HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1988/01/12 Item 21 (2)
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 21
Meeting Date 1/12/88
ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing: To consider the adoption of an urgency
ordinance establishing a development impact fee for streets
and highways for the eastern area
Interim Ordinance~~~~stablishing an interim development fee
to pay for transportation facilities in the eastern area
Ordinance Establishing a development impact fee
to pay for transportation facilities in the City's eastern
territories
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works
REVIEWED BY: City Manager ~~~~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes X No )
On February 19, 1986, the City Council adopted a schedule of development
impact fees for the Eastlake development area. The fees at that time were
used to ensure that Eastlake paid their fair share of the cost of specific
street improvements outside of their development which also included a
lane interim facility in the SR-125 corridor. Since then the Council has
~ined a consulting team to update the Eastlake development fee program to
apply to the City's entire eastern area and to be finalized in conjunction
with the adoption of the City's General Plan revision. Since the City's
General Plan revision won't be finalized until later this year and since there
are currently developments and building permits that will be approved in the
eastern area before adoption of the General Plan, it is staff's recommendation
that an interim ordinance be established at this time to go into effect
immediately in order to collect transportation fees from the developments in
the eastern area. It is intended that these fees be modified from time to
time, but specifically to be looked at the time the General Plan Amendment is
finally adopted.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the ordinances establishing an interim development
fee in the Eastern Territories.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOh1MENDAiION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
When Eastlake I was approved in February of 1986, the Eastlake Development
Impact Fee was adopted to ensure that Eastlake paid their fair share of street
and highway facilities in the eastern area which were beyond the boundaries of
the Eastlake Development. The streets within the Eastlake Development were
paid for directly by Eastlake or by an assessment district and were not part
the Eastlake Development Impact Fees. Since that time the concept of the
tLake Development Impact Fees have been expanded and incorporated into the
report which is attached called the "Chula Vista Tnterim Eastern Area
Development Impact Fees for Streets dated December 1987."
• Page 2, Item 2 1
Meeting Date 1 2 88
The major change between the now proposed fee and the Eastlake Development
Impact Fee is a change in street financing policy. That is all streets that
are of a category of major or prime - 4 lanes or 6 lanes divided by a median
and limited access from adjoining properties - are now included whether or not
those facilities are off site from a particular project. Developers who build
those facilities will be reimbursed by the funds collected from this fee if
their costs are higher than their responsibility.
Basis of Apportionment
Willdan Associates, the consulting engineers, developed the method of
spreading the cost. Cost estimates for all of the facilities that will be
built were calculated. Those facilities and estimates are listed on page 9 of
the attached report. The philosophy used is that a necessary system of major
streets and highways in the eastern area is needed to serve future
development. There are also some streets that are not major facilities in the
Bonita/Sweetwater area which are needed to serve future developments but have
no other way of being financed, such as Central Avenue. The basis of
apportioning costs is that everyone in the eastern area will benefit from the
construction of the streets. Their benefit will be in proportion to the
number of trips generated per day from their property and is based upon SANDAG
traffic generation figures. In effect, each development will be buying a
share of the entire circulation system in the eastern area, and will not be
ing just the streets adjacent to their development. The total number of
~ivalent dwelling units is calculated based on trip generation factors and
proposed developments per Scenario 2 in the benefit area. As can be seen on
page lU, the total cost of the facilities is divided by the number of
equivalent dwelling units to calculate the total fee per dwelling unit as
f of l ows
Development Impact Fees
Category Total
Single family detached DU 2,101
Single family attached DU 1,681
Multi-family DU 1,260
Commercial acre 84,040
Industrial acre 63,030
Table 1 on Page 5 of the attached report gives a listing by development for
the projects within the current City boundaries. It also lists the total of
the anticipated developments based on Scenario 2 of the City's General Plan
Update for those developments outside the City but within the City's
Sphere-of-Influence. One exception to that is that development south of
Telegraph Canyon Road to the south ridge between Orange Avenue and Telegraph
Canyon Road is included in the benefit area even though it is not within our
Sphere-of-Influence (United Enterprises).
r ~
LJ
•
Page 3, Item 2 1 _
Meeting Date 1/12/88
In the future, as more accurate cost estimates are completed, the General Plan
Amendment is finalized, and additional streets are added or deleted, or as a
more accurate estimate of the total number of dwelling units is supplied, the
cost per DU can be modified.
East "H" Street Development Program
One of the provisions of this impact fee is that the previously adopted East
"H" Street Development Program will be rescinded and that program will be
folded into the development impact fee program. There is approximately $1.2
million that the City fronted in the construction of East "H" Street that was
to be reimbursed. A project titled "Reconstruction of Existing Facilities"
(page 42) is a project that will pay approximately $120,000 per year to the
City of Chula Vista over a 10 year period to be used for general street
projects in the eastern area and/or operation of street facilities such as
traffic signals, street lights, etc. that would otherwise be the
responsibility of the City's general revenues such as general fund and gas
taxes. Thi s i s the vehi cl a that i s being used to reimburse the City for tYie
City's previous investment is East "H" Street since the East "H" Street
program is being rescinded.
Other Development Impact Fees
~ecember, the City Council adopted development impact fees for parks in the
ern area which included fees for both neighborhood and community parks.
There are other fees that the staff is working on that will be charged to
developments in the eastern area primarily for those developments' share of
libraries and other civic facilities such as civic center expansion, city
yard, etc. A report has been completed for the library system development
program and staff will be returning to Council in the near future with a
development impact fee for library facility in the eastern area. At a later
date, as studies and responsibilities for the city yard and civic center are
determined, it is staff's intention to also include fees for those facilities
for the eastern areas.
The Purpose and Use of the Development Impact Fee
As stated earlier, the purpose of the development impact fee, just like with
Eastlake is to equitably share the responsibility for providing the
circulation system in the eastern area. Fees will be collected as building
permits are pulled and any fees in the program could be used to build any of
the facilities as priorities are determined by City Council. However, as a
practical matter, because of the need for the facilities prior to all of the
development, developers will be pioneering facilities such as, or similar to,
East "H" Street, Telegraph (,anyon Road and getting credits and reimbursements
for those facilities. The development impact fee would mainly be used to
collect fees from smaller developments where it would be impractical to
require them to build major street facilities. It will also serve as a basis
equitably sharing the responsibility and determining reimbursements and
its as the larger developers install facilities included in the program.
•
Developer Meetings
Page 4, Item 2 1
Meeting Date-17T~j$$
All the developers listed on page 5, table 1, have been sent copies of the
reports and have been invited to two meetings held to discuss the report, one
on September 2 and one in December. Several questions have arisen and
modifications have been made to answer those questions. However, other issues
may not have been completed to the full satisfaction of each developer and
they have all been invited to this meeting and may make a presentation to
certain aspects that they may be dissatisfied with. At this point, the
developments within the County would not fall under the control of the City.
The City has requested that the County adopt a similar ordinance for the
City's Sphere-of-Influence. However, to date, they have not done so and staff
will be encouraging the County staff to have them take a similar action.
FISCAL IMPACT: The program will generate as the area develops in the
eastern area in the amount of over X71 million. This funding will be under
the control of the City of Chula Vista but will not come out of the City's
other funding sources.
WPC 3473E
•
• ~~ ^
by the City Council of
Chula nia
r
Vista, Califo
~
/
Dated ~~/07 ' ~0