The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About09/04/2001, C6 - REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL UPDATING TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES council j acenaa nepoRt �H CITY O F SAN LUIS O B I S P O FROM: Bill Statler, Director of Finance Prepared By: Linda Asprion, Revenue Manager)W SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL UPDATING TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES CAO RECOMMENDATION Approve the request for proposals (RFP) for preparing an update of the transportation impact fees; and. authorize the CAO to award the contract if the best overall proposal is within the approved budget of$25,000 for this project. DISCUSSION Background Under the City's user fee cost recovery policy (pages B-7 through B-11 of the 2001-03 Financial Plan), we should review and update service charges on an ongoing basis to ensure that they keep pace with changes in the cost-of-living as well as changes in service levels and delivery methods. In implementing this policy, the City has adopted the strategy of comprehensively analyzing fees every five years, with interim adjustments annually based on changes in the consumer price index. David M. Griffith & Associates (DMG) prepared our initial analysis for transportation impact fees under this approach in 1993 with fee adoption in 1995. Accordingly, it is time to prepare a comprehensive evaluation of service costs and related revenues. The Council approved this work effort in the 2001-03 Financial Plan, and appropriated$25,000 for this purpose. Purpose of Transportation Impact Fees The primary purpose of the city's transportation impact fees is to implement the City's General Plan and Financial Plan policy of assuring that new development pays for its fair share of the cost of transportation system improvements needed to serve it. In accordance with State requirements (AB 1600), there needs to be a reasonable "nexus" between the fees set by the City and the benefit received by new development. Consistent with the initial fee study, the primary source document in preparing this update will be the adopted General Plan Circulation Element. In short, the purpose of the transportation impact fee update is not to create new transportation system policies, but to assure that we have an up-to-date implementation plan. Consultant Workscope As set forth in the attached RFP, specific consultant tasks in updating transportation impact fees include: 06-� Council Agenda Report—Request for Proposal Updating Transportation Impact Fees Page_2 1. Update the listing of transportation projects eligible for impact fee funding, including project costs and funding sources. 2. Update existing facility cost allocation policies, procedures and methodology for compliance with the requirements of AB 1600 and other applicable statutes. 3. Update the calculation of fees to cover the cost of transportation facilities required by future development. 4. Review current strategies for transportation impact fees, including the City's traffic model, and identify additional information needed, if any. 5. Develop and present findings in a manner that ensures understanding, confidence and credibility by operating staff, interested community members and policy-makers in the overall work product. 6. Produce final report that summarizes key results and findings and explains the methodology used and documentation compliance with the "reasonable relationship" requirements of AB 1600. 7. Report on other matters that come to their attention in the course of their evaluation that in their professional opinion the City should consider. 8. Present the report to"stakeholders" and the City Council. Evaluation and Selection Process Proposal Review. A review team composed of representatives from Administration, Finance and Public Works will consider the following factors in evaluating proposals and making their contract award recommendation to the CAO: 1. Understanding of the work required by the City. 2. Quality, clarity and responsiveness of the proposal. 3. Demonstrated competence and professional qualifications necessary for successfully performing the work required by the. City. 4. Recent experience in successfully performing similar services. 5. Proposed approach in completing the work. 6. References. 7. Background and experience of the specific individuals to be assigned to this project. 8. Proposed compensation. As reflected above, we will not award the contract based solely on price, but on a combination of factors that represent the best overall value in completing this work. Proposal Review and Award Schedule. The following summarizes our anticipated schedule for proposal review and contract award: c 6-a Council/Agenda Report—Request for Proposal Updating Transportation Impact Fees Page 3 1. Issue RFP 09/05/01 2. Hold pre-proposal conference 09/12/01 3. Receive proposals 09/26/01 4. Complete"desk top"proposal evaluation 10/03/01 5. Firialize staff recommendation 10/10/01 6. Award contract 10/17/01 7. Execute contract 10/29/01 8. Start work 11/01/01 Based on a 90-day timeframe for completing this project, we plan to present the study findings and recommendations to the Council in March 2002. Prospective Bidders In addition to publishing a formal notice requesting proposals, we will mail the RFP to a limited number of firms specializing in this type of review who have indicated their interest in performing this work. A list of prospective bidders is attached. FISCAL IMPACT The projected cost for this work is$25,000. The Council has already approved funding for this study in the 2001-03 Financial Plan (page D-153). ATTACHMENTS A. Workscope excerpt from the Request For Proposal for Transportation Impact Fee Update B. Proposers List ON FILE IN COUNCIL OFFICE Request for Proposal C '46-2 Attashl ent Section A DESCRIPTION OF WORK 1. OVERVIEW Under the City's user fee cost recovery policy, the City reviews and updates service charges and impact fees on an ongoing basis to ensure that they keep pace with changes in the cost-of-living as well as changes in service levels and delivery methods. In implementing this policy, the City has adopted a strategy of comprehensively analyzing fees revenues every five years,with interim adjustments annually based on changes in the consumer price index. David M. Griffith and Associates prepared our initial analysis for transportation impact fees under this approach in 1993 with.fee adoption in 1995. Accordingly, it is time to update the evaluation of service costs and related revenues from transportation impact fees. 2. PROJECT GOALS The primary purpose of this project is to: a. Update transportation projects eligible for impact fee funding. b. Update facility cost allocation policies and procedures that comply with the requirements of AB 1600 and other applicable statutes. C. Update the calculation of fees to cover the cost of transportation facilities required by future development. d. Prepare a report explaining the methodology used and documenting compliance with the "reasonable relationship"requirements of AB 1600 in updating the fees. e. Present report findings to"stakeholders"and the Council. 3. CONSULTANT WORKSCOPE a. Update the listing of transportation projects eligible for impact fee funding. b. Update existing facility cost allocation policies, procedures and methodology for compliance with the requirements of AB 1600 and other applicable statutes. C. Update the calculation of fees to cover the cost of transportation facilities required by future development. d. Review current strategies for transportation impact fees, including the City's traffic model, and identify additional information needed,if any. e. Develop and present fmdings in a manner that ensures understanding, confidence and credibility by operating staff, interested community members and policy-makers in the overall work product. £ Produce final report that summarizes key results and fmdings and explains the methodology used and documentation compliance with the"reasonable relationship"requirements of AB 1600. g. Report on other matters that come to your attention in the course of your evaluation that in your professional opinion the City should consider. A-ff6Lc,6 h. Present the report to"stakeholders"and the City Council. In summary, we expect a final produce that reflects technical excellence as well as a strong policy orientation. 4. PROJECT COMPLETION We would like to complete this project—including presentation of findings and recommendations to the Council—within 120 days after contract execution. Assuming a contract award date of November 1, 2001, policy recommendations would be presented to Council in March 2002. - Coo— AttachmWLQ� PROPOSERS LIST v TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE UPDATE SPECIFICATION NO. 90293 Goodwin Consulting Group David Taussig&Associates Ms. Susan Goodwin,Managing Principal Mr. David O.Taussig,President 701 University Avenue, Suite 225 1301 Dove Street, Suite 600 Sacramento, CA 95825 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Phone No. 916-561-0890 Phone No. 949-955-1500 Fax No. 916-561-0891 Fax No. 949-955-1590 Maximus, Inc Economic Research Associates Mr. Joseph Colgan Mr..Bill Andersen 4320 Auburn Blvd., Suite 2000 964 Fifth Avenue Suite 214 Sacramento, CA 95841 San Diego, CA 92101 Phone No. 916-485-8102 Phone No. 619-544-7402 Fax No. 916-485-0111 Fax No. 619.544-1404 MBIA MuniFinancial Revenue Cost Specialists, LLC Attn: Proposal Coordinator Mr. Scott Thorpe 28765 Single Oak Drive 2545 E. Chapman Suite 103 Temecula, CA 92590-3361 Fullerton, CA 92831 Phone No. 800-755-6864 Phone No. 714-992-9020 Fax No. 510464.8012 Fax No. 714-992-90