The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06-19-2018 Agenda Item 09 - Capital Facilities Fee program (AB 1600) Fee table modificationMeeting Date: 6/19/2018 FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director Prepared By:Xzandrea Fowler, Community Development Deputy Director SUBJECT:CAPITAL FACILITIES FEE PROGRAM (AB 1600) FEE TABLE MODIFICATION RECOMMENDATION Adopt a Resolution to modify the development impact fee table that is set forth in Resolution 10879 (2018 Series). DISCUSSION Background On April 3, 2018 the City Council voted 5:0 to introduce Ordinance 1646 to establish and implement the Capital Facilities Fee Program (CFFP). The CFFP establishes development impact fees which are imposed as a condition of approval upon all development projects for which a building permit is issued on or after the effective date of the ordinance. Those development impact fees are established for the following public facilities: a. General Government Impact Fee; b. Fire Impact Fee; c. Parkland In-Lieu Fee; d. Parks and Recreation Development Impact Fee; e. Police Impact Fee; and f. Transportation Impact Fee. The Ordinance authorizes the amount of the fees to be established by resolution. The Ordinance was adopted by the City Council on April 17, 2018 and became effective on May 17, 2018. On April 3, 2018, the City Council approved Resolution 10879 (2018 Series) (Attachment B) which sets the fees for each of the categories listed above. The newly adopted development impact fees for capital improvement infrastructure associated with transportation, parks and recreation, public safety, and general government go into effect on July 1, 2018. Modifying the Development Impact Fee Table 1. Parkland In-Lieu Fee - Multifamily Condominium Following the adoption of the Ordinance and the Resolution, staff discovered that the fee table in the Resolution inadvertently omitted the land use fee category for “Multifamily Condominium,” which should have a different Parkland In-Lieu fee amount than the “Single Family” or the “Multifamily Apartments” land use fee categories. To avoid overcharging “Multifamily Condominium” developments, the appropriate Parkland In-lieu fee needs to be included in the fee table to reflect the $3,151 fee for “Single Family,” the $2,269 fee for Packet Pg. 89 Item 9 “Multifamily Condominium,” and the $1,457 fee for “Multifamily Apartments.” The proposed amendment to the fee table is provided as Exhibit A in Attachment A. 2. Add-on Transportation Fees –Prado Road Interchange and LOVR Interchange Following the adoption of the Ordinance and the Resolution, t he new “Citywide Transportation Impact Fee (TIF)” basically consolidated the city’s base and subarea TIFs into three components (a Citywide base TIF, a Prado Road add-on TIF, and a Los Osos Valley Road (LOVR) add-on TIF). The Prado Road add-on funds the Highway 101/Prado Road Interchange improvements plus related financing costs. The LOVR add-on provides reimbursement funding for the Highway 101/Los Osos Valley Road Interchange improvements plus applicable financing costs. The three components of the Citywide TIF are applicable to every property in the City, except for properties within the existing LOVR subarea and the newly adopted San Luis Ranch (SLR) Specific Plan area. The exception is necessary because, entitled developments within the LOVR and SLR subareas are already required to pay a set amount towards the LOVR interchange or the Prado Road interchange improvements. To avoid charging new development in those areas more than their fair share, the Citywide TIF was modified accordingly. The Capital Facilities Development Impact Fee Nexus Study (Nexus Study) included additional tables to reflect the modified Citywide TIF, but those tables were not included in the adopted Resolution. Only the general Citywide TIF was included in the adopted Resolution, but the adopted Ordinance referenced the modified tables. During the community outreach that occurred prior to the adoption of the CFFP, staff repeatedly communicated that the new Citywide TIF applied to new development in the SLR and LOVR areas would be modified to account for the existing TIF arrangements/obligations in a transparent and easy to calculate manner, as illustrated in the Nexus Study. Therefore, the TIF fee table, as set forth in the Resolution needs to be modified to reflect the transportation impact fee adjustments for the developments that are not subject to the additional Prado Road Interchange Add-on or the LOVR Interchange Add-on transportation impact fees. The proposed fee table modifications are shown as Exhibit A, Tables 2 and 3, of Attachment A. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The adoption of the modified Resolution is (1) not a Project under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and is therefore exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(4); (2) statutorily exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15273(a)(4) (Rates, Tolls, Fares and Charges for obtaining funds for capital projects necessary to maintain service within existing service area); (3) not intended to apply to specific capital improvement projects and as such it is speculative to evaluate such projects now and any specifically identified transportation projects were already evaluated under CEQA and imposed as mitigation measures in previously certified EIRs and/or adopted mitigated negative declarations; and/or (4) not intended to, nor does it, provide CEQA clearance for future development-related projects by Packet Pg. 90 Item 9 mere payment of the fees. Each of the foregoing provides a separate and independent basis for CEQA compliance and when viewed collectively provides an overall basis for CEQA compliance. FISCAL IMPACT The proposed modifications to the Resolution will not alter the original fiscal impact assumptions, because the assumptions included in the analysis for the CFFP nexus study included the Parkland In-Lieu Fee –Multifamily Condominium and the Add-on Transportation Fees for the Prado Road Interchange and LOVR Interchange improvements. Therefore, the inclusion of those fees into the fee table will not impact the forecasted revenue and/or cost associated with the implementation of the CFFP. ALTERNATIVE The following alternative is available to Council should you choose to adopt the modifications as recommended by staff: 1.Reject the proposed modification to the Resolution.The City Council may reject the proposed modifications to the development impact fee table(s) as set forth in Resolution No. 10879 (2018 Series). Staff does not recommend this action because it would result in the over-charging of Parkland In-Lieu impact fees for any new multifamily condominium development and the over-charging of Transportation Impact Fees for all development types within the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan and the LOVR Subarea. Attachments: a - Amended Resolution b - Resolution 10879 Packet Pg. 91 Item 9 R ______ RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2018 SERIES) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, MODIFYING THE CAPITAL FACILITIES FEE PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE TABLES AS SET FORTH IN RESOLUTION NO. 10879 (2018 SERIES) WHEREAS,on April 17, 2018 the City Council adopted Ordinance 1646 to establish and implement the Capital Facilities Fee Program (CFFP). The CFFP establishes development impact fees which are imposed as a condition of approval upon all development projects for which a building permit is issued on or after the effective date of the ordinance. The Ordinance also authorizes the City to set the amount of the impact fees by resolution; WHEREAS,the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10879 (2018 Series) set fees for the following fee categories. a) General Government Impact Fee; b) Fire Impact Fee; c) Parkland In-Lieu Fee; d) Parks and Recreation Development Impact Fee; e) Police Impact Fee; and f) Transportation Impact Fee. WHEREAS,the impact fee table exhibit in Resolution No. 10879 (2018 Series) inadvertently omitted:the land use fee category for “Multifamily Condominium;”the Prado Road Interchange Add-on transportation fee adjustment for development within the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan area, which funds a significant portion of the Highway 101/Prado Road Interchange improvements plus related financing; and the Los Osos Valley Road Interchange Add-on transportation fee adjustment for new development in the Los Osos Valley Road subarea, which funds a portion of the Highway 101/ Los Osos Valley Road Interchange improvements plus related financing; and WHEREAS,the omitted fee information was included in the Capital Facilities Development Impact Fee Nexus Study, dated March 20, 2018, prepared by Economic Planning Systems, Inc., and was incorporated by reference into the findings of Ordinance 1646 and Resolution No. 10879; and WHEREAS,modifying the fee table exhibit in Resolution No. 10879 (2018 Series) to include the omitted fee information, described above, will prevent the over-charging of parkland in-lieu fees and transportation impact fees for development projects in the future. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1.Recitals. The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference. Packet Pg. 92 Item 9 Resolution No. ______ (2018 Series) Page 2 SECTION 2.Findings. The City Council hereby finds as follows: a) The purpose of the updated development impact fees is to further protect public health, safety, and general welfare by providing adequate transportation, park and recreation, fire, police, and general government facilities to satisfy the needs of new development and to mitigate the impacts of new development on the City’s capital facilities and improvements. b) The updated development impact fees collected pursuant to this resolution shall be used only to pay for facilities and improvements identified in the Capital Facilities Development Impact Fee Nexus Study and shall not be in lieu of any other fee or tax as may be required by the Municipal Code. c) There is a reasonable relationship between the types of development on which the development impact fees are imposed and the use of the development impact fees and the need for the facilities and improvements. d) As required by Government Code Section 66001 et seq., there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the updated development impact fees and the cost of the facilities and improvements attributable to the developments on which the development impact fees are imposed. The estimated costs of facilities and improvements, including financing costs, to be paid for as shown in the Capital Facilities Development Impact Fee Nexus Study, for the City of san Luis Obispo, dated March 20, 2018, prepared by economic Planning systems, Inc. the findings and analysis of which are hereby incorporated by reference, have been allocated to new development. SECTION 3.Cost Estimates. At any time, the actual or estimated costs of facilities identified in the development impact fee analysis changes, the Finance Director shall review the development impact fee and determined whether the change affects the amount of the development impact fees. If the development impact fees are significantly affected, the Finance Director shall, within thirty (30) days, recommend to the Council a revised fee for their consideration. SECTION 4.Amount of Development Impact Fees. Effective July 1, 2018, development impact fees for capital improvement infrastructure associated with transportation, parks and recreation, public safety, and general government shall be in the amounts set forth in Exhibits A, attached hereto. Unless otherwise acted upon by the Council, the amount of the development impact fees will automatically be adjusted on July 1 of each subsequent year in accordance with San Luis Obispo Municipal Code section 4.56.040. SECTION 5.Amending Existing Resolution. Resolution Number 10879 (2018 Series) is hereby amended and superseded to the extent inconsistent herewith. SECTION 6: Environmental Review. The adoption of the modified Resolution is (1) not a Project under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and is therefore exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(4); (2) statutorily exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15273(a)(4) (Rates, Tolls, Fares and Charges for obtaining funds for Packet Pg. 93 Item 9 Resolution No. ______ (2018 Series) Page 3 capital projects necessary to maintain service within existing service area); (3) not intended to apply to specific capital improvement projects and as such it is speculative to evaluate such projects now and any specifically identified transportation projects were already evaluated under CEQA and imposed as mitigation measures in previously certified EIRs and/or adopted mitigated negative declarations; and/or (4) not intended to, nor does it, provide CEQA clearance for future development-related projects by mere payment of the fees. Each of the foregoing provides a separate and independent basis for CEQA compliance and when viewed collectively provides an overall basis for CEQA compliance. Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of _____________________ 2018. ____________________________________ Mayor Heidi Harmon ATTEST: ____________________________________ Teresa Purrington City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________________ J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________. Packet Pg. 94 Item 9 Resolution No. ______ (2018 Series) Page 4 ____________________________________ Teresa Purrington City Clerk Packet Pg. 95 Item 9 Resolution No. ______ (2018 Series) Page 5 EXHIBIT A CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES Effective July 1, 2018 Table 1: Citywide Capital Facilities Fee Schedule See Table 2 for San Luis Ranch Subarea Fee Schedule and Table 3 for Los Osos Valley Road Subarea Fee Schedule. Packet Pg. 96 Item 9 Resolution No. ______ (2018 Series) Page 6 Table 2: San Luis Ranch Subarea Fee Schedule See Table 1 for Citywide Capital Facilities Fee Schedule and Table 3 for Los Osos Valley Road Subarea Fee Schedule. Table 3: Los Osos Valley Road Subarea Fee Schedule Packet Pg. 97 Item 9 Resolution No. ______ (2018 Series) Page 7 See Table 1 for Citywide Capital Facilities Fee Schedule and Table 2 for San Luis Ranch Subarea Fee Schedule. Packet Pg. 98 Item 9 Packet Pg. 99 Item 9 Packet Pg. 100 Item 9 Packet Pg. 101 Item 9 Packet Pg. 102 Item 9 Packet Pg. 103 Item 9 Page intentionally left blank. Packet Pg. 104 Item 9