Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006/07/25 Item 7 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item: '1 Meeting Date: 7/25/06 ITEM TITLE: A. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 3.50 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO UPDATES IN THE PUBLIC FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES (PFDIF) TO PAY FOR VARIOUS PUBLIC FACILITIES WITHIN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA. B. ORDINANCE NO. OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 3.50 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO 'UPDATES IN THE PUBLIC FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES (PFDIF) TO PAY FOR VARIOUS PUBLIC FACILITIES WITHIN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA'S GENERAL PLAN BOUNDARY. C. RESOLUTION NO. ADOPTING THE "PUBLIC FACILITIES DIF, MARCH 2006 UPDATE". REVIEWED BY: D. RESOLUTION NO. APPROVING THE TRANSFER OF FUNDS FROM THE CORPORATION YARD COMPONENT OF THE PUBLIC FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE (PFD1F) TO THE PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION COMPONENT OF THE PFDIF FOR COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PURCHASE OF A STORM DRAIN COMPLIANCE INSPECTOR VEHICLE. E. RESOLUTION NO. APPROVING THE CLOSURE OF FOUR (4) COMPONENTS OF THE PUBLIC FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE (PFDIF) AND TRANSFERRING FUNDS THEREFORE. 0\.1 Director of BUd?d AnalYSi~ City Manager(j I (4/5ths Vote: Yes X No--> SUBMITTED BY: In August of 1989, Council adopted an ordinance establishing a series of 'supplemental' impact fees. After a more comprehensive review of the City's capital needs over the next year, the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee (PFDIF) program was established in January of 1991, via Ordinance 2432. This program enables the City to implement the intent of the Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC) program, and to ensure that existing residents do not bear the costs of new development. This program was last comprehensively updated in November of 2002. Tonight Council will consider approval of the 'Public Facilities DIF, March 2006 Update' The public hearing has been duly noticed. RECOMMENDATION: That Council: 7-1 Page 2, Item: Meeting Date: 1 7/25/06 1 Conduct the Public Hearing; 2. Approve the Ordinance amending Chapter 3.50 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code (first reading), to take effect and be in full force on the sixtieth (60th) day from and after its second reading and adoption; 3. Approve the Resolution adopting the report prepared by staff; 4 Approve the Resolution transferring funds from the Corporation Yard component to the Program Administration component; and 5. Approve the Resolution closing the Telecommunication Systems, Geographic Information Systems, Computer, Systems, and Records Management Systems components by: . Transferring funds from the Civic Center component to eliminate the deficit balance of the Geographi.c Information System component; and . Transferring funds from the Civic Center component to eliminate the deficit balance of the Computer Systems component; and . Transferring funds from the Civic Center component to eliminate the deficit balance of the Records Management System component; and . . Transferring $15,404 from the Telecommunication Systems component to the Program Administration component; and . Transferring the remaining fund balance of the' Telecommunication Systems component to the Civic Center component; and . Transferring a future debt service obligation of $15,404 from the Computer Systems component to the Progra[T1 Administration component. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable DISCUSSION: . This discussion represents a brief recap of more detailed information contained in the attached 'Public Facilities DIF Update, March 2006' report. The purpose of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee (PFDIF) is mitigation of the cumulative burden on public facilities placed by new development. The pUblic facilities financed by the PFDIF include the following eleven (11) components: 1 Civic Center Expansion 2. Police Facilities and Equipment 3. Corporation Yard Relocation 4 Libraries 5. Fire Suppression System 6 Geographic Information System (GIS) 7 Computer Systems 8. Telecommunications Systems 9 Records Management System 10 Administr?tion 11, M.ajor Recreation, Facilities On November 12, 2002, City Councii approved the "Public Facilities (PFDIF), November'2002 Amendment." This represents the last comprehensive update of the PFDIF program. In June of 2005, Council approved the application of an annual inflationary increase for the PFDIF For those components involving construction of facilities, the annual increase was tied to the Construction Cost Index (CCI) pUblished by the Engineering News Record. For the remaining 7-2 Page 3, Item: Meeting Date. 7/25/06 7 components, the annual inflationary increase was tied to the annual increase in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for the San Diego Metropolitan Area. The first such annual increase went into effect in October of 2005, increasing the single family fee per dwelling unit to $5,489 Staff has delayed undertaking a comprehensive update in anticipation ofthe City's General Plan Update, completed ,in December of 2005. The current update does not include any new major facilities, but instead focuses on updating the program obligation to account for increased construction and financing costs of previously included projects. In addition, the current update includes increased densities and other land use changes included in the General Plan Update approved by Council on December 13'h, 2005. The next update will address new fadlity needs identified in various Master Plan updates currently in progress as appropriate. The fees, facility phasing schedules, and PFDIF cash reserves detailed in the Public Facilities OIF, March 2006 Update are based on a specific rate of growth which, if lower than projected, will require a reevaluation of those fees, facility phasing, and cash reserves. Public Facilities Development Impact Fee Increase As described above, the City's PFDIF program has not been comprehensively updated since November of 2002. In the ensuing period, a number of factors have led to the increased rates included .in the current update. These factors include increased costs for construction materials and project insurance, increased financing costs; the addition of four minor projects; and a reduction in the number of development units (residential dwelling units and commercial I industrial acres) over which to spread the program's costs. New projects.reflected in this update include studies and minor capital acquisitions. The relative impact of new projects and construction and financi~g cost increases is illustrated in the chart below 2% la Project Costs [] Financing Costs . New Projects The majority of the aforementioned reduction in development units is a direct and unavoidable result of the ongoing development within the City For example, since the November 2002 PFDIF Update, the City has permitted approximately 4.000 single family and 3.000 multi-family units. This factor would have had greater impact on the program's cost, had the General Plan's increased densities and western redevelopment and infill development not been considered in the update These two factors combine to result in a net loss of approximately, 1,500 residential units between the November 2002 report and the cumint report. There is an additional impact to the commercial and industrial rates per acre resulting from a significant reduction in the anticipated development for these two land uses, a~ compared with the November 2002 Update. This reduction brings the development projections in line with the General Plan Update and historic development trends. 7-3 Page 4, Item: Meeting Date: 1 7/25/06 The proposed fees are based upon anticipated future development within the City The projected development for each land use is as follows: Single Family Dwelling Units Multi-Family Dwelling Units Commercial Acres Industrial Acres 4,854 22,467 518.42 881.51 Using these development projections,' the PFDIF fee has been calculated for each land use category The current and proposed fees, as well as the resultant fee increases, is detailed below Single Family Dwelling Unit $ Multi-Family Dwelling Unit $ Commercial Acre $ Industrial Acre $ 5,489 5,109 21,727 4,044 $ 7,891 $ 7,477 $ , 25;181 $ 7,958 $ $ $ $ 2,402 2,368 3,454 3,914 PFDIF fees are calculated individually for each component. The following \able details the component fee for each land use category, Civic Center Expansion $ 2,188 $ 2,073 $ 6,981 $ 2,206 Police Facility $ 1,464 $ 1,581 $ 6,914 $ 1,491 Corporation Yard Relocation $ 393 $ .315 $ 6,684 $ 3,148 Libraries $ 1,258 $ 1,258 $ $ Fire Suppression System $ 1,106 $ 796 $ 2,923 $ 582 Geographic Information Syster $ $ - $ - $ Computer Systems $ - $ - $ - $ Telecommunications $ - $ $ - $ Records Management System $ - $ - $ - $ Recreation Facilities $ $ 955 $ - $ Pro ram Administration $ $ 498 $ 1,679 $ 531 , While the increase per industrial acre remains the highest percent increase, it is worth noting that prior to the November 2002 update, the rate per industrial acre was significantly higher For example, in the 1999 Update, the fee per industrial acre was set at $13,090 This rate was then increased in the March 2002 Update to $20:860' It was only in the November 20"02 Update that the fee per industrial acre was reduced to $3,848. When considered in this light, the .rate per industrial acre currently proposed represents a decrease of 39% from the 1999 rate (a decrease of 6 5% annually); and a reduction of over 62% from the March 2002 rate. , Despite.fee increases approved since 1999, the PFDIF as a percent of the average new single family home sale price has dropped from 89% to .83%. Overall, average .residential impact fees have dropped by over 20%, from 8.4% to 6 7% during the same period. 7-4 Page 5, Item: Meeting Date: 1 7/25/06 Cost Allocation Methodoloqy The allocation of costs in a development impact fee program must be based upon benefit received. The ten project components of the PFDIF program (excluding the Program Administration component) are principally based upon providing infrastructure necessitated by people-related public service to the community, e.g. fire protection, police protection, public works services, etc. Originally, the PFDIF assigned benefit to future development on the basis of land use types. (residential, commercial, and industrial) using population generation factors. The November 2002 update introduced the use of Service Demand Factors in the allocation of costs between land use types. At that time, the factors were largely based upon the FIND (Fiscal Impact of New Development) model and TOW (Transportation Development Impact Fee) factors in effect at that time. The March 2006 report recommends updating the service demand factors usin'g the General Plan Fiscal Impact Model in place of the FIND model; in the calculation of both the Police Facility and Fire Suppression component factors. The FIND model was originally developed for the Otay Ranch annexation only, whereas the General Plan model is a citywide model. In addition, the data used in the General Plan model is more current, making it the more appropriate model for use in the current PFDIF update. The TDIF factors are based on Average Daily Trips, and were updated by Council in June of 2005. These updated trip generation factors were used in the calculation of the Corporation Yard component's factors. Commercial & Industrial Development Service Demand Factors The current update recommends one significant modification to the service demand- factor methodology This change applies only to commercial and industrial development, and is intended to provide a more equitable cost allocation between land uses and increase the degree of coordination and standardization among the City's public facilities and transportation development impact fee programs. . The City's Transportation Development Impact Fee (TO IF) program ~xcludes 'pass-by' trips from the calculation of commercial development fees. As the Corporation Yard component's service demand factors are' based upon the TDIF rates, this exclusion is already in use within the PFDIF program. The proposed modification will apply this same methodc;>iogy to all applicable components. For commercia! and industrial development, "pass-by" trips are now reflected in the. Police, Fire, and Corporation Yard service demand factors. Pass-by trips (also called undiverted linked trips) are trips in which a stop at a commercial or industrial facility is one part of a linked trip to or from home or work. An analysis of commercial trip origins and destinations was performed as part of this update process. This analysis found that approximately 77 percent of commercial trips are generated from- within -the PFDIF boundary area and 23 percent are from outside the area. Similarly, 46 perceht of trips to industrial uses in the City were identified as originated outside. the program boundary This update applies these ratios in the calculation of the service demafid factors for commercial and industrial uses. Excluding these pass-by trips from the calculation of commercial and industrial service demand factors limits the PFDIF obligation for these two land-uses to the mitigation of external customers and employees only These pass-by trips are then used to re- assign the internally generated service demand back to the residential land uses. For new residential development in Chula Vista, all costs associated with mitigating their impact on public services will now be assessed via the residential fee only ]-5 Page 6, Item: Meeting Date: r: ! 7/25/06 Acres versus Square Footage .. In the November 2002 Update, the PFDIF program introduced spreading costs among land use. categories using service demand factors. . This modification was designed to more closely tie fee payers with those receiving services. Such a meth,o.dology is effective if your future development mirrors your current development. ,While this may be true of residential development, it does not hold as true for commercial development. In the future, the City anticipates high-rise and mixed-use development unlike any currently found,in the City As a result, a riew means of dis.tributing.cost within this land use category may be necessary , . The current program assigns a fee based upon the acreage of the project, regardless of the number of stories iricluded in the project. However, it intuitively appears that for two buildings' with the identical footprint, the building with the greater number of stories would generate the higher demand for services. Sufficient data necessary to test this theory is not currently available, and as a result,' staff does not recommend modifying this aspect' of the PFDIF program's methodology at this tif]1e Staff. plans to return to Council with a rate recommendation following the completion of an analysis of service, (jemand for these new commercial development types. Prepavment Funds In the March 2002 PFDIF update, developers were given the opportunity to prepay fees for two components - the Civic Center ExpanSion component. and the Police Facility component. The prepay fee was a reduced rate, calculated by excluding financing costs from the fee calculation. This progr,am "'{as designed, to allow developers to provide project construction funds up front, eliminating the need to secure these funds through long-term borrowing and protecting developers from project cost increases (other than extraordinary circumstances). An audit of the prepayment program was completed in conjunction with the March 2006 Update. This audit ' identified a limited number of implementation issues, all of which will be addressed via the Civic Center Phase III financing. In total the City received $3,817,629 in Civic Center prepayments. These funds will be applied to Civic Center Phase III direct project costs. The use of these funds reduces the financing obligation of the PFDIF program by an estimated $3,464,291 The total financing cost of the project, as well as the PFDIF's obligation thereof, represent estimates only Several factors, including investment earnings on reserve funds, and the speed at which the principal balance is paid off, will determine actual financing costs incurred. In addition to the Civic' Center prepayment funds, the City also received $3,133,805 in Police Facility prepayment funds. The Police ,Facility was completed in 2004, without utilization of prepayment funds. If not addressed, this could result in a shortfall of fees collected,:, as compared with actual financing.costs incurred. in order to bring this component into compliance with the prepayment program, these funds .will also be applied to Civic Center Phase III direct project costs: This use of prepayment funds will reduce the financing cost associated with the facility, bringing the program into compliance with the prepayment agreements. The resultant financing obligation reduction is currently estimated at $2,789,750. As described above, the- actual financing costs may vary from this estimate. .. , Debt Service'ObliQation Of the future program obligation of. $226 3 million. approximately $132.6 million (60.2%) is attributable to debt ser;vice payments, These payments represent the repayment of principal, as well as' finance charges incurred in the long-term borrOWing of project construction funds. The debt service obligations of the PFDIF program are detailed in the following table 7-6. . " , Page 7, Item: Meeting Date: c-/ 7/25/06 2000 COP A - Corporation Yard 2002 COP - Police Facilities 2003 Refunding COP - 800 MHZ 2003 Refunding COP - CAD System 2003 Refunding COP - Fiscal System Adamo Property Acquisition Civic Center - Phase I Civic Center - Phase II Civic Center - Phase //I $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 14,243,052 46,278,533 10,225 525,507 15.404 408,286 37,920,147 24,972.462 8,229,195 The bonds for the Civic Center Phase 111 project have not yet been sold, and are therefore a projection based upon the most recent bond sale completed - Phase II of the Civic Center Complex Expansion. The PFDIF Program is unable to directly sell bonds in order to generate project funds; therefore the City is the final guarantor of the PFDIF's debt. Should insufficient PFDIF funds be available to meet the debt service obligation, the City's General fund would have to fill any gap. The City is exploring the possible creation of a 'Market Fluctuation Reserve' to set aside funds for unanticipated fluctuations in the housing market and anticipates including the creation of such a reserve fund in the next update of the PFDIF program. Cash Flow Analvses In conjunction with the current PFDIF Update, several cash flow analyses have been prepared. As these models illustrate, the City has good security to cover PFDIF construction and debt service expenditures, should a major downtum occur In the future, close monitoring of these models will be critical in ensuring the ongoing viability of the PFDIF program. Attached are the following cash flow models: . Attachment 2 - PFDIF Program Cash Flow Summary . Attachment 3 - PFDIF Program Expenditure Detail . Attachment 4 - PFDIF Program Cash Flow - Debt Service Obligation Minimum building Permit Activity The first two attachments reflect the program as proposed in the 2006 Update. Attachment 4 was created to identify the minimum number of building permits that must be issued annually in order to meet the City's existing PFDIF debt service obligation. This scenario is discussed in greater detail below Over the last three years (FY 2003 - FY 2005) the City permitted an average of 2,775 residential units annually The development forecast provided by the Planning Department and reflected in the current update is as follows: 7-7 Page 8, Item: Meeting Date: ~ I 7/25/06 Single Family Dwelling Units 4,854 Multi-Family Dwelling Units 22,467 Commercial Acres 518.42 Industrial Acres 881.51 From a cash flow perspective, permits - issued rather than dwelling units constructed is the salient statistic. It is at the time of permits issuance that impact fees are cpllected. As such, these models and all related discussions refer only to permits issued. In the attached cash flow analyses and the discussion below, the model is based upon four time increments. These increments are as follows: . Increment 1 2006 - 201 0 . . Increment 2: 2011 - 2020 . Increment 3: 2021 - 2030 . Increment 4 2031 - Build out Debt Service Obligation Minimum Building Permit Activity Scenario As detailed in Attachment 3, the PFDIF's total debt service is forecasted to total approximately $23.2 million in Increment 1, $52.6 million in Increment 2,and approximately $43 million in Increment 3. From 2031 through build out, ~he remaining debt service will decline to approximately $13.8 milliof']. In all, between 2006 and build out, the PFDIF program will expend over $132.6 million on debt service payments. The cash flow presented in Attachment 4 shows the minimum residential building permit activity necessary to meet the City's existing PFDIF debt service obligation only This analysis, therefore, assumes no staff tim~ or other project expenditures from the program. In the interest of being conservative, no commercial or industrial development has been assumed in this model. It should be noted that no annual residential development is reflected in Increment 1 This is a result of the available cash balance of the PFDI F fund, reducing the program's need by approximately $24 4 million in the first increment. With only $23.2 million in debt service payments during this period, no additional fee revenue is necessary to meet the PFDIF's debt service obligation through 2010 The necessary annual development has been calculated for both single family and multi-family residential uses. As, mentioned previously, no additional development is required in Phase I to meet existing debt service obligations during that phase. lri Increment 2, in order to meet the debt service' obligations of the PFDIF fund, either 650.82 single family units, OR 686.91 multi- family units would have to be permitted annually Most likely, actual development will be some combination thereof In Increments 3 and 4, the permitting of 309 - 575 residential units annually will be necessary to meet the program's debt service obligation. It should be noted that as far back as 1986 (and possibly longer), annual residential growth has exceeded 800 units. Over the last three years, the City has permitted an average of 2,775 residential units. These historic trends suggest that 7-8 Page 9, Item: Meeting Date: 7/25/06 7 residential development in the City will not fall below the levels necessary to meet the PFDIF's debt service obligation. ' PrOQram Modifications In addition to the methodological changes discussed above, this update also includes the closure of the following four (4) program components: . Geographic Imaging System (GIS) Component . Computer Systems Component . Telecommunication Systems Component . Records Management System Component These components are not associated with the construction of large facilities, but are instead responsible for the acquisition of various support systems. These systems have been acquired and are currently in use by the City As a result, this update recommends that no additional projects be created, no additional fees be collected, and subsequently, that all four funds be closed effective July 1, 2006. These closures are discussed in greater detail in the body of the report. In order to finalize this closure, a number of transfers are necessary The required transfers are as follows: . Transfer of $15,404 from the available balance of the Telecommunication Systems Component to the Program Administration Component. . Transfer of funds from the available balance of the Telecommunication and Civic Center components to eliminate the deficit balances of the Geographic Information Systems, Computer Systems, and Records Management Systems components. The final deficit balance of each component to be eliminated will not be known until completion of the City's annual financial audit. Effective July 1, 2006 these funds will be closed to all transactions. Following completion of the final audit, and identification of the final deficit balances, the funds will be closed per the above-described transfers. CorrectinQ Entry On November 19, 2002, the Council approved Resolution 2002-472, amending the budget of the Public Works Department to add two Storm Drain Compliance Inspectors. The same action also appropriated $20,600 from the PFDIF fund for the purchase of an inspection vehicle for this additional staff. Neither the Council Agenda Statement, nor the Resolution, identified the specific PFDIF component the funds were to be appropriated from. As a result, the appropriation was made from the Program Administration component, and the subsequent vehicle purchase totaling $16,023 was debited from this component. The Storm Drain Compliance Inspector is located at the Corporation Yard, and any vehicle purchase for this position should have been processed in the same manner as any other public 'works vehicle purchase, with the Corporation Yard Relocation / Expansion component expending the necessary funds. It is now necessary to transfer $16,023 from the Corporation Yard Relocation / Expansion component of the PFDIF to reimburse the Program Administration component. This transfer is reflected in the current fee calculation. Developer Discussions Staff. met with interested parties on two occasions to discuss the proposed update. A representative from the Building Industry Association (BIA), along with representatives from all major developers in the City attended these meetings. The two primary issues raised were the 7-9 Page 10, Item: Meeting Date: 7 7/25/06 allocation of program costs between residential and commercial/industrial land uses and the use of prepaymentfees. As previously described, both of these issues have been addressed in this update. CONFLICT OF INTEREST REVIEW' There is no conflict of interest associated with this item, as the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee program is a citywide program. FISCAL IMPACT: Facilities included in the PFDIF program total $250.7 million, with a future program need of $2263 million ($~4 4 million in funds on hand). Revenues resulting from this fee.update will' provide the. funds necessary to offset the costs associated with the construction and financing of all PFDIF projects, The following table summarizes the program obligation for each program component: Civic Center ExpanSion $ 80,436,927 $ 17,682,404 $ 62,754,523 Police Facility $ 49,310,428 $ 1,791,219 $ 47,519,209 Corporation Yard Relocation $ 20,145,921 $ 4,923,289 $ 15,222;632 Libraries $ 46,931,982 $ 12,556,119 $ 34,375,863 Fire Suppression System $ 13,899,793 $ (11,392,332) $ 25,292,125 Geographic Information System $ $ $ Computer Systems $ $ '- $ Telecommunications $ $ $ Records Management System $ " $ - ,$ Recreation Facilities $ 26,397,690 $ 305,783 $ 26,091,907 Program Administration $ 13,650,518 $ (1,438,841) $ 15,089,359 Attachments:, 1 Public Facilities DIF, March 2006 Update 2. PFDIF Program Cash Flow Summary 3. PFDIF Program Expenditure Detail 4 PFDIF Program Cash Flow - Debt Service Obligation Minimum building Permit Activity 5, Commercial Land Use External Trip Analysis 6 Industrial Land Use' Externa'l Trip Analysis " 7-10 . ATTACHMENT 2 M '" M ... r:i,1 ~ ... '" fen 0 .... N ~ M N N M ,'=, ~ .... .... [la! 0 '" ... "! ... ~ 0 0 ;~ ., 0 M 'N ... .; .; M M ..; ",- N 0- 0" iioi ~ ...J 'u) ...J U) '" ~ ., <( 0 .... '" ~ ::ot 0 .... 0 ,,...,,~ <( ., ... '" ., M '" 0 0 M '" ... .... j....~ ....- N- I- .,- ....- M ....- ~,,:.~ N .,; N k"- I- 0 ,'" ,0, 0 N M '" ;N M '" N ~~ I- :N ~ I- ;-;;':ii4 ~;~ C::"M ;w;-ro: "'~ ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .~~ ~i ,-it~1! :; 0 <D '" '" j1i;1 .... U) '" ,U) 0 [0: <D ... 0 N_ '" (a) ~ ,,~:.: 0 - 3i! '" ....- ;~ ..; ;,,'l:t .... c '" ... ;~ ... }.'O:t, M_ " ':; '" N N "'- e? E <Xl M 0 :0 M :~ " ~ ~'r'"^ .~ ~ ?!m u ~ bt., .5 M ~~ 0 ~ N ... .. ... ... .. ... .. .. .. ... ... .~ f~ M <D '" en 0 ... en 0 M ;;; M 0 en ~ N ,oq, .... ~ t~ '" M <D M 0 '" .... '" .... "'- N N .; ~ ... M M- ...- ....- 0" _J,~ <D ui 'E N M 0 <0 M '" 0 0 0 '" M '" .... N 0 '" " ~ ~ " N .... ~ ... "!. r-:.;- en en '" '" ",- E ui M ..; .-.,~ N ..: ;:; M f:'o. " ~ ... ,~! ... '" ~ N I u 0 ~/j .5 N fl\ '-'sr;< ... .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .... ... &~fl- ~ M 0 '" en '" N M '" N 1M M " 0 ~ M '" ... en M ... ,N 0 en ~ '~ 0 <D 0 en <D N 0 '" " '" en '" ., M N <D N '" ~ ~ ~ -i - N ui ,,- 6 ,,- 6 'co~ ",- en- .,; 'o- M <D ~ <D '" C 0 ... '" ~ N M N en M M ,~ 0 " ~ ~ " N " 0 N N "!. .... '" '" <D .... ,,- E .i ..; '<t- ~::;j' N- en- .;.;]. ui <D ~ '<t '", " ~ ... '" :'" '" ... :0 ~ ~ I ~ u .5 0 I N ",_'e ... .. .. .. .. ..,~ ... .. .. * ... 8~ f11't '~L', ~ M 0 en en 0 '" <0 ... ., M M " ~ '" en '" <D '" 0 N " ... ... '" M <0 N N ~ 0 '" <D '" <0_ en .~ '" " '" ,S9~ '" to oi oi N 'E ~ ..: .,; oi '" M 00 oi 6 o:i ., ",- '" ~ ~ " 0 N ... 0 <D '" .... '" M M U) ... 0 N_ N '" " N ... N "'- M '" ,~ ~ en ~ 'N .... ..; '" E ..; N ~ .,; ...- ,M ..; 6 '" j'~ o:i " '" N M <0 0 N '" ... ~ 0 i u 0 '!i~ .5 _'''_L N '''"-, '#;~ ... .. .. .. .. ~ .. .. .. ~ ... ?Ji!' P'i! (/) (/) <II <II <II <II W W :::J :::J " " :::J '" 0 0 ~ ~ "iii u u C z <5 :::J W W <( <( '" w :E :J.,;;; ~ ~ "iii "iii E: 2 :> 15 'c .~ W ::> E E '" ';: E: en z ~ - :::J c '" W '" '" " <II " :::J ,l!1' w '0;;' U. ~ E " '" 'E '0 U) ~ '" " ~ " X " E .5 ;: ~ '" I-- '" w C. "5 a; '" " 0 E <5 SJ' ~ c 0 0 ;: a; " 0> ~ >- .E "iii <: en :;; u i:i:: 0 ;: t; '" ~1 '" '5 "<(, '" " 0 <( " 0.. " 'F--. E: -<:: u .?:- t; " en :E 0, <II c 'E .?:- "iii <( u 13 ::> "tq " g.. '" '" E '13 '~ en u "iii '" "iii w OJ U u. '" ill S'~ w 'e- o.. iil1 c <Xl ~ E .'" Z4:~ en i('fi '" >- E: w <;; 0.. U ~:&1 "iii w .c 0, E :'1ii :E r:: <II '3 ::> <II ~ c ti1! <Xl Cl '" c 0 '0 ~f" ~ W 0 ~ U (jj :;; u .5 ,~_?,i{ 0 U z ~1 .c 't:l e <II if;dJ " ~ <II ~ Cl '" I ~ '" ll.. c :a u '" " I ,e. !:!: 'c <:' I <: '" c '" '" ~W? c u f2 >- ~ 'ti '- Cl I ~ w w X',~ [ c <: ll.. <Xl 0:: l.IJ w <( 7-11 ATTACHMENT 3 M '" .... ... '" .... N '" ~ 0 0 ., '" '" M ... M N 0 0 ., ... '" '" ~ '" ., 0 '" .... '" '" N '" ... N ~ ... ~ ., 0 en ...- N ~ .... ...J "" 0" .,; ",' .,- 0" N- ai" N- N' 'Ii ., ai" ~ '" ~ .... N ~ '" N .... N '" M N.M M M '" N '" ... '" '" N '" .... ... N 0 ui ....- ~ .,- N- ~ ~ it; ... M N M N J- .. ~ '" ~~iA-iA- '" '" '" '" - ... N <0 ... In ... ::l 00 0 00 '" '" - 0 '" '" "'- "'. ~ c: 31 <0' ui '" '" .. " ';j 0 '" <0 '" " E CO <0. <0. '" "'. ., " '" ... ri ",- - ~ " ~ .E M 0 N '" '" (A.h"T b'7 Ell- '" '" '" Ef} EA-EA-EA-E.'7 '" 00 N .... 00 M 0 00 '" 0 N - M ~ '" <0, '" c: 0 ~ ~ 00 cr) " N '" N .... 0 E , ~ 00 "', 0 " ~ r--: ",. 00 ri - N ~ " '" .E N '" V> V> .., .., .., .., .., .., Y7EA-EA-EA-EA- .., ... '" '" '" N 0 iO N '" 0 ... '" <0 '" ~ en '" "', o. "', 0 N 1': N ",. ui .,; 0 ~ ~ ... N " N "', '" 00 N 00 '" .... E 0 ~ 00 ... ~ ~ " 00 ..... ",' cr) ri - " .E .., .., .., .., .., .., .., .., .., .., .., .., .., .., .., 00 <0 '" .... ... '" '" 00 '" a;- ... 0 00 '" '" ... ~ '" ~ N 0 0 '" N '" N ... N 00 0 <0 .... '" 0 .... N '" .... '" '" <0, ~ .... 00 '" .... N ~ .... - '" 6 6 o:i ~ .,; 00. 'Ii ",' '" c: '" '" '" 00 00 ~ " '" '" ~ N ~ N '" ... "" .... N '" '" '" '" E '" "", '" N <0 "'. ... ~ ... N e ",' OJ ",. N <0' 0 .E EA-EA-iA-W-EA-EA-EA- V> fh (fl. EA- (A. EA- V> 00 c " Q) (f) E 2 u.. E Cl. E oil "5 c Q} Q} - Q} v; .... e- o '- N v; "' " w .lS ,., "C "E' I ,., UJ 0 (f) l" c Q) '" :2 UJ :u ~ u, '" Cl >- <Ii u: .a "' 0 0 c: ;; C c :5 '" c ~ 0 <( "' g l" Q) "' ~ .2 0 u: 0 Q) Q} ::l c: 00 0 'in Q} -'< E 0 " ~ '13 '3 '= - c "' .!!l "- Q} :u - '" 0. 0. 0. c ;; '3 c ;; '6 0 u.. 0- Q} Q} Q} .2 :u .!!l Q} "- 0 0 0 u "' "' "' c '" e- '" 1;; <:: :s Q} 0 0 0 <( '" '" '" '" 1;; w w C -;; w u 0 "C Q) 0 ,., .c .c .c ...J :u l" " u "- a '" '" '" 0. 0. 0. . "' ~ c c: c t - "- 00 u: 0 ~ '" ::J 0. '0 '0 '0 Q} , , 2 0 " .c ," c IJ.j <( c c c: "- :u - :u -;; - u - '" e Q) ,., c 0 0 c 0. 0. -2 .2 .2 C C <: .c u 0 1;; .2 0:: , 0 0 0. Q} Q} ;: Q} Q} Q} Q} Q} Q} UJ c 1;; "' "- "' lii 0 0 0 CY CY CY 0 0 0 0 Q} '" "' '" <Ii E '" ii5 .c is .c UJ '* w. ti: 0 N '" '" '" u .~ u - 0 0 0 0 0 '" ." ." Q} l" u l" u l" 'cl c 0 0 0 0 0 "C > E :; :; ri2J<3 -<: <:3 <:3 <:3 '" N N N N N <( W u: 0. u: 0. u: 8 ~~m': !:!:: '" 00 00 '" N 3: ";S!(]) G: OJ N '" '" <0 Q) ~....." I'- CJ ~ ~ ~ z iE1i9 0.. UJ UJ UJ UJ (j) ;0" CJ 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. ''''(,i CJ - '- .s '" Q II) ~ ::r - 'i; t:: '" ~ Ll.i ;: c i:t .t:: II) II u. ~ Cl. ~o ~ ~ l: 0 " '" E i!! <e " g -='" :; .... 0 'E:!2 Q) "S E III i!! ' ,,~ ..5~ '" "'0 ~ .., l: 0 " '" E ,,~ - '" " 0 -='" "'0 ~'" l: 0 " '" E ' " ~ - ~ " 0 E'" ..J < 1- o 1- ....o~ "'on.... ....._ 10 0 Pi N- rD ..,"'.... O~<e N ~.... .., on ~.... 0" cD .., '" ~ '" ~-M- g::g;! '" on 0 0000- .... '" ..... "'~'" ,.: cO lO- a> ~~~f;R-~W-tA-f,I:J. V7vrEA-EfTvr{fl.ER-i.o<). tfTtA-tflt."TtFJ.vrER-'f09. vrvrvrb'7Ef7U3-Y? ~~t:;;i;1; ......l.{)O V C')- N cr5 6 (1)- C"1N"'<tMO') o co..-m NR v- C'j- WEf7E,<Tffl-WEf7(f)- W l: oil i5:tt .~ ~ m "u " '" t; u. " l: r:r: ,9 oIlro -'" l' Co irl "-0:: "'C 2:-~ c 'c ro '" " > '" E " ..3:: E C Co 0 0 "-U:;; <; -;;; - '" ;, :;; o l: -g ,9 " - en '" -1' -'" " ~ " t\".o:: .... ".... '" " '" '" := ra >"" ,> ,.. , >-:= x :!::: 'u a} 13cao. '" u. E u. l: 0 l: 0 U 0:;:; :; m B ~ u ~ " " C1' "0::< o::..c:..c: -'" " u " c: l: " '" '" ~o::o:: u,..,.. ro co ell enOO CONL{)O......Ml.{) C"? (0 tn............ coco NNNNNNN a:::r:r:o::o:::a::a::r:r: D..D..D..D..o..o...a.. o co ., 0'" a> N.l.O (\,l co 0 01- ...."'..., "'- 10 ..... 00- ~- ... <c ..... ,..... <:; ..., a> o' 10 - .:!! .s .Q ::r II) .'a " " .'" ~ ~o <00 .., .., ......- en- ~ .... ......, M ~ "'It) 00 '" co ....."'0 co It) <eo .....-~ {fl-thvrEf7thi.l;t. vrtfr EfT EA-EA-E,I:). (ONl.OlOOOl VVQ)("')O",," OONCOON r-: co M- 1"-- 0- fD'" .....L{)OMr.oC\l O.....N">t 0) v- cri ,...," Ef7vrEf7vrvr~ cnNLOLOOC"ll ("')VQ)C")O"",, V_ONCOQlC ...... co- ("'). .....- u) lO" COlOOM......ro:l ..... C'\!v <0 lO- C"') 0)" f:f7E1tvrYTEA-fo/:J. 1.0..... 00 v .................("') co N C"?_ ...... 00- cri ...... l{)- .....coco...... l.O ~...... M fA-&7Ef7vrt.'T~ c c " c (]) E fJl Q) E .9- ~ 8[.Q-S-'~ .~ "3 5- UJ 2: Q)o-Wro~ en W Q) :!::: IDm>c..06 c3:gcJ~ :5 c.. E ...:.= en E .9 ill 2:: m 0 ::J ..c: :J o..u <(0 Cf) 010 0..... 0"" llf 0" ~~ ",' '" 0" 8:; 0'''' ......., ,.. 10' ATTACHMENT 3 - .:!! o :Q ::r II) - .:!! 'Q. '" U <: o <:. ATTACHMENT 4 0: 0: 0 0 '" '" N .., '" .... <t '" .... N '" '" 0 '" '" '" .., N 0 0 00 <t '" '" <t '" ~ ~ 0 '" N_ "'- <t N ~ <t ~ .; .; ..J .,; ",- ri a:> 0 '" ",- 00- 0 N ",- ..J 0 '" .... .... <t .... ~ N ~ <=> N .... N .... <t ..: ~ ~ N N '" ... "'- '" N ..: ri ... f- a; a; ... a; .... ~ a; f- - ~ 0 <=> 0 ~ <t .., 0 f- - f- -' if> '" '" '" *iR--tA-~ '" if> '" "' "' '" '" '" '" 0 - - 0 0 OJ 0 OJ M <t '" '" :; - "'- '" "'- "' ... .; - 0 ..f ... '" .,; '" .,; '" 0 " :E '" '" <=> M '" M N .., '" OJ OJ '" '" '" co_ E 's M- M- M- ... ri '" <ll - " .5 - ,., 0 N '" '" '" '" '" "''''''' ....'" '" '" '" '" '" OJ '" .... OJ '" <XI .... .... OJ "' 0 '" '" .... ,., 0 00 00 ~ '" co_ '" ..,: ..,: - ,., M- <"i' - ",- 00 0''- <t .... " 0 .... .... co '" .... 0 '" '" '" N '" '" - 00 "'- 0 E , N ",- ,..: <"i' 00 ri f - '" '" - N " 0 .5 N '" '" '" '" '" '" ....'" '" '" '" '" '" ,., 0 0 '" '" '" '" '" ,0 N ~ - '" '" "'- '" '" co '" 0 <XI '" N 0 ~ OJ M_ 0 '" ci .0 a 1: N .:r ..... ,..: - oi ~ ... N co '" a:> 0 .., '" '" - '" OJ '" 00 M ,'" '" 'S: '" N N_ M_ M_ '" 0 ~ OJ "'- '- E , OJ- ....- ri <"i' - - ~ ~ <>> 0 '" ~ "" "" ~ q; - ~ " 0 - .5 N '- E '" '" '" '" '" '" '" if> .... '" '" '" '" OJ Cl.. ~ 00 <D "" ..... <t '" '" OJ M ,., <t M '" 0 0 '" '" '" '" - "" ~ 0 '" 0 ..... N_ "'- <t '" '" co - ~ " 1: - ,..: N ci 0 '" .,; <D- <t u:i 00 00 ~ 0 N '" '" - N - N '" <t '" ,., '" N '" M '" "' N "'- "" '" N '- E ... ",- OJ- N '" '" "' - '" '" N 0> !Xl - 0 '" " 0 ~ E: .5 N " '" EI'7&'7f;fl-Wt.'76'7f;1).WW '" .S '" .... .... '" ~ " rn rn b '- ::J => on :;; 0 0 " -0 OJ E w w .s 0 E '" Z. Z. - .~ '" <;; 'E 'E 0 E N <;; ,., ~ '" :r: >'(/) <II <II V) ., :z (f) rn u. ~ ~ - j'] >- on 0 u <:: - '" '" .Q 'c .~ " ;g 0 <( on ~ " on :; E 0 '" ::J " ,2 00 0 u: '0; OJ " :; E Cl ",=> "iii '(3 ':; = = E ,- 0 , ~ '" 0 ., Il. Il. Il. g-'" 0 u. cr- '" '" '" l: -.; ~ "- 0 0 0 U ID ID '" ~ 0 '" ouu<(~ '" ., - 0 0 " 11 ,~ "" "" '" <0 '" li: 0 .l!J 0 ""5 g'~~~ll.. Il. Il. " '" '" -",0 Il. '" <=> '" .t: u <:: -- .- ._ Q) I , , Cl N E II) " E -'" '" <( -g-g-gg-:v <;; <;; "- '" "" - ,S '" n; '" E E: Il. Il. 222ctc E E " '" .!2 U u- ., ,.,0 0 III Q) (l) OJ '" '" " '" '5 ~ <ll ",u- '" 0 0 0:::: a:::: 0:: 0 U U U '" " .g E: "" rn~ Cl.. 0 N ("') ("') C'? E u u " n; <:: ~ ~ '" !'l: c '5 Ql <=> 0 000 co '> '5 :2 <ll q; 'S 0 '" 0 <=> o 0 a -0 "- "" U Ui::> 0 N '" NC'\lC'\l<(U 0 U "" .", .Q <:: ~ II) .~ rn ~ "' "' '" OJ '" '" '" " '" Ql U '" E S; ':!: 'c " V) '" .s. " " OJ - " 0 "' ;;; [t '0, " .Q 'C .- "' "' - <( <( '" '" OJ " - " Cl.. <ll ct:: Cl w q; !'l: - 7-14 225 I San Diego Ave. Suite A270 San Diego, CA 92110-2926 619.683.2933 fax: 619.683.7982 koasd@katzokitsu.com www.katzokitsu.com Los Angeles 323.260.4703 Fax: 323.260.4705 Tustin 714.573.0317 fax: 714.573.9534 San Bernardino 909.890.9693 fax: 909.890.9694 _Katz,Okitsu. &Associates Planning and Engineering . ATTACHMENT 5 July 19, 2006 A644 I Tiffany Allen City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 SUBJECT: SUMMARY OF CHULA VISTA COMMERCIAL PFDIF ANALYSIS , Dear Ms. Allen: Katz, Okitsu & Associates has prepared this memorandum to assist in the update of the Commercial service demand factor (SDF) for the City's PFDIF (Public Facilities Development Impact Fee) program. The following analysis methodology was employed to isolate commercial trips originating/terminating outside the City limits from commercial trips traveling within the City limits. Commercial trips within the City limits are considered to be Chula Vista residents whom already contribute via their residential fees. Therefore, the City has suggested that only the "outside" commercial trips be applied to the SDF calculations for the PFDIF program. Analysis Methodology' I). Identify predominantly commercial traffic analysis zones (T AZs) within the City of Chula Vista. 2) Commission SANDAG (San Diego Association of Governments) to run a combined select zone model based on the chosen commercial-dominant zones, after removing all non- commercial land uses from each zone. 3) Based on the model output, identify all commercial trips originating / terminating outside the City of Chula Vista limits, 4) Calculate the average commercial trip rate per acre from the model. 5) Calculate the Commercial external SDF based on the percentage of "outside" commercial model trips (as compared to the total numbe~ of commercial trips generated by the model). Katz, Okitsu & Associates worked with the City of Chula Vista Traffic Engineer to identify commercial-dominant T AZs within the City of Chula Vista limits. Eight zones were selected from different parts of the City as to provide a more global representation of commercial activity Collectively, the eight zones contain community commercial, regional commercial and street front commercia! land uses, thereby providing a variety of commercial components and a ~nge of trip generation rates. SANDAGproduced a combined select zone model for all eight commercial-dominant T AZs using the City of Chula Vista's General Plan Update preferred land use alternative for Buildout conditions (Alt58c). All non-commercial land uses were removed so that strictly commercial trips were represented. Average daily traffic volumes from the eight zones were distributed throughout the network. A cordon was identified on the select zone plot to represent the 7-15 Katz, OkitSll & Associates Planning and Engineering ATTACHMENT 5 Ms. Allen July 19, 2006 Page 2 of 2 A644 I City boundary Otay Ranch - University Villages 9 and 10, located in the southeast portion of the City of Chula Vista, are not currently included in the City's PFDIF Program. Therefore, these villages were placed outside of the cordon. As previously described, trips traveling to/from each commercial zone within the City boundary are considered to be Chula Vista residents whom already contribute via residential impact fees. Therefore, the total number of commercial trips originating / terminating outside the cordon was calculated, and then divided over the total number of trips generated by the model (approximately 172,000 dally trips) to equal the "percentage of outside trips" The percentage of outside trips was found to be 23%. In conclusion, the calculated external service demand for commercial development within the City of Chula Vista's PFDIF program area is 23% of the total commercial service demand. . . Sincerely, Katz, Okitsu & Associates J. Arnold Torma, P.E. Principal Engineer SLM Attachments: Attachment A - Commercial External SDF Calculations for City's PFDIF Program " " 7-16 '" u; ;; '" S .c 0 ,S "' " e 0 N C '" e E 0 9 0; '" Q; E E 0 0 .8 "' '0; >- 0; e -< " e 0 N U -< " 0; I- (f) Z CJ w :;;; -< I 0 Z 0 -< -< (f) l- I- e -< 0 "0 " "' '" .c "' e 0 :g S " 0; 0 " '" CC 0; '" Q; E E 0 0 u.. n u.. 0.. '" u; ;; '" S .c 0 0 ~ 6 ~ ~ ~ ~ c ~ " " " c " 0 0 ~ " . a: a: . -ci ~ ~ ~ a: > ~ . 0 0; a; a. ~ ~ " " ~ ~ u ~ ~ 0 . '''- ;; ~ ~ . a: E ;; ~ " " ~ 0; ~ ~' ii5 6 6 " 6 a. 0 ii5 ~ ~ ~ c c ~ ;; ~ z c c 0 0 c . E 0 " " 0 0 " ~ a. 0 ~ ~ j; j; ~ ii5 " " .~ " " . . " - Z a. . . ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ u ~ ~ ;; ;; :;; c c c 0 a. a. ~ ~ a. " " " ~ ~ ~ ..J 0 . ii5 ii5 . " " ~ ~ ~ ~ . . . -'! -'! :I: :I: -'" ~ "0 ~ ;; ;; ;; ;; ;; ~ " ~ " " e ~ 0 0 0 " ~ 05 05 05 UJ UJ UJ 0 UJ ~ UJ 0 0 -~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 u oa: W W 0 c o- W W W W c E ::g~ ~ 0 c c c E " ~ "lij"'C " " " 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 0 u u - . t ~ u u u u ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ o ~ Z "' za. Za. "' Z "' Z ~ .!! S" ~ o' a: !: .5 N '" '" "' 0 "' N .,. - .,. ro "' ~ ;; o ~ - " . I- 0 >' :; ;; <; ~ " " " " I- ,9- " " " " '0 ,:: "' ~ ~ ~ .,. ~ ~ ro - N " . . ~- - ~ ~ ~ a:.:l ro ro '" N 0 .,. '" '" di:!i:i '" '" "' "' ro 0 .,. iO " e- "' "' "' "' '" '" "' 0 ~ :; ~ .9- '" 0 '" N 0 "' N "' ,:: ~ '" ~ ro ro "' '" ~ N "' ~. .,. '" N '" -< d d oi - ci ;: ci .;- N '" N - .,. N Ul UJ UJ UJ UJ "- UJ UJ UJ UJ UJ I- '" UJ Z a: a: a: a: 0 a: a: a: a: a: a: U U U U 0 U U U U U U ::J <( <( <( <( 0 <( <( <( <( <( <( - " N ~ ro " N "' " .,. ro '" :;; '" oi ,..; .. ori oi .; oi " .,. - ~ ~ '" N '" " '" ~ ~ ~ <( ~ <( ~ (3 ~ (3 <( <( <( <( ~ <( <( (3 (3 (3 (3 a: (3 (3 a: <( UJ UJ a: a: a: a: (3 " a: a: " Ul UJ UJ UJ UJ a: " UJ UJ " Ul " " " " UJ 0 " " 0 a; ::J " " " " " U " " U '" 0 0 0 0 0 " >- 0 0 >- .,. :i U U U U 0 Z U U Z N >- >- >- >- U 0 >- r:: 0 <( >- >- >- >- ~ a: >- '" >- ..J Z Z Z Z <( "- z z u. E => => => => z >- => => >- " " " " 0 UJ " " UJ ~ " '" " '" a UJ " " UJ i'" a: a: 0 0 0 0 UJ >- 0 0 >- 0 U " U U '" '" U U '" >- Ul '" '" '" '" ~ '" '" ~ 0 " 0 " " ;; " " " 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 " 0 u '" '" '" '" "' '" "' "' "' Ul '" '" ;0 N "' "' "' 0; 0; z "' N "' "' '" ~ 0 :;: N N N N '" '" '" N .,. .,. .,. .,. .,. .,. .,. .,. 7~17 "' .,. "' " o o "' '" "' ;::: ~ ~~ ~ .9-ro <c r=-s ~ iQD u- , 0 ~ -~ EU o 0 u~ ~~ 2 '00 og " '0 IJ) 'w _ E '5 15 :flu <1:" _0 01- i:: g g (t1 0_ 0 E ~ "i- E- " Ul . ;; c E .. - ~ (ij c 0 "a' f- "g .9 td ~ =- ~ Ul 2 a. .~:_g ~ ,u ~ -"'- w ,9- E~ <'ll ";:; "0 I- w~ ~~ o .!!l U u o W ::g E '" E o 0 ou " '" N I ATTACHMENT 5 - ". ~ <( '" . u " N <ci o .9 " o 0" o ,~ ~ ~ .,. N. oi " e o ~ >- ~ ~ '5 "' 'C ,Q 1i o c o "' ~ ;; 'f;: ~ b <( o z <( '" 8 ~ c 'E o g <Ii ~ ~ lll- :s o (tj ~ :s ~ "s- ; gg .,. ~ "N u.<( '" >- " ~ o u o ill w 0 ~ .2 L.O 1.t! '" 0 ~ .s o c ~ 0 · "0 " 0 . ~ " " . ~ U ijl "'E c ~ "o.."w g- . ~ ~ '" ""iii ~ 6 ~ "51 III o ~ rr: E W ~ ~"' ~ '0 ~ . .~ "@ "' ~ "' . N ;; .,. "3 " u N" i'" U 2251 San Diego Ave. Suite A270 San Diego, CA 92110-2926 619.683.2933 fa,,, 619.683.7982 koasd@kaczokitsu.com www.kaczokitsu.com Los Angeles 323.260.4703 Fax: 32].260.4705 Tustin 7 r 4.573.03 r 7 fax: 714.573.9534 San Bernardino 909.890,9693 fax: 909.890.9694 ~Katz, Okitsu & As~;"ociates Planning and Engineering' . . '. ATTACHMENT 6 July 19, 2006 A6441 Tiffany Allen City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 SUBJECT: SUMMARY OF CHULA VISTA INDUSTRIAL PFDIF ANALYSIS Dear Ms. Allen: Katz, Okitsu & Associates has prepared this memorandum to assist in the update of the Industrial service demand factor (SDF) for the City's PFDIF (Public Facilities Development Impact Fee) program. The following analysis methodology was employed to isolate industrial trips originating/terminating outside the City limits from industrial trips traveling within the City limits. Industrial trips within the City limits are considered to be Chula Vista residents whom already contribute via their residential fees. Therefore, the City has suggested that only the "outside" industrial trips be applied to the SDF calculations for the PFDIF program. Analysis Methodology' I) Identify predominantly industrial traffic analysis zones (T AZs) within the City of Chula Vista. 2) Commission SANDAG (San Diego Association of Governments) to run a combined select zone model based on the chosen industrial-dominant zones, after removing all non- industrialland uses from each zone. 3) Based on the model output, identify all industrial trips originating / terminating outside the City of Chula Vista limits. 4) Calculate the average industrial trip rate -per acre from the model. 5) Calculate the Industrial external SDF based on the percentage of "outside" industrial model trips (as compared to the total number of industrial trips generated by the model). Katz, Okitsu & Associates worked with the City of Chula Vista Traffic Engineer to identify industrial-dominant T AZs within the City of Chula Vista limits. Four zones were selected from different parts of the City as to provide a more global representation of industrial activity Collectively, the four zones contain the following industrial land uses: industrial park, light industry and heavy industry, thereby providing a variety of industrial components and a range of trip generation rates. SANDAG produced a combined select zone model for all four industrial-dominant T AZs using the City of Chula Vista's General Plan Update preferred land use alternative for Buildout conditions (Alt58c). All non-industrial land uses were removed so that strictly industrial trips were represented. Average daily traffic volumes from the four zones were distributed throughout the network. A cordon was identified on the select zone plot to represent the City boundary Otay Ranch - University Villages 9 and 10, located in the southeast portion of 7-18 _Katz, Okitsu 8l Associates ~A Planning and Engineerint Ms. Allen July 19. 2006 Page 2 012 A644 I ATTACHMENT 6 the City of Chula Vista. are not currently included in the City's PFDIF Program. Therefore, these villages were placed outside of the cordon. , As previously described, trips traveling to/from each industrial zone within the City boundary are considered to be Chula Vista residents whom already contribute via residential impact fees. Therefore, the total number of industrial trips originating / terminating outside the cordon was calculated, and then divided over the total number of trips generated by the model (approximately 37,000 daily trips) to equal the "percentage of outside trips" The percentage of outside trips was found to be 46%. In conclusion, the calculated external service demand for industrial development within the City of Chula Vista's PFDIF program area is 46% of the total industrial service demand. Sincerely, Katz, Okitsu & Associates ... r Arnold Torma, P.E. 'Principal Engine~r SLM '. Attachments: Attachment A - Industrial External SDF Calculations for City's P~DIF Program 7-19 J'! "' ;; '" :; .<:: U oS "' " e 0 N C '" e E 0 9 <ii }:; "' ::l "0 E .E "' 0';; >. <ii e <l; " e 0 N 13 <i: " OJ f- C1) Z W c;J :;;; <l; I 0 U Z <l; <l; f- C1) f- e <l; 0 "0 " "' '" -" "' e oQ "' :; u <ii U " "' II ~ "' ::l "0 E LL 0 LL a.. '" ~ ;; .!'l ::l .<:: U 0 Z:- (j ~ 0; 0; ~ ~ 0; 0 ~ Iii 0: Iii ~ " c Iii ID ~ ." ~ ~ " c ~ ~ c ~ ." ~ , ~ c " Z ~ 0; ~ ~ 0 6 ~ ID C Iii ~ ~ ;:: ~ c "E c ~ ID "" ~ > ~ U ID E <( > ID 0 ~ 0 ID 3 c " c ..J ID 0 > a. " "' <( c ~ 0; ID ID ~ C ID C ~ ~ ~ ~ ID ~ ID m "' "0 -" "0 "0 0; :f 0; 0; c "0 c E " " 0 u " u u W ID W ~ Z ~ Z U) >< " - ~ 1ii "0 . a: f- ~ ~ M 0; "0 .g- ~ ;!: M ;e '" f- 0 ,e :; 0 1ii "0 ~ "a"- "a"- ~ " f- a. "0 ~ m ~ ;: '" N ,e 0 " 0;- 1ii ~ a: ~ '" 0; "i)j ~ ~ :!' 0 ~ ~ m '" a. 0 ~ :; ~ a. "' ~ ro M "' ~o '" ~ 0 ro "" ai ~ 0 N ai ai '" N en f- w w w w w w Z 0: 0: 0: 0: a: 0: <.) <.) <.) <.) <.) <.) ::l <( <( <( <( <( <( M N " m 0 "' ,,; '" ;; .. oj ,..: <> M ro ~ '" '" <> '" w en '" N '" ::l >- ~ 0: 0: >- M 0: >- 0 <( ... 0: '" <( 0: Z a. U) ... N a. ... ~ :l U) <( -' U) "" <( 0 :l ... <( :l ..J a' i:: 0 E a' 0 ... i:: ... i:: U) >- ... -' U) ... :l > I <( :l I 0 <( '" ... 0 '" W 0 Z I OJ ... z OJ W M M 0 0 ;; 0 ;; 0 0 N 0 N N u N N W N N N N Z ro ~ ~ ;;; N 0 ;;; M M '" N '" '" '" '" '" M "a"- " " " ~ M ,..: M ID " " .0 c 0; '~ E E '" 0 - <.) ID " " ~ c .0, .~ " ~ " .. ID ..r:: :'::: ~ -; .~ "- ,,-- E E!9 0 " u ~ " " . . ~ .9- .9-~ " ,::: "- <( ,::: <.) ~ N " "0 " U) ~ .0 Z- .0 ., " (j " ~ ~ " ~ ID ~ .. " 0 "' f; "' ., ~ ID ID "- "' ID i5 CIl ~ ~ ~ " ." ." ." <( a '5 '5 '5 N t ... 0 0 0 U) " " "a"- 0 " 0 0 "' '" ,..: ,..: '" E M ~ E " '" II: - <J) 7-20 ATTACHMENT 6 - " " <0 <<: .; 5- " :g " w "- "S . N ;0 -" u ~ ID "0 .9 ~ ID f; C o ~ ID W ~ -" ~ ID 1" o . . ." ID " '" " "- ".5 '" M "0 ID ~ ~ ID 1ii 3 u " <.) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 3.50 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO A DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE TO PAY FOR VARIOUS PUBLIC FACILITIES WITHIN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA'S GENERAL PLAN AREA BOUNDARY WHEREAS, on January 8th, 1991, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista adopted' Ordinance No. 2432, establishing the Public Facilities Impact Fee (PFDIF or Impact Fee),.and WHEREAS, on June 14th, 2005, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista adopted Ordinance No. 3010, increasing the PFDIF from $5,048 to $5,480 per single family dwelling unit; and WHEREAS, cost estimates for the current 'list of needed public facilities have been updated; and, WHEREAS, PFDIF allocation factors have been recalculated using General Plan Fiscal Impact Model analysis, and WHEREAS, the Impact Fee is solely based upon that portion of the project costs which are attributable to new development; and WHEREAS, the fee increase was developed in conjunction with developers and the Building Industry Association (BIA); and . WHEREAS, development is considered to take place in accordance with the Phasing Plan established by the City's Planning Department, which is subject to change depending on actual development phasing; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: FindinQs The City Council finds, after consideration of the evidence presented to it including the "Public Facilities Development Impact Fee Update - March 2006", that certain amendments to Chapter 3.50 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code are necessary in order to assure that there are sufficient funds available to finance the public facilities necessary to serve new development within the City of-Chula Vista by the development impact fee, and The City Council finds, based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, and consistent with the City's General Plan, that the imposition of public facility impact fees on all development within the City of Chula Vista for which building permits have not been issued is necessary in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare by providing for the public facilities and services to assure effective implementation of the City's General Plan; and The City Council finds that the amount of the amended fees levied by this ordinance does not exceed the estimated cost of providing the public facilities. 7-21 SECTION 2: That the existing Ordinance Nos. 2432, 2320, 2554, 2810, 2855 and 2886 are hereby superseded, anp Chapter 3.50 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: 3.50.010 General intent. The city's general plan land. use and public facilities elements require that adequate public facilities be available to accommodate increased population created by new development within ,the city of Chula Yista. , The city council has determined that new development will create adverse impacts. on the city's eXisting public facilities which must be mitigated by the financing and construction of certain public facilities which are the subject of this chapter New development contributes to the cumulative burden on these public .facilities in direct relationship to the amount of population generated by the development or the gross acreage of the commercial or industrial land in the development. The city council has determined that a reasonable means of financing the public facilities is to charge a fee on all developments in the city of Chula Vista. Imposition of the public facilities development impact fee on all new development for which building permits have not yet been issued is necessary in order to protect the public safety and welfare, thereby ensuring effective implementation of the city's general plan. (Ord. 2887 S 1, .2002). -, 3.50.020 Definitions. For the purposes of this chapter, the following words or phrases shall be construed as defined in this section, unless from the context it appears that a different meaning is intended: A. "Building permit" means a permit required by and.issued pursuant to the Uniform Build'lng Code, as adopted by reference by this city B "Developer" means the owner or developer of a development. C "Development permit" means any discretionary permit, entitlement or approval for a development project issued under any-zoning or subdivision ordinance of the city o "Development project" or "development" means any activity described as the following: . 1 Any new. residential dwelling unit developed on vacant land; 2. Any new comr,nercialloffice or industrial development constructed on vacant land; 3. A~y expansions to established developments or new developments on nonvacant land in those land use categories listed in subsections (0)(1) and (2) of this section, if the result is a net increase in dwellint) units. The _.fee shall be based solely on this net dwelling unit increase; 4 Any new or expanding special land use project; 5 Any special purpose project developed on vacant land or nonvacant land, or expanded within a pre-existing site, if the result is a net increase in dwelling units. 1;he fee shall be. based solely on this net dwelling unit increase; 6 Any other development project not listed above but described in Section 65927 and 65928 of the State Government Code. . E. "Community purp'ose facility" means a facility which serves one of the following purposes: 7-22 , 1 Social service activities, including such services as Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts, Boys and Girls Club, Alcoholics Anonymous and services for the homeless; 2. Public schools; 3 Private schools; 4 Day care; 5 Senior care and recreation; 6 Worship, spiritual growth and development. F "Special land use" means any nonresidential, non-commercial/office or nonindustrial development project (e g., Olympic Training Center, hospitals, utilities), or non-special purpose project. G. "Special purpose project" means any for-profit community purpose facility (e.g., day care). . H. "Engineer report" refers to the April 20, 1993, "developmel"\t impact fees for public facilities" report. I. "Extraordinary project cost increases" means increases resulting from costs that could not have been reasonably foreseen at the time a project budget was established. J "Extraordinary dwelling unit change" means an increase or decrease in the number of remaining planned residential dwelling units or commercial/industrial' acres for which building permits have riot yet been pulled, which changes the existing total by more than 2,000 dwelling units or 200 commerciallindustrial acres. (Ord. 2887 S 1, 2002). 3.50.030 Public facilities to be financed by the fee. A. The public facilities ("facilities"), which are the subject matter of the fee, include buildiflgs, equipment and related one-time start-up costs or portions thereof, as detailed in subsection (C) of this section and in the engineer report on file in the office of the city clerk. B. The city council may modify or amend this list of facilities by written resolution in order to maintain compliance with the city's general plan or the capital improvement program. C The facilities are as follows: 1 Civic Center expansion; 2. Police department facilities and equipment; 3. Corporation yard relocation/expansion; 4 Library system expansion; 5. Fire suppression system expansion; 6.~ Geographic information system expansion; 7 ~ Computer system expansion, 8.~ Telecommunication system expansion; 9 ~ Records management system expansion; 10 Major recreation facilities (community centers, gymnasiums, swimming pools). (Ord. 2887 S 1, 2002) **Facilitv oraiects are comolete. No future oraiects will be added. 3.50.040 Territory to which fee applicable. 7-23 The area of the city of Chula Vista to which the fee herein established shall be applicable shall be the territorial limits of the city of Chula Vista ("territory"), as they may from time to time be amended. (Ord. 2887 3 1, 2002). 3.50.050 Establishment of fee. A development impact fee ("fee") is hereby established to pay for the facilities within the territory The fee shall be paid upon the issuance of. building permits for each development project within the city of Chula Vista, except that, at the discretion of the city manager, a developer may prepay all or part of civic center expansion fees that would be applicable to the developer's future development projects. Prepayment would occur at the then current rate; however, the developer has sole responsibility for paying subsequent fee increases resulting .from (1) extraordinary project cost increases, or (2) normal annual adjustments in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) or Building Construction Index (BCI), or (3) extraordinary dwelling unit changes. (Ord. 2887 3 1, 2002). 3.50.060 Determination of fees by land use category. For purposes, of this fee, single-family dwelling units shall include single-family detached homes and detached condominiums; multifamily dwelling units shall include attached condominiums, townhouses, duplexes, triplexes, and' apartments. Commercial/office and industrial development projects shall be charged on, a per acre basis. Development impact fees for single-family; multifamily, commercial and industrial land uses shall be based on the demand for service generated by that land use, for each public faCility set forth in CVMC 3.50 030' Service Demand Generated by Land Use Public Facility Single- Family Multifamily Commercial Industrial Dwelling Dwelling Unit Acre Acre Unit Police department ~150 ~747 ~075 W2a028 facilities and equipment Corporation yard J9a125 .~65 .n5228 ~182 relocation/expansion Library system expansion (residential a24178 47e822 000 000 only) Fire suppression system ,~212 J.W707 .200060 GW020 expansion Major recreation facilities a24.178 47e.822 000 000' (residential only) General Government Civic Center expansion ~169 400742 .;w.+058 004031 Googrophic inform:!tion ~ -4G8 ~ .,004 systom oxp:!nsion Computor system ~ -4G8 ~ .,004 oxp:!nsion Telocommunic:!tion ~ -4G8 ~ .,004 I I 7-24 system expansion Records management ~ 400 ~ ,004- systom oxpansion Administration ,*7169 400742 .~058 ro4031 I I I The rate for each special land use development project, as defined in CVMC 3.50020, shall be equivalent to the commercial/office rate per gross acre of iand. The Olympic. Training Center shall be equivalent to the industrial rate per gross acre of land. The rate for each special purpose project, as defined in CVMC 3 50 020, shall be equivalent to one-half the commercial/office rate per gross acre of land. The charges shall be those outlined in CVMC 3.50 090(C) The fee multiplied by the total number of dwelling units or acres within a given development project represents a developer's fair share ("fair share") for that development project. (Ord. 2887 S 1, 2002). 3.50.070 Time to determine amount due. The fee for each development shall be calculated at the time of building permit issuance and shall be the amount as indicated at that time, and not when the tentative map or final map wE!re granted or applied for, or when the building permit plan check was conducted, or when application was made for the building permit, except that a developer of a development project providing low- and/or moderate-income housing in accordance with Section III, Objective 1 of the 1991 housing element of the general plan may request authorization to prepay or defer the fee for up to 500 equivalent. dwelling units (EDUs) and said request may be approved at the sole discretion of the city manager In order to facilitate those low- and/or moderate-income projects which are planned for construction through March 24, 2005, the fee for said projects shall be the fee existing as of March 25, 2002. (Ord. 2887 S 1, 2002). 3.50.080 Purpose and use of fee. The fee collected shall be used by the city for the following purposes, in such order and at such time as determined by the city council: A. To pay for such of the facilities that the city council determines should be constructed, installed or purchased at that time, or to reimburse, the city for facilities funded by the city from other sources. B. To reimburse developers who have been required or permitted by CVMC 350 140(A) to construct, install or purchase approved facilities listed in CVMC 3 50 030(C), in such amounts as the council deems appropriate. C To repay any and all persons who have, pursuant to prior fee Ordinance Nos. 2320 or 2432, or pursuant to this chapter, advanced or otherwise loaned funds for the construction of a facility identified herein. D To repay the city for administration costs associated with administration of the fee. (Ord. 2887 S 1, 2002) 3.50.090 Amount of fee. A. The fee shall be the amounts set forth in subsections (B) and (C) of this section. The fee shall be adjusted, starting on October 1, 2005, and on each October 1 st thereafter, based on the following two indexes: For the Civic Center expansion, libraries, fire suppression arid major recreation facilities: the Engineering News Record, Building Construction Cost Index for the Los Angeles Area. 7-25 - For the police, corporation yard, geographic information systems, computer systems, telecommunications systems, records management and administration components: The U S Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (San Diego Metropolitan Statistical Area). Adjustments of the fee based upon annual changes to these two indexes shall be automatic and shall not require further action by the city council. The PFDIF may also be reviewed and amended by the city council as necessary based on changes in the type, size, location or cost of the facilities to be financed by the fee, changes in land use designation in the city's general plan; and upon other sound engineering, financing and planning information. Adjustments to the fee resulting from these discretionary reviews may be made by. resolution amending this section. B The fee shall have portions which are, according to the engineer report, allocated to a specific facility ("fee components"), which correspond to the costs of the various facilities, plus the administration c()s~ for the fee", wh;,ch is a percentage of theme components' cost. C The fee shall be the following, depending on the land use. . . Land Use Fee Residential - Single-family $&,4W7.891/DU dwellings Residential - Multifamily dwellings $~7,477!DU CommerCial/Office $21,70725.181/acr e Industrial $4,G4G7.958/acre Special land use $25.18121,707/acr- e Olympic Training Center $7,958/4;G40/acre Public purpose Exempt Nonprofit community purpose Exempt facility , , Special purpose project $10,85312.590/acr e '. (Ord. 3010 S 1,2005; Ord. 2887 S 1,2002). 3.50.100 Development projects exempt from the fee. A. Development projects by public agencies shall be exempt from the provisions of the fee if those projects are designed to provide the public service for which the agency is charged ("public purpose"). B. Community, purpose facilities which are not operated for profit ("nonprofit community purpose facilities") are als.o exempt inasmuch as these institutions provide benefit to the community as a ,whole, including all land use categories which are the subject matter of the fee. The city council hereby determines that it is appropriate to spread any impact such nonprofit community purpose facilities might have to the other land use categories subject to the fee. In the event that a court determines that the exemption herein extended to community purpose 7-26 facilities shall for, any reason be invalid, the city coun<;il hereby allocates the nonprofit community purpose facilities' fair share to the city bf Chula Vista and not to ar1Y' of the land use categories which are the subject matter of the development impact land use categories. C Development projects which are additions or expansions to existing dwelling units or businesses, except special land use projects, shall be exempt if the addition or expansion does not result in a net increase in dwelling units or commercial/industrial acreage (Or~. 288791, 2002) 3.50.110 Authority for accounting and expenditures. A. Fees Collected Before the Effective Date of the Ordinance Codified in This Chapter 1 All fees which have accrued shall remain in separate accounts ("accounts") corresponding to the facilities listed in CVMC 3 50 030, as established by the director of finance, and shall only be expended for the purposes associated with each facility account. 2. The director of finance is authorized to maintain accounts for the various facilities identified in this chapter and to periodically make expenditures from the accounts for the purposes set forth herein. B. Funds Collected On or After the Effective Date .of the Ordinance Codified' in This Chapter 1 The fees collected shall be deposited into a public facility financing fund ("public facilities development impact fee fund," or alternatively herein "fund"), which is hereby created and shall be expended only for the 'purposes set forth in this chapter 2. The director of finance is authorized to .establish a single fund for the various facilities identified in this chapter and to periodically make expenditures from the fund for the purposes set forth herein. (Ord. 2887 S 1, 2002). 3.50.120 Findings. The city council finds thi3t collection of the fee established by this chapter at the time of the building permit issuance is necessary to provide funds' for the facilities and to ensure certairity in the capital facilities budgeting for growth impacted public facilities. (Ord. 2887 S 1, 2002) 3.50.130 Fee additional to other fees and charges. This fee is in addition to the requirements imposed by other city laws, policies or regulations relating to the construction or the financing of the construction of public improvements within subdivisions or developments. (Ord. 288791, 2002) 3.50.135 Mandatory oversizing of facility - Duty to tender reimbu'rsement offer. Whenever a developer of a development project is required a~ a condition of approval of a development permit to cause a facility or a portion of a facility to be built to accommodate the demands created by the development project, the city may require the developer to install, purchase or construct the facility according to design specifications approved by the city, that being with such supplemental size or capacity required by the city ("oversized capacity requirement"). If such an oversized capacity requirement is imposed, the city'shall offer to reimburse the developer from the fund either in cash or over time, with interest at the fair market value of money, as fees are collected, at the option of the city, for costs incurred by the developer for the design and construction of 7-27 the facility, not to exceed the estimated cost of that particular facility as included in the calculation and updating of the fee. The city may update the fee calculation as the city deems appropriate prior to making such offer This duty to offer reimbursement shall be independent of the developer's obligation to pay the fee. (Ord. 2887 S 1, 2002). 3,50.140 Developer construction offacilities. , A. Whenever a developer.of a developmellt project would be required by applicatioll of city'law or policy as a condition of approval of a development permit to cOllstruct or fillallce a facility, or if a developer proposes to desigll and construct a portion of a facility in conjunction with the prosecution' of a development project within the territory, and follows the procedure for doing same hereinbelow set forth, the city council shall, in the followillg applicable circumstances, tender ollly the credit or reimbursement hereinbelow identified for that circumstance. 1 If the cost of the facility, incurred by the developer alld acceptable to the city, is less than or equal to that portion of the developer's fair share related to the fee component for that facility, the city may only give a credit ("developer credit") againsHhat portion of the developer's fair share related to the fee component for that facility ("fair share of the fee component"); or 2. If the cost of the facility, incurred by the developer and acceptable to the city, is greater than that portion of the developer's fair share related to the fee component for that facility, but less than or equal to the developer's total fair share,> the ciiy may give a credit, which credit shall first be ,applied against that portion of the fair share related to the fee component for that facility, and the excess costs for the facility shall then be applied as credits against such other fee components of the developer's total fair share as the city ~anager, in his sole and unfettered discretion, shall determine; or 3. If the cost of the facility, incurred by the'developer and acceptable to the city, is greater than the developer's total fair share, the city may give a credit against the developer's total fair share as the city manager, in his sole and unfettered discretion; shall determine, and/or the city may tender to the developer a reimbursement agreement to-reimburse said developer only from the fund as moneys are available, .over time, with'interest at the fair market value of money, at the option of the city , B. Unless otherwise stated herein, all developer credits shall be calculated on a dollar basis and converted into dwelling units at the time. building permits are pulled, based on the then-current fee. (Ord. 2887 S 1, 2002). 3.50.150 Procedure for issuance of credits or tender of reimbursement offer. The city's extensioll of credits or tender' of a reimbursemellt offer to a developer pursuant to CVMC 3.50140 shall be conditioned on the developer'complying with the terms and,collditiolls of this section: A. Written,. authorizatioll shall, be requested by the developer from the city alld "issued by the city coullcil by written resolutioll before developer may incur allY costs eligible for reimb\Jrsemellt relating to the facility B The request for authorization shall contaill the informatioll listed in this section alld such other information as may from time to time be requested by the city C If the council grants authorization, it. shall be by written agreement with the developer, and on ,the. following cO[lditions amollg such other conditions as the council may from time to time impos~_ 7-28 1 Developer shall prepare all plans and specifications and submit same for approval by the city; 2. Developer shall secure and dedicate any right~of-way required for the facilities; 3 Developer shall secure all required permits and environmental clearances necessary for construction of the facilities; 4 Developer shall provide performance bonds in a form and amount and with a surety satisfactory to the city (where the developer intends to utilize provisions for immediate credit, the performance bond shall be for 100 percent of the value of the project); 5 Developer shall pay all city fees and costs; 6. The city shall be held harmless and indemnified, and upon tender by the city, defended by the developer for any of the costs and liabilities associated with the construction of the facilities, 7 The city will not be responsible for any of the costs of constructing the facilities. The developer shall advance all necessary funds to construct the facilities; 8. The developer shall secure at least three qualified bids for work to be done. The construction contract shall be granted to the lowest qualified bidder If qualified, the developer may agree to perform the work at a price equal to or less than the low bid. Any claims for additional payment for extra work or charges during construction shall be justified and shall be documented to the satisfaction of the director of public works; ,9 The developer shall provide a detailed cost estimate which itemizes those costs of the construction attributable to the facilities and exclude any work attributable to a specific subdivision project. The estimate is preliminary and subject to final determination by the director of public works upon completion of the facilities; 10 The city may grant partial credit for costs incurred by the developer on the facility upon determination of satisfactory incremental completion .of the facility, as approved and certified by the director of public works, in an amount not to exceed 75 p'ercent of the cost of the construction completed to the time the partial credit is granted, thereby retaining 25 percent of such credits until issuance by the city of a notice of completion; 11 When all work has been completed to the satisfaction of the city, the developer shall submit verification of payments made for the construction of the facility to the city The director of public works shall make the final determination on expenditures which are eligible for credit or reimbursement. (Ord. 2887 S 1, 2002) 3.50.155 Developer transfer of credits. A developer who, in accordance with the provisions of CVMC 3.50140 and 3.50150, receives credits against future payments of the fee for one or more fee components may transfer those credits as provided herein to another developer A. The developer shall provide the city with written notice of such transfer within 30 days. The notice shall provide the following information: 1 The name of the developer to whom the credits were transferred; 2. The dollar value of the transferred credits; 3. The fee component(s) against which the credits will be applied; and 4 The projected rate, by fiscal year, that the credits will be applied, until said credits have been fully redeemed. 7-29 B, Credits received ,by a developer of a low- and/or moderate-income project in accordance with CVMC 3 50,070'can only'be transferred to another low, and/or moderate-i,ncome development project. (Ord, 2887 S 1, 2002) 3.50.160 Procedure for fee modification or r~duction. Any developer who, because of the nature optype of uses proposed for a development proje,ct, contends that application of this fee is unconstitutional, or unrelated to mitigation of the burdens of the development ma'y apply to the city council for a modification or reduction of the fee, The application shall be made in writing and filed with the city clerk not later than 10 days after notice of the pUblic hearing on the development permit application for the project is given, or if no development permit is required, at the time of the filing of the building permit application, The application shall state in detail the factual basis for the claim of 'modification, or reduction, The city council shall make reasonable efforts to consider the application within 60 days after its filing. The decision of the city council shall be finaL If a reduction or modification is granted, any change in use within the project shall subject the developer to payment of the fee, The.procedure provided by this section is additional to any other procedure authorized by law for protection or chall~nging this fee, (Ord, 2887 S 1, 2002) 3.50.170 Fund loans. , A. Loans by the City" The city may loan funds to the fund to pay for facilities should the fund have insufficient funds to cover the cost of said facility Said loans, if granted, shal/'be approved upon the adoption of the annual city budget and shall carry interest rates as set by the city council for each fiscal year A schedule for repayment of said loans shall be established at the time they are made and approved by the council, with a maximum term not to exceed the life of the fund, S. Developer Loans, A developer may loan funds ,to the city as outlined in CVMC 3,50 140 and 3 50,150 The city may repay said developer loans with interest, under the terms listed in subsection (A) of this section, (Ord, 2887 S 1, 2002), " 3.50.180 Effective date. This chapter shall become effective sixty (60) days followinq its second readinq and adoption January 18, 2003 (Ord, 2887 S 1, 2002), SECTION 3: This chapter shall become effective sixty (60) days following its second reading and adoption, SECTION 4: , NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED, that the City Council of the City Of Chula Vista does hereby adopt and amend Chapter 3,50 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code'relating to Public Facilitie,s Development Impact Fees, Presented by Approved as to form by Edward Van Eenoo ' Director of Budget and Analysis ~ . . Ann Moore " 6i;~ Altom", - . - - 7-30 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADOPTING THE PUBLIC FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE MARCH 2006 UPDATE. WHEREAS, on January 8'h, 1991, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista adopted Ordinance No. 2432, establishing the Public Facilities Impact Fee (PFDIF); and WHEREAS, the purpose of the PFDIF is mitigation of the cumulative burden on public facilities placed by new development; and WHEREAS, staff has prepared a comprehensive update of the PFDIF program, including a public facility expenditure plan for 2006 - 2030, development projections, and impact fee calculations; and WHEREAS, development is considered to take place in accordance with the Phasing Plan established by the City's Planning Department which is subject to change depending on actual development phasing; and WHEREAS, the 2006 - 2030 expenditure plans for public fac[lities are detailed in each PFDIF component in the "Public Facilities Development Impact Fee, March 2006 Update" and summarized in the Cash Flow Analysis; and WHEREAS, the 2006 - 2030 expenditure plan serves the purpose of identifying the planned use of all Public Facilities DIF funds; and WHEREAS, the "Public Facilities Development Impact Fee, March 2006 Update" was developed in conjunction with developers and the Building Industry Association (BIA), NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby adopt the "Public Facilities Development Impact Fee, March 2006 Update" Presented by Approved as to form by Edward Van Eenoo Director of Budget & Analysis Ann Moore ~'lCity Attorney 7-31 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE TRANSFER OF FUNDS FROM THE CORPORATION YARD COMPONENT OF THE PUBLIC FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE (PFDIF) TO THE PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION COMPONENT OF THE PFDIF FOR COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PURCHASE OF A STORM DRAIN COMPLIANCE INSPECTOR VEHICLE. WHEREAS, on November 19, 2002, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista approved Resolution 2002-472, amending the budget of the Public Works Department to add two Storm Drain Compliance Inspectors, and WHEREAS, Resolution 2002c472 also appropriated $20,600 from the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee (PFDIF) fund for the purchase of an inspection vehicle for this additional staff; and WHEREAS, the funds were appropriated and spent from the Program Administration component of the PFDIF fund, in the amount of $16,023; and WHEREAS, the Corporation Yard component of the PFDIF is more appropriate for this expense, 'and WHEREAS, it is now necessary to reimburse the Program Administration component from the Corporation Yard component for expenditures related to the purchase of a Storm Drain Compliance Inspector vehicle; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve the transfer of $16,023 from the Corporation Yard component of the PFDIF to the Program Administration component of the PFDIF Presented by Approved as to form by Edward Van Eenoo Director of Budget & Analysis 7-32 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE CLOSURE OF FOUR (4) COMPONENTS OF THE PUBLIC FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE (PFDIF) AND TRANSFERRING FUNDS THEREFORE. WHEREAS, the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee (PFDIF) is currently composed of ten (10) facility based components, as well as a program administration component; and WHEREAS, all planned acquisitions included in four of the components have been completed and no future projects are anticipated, including the Geographic Information Systems component, the Computer Systems Expansion component, the Telecommunications System component, and the Records Management System component; and WHEREAS, it is appropriate to cease collecting fees for these facilities and close their respective funds; and WHEREAS, the Geographic Information System, Computer System, and Records Management System components are estimated to have a deficit balance as of the end of fiscal year 2006, and WHEREAS, it is necessary to transfer funds from other PFDIF components to eliminate these deficit balances; and WHEREAS, per Chula Vista Municipal code Section 3.50 110, the Finance Director is authorized to establish a single fund for the various components, and to periodically make expenditures from the fund for the purposes set forth in Chapter 3.50 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, WHEREAS, the Telecommunications System component is estimated to have a positive fund balance as of the end of fiscal year 2006, and these funds may be used to eliminate the above described deficit balances; and WHEREAS, there is a remaining debt service obligation of the Computer System component which will now be transferred to the Program Administration Component; and WHEREAS, it is necessary to transfer funds from the Telecommunications component to the Program Administration component to offset the impact of the debt service obligation transfer; and WHEREAS, the remaining deficit balance of the components to be closed' will be eliminated using available funds from the Civic Center Expansion Component; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve the closure of the Telecommunication Systems, Geographic Information Systems, Computer Systems, and Records Management Systems components. 7-33 NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City Of Chula Vista does hereby approve the transfer of funds from the Civic Center component to eliminate the deficit balance of the Geographic Information System component; the transfer of funds from the Civic Center component to eliminate the deficit balance of the Computer Systems component; the transfer of funds from the Civic Center component to eliminate the deficit balance of the Records Management System component; the transfer of $15,404 from the Telecommunication Systems component to the Program Administration component; the transfer of the remaining fund balance of the Telecommunication Systems component to the Civic Center, component; and the transfer of a future debt service obligation of $15,404 from the Computer Systems component to the Program Administration component. Presented by Approved as to form by Edward Van Eenoo Director of Budget & Analysis " 7-34