HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Bill 4B 05/03/2010~~LU~
a '~
~
I85$
DATE: May 3, 2010
~ .It~~ # 4.3
TO: ~Ionoralble ~ayor amd 1Vgennbers of the Cify Council througfla Caty 1VIanage~
FROM: Sandra Sato, Interim Finance Director
SUBJECT: gieview Ana~ual Development ~mpact Fee Ite~ort ffor Fiscal Year 2008-2009;
Adopt Resolutiou~ M[aking ~ind'angs Regard'ang IJnexpended Develloprnea~t
Inap~ct ~ees
R~COl1VII1VYENDA'TI ON:
It is reconl.mended that the City Council review the ami~ial report on Developnlent I~ipact rees
and adopt the proposed resolution.
~A~C'KGROUNI~:
The Mitibation Fee Act, Gover•nment Coc~e ~SS66000 et seq., (the "Act") governs the
establishment and administration of development impact fees paid by new development projects
for public facilities needed to serve new development. Fees must be separately accounted for
and used for the specitic purpose for which the fee was imposed. The City's adopted
developinent impact fees are listed in the attached exhibits. Expenditures are authorized tlirough
tlze annual Capital and Operating Budgets and the City's Capital Improvement Program. Tlle
annual ado~ted City Budget~ is on file with the City Clerlt. ~
~D~S~USS~ON:
The Mitigation Fee Act requires tl~at t11e City prepare an annual accotmting report of all fees
subject to the Act (Attachment 1). This report must be made available to interested parties and
the public at least 15 days prior to the time the report is presented at a City Council n~eeting for
t•eview by the Council pul•suant to Govei~unent Code ~66006(b)(2). The FY2008-2009 report
was inade available to the public on the City of Petalunla website oi1 April 15, 20] 0; a copy of
the ~•e~ort also was inailed to all persons who had requested mailed notice relating to city fees oii
April 15, 2010.
Agenda Review:
Dept. Director /~ _ City flttorney Finance Director `1/1!1 City Manage~
~~NANC~AL IIVIPAC'I'S:
There ar•e no financial impacts directly related to the recominended action. Due to the decline in
develop~nent activities there are no direct expenditures for sonle of these funds. There are,
however, fitied costs related to the administration and accounting of the development fees, which
l~ave been reported as "City Administrative Costs" and which occur regardless of whether direct
expenses have occurred. A suminary of all impact fee expenditures during FY2008-2009 is
displayed in the attachment E~hibit B.
ATTAC~IMENTS
1. Aimual Development Impact Fee Report for Fiscal Year 2008-2009
2. Resolutioii Making Findings Regarding Unehpended Development Impact Fees
~
RESOLUTION OF THE PETALUMA CITY COUNCIL MAKING FINDINGS REGARDING
UNEXPENDED DEVELOPM~NT IMPACT FEES
W~IERE~S, the City of Petaluma imposes fees to mitigate the impacts of development,
purstiant to Government Code ~§66000 et a•ec~.; and
WHEIZEAS, fees collected are deposited into a separate fund accowit for each type of
development impact fee; and
WHER~AS, tl~e a description of each fee, its amount, and various infornlation required
by Gove~•nment Code section 66006(b)(1) to be reported on an aiuiual basis is set forth in the
Development Impact Fee Report - Fiscal Year 2008-2009 attached hereto as EYhibit A and
incot•porated het•ein by reference ("the Report"), as required by Governinent Code §66006(b)(1);
and
WHER~AS, the Report w~s made available to the public on the city's website on April
15, 2014; and
WHEREAS, copies of tlle Report were mailed to all persons having requested notice of
City actions relatin~ to fees by on April 15, 2010; and
WHEREAS, tlle City Council has reviewed the Report; and
WHEREAS, tlle City of Petaluma has collected development impact fees in certain funds,
some of wl~ich fees will not be eYpended within five years froin the first deposit of fees into said
accout~ts: and
WHEREf1S, Govei7unent Code section 66001(d) requires tlie city to inake certain
findings ~:very five years with respect to the portion of the funds remaining unexpended five
years ~fter the tirst de.posit of fees into said itmds and every five years thereafter; and
WHEREAS, as of Jui1e 30, 2009, the following fund account had funds remaining
urlexpei~ded more than five years after the first deposit of fees into said fimds, and has not been
the subject of tindings in the ~rior five years: Fluid 2120 Coinmtiizsity Cei~ter Facilities fee;
NOW, T'HEIZEFORE, ~3E IT RESOLVED, that:
l. The recitals stated l~erein are true aiid con•ect and adopted as findings of the City
Council.
?. The City Couucil has received and reviewed the Development Impact l~ee Report
- Fiscal Year 200~-2009 attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorpot•ated herein by
reference ( "tlie Report").
~. AS to F'unc~ 2120 Conlz~~unity Center Facilities fee, the City Council finds~ that:
a. Tl~e puipose to which said tee is identified generally in Exhibit A of the Report , and
more~ spec~ifically in the City of Petali~ma Mitigation T'ee ~Repoi~t~ (Sinci~.ir & Associates,
~
1VIay ~, 2008); aild the Development Iinpact Fee Ca;lculation arid Neaits Report for the
City of Petaluma, California and Master Facilifies Pl~n far the City of Petaluma,
Califoi~nia (bofh, Revenue & Gost Specialists, L.L,C., August; 2003) (collectively, t11e
"Nexus Studies''); Copies of the Nexus Studies are available for inspection 'at the offices
of the City Clerk.
b. There is a reasonable relationshi~ between said fee and the purpose for which it is
charged,, as more fully set forth in the Nexus Studies.
c. The renlainder of funds needed to constiuct the public impt•ovements identified in the
Nexus Studies related to said fee account will be collected .from future developinent
impact fees throug112025, the life of the City of Petaliul~a Geneial Plan 2025, and from
other sources as identified in the Nexus Studies and the City's adopted Capital
Iinprovement Program.
`f~
A'~''~'A~~l~~l~T 1
L
~
~ ~,
~
~~~~ ~~ ~~~1~~'~J 10'~1~9 ~ ~1~~~~~~1 '~! ~1~
ANNLJI~L ~EV~L~~IV~ENT ~1VJ[]PA~~' F~~ ~PO~ZT'
~'~SCA.L Y~A~ 2~08 - 2009
~'
~
~
.~ ~ ~
C'ity af ~'etaluma
Anr~c~al ~evelopment Irnp~ct Fee IZ~powt
Fisc~l Yecar 2008-09
~ackground
The Mitibation Fee Act, Governme~2t Code ~~66000 et seq:, (the "Act") govenis the
establishment and administration of development impacf.fees paid.by new development projects
for public facilities needed to serve i~ew development. Fees must be separately accounted for
and used for the specific purpose for which the fee was impos _ed. The City's adopted
developinent impact fees are listed in the attached exhibits. Eapendifures are authorized tl~rough
the annual Capital and Operating Budgets and the City's Capital Improvement Program. The
annual adopt-ed City Budget is on file with the City Clerk.
A~nual 1)evelo~~ent Fee Renortin~
The Act requires that the City prepare an annual review of all development impact fees as
defined in the Act and make a public report on the fees available to the public after the end of
each fiscal year. Government Code §66006(b)(2) requires the reporti to be placed on an agenda .
for review at a public meeting riot less tlian 15 days after tlie report is~made available to the
public. The FY2008-2009 report was made available to the public on the City of Petaluma
website on April 15, 2010; a copy of the report also was mailed to all persons who had renuested
mailed notice relatinb to city fees on April 15, 2010.
Excluded from this report are types ofdeveloper fees that are:not subject to the reporting
requirements of the Act_ For eYample, fees collected pl~rsuant to the City's zoning powers, rather
than pl~rsuant to the Act, are in-lieu hotising fees, the com~nercial linkage fee which is the non-
residential equivalent of an in-lieu housing fee, public art in-lieu fees and two fees related to the
Central Petalluna Specific Plan aiea: Water capacity fees and wastewater capacity fees are not
development iinpact fees~as defined ii~'~Sections 66006 and 66001 of the Act. The Quimby Act
parkland acquisition fee for residenfial subdivisons is imposed pursuant to ttie Subdivision Map
Act (Gov't. Code ~66477), and is also not included in tl~e Section 66001 reporting requireinent.
The Storm Drainabe Fee was last updated in 1986, prior to the 7anuary 1, 1989 effective date of
AB 1600, but is nevertheless included in this report and fiildings for informational purposes.
The ciiy is also requii•ed to adopt by resolution certaii~ findings _for any fund accounts whicli
contaili uneYpended funds as of the fifth fiscal year following the first deposit into those funds
and every five years thereafter. (Gov't. Code ~66001(d) ) Qne affected account is shown on
E:~hibit B to this ieport, Fund 2120, Cormnunity Center Facilities..
Th~. report is arganized as follows:
Exhibit A: A brief descripfion ofthepurposes of each developnlent im}~~ct fee and its
authorizing legislation (Gov't. Code ~66006(b)(1)(A).)
~
E~hibit B: St~nunary of the July 1, 2008 begiilning balalice, returned unused furids fiom projects,
aruiual fee revenue collected and interest eanled, identification of public iinprovements on which
fees were expended and the ending balance as of June 30, 2Q09 for each fee (Gov't. Code
566006(b)(1)(C)-(E).)Eacess funds froin capital project fiinds were retLU7led to the originating
revenue fiinds. The arulual expendift~res on each specific public impro~ement are listed,
including the total percentage ofthe cost of the public;imprgvement that was funded with
development impact fees. In addition to public improvenlent project costs, the City iricurs costs
to administer each mitigation fee program and to prepare the annual reports and the five-year
compliance analysis also required by the Act. As shown in the mitigation fee cost studies (or
"nexus studies") which support the various impact fees, the City charges administrative and
compliance costs at 3% of the program cost for each fee as a progranl expense. The actual dollar
cost for these expendih~res is listed for each fee. No individual.de~elopment impact fee fund has
collected sufficient funds to construct all improvements covered by fliat fiind as described in the
nexus studies (Gov't. Code §66D06(b)(1)(F).)
E.~hibit C: Sl?ows the one fund which has unexpended fees inore tlian five years after the first
deposit of money into that fund and which has not been the subject of findings, in the prior five
years. (Gov't. Code ~66001(d).)
~xhibit D; Identifies the amount of each development impact fee, including the modifications
which became effective August 1$, 2008, when the City updated.all development impact fees
other than the Stoim Drain Tmpact Fee (Gov't. Code ~66006(b)(1)(B).)
There were no interiund loans, transfers, refunds ar reallocation of funds in lieu of refunds in
Fiscal Year 2008-2009 (Gov't. Code §66006(b)(1)(G)-(I-I).)
~
~xha~at A
~ CITY OF PETAL:UMA
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE SU1d1~lARY
~'ee # Iimpact Fee Na~e Fee Aut-~o~ity ~~-ieff l3escription of the 'Y'ype ~f F'ee
1 Aquatic Center Resa 2008-086 The Aquatic Center Facilities.lmpact Fee is to finance the por-tion of
Facilities Impact Fee N_C.S., May 19, construction ofan aquatic comple~.with a 50 meter lap pool and a
2008 4,500 square foot recreation pool that is related to the project's services
to new development.
2 Community Center Reso. 2008-088, The Community Center Facilities Impact Fee is to finance the
Facilities Impact Fee N.C.S., May 19, expansion of community center facilities, inclucling fuiniture and
2008 fiYtures, to equip new cqmmunity center facilities space required to
reduce the impact of fuhice development:
3 Fire Sup~ression Reso_ 200$-088 The Fire Suppression Facilities Impact Fee is to finance specific fire
Facilities lmpact Fee N.C.S., May l9, protection and emergency•services facilities to reduce impacts caused
2008 by future development.
4 Library Facilities Reso. 2008-090 The Library Facilifies vnpact fee is to provide funding for additional
Impact Fee N.C.S., May 19, library facilities, furniture,. fXtures and collection materials to reduce
2008 the impacts caused by future development.
S Parkland Reso. 2008-092 The Parkland Acquisition Fee is, imposed on development projects
Acquisition Fee N.C.S., May 19, that are ~zot subject to-the Quimby Act. It funds acquisition of and
2008 payment for parkland necessary to maintain the standard established in
the city's General Plan, based on a ratio ~f parkland acreage to
population, including employees of new commercial development, as
new residents and employees axe added by new development.
6 Parkland Reso. 2008-093 The Parkland De~eloprnent Fee fitnds public facilities whicll improve
Development Impact N.C.S., May 19, neighborhood and cominunity parklands as needed to serve new
Fee 2008 developinent.
7 Open Space Reso. 2008-091 The Open Space Acquisition I'ee fi~clds acquisition of and payment for
Acq~~isition Impact N.C.S., May 19, open space necessaty fo maintain tfie city's standard established in its
Fee 2008 General Plan based on. a ratio of open space acreage to population,
including employees of new comine~•cial deuelopment, as new
residents~ and eiriployees ~a~•e-added~~by new ~development. ~
8 Law Enforceme~lt Reso. 2008-089 The Law Enforcement FacilityFee funds the portion of constl~uctio-i of
Facilities Impact Fee N.G.S., May 19, ~iew law enforcement:facilitie"s, includin~ a new police statioil a~~d t~~~o
~ ~ 2008 com~~lu~ications~~towei~s; ~and.acquisition ~of .police vehicles and
equipinent, that is related to tfie need':to serve: new development.
9 Public Facilities Reso. 2008-094 The Public Facilities Impact_ Fee funds a propoctionate.share of City
Impact Fee N.C.S., May 19, Hall renovation or relocation, corporation yard construction and VOIP
2008 and Wi-Fi communications systeins. It also funds additional computer
teclii~ology and city vehicles to serve the adcled po~~ulation and
employees brought to the ciry by new development.
D
Fee `# Iim~act ~ee Name ~+ ee,Aut-~o~-ity ~rgef -~es¢ription of tfl~e Type of ~ee
7.0 Storm IDrainage Ord. 1530 The Stot-rn Drainage Im~act Fee funds the construction of storm
Impact Fee N:C.S., eff. Sept. drainage improvements needed to control increases in run-off created
20; 1982; Ord. by new developinent pi'ojecfs, The Stoi7n. Drai~iage Impact Fee was
1653 N.C.S., eff. adopted and lasf updated before the enactment and effective date of
June 2, 1986 AB1600, but is included in this report for info77national purposes.
(Petaluma
Municipal Cocie
Chapter 1730);
Reso. 9751 ~
N.C.S., June 2,
1986
11 Traffic Development Reso. 2008-095 The Traffic Developmetit :Iinpact Fee'funds construction and
Impact Fee N:C.S., May 19,. implementation of"improvements to key elements of the citywide
2008 . transportation system sufficient to accommodate future traffic demand
generated by new development.
9
~eve~opgnen~ I~~act Fee~~epo~t - I+'Y2008-2009 • lEx-~i~it ~~ of 2
For Fisc~al Year 2008 2009 Est.
%
Fund Returned Funded Fund
$alance Unused Funds Fee Interest EYpenditures/ by Impact Balance
Fund,Title / Project Title 6/30/2008 From Projects: Revenue Revenue Transfers Fees (1) 6/30/2009
Fund 2110: Aquatie Center Facilities 13,205 - 7.;348 472 473 20,551
c00400605: Aquatic Center 250 0.2%
City administrative costs 223 100.0%
Fund 21~20: Conimunity~ Center Facilities~ 40~1,21~ 1 539;700 32~,034- 1~6,435 961 988,419
c00100107: Facility energy efticiency improvements retuttl of unused fee ~50,000
cOQ100108: Various community facilities projects retum of;unused fees 69,700
c00400104: East Washington park return of unused fees 120,000
City administrative costs 961 100.0%
Fund'2125: FireSuppression Facilities 1D8,791 - 58;760 3,792 10,041 161,302
c00300305: ftelocation of Fire Station # l 8,279 0.3%
City administrative costs 1,763 100.0%
Fun~l~ 2~1~35; Library Facilities 82,297 - 1~2,1~07 2,362 353 96,403
City administrative costs 363 100.0%
Fun~ 21'~40: Parl:land Acquisition and DevelopmenY ~881,430 103;500 273,865; 48,650 9,216 1,298,229
c00400205 PlayQround Replacements - 1,000 0.8%
c00400206 Wiseman Park [mprovements retum.of unused.fees 78;000
c00400305 Turtle Creek/Fo~ Hollow~Parkreturn of:unused fees 25,500
City administrative costs 8,216 100.0%
Fund 21~41:~ Parkland Acquisition ~(08) -~ - - - - ~ -
Fund 21~42: Parl:land Development (08) . - - = - - -
Fiind 21~43: Ope'n Space Acquisition (08)
Fund 21=15: Law Enforcement Facilities. 161,220 - 44,356 ~,00~ 1,331 209,249
City-admin'istrative costs ~ 1,331 100.0%
Fund 2150; Public Facilities 62,079 - 30,760 l; T72 76,923 17,089
c00100107: Facility energyefficiency`improvements 76,000 85.4%
City administrative costs. 923 100.0%
~~
I~evelmpmea~~ ~mp~ct Fee l~e~oa-t - FX20~8-2009 ~~x~~~~~ ~ 2 of 2.
For Fisccrl `Year 2008-20U9 ' Est.
. . . %
Fund Returned Funded Fu~id
Balance U~iused F~mds Fee Interest Expenditures/ by Impact Balance
Fund Title / Project Title 6/30/2008 From Projecfs Revenue, Revenue Transfers Fees (1) 6/30l2009
Fdnd 2155: Storm Drainage 1,637,155 1,84~;000 230,39~ 81,124 6,912 3,784,762
c00500103: Storm RRrelocation retun~ of unused funds 236,000
c005.00203: River plan denman Phase 3 return of unused, funds 24,000
c00500~08: Stream and precipitation gauges return of unused fimds 4;000
c00500704: Storm dredging spoils return of unused funds 657,000
c00500705: Lakeville Channel Improvements return;of unused funds 195,000
c00500804: Storm drainage improvements return.of unused funds 508,000
c00500805: River dredging habitat restoration rehirn of unused funds 219,000
City administrative costs 6,912 100.0%
Fund 2156: Storm Drainage (08)
City-administrative cosi's
-. - 3i9 7 10 336
10 100.0%
Fund 2160: Traffic Aiitigation 641,980 1;028,130 192;939 39,320 14,288 1,837,581
c00500108: Pedestrian street safety enhancements retum of.,unused funds 250,000
c00500307: Street Cypress/McDowell return of unused funds 5~,000
c00~00800: Highway i 16 Widening - 10,000 50.0%
c00500900: Street - Soundwalls 279,130
c0050T404: Street Btidge Rehabilitation 446,000
City administrative costs . ' 4,288 100.0%
(1) Project funding % per Capital Improvement Program. The city will'incurcosts to administer the mitigation fee programs and to prepare the annual
reports and the five-year compliance. analyses and reports reqtiired by the Mitigation Fee Act, this cost is estimated to be'3°~o of program
costs and is built into the fee
/~.
Develapme~rt Impact F'ee ~'unds Subject to Ea~~ibi~ C
Fave ~'e~r. .Reporting.Purscdant:.to Government. C'o~le Section 66001(~)(1) ~
Fund Fund
Balance 5 year 5 year Balance
6/3'0/2004 Revenue Expenditures 6/30/2009
Fund 2120: Community Center Facilities $887,878 $1,858,245 $:1,757,704 $988,419
~~
~x~fl~Ilt ~, ~ of ~
DE:VELOPII~IEIVT 7141P14C'T FEE S~HEI)IILE
~~lE '~'~'P~ I.AN.~ ,~JSE 'I'~'P]E FE]E ~JNIT ~~' 1Vd~ASgJ~2ElVgEN'g'
A_ q~natic Ceunter Single Family Resident'ial $326 ' Uriit
Faci~ities Impact ~'ee
Multifamily Residential $220 Unit
Commercial $62 1,000 sq ft of building space
Office ~ $59 1;000 sq ft of building space
Industrial $3:8 1~000 sq ft of building space
~
`~ , ~'';, ~~~ ~~~~~~~
~, ~
w.~~
. . , ~ ,
; ~,^ ~ ~ ~ \\~
r,. .-ft :;~ .. .. ~~r ,: ' > . _ ~ ~
..~..E
~,~~, ~, u : ~ ~.
~ ~"~ ,; ~,~~ ~,,-
~ ,. . ~ . .:...
Co~nm~unity Cernte~ Single Family Residential $1,376 Unit
Facilfltaes I~pact~ Fee ~
Multifamily Residential $927 Unit
Comnlercial $261 1,000 sq ft of building space
Office $249 1,000 sq ft of building space
Industrial
_ __ $159 :1,00.0 sq:ft ofbuilding space
~ ~'~ _ 2~
., ~ : . ~ .
; , y \.,.,
;, _. .. _ \\\\ ~ ,.: '~'~ \ . ~ f a~
~.~~ ~ - & ~
, s~. .: ._ ~ .~ .,: ... . W ~ y aS
r..
~
„
.:< r S~- ~ @ / E ', a ..
.`~ 3 ~~.~"{`/
~~~ , r,*,: ?.
. . _ .. .,.
Fir,e Suppression ' Single Fanlily Residential $761 Unit
Facil~ties g~~act Fee
Multifamily Residential $512 Unit.
Mobile I-Iome $761 Unit
Senior HoLising $512 Unit
Assisted Living Units $512 Unit
Commereial Lodging $512 Unit
Commercial $144 1,000 sq ft of building space
Retail Uses $144 1,000 sq ft of building space
~ Office tTses $138 ~ 1,000 sq ft of building space
Iiidustrial LTses $88 1,000 sq ft of~building space
~U a ~ ~
~~ ~ ~~ ,~. ~
` .;a
... , '.:. .. . . .. ~,... .
. . ..
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ `A`~afd~ ~ .. a ~xl
..s .. ,. . .x ... :,,;.
. .......
; ~ ~
'rof \ 3„ ~:a
,E H.`, . .
~ ~ ~ ; ` ~~ ~ ~Fr `~~
/%/r..~ ~ ~ .4'
.. .. n,,......au... ., >e~ ~ i ~~ .>..,,,
~I.,aw ~nfo~ceflnent Single Family Residential $1,1~9 Unit
Faci-ataes 'gan~~ct ~'ee
~ ~ 1VIu.ltifamily Resideirtial $773~ ~Unit~
Nlobile Home $1,149 Unit. ~
Setiior Housing $773 Unit
' Assisted Living $773 Unit
' Coinmercial Lodging $773 Unit
~~
~X~I~I~~ ~, 2 0~ ~
__
FEE 'I'X]PE
~ LANID ~JSE T~'PE
~'~E
iJIV~T O~ 1Vg]EASU~1VIlENT
~;aw`~nfoa•cegnent
(con't)
Retail $217 1,000 sq ft of building space
Commercial $217 1,000 sq ft of building space
Office $208 1,00'0'sg ft of building space
Industrial $132 1,000 sq ft of building space
~ ~`rr ~ r '; ~t ~ ~ ' `
,e~f ~ ~~~ ,~ a.~ -
,
~ ~ ~'
~~
,s.'~~'~'.
~ ~;~ '
~a~~a, ~ s ~ ~?g~`~.
I,ibrary ~'acilH~fles Sinble Eainily Residential~ $586 Unit
Itnpact Fee
Single Farrii.ly - attached $586 Unit
1VIultifarrii~ly Residerifial $395 Unit
Mobile Honie $'S86 LJnit
Corrunercial . $111 1,000 sq ft of building space
Office $106 1,000 sq ft of bliilding space
Industrial ~ ~$6.8 1,000 sq ft of building space
~,__
~ ~ ~f~'~\ \
~:'-
l.a. ..~. ... ......--~. .."~~c
'.~
: ,
.... _
,^ ~
. ,p \
,
C ~::~~~~ ~ L
..
i,/,....~.~... . i,. . , .
€,
•
.t~)
~~~ R
, ,
~ i~:}n... ~.~ r~
\~
x i..
. . .. , .
,.
~ ~
:
.
~
~>.
~ ~ ~~ ~~ \
~ ..,. ,....
~.. ~ ~
~ /'~
, „
Ope~ Space Single Family Resi~dential
~ $5,950 Unit
Acquisition &'ee .
Multifamily Residential $4,006 ~ Unit
Comrnercial $1;127 Unit
Office $1,078 1,000 sq ft of building space
Ind"ustrial . $686 1,000 sq ft of building space
~, i; `~` `'
~ ti .i
/
\~
~
i
F ~
~
g
\~\ ' ~
~3
~~
' K ~
~
z
~v ~ ~ `
~
"
/
~
`
3
~ a
~ ~ '
ha
~
,
,,,,
. ,., .r...~ ,.~_....u., .„
a,nl i,..~~:.~F, v,: E~
~
~:~..... fi ;
,.,~~.~
/, ,.._
. .rz~ti,,, .a ~,e ,ic
.
u~ •c
.
Fn M„„y
Par9: L~nd Aecguisition Single Family.Residential $3;209 ilnit
~'ee (Non-(~uia~~y Act .
Projects) ~ ~
Nlulfifaniily Residential $2,174 Unit
~ Commercial $608 1;000 sq ft of building space
Office $581 ' 1,000 sq ft of building space
Indusf"rial $370 1;000 sq ft of buil`ding space
~ h ~ ~ ~ i ~
i . \.
~
~ ~ ~~ ~ f ~v~ _: ~ \ h~ y
r~ \.,£
~
~~ ~
. ~' ~,
~ ~ ~. y .
~
\
'
c
~ ~
%
~: E
~
\ „ ~%
~~ ` %
,
%y
..<. ,i \ ,
~?. °,'
, :..;::..:.. . ,
z~..
.
..'.,r
H F ~~a .. ~. . . -
?.rt..
.,c.
~..... .
r.j
.
.^.,.zi... , ~.a....: -
..
..
.~'.~..~, z~ ~~
.
~.
%
.
.,,
. >
.
C..
\
, y
, a_,..,
.
..
1'ark I.~~nd Single~Family Resideiitial $5,~98 LTnif
~DeveIlopa~en~ IYnpac~
Fee
Single Eaniily- attached $5,498 Unit
~ Muliifai~iily residential $3,702 Unit
Manufactureel.Hoir-e $5;.498 Unit
Cbminercial $1,0~1 1,000 sg ft of building space
Office $996 1;000 sq ft of building space
Industrial $6~4 1,OOQ
.~ r' a', a ~
, h F ~
~ F:e. ~ " ~ ~.. \ ~y ` : S~i~r c ~ ''. ~
r ~ ;~~:-~ ~ ~~?~~~ ~v
~ ^~i7
~` .: ~,..
.
~
,.; .. . ~
~ T ~ ~' _
„ ~
~ .~'.
w, .~. a~~` .> v, r.....d a..~.a .. ~ , _. ~ ..w ~
N.,~aam.....«..,,~..~.a ~..w, ,....v. S.sz..'~r. . .SrD ~ .k ... ,..e .. d...
~.. ...w .~~
/ ~
E~l~~~~' ~, 3 of 4
~'~EE '~XP~, ~AN~ iJS~ TXP~ ~~~ ~JNgT' ~4~F 1VIEASi7~~1VIEN~
~ ~, ~ ~
.~ ... a~.. .. ,..~. ~ ~ \~ ~~ , ~
. ,,,:
.~ .x.-. ,~ ......,h. . , ,~~ ~ ~
>
, -~: ~ ~ , : ~~~ ~ ~~
,z.~_ ~. ,.. '.~.
>. ..~.. ~ . ,~ ., ~. .._.
Public ~'acilities Single Fanlily Residenfial ~ $'1;309 Unit
YznPact lE"ee
Multifamily Residential $881 Unit
Cominercial $248 1,000 sq ft of building space
Office $237 1,000 sq ft of building space
Industrial, $151 1,,OQ0 sq ft of building space
\
~ ~ ks - 2., --
~ dl'~ ~ lt
~~ ~ "''E ~/% 9~~~.
~ ; ~
~ ~
.f. ~
....~~. , v.~..~. .~. ~ , .. , ~~ .5~.- ~
. ._c, . .....:,. . ~ ~~ /..... .. .. ~
~
.. .,i. .. .xa
, ....h
. ~
..r . ...~ ~ .
~J'a.^~~i „~
~....e
~
T'raf~'ic Im~act ~ee* Single Family Residential $1.8;830 Unit`
~(C~a~trans Prefea~red) M~iiltifanlily~ Resident~ial $11,48;5 U~riit~ ~
Senior Housing $4;896 Unit
Office $18,078 . 1,000 sq ft of building space
Hotel/IVlotel. $12,993 Room
Cominercial/Sho~ping $17,552 1;Q00 sa ft of building spaee
Industrial%Warehouse $11;298 1,000 sq ft of building space
Education $2,825 Student
Institution . $8;097 1;,00.0 sg ft of building space
~ ,` ~~, ~~~~
., , ; ._ ~. , , ~r.;, .
~ ~ y ; , ~ \ ~
.,~~ ,~.. .~. ~~. @~.._.~ ,~ ~,,
,..
...,; ~ ~ ~ ~ ; u ~~ ~~'.
,~ ,,, ~ ~„ .~.
., , . . ,~.. ~ , _ ,;,.. ..
.
'~'raffie Img~act Fee* Single-Family Residential $15,370 Unit
~(~,ocall,y Prefferred) ~ Multifainily.Residential $9,3,76 Unit
Senior Housing $3;996 Unit
Office $.14,755 1,00.0 sq ft of buildinb space
HoteUMotel $10,605 Room
Con~inercial/Shopping $14,294 1,000, sq ft of building space
Industrial/Warehouse $9,222 1,Q00 sq ft of building space
Educatioil $2,306 Student
, Institution $,6;609 1,;000 sq ft,of building space
,~ , ~
~ , ~~~~. ~ ~ / '~; ~ ~'~: v-
'
~ ~~ , , ~
~`~\\ .,2Y , \ . . F -- ~\ ' Z
:
$~
~ ~~
'~. '~.
~°
,~
•
~ A ,~ .
:~ ~ ,: k
~.- Y .
~
~
~
¢:
-
~
W ft
,~ ,. ~..:..
.1~. '
~ ~ ,,. . ..:: .,. . .
~:.
. :„ ..
.n, . ..~
„ ,. . ~.<: .w.~.....;. ....~\
:,
. .., .
i
„ w
:
.
.,. ,.,„
_. a.
, ....a
.
. ;
~
*NO'~1~: 'I'he 2 adopted_,traf$ic irnpact fees reflect t-~e cosg di~'ferential be~veen. two c~esngn ~Iterna~ives for
tlne propose~l .Rainier Avenue Crosstown Connec~or and lE~ighway 101 Inte~change- ("Calt~ans Preferr.ecl";
"]Locally Pre~erred"). iJa~til a fnn~l deter~irnatio~ is a~ade on a design alternative, the ~City will collect ~he
higher (t~e "CaIl~rans Prefer~ed") of tlge 2 traffic im~act fees on all projects subject'.to tlhat fee. Sho~nld ~he
"~ocally P~-eferred"' desngn alterraative ul$imate9y ~ie sel~cted, t~e Cify will then charge t~-e "I.ocally
Prefer.reill" ~~-affic a~n~act fee annount ~rnd. reffund ~he 'increAment~ll, dif~ea~erice be4ween t~ne two fees to thos~
projects ~~at hac~ already ~aid tlne "Cal~raa-s ~'refera-ed" traffc impaet fee.
~~
E~~~IT D, ~ of 4
ST`0~~:~~N IM[PAC"I' F~E
'Ca~cuflataon of Fee
12~nnoff comg~udation: The increase in runoff created by a,given projeet: is calculated for a 100-year storm, utilizing
runoff coefficients based upon ,the .portioil of vegetated area fo impervious surfaces, and eYpressed in acre-feet.
Runoff coefficients are based upon the typ;e of use, slope of the land; and percent of vegetation coverage.
ComIlnea~cia~a-dusta-ual: Projects pay a fee of $30,00.0 per acre foot of additional runoff. The ~amount of
incremental runoff created is directly liriked to the ainount of landscaping provided. The m~imum fee possible is
$9;000 per acre of land. This would apply to a project with 20% or less landscaping. A project with 25%
landscaping can expect a fee of'$6,750 per acre, 30%o would pay $6,~00 per acre, and so on.
Residential: Projects pay a fee of $15,000 per acre foot of, additional runoff. Increinental runoff is dependent upon
the density of a project and the arnount of landseaping and open space provided. A liigh density project with 20% or
less area in landscaping could ex~ect:to pay $4,500 per acre. A type detach'ed single-family subdivision would pay
approximately $'1,500 per aere. ~
~~D