non-Residential Development
34,
ATTACHMENT 1
Council Agenda Report- Water& Wastewater Impact Mitigation Fee Update Study
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
UTnxrIES DEPARTMENT
WATER AND WASTEWATER
AB 1600 FEE STUDY UPDATE
Feblvary 25,2002
Prepared for
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
879 Morro Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
(805)781-7205
Prepared by
DAvrD TAUSSIG& ASSOC.,INC.
1301 Dove St., Ste. 600
Newport Beach,CA 92660
(949)955-1500
3- 7
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
i. Executive Summary---...............................................................................................................
I. Introduction.................................................................................................................................I
II. Expected Future Development.......:...:...............................................................•..-•---------------2
M. Statutory Requirements to Justify Development Impact Fees...........................................3
IV. Methodology Utilized to Calculate Water Facilities Impact Fees------•••••••••••-••••••-••-•---------5
(1) Service Area----------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5
(2) Level of Service and Projected Demand-----------------------------------------------------------------------5
(3) Existing Facilities ---------------------------------------------------•-----------------------------•6
(4) Proposed Facilities...................................................--------------------------------------------------------
(5) Facilities Costs...................................................................................................................8
(6) Impact Fee Schedules--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------10
V. Methodology Utilized to Calculate Wastewater Facilities Impact Fees----------------------------12
(1) Service Area ---------------••-•-.-.-.-----.....------12
(2) Level of Service and Projected Flows----------------------------------------------------------------------------12
(3) Existing Facilities---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------,--------13
(4) Proposed Facilities--------------------------------------------------------,.....--.................................----------•.14
(5) Facilities Costs,. -•......................................................15
(6) Impact Fee Schedules.............................................................................--.......................15
VL Summary Fee Schedule....................................---------------------------------•--...-.......-------...-....----------18
l f �
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In the southern section of the City of San Luis Obispo (the "City"), there are six areas of undeveloped land
contiguous to the City boundaries that will be considered for future annexation (the "Annexation Areas").
Pursuant to the City's General Plan, water and wastewater services will be expanded to include these
Annexation Areas. In addition, City Ordinance Nos. 1200 and 1256 implemented impact fees to mitigate the
impacts of new development on the water and wastewater facilities in the City. Thus, the purpose of this report
is to update the impact fees to be allocated to future development for the expansion of the City's existing water
and wastewater facilities.
To assess the correct level of fees required to finance these facilities, David Taussig & Associates ("DTA")has
been hired to prepare a Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study Update ("Fee Study Update"). This study is
intended to comply with Section 66000 et. seq. of the Government Code, which was enacted by the State of
California in 1987 through Assembly Bill 1600, by identifying additional water and wastewater facilities
required by new development("Future Facilities") as listed in the Water and Wastewater Master Plans, and
determining the level of fees that.need to be imposed to pay the costs of the Future Facilities.
This Fee Study Update for the City is intended to meet the nexus or benefit requirements of AB 1600
(California Government Code 66000, et seq), which mandate that there be a nexus between fees imposed, the
use of the fees, and the development projects on which the fees are imposed. The City adopted an initial Water
and Wastewater Impact Fee Program in 1991 to ensure that future development would pay their fair share of the
cost of expanding the City's water and wastewater systems. This Fee Study Update is intended to update the
existing Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Schedules by adding fees for additional ci -wide facilities to the
existing city-wide fee levels. The Fee Study Update also includes additional fees for water and wastewater
facilities that provide local benefits to the six Annexation Areas.
The population of the City of San Luis Obispo as of April 1, 2000 was 44,174, according to the 2000 U.S.
Census. The Water System Master Plan prepared by Boyle Engineering projects a buildout population of
56,000. The six areas which are projected for future annexation are the Airport Area, the Dalidio/ Madonna /
McBride Area, the Edna Islay Area, the Irish Hills Area, the Margarita Area, and the Orcutt Area. In addition,
there are pockets of infill parcels that will benefit from facility improvements and expansions discussed in this
report. The recommended increases in the city-wide component of the water and wastewater impact fees are to
apply to all new development, while the local component of the wastewater impact fee is to apply only to the
six Annexation Areas. The local component of the water fee is only being recommended for the Airport and
Margarita Annexation Areas, as they are the only ones impacted by water facilities that provide only local
benefits.
The Water Master Plan Update by Boyle Engineering was used as the basis for water demand projections and
facility expansion requirements, which were used to identify the water facilities necessary and costs to support
future development. The service area for water facilities includes three pressure zones which serve the six
Annexation Areas. Water demands identified in Boyle Report were utilized to determine the extent of system
expansions required by future development. The water facility improvements to be funded by the Impact Fees
include grid main pipelines, two storage reservoirs, new clearwell and sedimentation tanks at the Water
treatment plant, and various booster station and pressure reducing station upgrades. The probable costs of the
City of San Luis Obispo i
Water and Wastewater Facilities AB 1600 Fee Study Update August 17, 2001
3 - 9
facilities are identified in the Boyle Report. Allocations to future development are based upon its proportionate
share of build out water demand, measured by Average Daily Demand("ADD').
All water impact fees in the Fee Update Study were calculated employing the methodology of an Equivalent
Dwelling Unit ("EDU") to allocate benefit among the three residential land use classes. EDUs for each of these
land use classes were calculated based on gallons per day of demand. Non-residential water impact fees were
allocated based on fixtures or meter size. The 5/8"to %" meter size was assumed to represent one EDU. Meter
capacities vary by size and type. The meter capacities as ratios of the standard 5/8"meter were used to compute
the related impact fees. Recommended water impact fee levels are listed below in Table ES-1, as well as in
Table 9 in the text of this study.
Table ES-1: Water Impact Fee Summary
Land Use Service Unit Current City- Citywide Fee New Citywide Airport Margarita Area
wide Fee Increase Fees Area Add-On
Add-On
Residential:
Single Family 1.00 $7,059 $340 $7399 $746 $746
Multi-Family 0.80 $5,647 $272 $5,919 $597 $597
Mobile Home 0.60 $4,235 $204_ $4,439 $448 $448
Non-Residential
5/8"-3/4"meter 1.00 $7,059 $340 $7,309 $746 $746
1"meter 2.00 $14,118 $680 $14,798 $1,492 $1,492
1-1/2"meter 4.00 $28,236 $1,360 $29,5% $2,984 $2,984
2"meter 6.40 $45,179 $2,176 $47,355 $4,774 $4,774
3"meter 14.00 $98,828 54,760 $103588 $10,444 $10,444
4"meter 22.00 $155301 $7480 $162781 $16,412 $16,412
6"meter 45.00 $317,660 $15,300 $332,960 $33,570 $33,570
The Wastewater Master Plan Update prepared by Brown and Caldwell was used as the basis for wastewater
production projections, facility costs and cost allocations to the six Annexation Areas. The service area is
divided into five "catchment" areas, based upon geographical flow contributions to five key pumping stations
identified in the report. Various pump stations, force mains and collector mains were identified by catchment
area, as well as upgrades to the Wastewater Reclamation Facility ("WRF"'). For the most part, sewer collector
mains were assumed to be the responsibility of developers and were not included in the fee analysis. Upgrades
to the WRF were assumed to have city wide benefit, and were reflected in the updated Wastewater Impact Fee
Schedule in Table ES-2. Costs identified with each catchment area are reflected in the recommended"add-on"
fees also shown on Table ES-2
As with the methodology for calculating water impact fees,the wastewater fees were apportioned to the six land
use classes by employing the methodology of an EDU. EDUs for wastewater facilities were calculated based
on the flow rate or number of gallons per day utilized by each of the six land use types. The wastewater flows
based on proposed land uses were identified in the Wastewater Master Plan Update. Wastewater facility costs
were tabulated by Annexation Areas. Flow rates were calculated based upon the residential dwelling units and
square footage of non-residential use within each Annexation Area. The facility costs for each Annexation
Area were then divided by the total contributing flow rate to determine the cost per gallon per day of
wastewater generated for a single family dwelling unit for a each Annexation Area. The impact fee for a single
City of San Luis Obispo iii
Water and Wastewater Facilities AB 1600 Fee Study Update August 17, 2001
3-11)
family home in each Annexation area was determined by multiplying the unit cost, in dollars per gallon per day,
by the level of service flow rate identified. Impact fees for other land uses were calculated by applying the
various EDU's for residential uses and meter sizes for non-residential uses. The wastewater impact fee updates
were broken down into city-wide fee increases, based upon citywide benefit, and area specific "add-on" fees,
based upon pump station and collection system improvements specific to each Annexation Area. All
wastewater facilities impact fees are summarized in Table ES-2 and in Table 10 of the text of this Study.
Table ES-2: Wastewater Impact Fee Summary
Area Specific Add-On Fees
Land Use Service Current Citywide New Airport Dalidio Edna Irish Margarita Orcutt
Unit Fee Fee Citywide Madona Islay Hills
Increase Fees McBride
Residential;
Single Family 1.00 $2,795 $441 $3,236 $751 $207 $722 $367 $713 $1,689
Multi-Family 0.80 $2,237 $353 $2,590 $600 $166 $578 $294 $570 $1,351
Mobile Home 1 0.60 $1,678 $265 $1,943 S45Qj $124 S4331 $220 S4281 $1,013
Non-Res.
5/8"-3/41'meter 1.00 $2,909 $441 $3,350 $751 $207 $722 $367 $713 $1,689
1"meter 2.00 $5,818 $882 $6,700 $1,501 $414 $1,444 $734 $1,425 $3,378
1-1/2"meter 4.00 $11,636 $1,764 $13,400 $3,002 $828 $2,888 $1,468 $2,850 $6,756
2"meter 6.40 $18,615 $2,822 $21,437 $4,803 $1,325 $4,621 $2,348 $4,560 $10,810
3"meter 14.00 $40,723 $6,174 . $46,897 $10;507 $2,899 $10,108 $5,137 $9,975 $23,647
4"meter 22.00 $63,993 $9,702 $73,695 $16;511 $4;556 $15,884 $8,073 $15,675 $37,160
6"meter 45.00 SDOM6 $19,845 $150,741 $33,773 $9;3201 $32,49 $16,513 $32,0631 $76,010
City of San Luis Obispo
Water and Wastewater Facilities AB 1600 Fee Study Update August 17, 2001
3-11
I. Introduction
The City of San Luis Obispo (the "City") is located on the Central Coast of California in San Luis Obispo
County. The City's population in the year 2000 was 44,174, based on the 2000 U.S. Census. According to the
California Department of Finance's City/County Population estimates, dated.January 1, 2000, there were 18,871
dwelling units of various types and 2.322 persons per household yielding a population of 43,0271. There are
currently 6,218.86 acres of residential and non-residential development in the City according to the Water
Master Plan. The future development of the City will be impacted by the annexation and development of six
annexation areas south of the City. These areas have been proposed for annexation to the City, pursuant to the
1994 General Plan. Due to this projected residential and non-residential growth and in coordination with the
findings of the Wastewater and Water Master Plans, both prepared in October 2000, the City recognizes the
need to generate sufficient funding for increased water and wastewater facilities to support this growing
population. The City has undertaken past Impact Fee Studies in compliance with City Ordinance Nos. 1200 and
1256, which were implemented on September 3, 1991, and April 5, 1994, respectively, for the purpose of
implementing impact fees to relieve the impacts of future development on Water and Wastewater Facilities,
while insuring compliance with the nexus requirements of Assembly Bill 1600 ("AB 1600").
Pursuant to the nexus requirement of AB 1600, a local public agency is required to "determine how there is a
reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility or portion of the public
facility attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed." It is impossible to accurately determine
the impact that one specific new residential unit or commercial/indust ial project will have on existing facilities.
Predicting specific future residents' or employees' behavioral patterns, sewer and water needs, and health and
welfare requirements is extremely difficult, and involves numerous assumptions that are subject to substantial
variances. Recognizing these limitations, the Legislature drafted AB 1600 to specifically require that a
"reasonable" relationship be determined,not a direct cause and effect relationship.
To assess the correct level of fees required to finance the water and wastewater facilities, David Taussig &
Associates,Inc. ("DTA' has been hired to prepare a Water and Wastewater AB 1600 hnpact Fee Study Update
("Fee Study Update"). This study is intended to comply with Section 66000 et. seq. of the Government Code,
which was enacted by the State of California in 1987, by identifying additional water and wastewater facilities
required by new development ("Future Facilities") as listed in the Water and Wastewater Master Plans, and
determining the level of fees that need to be imposed to pay the costs of the Future Facilities. The fees will
finance facilities at levels consistent with the City's existing standards or at levels identified by the various City
departments and the Master Plans as being appropriate for new development. All new development will be
required to pay its "fair share" of the cost of the new infrastructure through this development fee program.
However, to the extent that any new infrastructure provides benefit to existing development, or deficiencies are
found in existing infrastructure levels, such costs must be funded through sources other than the development
fee program.
1 The population of 44,174 provided by the U.S.Census Bureau is the result of data collected from the 2000 census.The population of
43,027 provided by the State of California,Department of Finance is based on projection calculations from previous census.The two
figures as well as other demographic data stated in this section of the report is for information only,and not used in subsequent fee
calculations.
City of San Luis Obispo Page 1
Water and Wastewater Facilities AB 1600 Fee Study Update August 17, 2001
3.12
Il. Expected Future Development
The City is positioned for future growth in conjunction with the annexation of the undeveloped areas to the
south of the City. The Land Use Element of the City General Plan, dated August 1999, projects a population_of
57,200 people and 24,300 maximum dwelling units for the City through the Year 2022. This population figure
includes the build out population for the Cal Poly Campus. The Wastewater Master Plan, dated October 2000,
projects the Service Area population through the Year 2018 to be 56,000,not including the Cal Poly population.
Additionally, the Master Plan projects.3,062 dwelling units, 5,738,000 commercial / industrial square feet and
100 motel rooms through build out of the City. The Wastewater Master Plan population projection of 56,000 is
used as the basis for sizing improvements to the water system.
There are six Annexation Areas shown on the City's General Plan Land Use Map that are located outside of the
current City limits. These areas are targeted for future annexation, and will contribute a major share of the
projected increase in water and wastewater capacity needed to accommodate future growth. The six Annexation
Areas are as follows:
1. Airport Area
2. Dalidio/Madonna/McBride Area
3. Edna Islay Area
4. Irish Hills Area
5. Margarita Area
6. Orcutt Area
Exhibit 1 illustrates the City limits, demarcating the boundaries of the Annexation Areas.
City of San Luis Obispo Page 2
Water and Wastewater Facilities AB 1600 Fee Study Update August 17, 2001
3-13
ca
O
O
O
Lu
< u
7A
3-ij
�6
� z
a
z -J
0
H
W � v
x �
x -
O �
I-I rggj .
w i
MW
2-P
I
M. Statutory Requirements to Justify Development Impact Fees
Prior to World War II, development in California was held responsible for very little of the cost of public
infrastructure. Public improvements were financed primarily through jurisdictional general funds and utility
charges. It was not uncommon during this period for speculators to subdivide tracts of land without providing
any public improvements, expecting the closest city to eventually annex a project,and provide public
improvements and services.
However, starting in the late 1940s, the use of impact fees grew with the increased planning and regulation of
new development. During the 1960s and 1970s, the California Courts broadened the right of local government
to impose fees on developers for public improvements that were not located on project sites. More recently,
with the passage of Proposition 13, the limits on general revenues for new infrastructure have resulted in new
development being held responsible for a greater share of public improvements, and both the use and levels of
impact fees have grown substantially. Higher fee levels were undoubtedly driven in part by a need to offset the
decline in funds for infrastructure development from other sources. Spending on public facilities at all levels of
government was $161 per capita in 1965, but it had fallen by almost fifty percent to less than $87 per capita by
1984(measured in constant dollars).
The levy of impact fees is one authorized method of financing the public facilities necessary to mitigate the
impacts of new development, as the levy of such fees provides funding to maintain an agency's required Public
Facility Standard for an increased service population. A fee is "a monetary exaction, other than a tax or special
assessment, which is charged by a local agency to the applicant in connection with approval of a development
project for the purpose of defraying all or a portion of the cost of public facilities related to the development
project..." (California Government Code, Section 66000). A fee may be levied for each type of capital
improvement required for new development, with the payment of the fee occurring prior to the beginning of
construction of a dwelling unit or non-residential building (or prior to the expansion of existing buildings of
these types). Fees are often levied at final map recordation, issuance of a certificate of occupancy, or more
commonly, at building permit issuance.
The City has identified the need to levy impact fees to pay for water and wastewater facilities improvements.
The fees will finance such future facilities at levels consistent with the City's existing facilities standards, or at
levels identified by the City as appropriate for new development. All new development will be required to pay
its "fair share" of the cost of the new infrastructure through these fees. However, to the extent that any new
infrastructure provides benefit to existing development, or deficiencies are found in existing infrastructure
levels, such costs must be funded by the City through sources other than the development fee program.
Assembly Bill ("AB") 1600, which created Section 66000 et. seq. of the Government Code, was enacted by the
State of California in 1987. This Fee Study Update for the City is intended to meet the nexus or benefit
requirements of AB 1600, which mandate that there be a nexus between fees imposed, the use of the fees, and
the development projects on which the fees are imposed. Furthermore, there must be a.relationship between the
amount of the fee and the cost of the improvements. To impose a fee as a condition for a development project, a
public agency must do the following:
City of San Luis Obispo Page 3
Water and Wastewater Facilities AB 1600 Fee.Study Update August 17, 2001
3 _�6
I. Identify the purpose of the fee.
H. Identify the use to which the fee is to be put. If the use is financing public facilities, the facilities
must be identified.
III. Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the fee's use and the type of
development project on which the fee is imposed.
IV. Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the need for a public facility and the
type of development project on which the fee is being imposed.
Identifying these items will enable an impact fee to meet the nexus and rough proportionality requirements
established by previous court cases. Current state financing and fee assessment requirements only allow new
development to pay for its fair share of new facilities' costs. Any current deficiencies resulting from the needs
of existing development must be funded through other sources. Therefore, a key element to establish legal
impact fees is to determine what share of the benefit or cost of a particular improvement can be equitably
assigned to existing development, even if that improvement has not yet been constructed. By removing this
factor,the true impact of new development can be assessed and equitable fees assigned.
AB 1600 Nexus Test
Identify Purpose of Fee Water and Wastewater Facilities
Identify Use of Fee Expansion of Water and Wastewater Facilities.
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship betweeni New residential and non-residential development in the Annexation
the need for the public facility, Areas will generate additional residents and employees who will
the use of the fee, and the type increase the demand for water and wastewater services. Fees collected
of development project on from new development will be used exclusively for this purpose.
which the fee is imposed
Because the Annexation Areas that are the subject of this study lie in predominantly undeveloped areas, the
backbone water and wastewater facilities needed for development are easily identified. New water distribution
mains and storage facilities are needed to deliver water, and new sewer mains and pump stations are needed to
collect wastewater. Proportionate shares of costs to upgrade water and wastewater treatment plants are also
identified.
The methodology for calculating water and wastewater impact fees employs the concept of an Equivalent
Dwelling Unit ("EDU') to allocate benefit among differenttypes of land use. EDUs are a means of quantifying
different land uses in terms of their equivalence to a single family detached dwelling unit,where equivalence is
measured in terms of potential infrastructure use or benefit for each type of public facility.
City of San Luis Obispo Page 4
Water and Wastewater Facilities AB 1600 Fee Study Update August 17, 2001
3-i7
IV. Methodology Utilized to Calculate Water Facilities Impact Fees
This section describes the methodology utilized to establish a rational and substantive nexus between new
development in the major undeveloped areas, which will be annexed into the City in the future, and the
improvements to the water supply system needed to serve these new areas. These six Annexation Areas of new
development are identified in the City's General Plan and in Section I of this study. Levels of service,
projections of future demand, inventory of existing facilities, required expansion of distribution and treatment
facilities, and associated capital costs are identified in the Water System Master Plan prepared by Boyle
Engineering.Z
1. Service Area
The City of San Luis Obispo Utilities Department provides water service to City residents and employees
working within the City. Water service is provided within the City limits and to the County Airport and Cal
Poly-San Luis Obispo. Cal Poly does,however,provide its own storage facilities to handle peak demands. If an
area outside the City limits wants to receive water service, that area must be annexed into the City. The
exceptions to this rule are customers who have prior agreements and uses which are consistent with the General
Plan.
The Annexation Areas mentioned above are located within several pressure zones within the City's water
distribution system. The Airport Area, Margarita Area, Irish Hills Area and Dalido-Madonna-McBride Area lie
within Pressure Zone #1 ("Edna Saddle"). The Edna-Islay and Orcutt Areas lie within Pressure Zone #3
(Terrace Hill"). The Madonna Inn Area lies within Pressure Zone #2 ("Downtown"). In addition, there are
scattered pockets of in-fill parcels within the City limits that will benefit from the proposed facility
improvements.
Although each pressure zone operates independently due to geographical characteristics, the City's distribution
system incorporates pump stations and pressure reducing stations that interconnect pressure zones for the
mutual benefit of improving delivery pressures, flow capacities and storage to the entire system.. For this reason,
the service area for determining water impact fees for future development will be a composite of the six
Annexation Areas identified above and the various in-fill parcels.
2. Level of Service and Projected Demand
Water use is measured by either production or consumption. Water production is the total volume of water
delivered to the system by wells and treatment facilities. Water consumption is the quantity of water used by
customers, as determined by meter records. Existing water production was determined by using the City's water
production trends for 1997, as described in the Water Master Plan. The per capita water production in the City
in 1997 was 132 gallons per capita per day ("gpcd"). The average daily demand, excluding Cal Poly, equaled
3,860 gpm. To calculate water demand for build out conditions, the Water Systems Master Plan used a city-
wide per capita use factor of 145 gpcd to ascertain the total demand. The 145 gpcd water use factor was
2 Boyle Engineering,City of San Luis Obispo Water System Master Plan(Final Report),October 2000.
City of San Luis Obispo Page S
Water and Wastewater Facilities AB 1600 Fee Study Update August 17, 2001
3-10
C C
identified in City of San Luis Obispo General Plan, Water and Wastewater Management Element, Section 3.
This number is based on annual water production from (i) the year of highest demand (1987) less Cal Poly
demand, (ii) the population estimate by the Department of Finance, and (iii) a 20% allowance for long term
conservation. The EDU is chosen as the standard for determining levels of service for the various land uses
within this study.
The Water Master Plan utilized land uses identified on the City's General Plan and average daily demand
factors for the various land uses to project build out demands for a projected city wide population of 56,000, as
indicated in Section 3 of the General Plan, Water and Wastewater Management Element. Using the rate of 145
gpcd for the projected population of 56,000 expected at build out results in an expected water demand of 9,096
acre-feet per year. Demands from Cal Poly—San Luis Obispo and the Airport are then added to estimate
required build out capacities. This demand was utilized in the Water System Master Plan to determine the extent
of system expansions required by future development.
3. Existing Facilities
The City's existing water system includes the following water supply, treatment, distribution, and storage
facilities: Raw water supplied by the Whale Rock and Salinas Reservoirs, the Stenner Canyon water treatment
plant, transmission mains that deliver the raw water to the treatment plant, and four groundwater wells. The
City's existing water distribution facilities include the 13 backbone reservoirs, 10 booster pumping stations, 20
pressure regulating stations, and a total of approximately 150 miles of pipeline which deliver water to the City's
existing 18,871 dwelling units and 6,218.86 acres of residential and non-residential development. The existing
water storage facilities include 13 reservoirs and tanks with a total nominal capacity of about 24 million gallons
("mg"). The existing system.is divided into 15 pressure zones,which are listed in Table 1 below.
Table 1
Existing Pressure Zones in the City of San Luis Obispo
Pressure Zone Acres Population Based on Demand
1. Edna Saddle 2,114 13,717
2. Downtown 898 8,099
3. Terrace Hill 887 6,988
4. Foothill 479 4,337
5. Res.No. 1 228 2,610
6. Andrews Street 58 397
7. Patricia 140 973
8. Highland 81 635
9. Bishop Street 783 2,660
10. Slack Street 95 635
11. Hig Pressure 269 2,223
12. Serrano Street 128 308
13. Ferrini Heights 41 278
14. 1 Alrita 7 61
15. Rosemont 16 79
City of San Luis Obispo Page 6
Water and Wastewater Facilities AB 1600 Fee Study Update August 17, 2001
.3-I 9
The Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study(the"Initial Study")dated June 26, 1991, identified the following
facility expansion projects:
• Expansion of the Salinas Reservoir from 23,843 acre feet storage capacity to 41,792 acre feet.
• Expansion of the Water Treatment Plant from 11.-5 million gallons per day("mgd")to 16 mgd.
The 1991 Fee Study and the 1994 Appendix provided a mechanism to fund the proportionate share of new
development costs which will provide for the expanded water supply and water treatment needs. The October
2000 Water System Master Plan indicates that the capacities of the raw water delivery system and the water
treatment plant are adequate to handle build out demands. It is assumed for the purposes of this Fee Study
Update that the cost of expanded portions of these facilities previously constructed to accommodate future
development shall be a component of the updated impact fee. This component shall continue to be levied to
assure that future development pays its fair share of the costs of existing city—wide infrastructure.
4. Proposed Facilities
The areas of projected growth lie predominantly within the Edna Saddle, Terrace Hill, and Downtown pressure
zones. The Edna Saddle Zone encompasses the Airport Area, Margarita Area, Dalidio-Madonna-McBride Area
and Irish Hills Area Annexation Areas. The Terrace Hill pressure zone includes the undeveloped areas of Edna
Islay and Orcutt. The Downtown pressure zone includes an area related to the commercial expansion adjacent to
the Madonna Inn.
The backbone facilities identified in the Water System Master Plan that are required to accommodate
development in the Annexation Areas include the following:
• New grid main pipeline within Edna Saddle,Zone 1,as identified in the Airport Specific Plan
• New 0.2 MG reservoir in the Prefumo Canyon area
• New 1.2 MG reservoir in the Bishop Street,Zone 9
• New 4.0 MG clearwell at the treatment plant
• An additional sedimentation tank at the treatment plant
• Various pump station and pressure-reducing station upgrades located throughout the developed areas of
the City
Grid main pipelines identified in the Master Plan within Terrace Hill Zone 3 and Alarita Zone 14 are considered
the responsibility of the developer.
Of the 85,381 lineal feet of new water main and appurtenances ranging in size from 10" to 16" in diameter
within the above zones, approximately 49,400 lineal feet of the total grid mains will be dedicated to the Airport
and Margarita Area distribution system. Cost allocations for the Airport and Margarita Annexation Areas will
be based upon backbone system pipelines identified in the Airport Specific Plan and will be treated as a separate
"add-on" fee for these Annexation Areas,because the grid mains only benefit these areas.
The new 0.2 mg reservoir located in the Prefumo Canyon Area is proposed for the Edna Saddle pressure zone,
for the purpose of alleviating fire flow pressures and providing backup supply during maintenance down titres
for the Edna Saddle reservoir. The new 1.2 mg reservoir in the Bishop Street Area will provide additional
storage capabilities,through a pressure reducing station,to the Terrace Hill Zone.
City of San Luis Obispo Page 7
Water and Wastewater Facilities AB 1600 Fee Study Update August 17,.2001
Because the City's distribution system interconnects pressure zones through pump stations and pressure
reducing stations, the Annexation Areas receive a proportionate benefit of pressure, flow, and storage from the
various upgrades proposed in the Water Systems Master Plan.
5. Facilities Costs
This study will.apportion the costs of the grid main and storage improvements within the Annexation Areas
described above, as well as a proportionate share of water treatment facility upgrade costs, based upon benefit
received. See Exhibit 1 for Annexation Area boundaries.
The probable costs of the components of the facilities described above are identified in the Water System
Master Plan, Section 5, "Capital Improvement Program." The Water Systems Master Plan presents costs in
terms of 1998 dollars. A 3%per year escalation factor is applied to bring facility costs to 2001 dollars.
The Water Master Plan states that the 4.0 mg clear well and the second sedimentation basin is recommended for
both expansion for future growth and operational efficiency and redundancy. Current development requires
approximately 8 mgd plant capacity. Build out capacity is estimated to be 12 mgd. Thus, construction of an
additional 8 mgd sedimentation basin will provide 4 mgd capacity for growth, and the remaining 4 mgd
capacity will ensure operational efficiency and redundancy. Therefore, 50% of the capital costs are being
allocated to new development, and 50% (representing plant operations) are being allocated to both existing and
future development based on their proportionate shares of increase in water demand, as measured by Average
Daily Demand ("ADD"). Percentage allocations for new development in each of the pressure zones based on
increased water demand are shown in Table 2 below.
Table 2
Increase in Water Demand Due to New Development
Pressure 'Existing 2Build out Increase Percentage of Percentage of City
Zone Average Average (gpm) City Total Total Build out
Daily Daily Increase
Demand Demand
m m
Edna Saddle 1,382 2,711 1,329 65.02% 19.12%
Downtown 816 924 108 5.28% 1.55%
Terrace Hill 704 969 265 12.96% 3.81%
Bishop 292 292 0 0% 0%
City Total 4,906 6,950_ . 2,044 100.00% 29.41%
Table 2-9,Water Systems Master Plan, Boyle Engineering,October 2000
2Table 2-11,Water Systems Master Plan,Boyle Engineering,October 2000
3This percentage is used to calculate the fair share of the sediment basin upgrades cost required for operations allocated to
new development,and is used in the calculation below.
Therefore, the percentage allocation for the sedimentation basin for the new development in these four pressure
zones was calculated as follows:
• Allocation for future development = 50.0%
City of San Luis Obispo Page 8
Water and Wastewater Facilities AB 1600 Fee Study Update August 17, 2001
321
• Allocation for facilities upgrades is 50% (plant operations) x 29.4% (the percentage of the total ADD at
city buildout that will be generated by new development in these pressure zones) = 14.7%
Composite percent allocation=50%+ 14.7°/o = 64.7
The costs of all other upgrades to the WTF were allocated based on the percentage of the total ADD at City
buildout that will be generated by new development in the four pressure zones, or 29.4%. The cost allocation
for the new 1.2 mg reservoir was assigned only to new development in the Terrace Hill (Zone 3) and Bishop
Street (Zone 9) pressure zones based on the relative ratios of build out ADD that characterized these two
pressures zones, as calculated below
Existing Build-out
Average Daily Average Daily
Demand Demand Increase
Zone Description Zone Number (gpm) (eam) (gpm)
Terrace Hill 3 704 969 265
Bishop Street 9 292 292 0
Total 996 1,261 265
The percentage of capital costs required for the Bishop Reservoir allocated to new development is 265 gpm
increase divided by 1,261 gpm at build-out,which equals 21.02%
Table 3 below summarizes the costs of facilities improvements and upgrades allocated to new development,
escalated to 2001 dollars.
Table 3
Water Facilities Costs to Accommodate Future Development
Total Percentage Allocation to Allocation to New
1998 City- Allocated to New Development in
wide Water New Development 2001 Dollars
Facility Improvement Facilities Development
Costs
Treatment Plant:
4 MG Clearwell $2,900,000 29.40% $852,600 $931,892
Second sedimentation Basin $1,300,000 64.70% $841,100 $919,322
All other upgrades,Phases I,11,III $1,050,000 29.40% $308,700 $337,409
Citywide distribution system upgrades: $3,150,000 29.40% $926,100 $1,012,227
Reservoirs:
0.2 MG at Prefumo Canyon $203,000 100.00% $203,000 $221,879
1.2 MG at Bishop Road $1,250,000 21.02% $262,750 $287,186
Total $9,853,000 $3,394,250 $3,709,915
In addition to these city-wide water facilities, there are $7,405,000 (1998 dollars) in water distribution pipelines
identified in the Water Master Plan for the Airport and Margarita Annexation Areas. Of these costs, $4,550,723
City of San Luis Obispo Page 9
Water and Wastewater Facilities AB 1600 Fee Study Update August 17, 2001
3 -22-
was associated with pipelines defined as backbone lines in the Airport Area Specific Plan. All other lines are
considered to be developer responsibilities. This local component of the water fee that applies only_to the
Airport and Margarita Annexation Areas is illustrated below.
Percentage
allocated to Allocation
Facility Improvement 1998 Cost new in 2001
development Allocation dollars
Edna Saddle(Airport and
Margarita Specific Plans) $4,550,723 100.00% $4,550,723 S4,973,940
6. Water Impact Fee Schedules
The water impact fees have been calculated employing EDU methodology to allocate benefit among three
residential land use classes. EDUs are a means of quantifying different land uses in terms of their equivalence to
a single family detached dwelling unit,where equivalence is measured in terms of potential infrastructure use or
benefit for each type of public facility. The EDUs for water impacts were calculated based on gallon per day of
demand. EDU factors for multifamily and mobile home land uses were provided by the City. The total demand
due to new development is shown in Table 2 as 2,044 gpm, or 2.94 mgd. The cost per gallon per day was
calculated by dividing the total facility cost of$3,709,915 by 2.94 mgd,which equals$1.26 per gallon per day.
In order to determine an average demand for a single family dwelling unit, a per capita demand for city buildout
conditions for residential uses must first be determined. The data from Table 3, Method 2 of the General Plan,
Water and Wastewater Element was used. The projected yearly demand for residential uses of 6,263 acre-feet
was converted to gallons per day and divided by the.City build out population of 56,000 to yield a per capita
demand of 99.84 gpcd. This rate was then multiplied by 2.7 persons per single family household to yield 270
gallons per day per dwelling unit, which by definition is equal to one EDU. The fee for one EDU is therefore
$1.26 x 270=$340 per EDU
This fee is then added to the current city-wide impact fee in force, effective July 1, 2001, of$7,059 per single
family dwelling unit. The current fee program accounts for fair share allocations to new development for the
cost of expanding water source and water treatment facilities, as identified in the 1991 Impact Fee Program and
the 1994 Appendix.
Table 4
Water Facilities—Residential Water Impact Fee Schedule
Persons per Water Current New Water `Fort
Land Use Household EDU Fee Water Fee Fee Area
Increase Add-on Fee
Single Family Residential 2.7 1.00 $340 $7,059 $7,399 $746
Multi-Family Residential 2.1 0.8 $272 $5,647 $5,919 $597
Mobile Homes 1.61 0.6 $204 _ $4,2351 $4,439 $448
As noted previously, the Airport Area Specific Plan identifies backbone water mains required at a cost of
$4,973,940. The Water System Master Plan calculates an average daily water demand of 1.8 mgd for the
City of San Luis Obispo Page 10
Water and Wastewater Facilities AB 1600 Fee Study Update August 17, 2001
Airport Annexation Area. The cost allocation is $2.76 per gallon per day. Converting this to a single family
EDU, as was performed above, yields a fee of$746. This fee is used as an additional local component"add-on"
fee per EDU for all land uses within the Airport Annexation Area. See Table 4 above fora summary of the
water impact fees for different residential land use types.
For non-residential land uses, DTA believes the implementation of an EDU-based fee structure causes
confusion and inequities. Average water consumption varies widely with different types of commercial land
uses. Therefore, to establish a more rational nexus, an allocation based on actual fixtures or meter size is more
appropriate. To determine fees based on fixture counts for new units is both cumbersome and difficult to
enforce when fixture additions occur. To assess fees based upon meter size has the advantage of charging a fee
based upon an upper limit of usage inherent in the meter size, covering potential changes in demand as building
uses and fixture counts change over time. The disadvantage of meter size fee structuring is that the larger meters
have a much wider capacity range that may not necessarily reflect usage levels. Actual consumption could be
considerably lower than meter capacity. It is assumed for the purposes of this study that using the design
capacity of installed meters provides a conservative assumption of future demand.
The 5/8" to 3/4" meter size was used to represent one EDU.. Meter capacities vary by size and type. The meter
capacities as ratios of the standard 5/8" meter were used to compute the related impact fees. See Table 5 for a
summary of the non-residential water impact fees by meter size.
Table 5
Non Residential Water Impact Fees
Expanded Current Total New Airport
Service Area Add-
Unit
Meter Size& Type City-wide City-wide City-wide on Impact
Impact Fee Impact Fee Impact Fee Fee
5/8" x'/4" 1.00 $340 $7,059 $7,399 746
1" 2.00 $ 680 $1.4,118 $14,798 $1,492
4,00 $1,360 $28,236 $29,596 $2,984
2" 6.40 $2,176 $45,179 $47,355 $4,774
2" 14.00 $4,760 $98,828 $103,588 $10,444
4" 22.00 $7,480 $155,301 $162,781 $16,412
6" 45.00 $15j3001 $317,6601 $332,9601 $33,570
City of San Luis Obispo Page]]
Water and Wastewater Facilities AB 1600 Fee Study Update August 17, 2001
V. Methodology Utilized to Calculate Wastewater Facilities Impact Fees
This section describes the methodology utilized to establish a rational and substantive nexus between new
development in the annexation areas in the City of San Luis Obispo and the improvements in wastewater
collection and treatment facilities needed to accommodate future development.
As with the methodology for calculating water impact fees, the wastewater fees will be calculated employing
the methodology of an EDU to allocate benefit among the six land use classes. EDUs for wastewater facilities
are calculated based on the flow rate or number of gallons per day utilized by the following the six land use
types: single family dwelling units, multi-family dwelling units, retail, manufacturing, office, and motel/hotel.
The wastewater flows based on the proposed land use were identified in the Wastewater Master Plan Update',
prepared by Brown and Caldwell.
1. Service Area
The six Annexation Areas fall into five geographic catchment areas tributary to pump stations that deliver
collected wastewater to the City's wastewater treatment plant located near Prado Road and Highway 101. Each
catchment area is an independent system with collection mains, pumping stations and force mains that deliver
wastewater to the treatment plant. Each catchment area varies in its contributions to flows at the treatment
plant, due to topography and land use. The Wastewater Master Plan Update tabulates wastewater flows at build
out based upon land uses identified on the City's General Plan and the Land Use Element Map, and the City's
adopted level of service. As Annexation Area boundaries do not coincide with wastewater catchment area
boundaries, the flows were sorted and tabulated as required to determine the contributing flows from each
annexation area. The catchment areas are identified by their downstream pumping stations and are listed below:
• Howard Johnson Pumping Station
• New Tank Farm Pumping Station
• Laguna Pumping Station
• Margarita Pumping Station
• Silver City Pumping Station
2. Level of Service and Projected Flows
Wastewater generated by a given land use is directly related to water demand. Fora single family residence, the
average daily demand of 145 gallons per capita per day (gpcd) multiplied by the average household population
of 2.7 yields a demand of 392 gallons per day. Interior water usage (excludes landscape irrigation) is generally
50% of total single family residence demand, resulting in 196 gallons per day of interior usage. Assuming
wastewater generation is very close to interior demand, the 190 gallons per day per single family household
identified in the Wastewater Masterplan Update as the adopted level of service is reasonable and prudent.
City of San Luis Obispo Page 12
Water and Wastewater Facilities AB 1600 Fee Study Update August 17, 2001
3 as
� ! i
Table 6 below lists the per day flow generation by land use identified in the Wastewater Master Plan Update:
Table 6
Unit Flows By Land Use
Land Use Unit of Measure Gallons per Da
Single Family Dwelling Dwelling Unit 190
Multi-Family Dwelling Dwelling Unit 120
Retail 1000 sf of floor area 200
Manufacturing 1000 sf of floor area 120
Office 1000 sf of floor area 190
Motel/Hotel Room 120
The City has projected a build out population of 56,000 in the year 2018. The Wastewater Master Plan Update
assumes 100 gallons per capita per day (gpcd) delivery to the treatment plant; based upon total wastewater
generated by residential and non-residential uses, divided by the City population. Therefore, the plant capacity
required to meet buildout conditions is 56,000 x 100 gpcd=5.6 mgd.The current plant capacity is 5.1 mgd. The
Wastewater Master Plan Update allocates the portion of treatment plant facility upgrades related to future
development by percent flow contribution to the plant by service area at build out.
DTA coordinated with the Planning and Engineering Departments of the City, in addition to utilizing the City's
General Plan Water and Wastewater Management Element, dated June 2000, and the Wastewater System
Master Plan Update, prepared by Brown and Caldwell and dated October 2000, to (i) quantify the capacity of
existing water and wastewater facilities and (ii) determine the extent of expansions, upgrades and new facilities
required to serve future development(the "Future Facilities Need").
3. Existing Facilities
The City provides wastewater collection, treatment and disposal services for City residents and California State
Polytechnic University at San Luis Obispo. The collection system contains more than 150 miles.of piping and
eight pumping stations. The City Water Reclamation Facility ("WRF"), located on Prado Road near Highway
101, provides primary, secondary and advanced wastewater treatment. The WRF has a current average dry
weather flow ("ADWF") capacity of 5.1 mgd, and a peak wet weather flow ("PWWF") capacity of 22 mgd. In
1993 the WRF was upgraded to meet various NPDES effluent requirements.
In 1991 David M. Griffith & Associates ("DMGA") prepared for the City an AB/1600 Water and Wastewater
Impact Fee Study that identified wastewater impact fees to be imposed on future development. The
identification of upgrades and associated costs were based upon a report by Brown and Caldwell, "Wastewater
Treatment Plant Upgrades and Sewer Line Replacements."These fees would recover the fair share, depreciated
cost of that portion of the existing sewer facilities that would benefit new development, as well as the
proportionate share of proposed upgrades to the system, based upon excess capacity available to new
City of San Luis Obispo Page 13
Water and Wastewater Facilities AB 1600 Fee Study Update August 17,2001
development. This city-wide impact fee program for wastewater identified in the DMGA report is still in force,
and will be carried over as a component of the fees proposed in this report.
4. Proposed Facilities
The Wastewater Master Plan Update has identified required upgrades and expansions to the treatment plant and
pump stations throughout the wastewater collection system and has grouped such improvements and associated
costs by pump station catchment area and by the Annexation Areas described in Section III. These upgrades and
expansions to the City's wastewater collection and treatment system fall into one of three basic categories:
• Collection system piping improvements—include new sewer collector pipes to collect wastewater flows
from future development. Only those pipes that are located in developed areas that do not.clearly fall
into developer responsibility categories.are included in this program_.
• Pumping Stations — includes pump station removals, replacements, new force mains and trunk sewer
gravity lines required by the geographical re-arrangement of pump stations.
• Water Reclamation Facility Expansion—Priority 1 projects, Priority 2 projects,and WRF Upgrades
The improvements are explained in more detail below:
Sewer Collection System
• Margarita Area — Approximately 1;200 lineal feet of new 8" sewer will be required north of Tank
Farm Road in order to collect flows from new development projects and deliver, via the proposed
16" gravity sewer line in Tank Farm Road,to the new Tank Farm Pumping Station
• Orcutt Area — Approximately 2,000 lineal feet of new 8" sewer in Industrial Way will be need to
collect wastewater from various development projects in the Orcutt Area. This reach of new sewer
will be constructed through developed areas, where new capacity will be mutually shared by various
developers.
• Airport, Dalido/Madonna/McBride, Edna-Islay, and Irish Hills Areas — Construction of new sewer
collector pipes shall be the responsibility of future developers
Pumping Stations and Related Pipelines
The Wastewater Master Plan Update identifies required removals, replacements and/or upgrades to five of the
City's eight pumping stations. The report also recommends the removal of a County pump station located in the
Fiero/Broad Street area. Table 7 below describes the nature of improvements needed at pumping stations.
Included in the costs for the upgraded pump stations are required force mains and trunk sewer gravity lines
required to the physical and geographical modifications to the collection system.
City of San Luis Obispo Page 14
Water and Wastewater Facilities AB 1600 Fee Study Update August 17, 2001
Table 7 .
Pump Station Im rovements
Pump Station Remove Replace Upgrade New
Howard Johnson X X
LagunaX X
Madonna
Margarita
Rock View X
Silver City X
Tank Farm X X
Fiero/Broad X
Coun
Water Reclamation Facility Improvements
WRF improvements that are recommended and identified in the Brown and Caldwell report are categorized into
three levels: Priority 1 Projects, Priority 2 Projects, and WRF Future Plant Upgrades. Priority 1 Projects will
upgrade the facilities to improve treatment process efficiencies and/or reduce annual operation and maintenance
requirements. Priority 2 Projects are design- and construction-oriented projects that are a lower priority.
Finally, future plant upgrades are necessary if the City annexes additional land.
5. Facility Costs
AB 1600 requires that a reasonable relationship exist between the need for public facilities and the type of
development on which a fee is imposed. As noted previously, the need for public facilities is related to the level
of service demanded, which varies in proportion to the EDUs generated by a particular land use type. For
purposes of determining the fee amounts in this study, new development in the City is classified as single or
multi-family residential or non-residential retail, industrial, office, or motel land use. Each land use type has a
standard number of gallons per day of flow that it generates, as described in Section 2 . In addition, certain
amounts of new development for each land use type have been proposed for each of the six annexation areas.
The number of new residential dwelling units or commercial/industrial square feet in each Annexation Area was
then multiplied by the number of gallons per day of wastewater flow that was assumed for each land use type.
The flow rates for each land use type were then summed to determine the flow rate in gallons per day that is
proposed for that Annexation Area. The construction costs for the wastewater facilities improvements that
serve each Annexation Area were determined by Brown and Caldwell and summed to obtain a total cost for
each Annexation Area. The total cost was then divided by the flow rate(gallons per day) for each land use type
to ascertain a unit cost (dollars per gallon per day). The calculations for each Annexation Area are summarized
in Table 8.
6. Impact Fee Schedule
Based upon the residential dwelling units and square feet of non—residential uses within each Annexation Area,
flow rates identified in Section 2 above can be applied to determine the flow rates generated by each
City of San Luis Obispo Page 15
Water and Wastewater Facilities AB 1600 Fee Study Update August 17, 2001
Annexation Area (see Table 8, "Flow Rate, (gal/day)"). The apportioned construction costs, taken from the
B&C Report, for each Annexation Area is then divided by the total flow rate to determine the cost per gallon of
wastewater generated for each Annexation Area. (see Table 8 "unit cost($ per gallon/day)"). The impact fee for
each Annexation Area and each land use within each Annexation Area was then determined by multiplying the
unit cost, in dollars per gal per day, by the level of service flow rates identified in Section 2. The wastewater
impact fees for various land uses from the 1991 program were then added to the fees listed in Table 8 to
determine the proposed updated wastewater impact fee for residential land uses.
For non residential land uses, it is assumed that wastewater generation is directly proportional to water usage.
Since meter size is an approximation of actual water usage,non residential fees are based upon meter service
units related to meter size, and are shown also in Table 8.
City of San.Luis Obispo Page 16
Water and Wastewater Facilities AB 1600 Fee Study Update August 17, 2001
3a9
1
j
ep[M oo " NM O F-'00 '00Cp rLcoi. ao � w
`429 6C,94S.- N EAC43
fDO �
M M co 69 dA CA
r Cfl
O O O
O O O O m O O
p O OO O) M . 0O m
un�p ion i° 04 Cop CO U � GorrL000cor0
m orn co Cl) O mMn
N N f� N `7 COO 7 .: M CO
.- OMI CO
cry 61!>69 69 6,3�69 cfl E»C%l Cl)r-
_O O cli O O 00 O.O L NM NNn � COO (° m
N Cl) C O. O O O O 0 O K .- CO N CO O O
ewe6�e{n� coLn OO C,4 0 r cc co V) N ON) M w N O 01 M a V
,T N N fA_ EA fA M vi Cfl v C
� Ol
O O O C
O O O O 00 0C) P �70 fistCOCOP, cn
m
sll!H4sui M t� O to CD CC
ON 7N �en C.4 tOnNN CO+) � RCq L6 06
� OtO L m «
N
x CL
Q o o m = c'
O 0 0 0 a ° m m
R 'N O 0 O O LO CO C14 1, N V 0 OO fy C.O
els!-eup3 c° o m 0 ri r- 0 n N; o ui C� o m c E
N O f7 O CH CA EA V)Vl 69 CA G O C Q O
m m C.O
CJ
r �
Ga oo m a0 �m
O m m
OPN6°W o 0 0 0o t- La I .- MCONrnMrn `° oEoc � '
R E N0 N - NC 0 CO N 0 , N M O NEUUO EW eC%4 NvD U mLm
CL N v> v> » ss»°1PUea CV 69n m4
= m m
c
0 0-..-- O - O C
m o 0 00 0 0 !gym
O LO
MUn CO m NO m.N
{JOCJlIt/ N O _r N m r- '�° O LO Cn n COO a P O COO O O CO W m tm0 .Lm..'
N N Cl) N I� d9 f9 E9 fA d9 O m M E. E E m C
Cp N N fA Vi fH
N. N di 3 N m3m m °
69
00 h •• m N dl C
d C N m m
a o 'O > j � X0000000 « � m =
m a00v « m
Fy ~ Cc 9 � C aCO4C a C C C �. m
m m>1 CL a CL a O. m N m C m
m T fa O N C c. C)
m CmC75 m :. � � � L O
V
CT 'O U a C C. O U >, .7 m C C.T.m
N v rnv m c � 0m 9 � �a ° jD EEE ° T
N opo L) U) aaM c' �� O m o 0000
j@CD :°cNaCL EE :3 ° o � coo � 0a)
v 30@rn ammLE � aaom ar) 00c mo m
N r @mv - cram E � >, @0 (9Zd 0m m2
� v � E m ° Ovm - ULLmN (A @ (Dwm mdm � �
W m E w o °)r ° m E rn0Y E o m E i. E m E m 3 a3) m m
mLL lL .m. .� m 3 N 0 W > C > LL m —E = LL.- m " y m m m m
° s •Y m �' m � aSfnl� ° a°i y.m m uc a> Em m m m ii u u « «
a� « E a— — e
rn = M m = m m m m
2 w S 0 2 0 10 a Mr.
'a E:U n m� c n E � E E E E � m � � o
J LL U E Cn CV cn r co
3-3
\ i
VI. Summary Fee Schedule
Table 9
Water Impact Fee Summary
Land Use Service Unit Current Fee Citywide Fee New Citywide Airport Margarita Area
Increase Fees Area Add-On
Add-On
Residential:
Single Family 1.00 $7,059 $340 $7 99 $746 $746
Multi-Family 0.80 $5,647 $272 $5,919 $597 $597
Mobile Home 0.60 $4,235 $204 $4,439 $448 $448
Non-Residential
5/8"-3/4"meter 1.00 $7,059 $340 $7,399 $746 $746
1"meter 2.00 $14,118 $680 $14,798 $1,492 $1,492
1-1/2"meter 4.00 $28,236 $1,360 $2%596 $2,984 $2,984
2"meter 6.40 $45,179 $2,176 $47,355 $4,774 $4,774
3"meter 14.00 .$98,828 $4,760 $103r588 $10,444 $10,444
4"meter 22.00 $155,301 $7,480 $162J81 $16,412 $16,412
6"meter 45.00 5317,660 $15,300 $3329960 $33,5701 $33,570
Table 10
Wastewater Impact Fee Summary
Area Specific Add-On Fees
Land Use Service Current Citywide New Airport Dalidio Edna Irish Margarita Orcutt
Unit Fee Fee Citywide Madona Islay Hills
Increase Fees McBride
Residential:
Single Family 1.00 $2,795 $441 $3,236 $751 $207 $722 $367 $713 _$1,689
Multi-Family 0.80 $2,237 $353 $2,590 $600 $166 $578 $294 $570 $1,351
Mobile Home 0.60 $1,678 $_265 $1,943 $450 $124 $433 $220 $428 $1,013
Non-Res. _
5/8"-3/4"meter 1.00 $2,909 $441 $3,350 $751 $207 $722 $367 $713 $1,689
1"meter 2.00 $5,818 $882 $6,700 $1,501 $414 $1,444 $734 $1,425 $3,378
1-1/2"meter 4.00 $11,636 $1,764 $13,400 $3,002 $828 $2,888 $1,468 $2,850 $6,756
2"meter 6.40 $18,615 $2,822 $21,437 $4,803 $1,325 $4,621 $2,348 $4,560 $10,810
3"meter 14.00 $40,723 $6,174 $46,897 $10;507 $2,899 $10,108 $5,137 $9,975 $23,647
4"meter 22.00 $63,993 $9,702 $73,695 $16,511 $4,556 $15,884 $8,073 $15,675 $37,160
6"meter 45.00 $130,8961 $19,845 $150,741 $33,7731 $9,320 $32,490 $161513 1 $32,063 1 $76,0101
City of San Luis Obispo Page 18
Water and Wastewater Facilities AB 1600 Fee Study Update August 17, 2001
3��
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Agenda Report-Water and Wastewater Impact Mitigation Fee Update Study
PROPOSED WASTEWATER E%1PACT FEES-David Taussig and Associates,Inc.
UPDATED TO REFLECT WASTEWATER MASTER PLAN IMPROVEMENTS
WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE . -
Area Specific Add-On Fees
Residential Fee Schedule
Service City- Dalidio
Land Use Unit Current wide New City Airport Madonna Edna Irish Margar- Orcutt
EDUs
Fee Add on wide Fees McBride Islay Hills ita
Single 1.0 2,795 441 3,236 751 207 722 367 713 1,689
Family
Multi0.80 2,237 353 2,590 600 166 578 294 570 1,351
Family
Mobile 0.60 1,678 165 1,943 450 124 433 220 428 1,013
Home
Non Residential Fee Schedule
Service City- Dalidio
Unit Current wide New City Airport Madonna Edna Irish Margar- Orcutt
Fee Add on wide Fees McBride Islay Hills tta
EDUs
5/8 x'/.in
meter 1.0 2,909 441 3,350 751 207 722 367 713 1,689
me
1 inch 2.0 5,818 882 6,700 1,501 414 1,444 734 1,425 3,378
meter
1-1/2 in •4.0 11,636 1,764 13,400 3,002 828 2,888 1,468 2,850 6,756
meter
2inmeter 6.40 18,615 2,822 21,437 4,803 1,325 4,621 2;348 4,560 10,810
3inmeter 14.0 40,723 6,174 46,897 10,507 2,899 10,108 5,137 9,9,75 23,647
4 in meter 22.0 63,993 9,702 73,695 16,511 4,556 15,884 8,073 15,675 37,160
6inmeter 45.0 130,896 19,845 150,741 11 33,773 9,320 32,490 16,513 32,063 76,010
J O�
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Agenda Report—Water and Wastewater Impact Mitigation Fee Update Study
WASTEWATER FEE CALCULATIONS FORNON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
Example I.a
Service Commercial/Office development in the Airport area-39,942 square feet.
Water meter sized at 1-1/2 inches.
PROPOSED
Meter EDU* Current Fee City-Wide AirportArea Total Impact
Size Add on Add On _ ._Fee Due
1-1/2 in 4.0 $11,636 $1,764 $3,002 $16,402
Example Lb
Service Commercial/Office development in the Dalidio/Madonna/McBride area-39,942 square
feet. Water meter sized at 1-1/2 inches.
PROPOSED
Meter
Dalidiol
City-wide Total Impact
EDU* Current Fee Madonna Area
Size Add on Fee Due
Add On _
1-1/2 in 4.0 $11,636 $1,764 $ 828 $11,464
Example 2.
Office development in the airport area-48,449 square feet. Water meter sized at two inches.
PROPOSED
Meter EDU* Current Fee City=wide Airport Area Total Impact
Size Add on Add On I Fee Due
-
2 in 6.40 $14,195 $2,822 . $4,803 $21,820
Example,3
Office development in the downtown area-39,000 square feet. Water meter sized at two inches.
- PROPOSED
City-wide Total Impact
Meter EDU* Current Fee. Add On
Size Add on Fee Due_
2 in 6.40 $14,195 $2,822 Not applicable $17,017
*EDU—Single Family Dwelling Unit Equivalent
3-33