HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Resolution 7882 (Traffic Mitigation Fees)RESOLUTION NO. 7882
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
ESTABLISHING OR MHDIFYINS TRAFFIC MIT16ATION FEES FOR
DEVELOPMENTS WITHIN THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
',A,'h8,rea:_:, the City Council l i If the 1_ i ti4 of San Rafael has adopted San Rafael
ael
1"il_iriii_]i.ii�l i.iii�h? SeGti�€tj .:>.'� �:r-ei�titl±� �9tli� �?=:t7tlll:=�lirli� the ;�iatfjf�r-lt►� for
itiipCsin i rind charging Public Facilities Fees; and
''3t�het-�?a . t�li_' San 10afael f enema Flan �'j:_i[;�f.".i identilie:? 1tilGia t ; -if
i_ontemplated future development on existing circulation facilities iri man
Rafael, along with an atia1h4si of the need iif ries' it-►:i_ilatioti
improvements required by newde�velopr�ient: and
Whereas., said Plan also sets forth the relationship between contempl aited
future development., the needed facilities and the estinnated cost=: of those
improvements;
vements;
Wher e;j:_., the Flan Silas- available f or public inspection and review f or more
than ten ',10) day=s prior to this public heari nq; and
Whereas, the Citq Council finds a- fol Bovis:
Ti aitfic Mitigation Fees:
r,.
The purpose iif the traffic mitigation fees are the provide fund`) for
increasing street capacity to accommodate additional traffic generdt ed bhi
new development; and
B. The City Council finds and determines that the. traffic to be generated
by projected levels of development its San Rafael will exceed the Citq's
adopted traf`iic level iif service standard D. There is a substantial
government interest iri maintaining a system of city _streets which can
satisfactorily accommodate projected level'_ of traffic; and
C. In order- to project i t ; circulation need:_,, the City of ears Rafael
undertook a comprehensive review of the City's streets and traffic
patterns a they currently, exist and as they are projected to exist in the
future. This study is embodied in the 1` 88 Sari Rafael General Plat; 2,00
Circulation Element, its; "Technical Append i,X and traffic studio
providing background information for the Circulation Element: The
RESOLUTION NO. .,J82
.Greater East '-pari Rafael T raffic: A n a -0 N si:s"_ _=HK Associates J H K
AL,:_o iates 1965; i' orthilate Ac ti vitia Center Plan adopted October 196
incorporating the `Terra Linda ':t'alleq Subregionai Traffic Impact Studq
Summary", Wilbur Smith and Associates, 1979. The Circulation Element
includes extensive independent research and corroborative evidence fry m
other V=ital and regional studies. It is incorporated herein by reference.:
Arid
D. The Circulation Element provides a basis for estirnatinq Sart Rafael':
projected traffic needs and identifies the street improvements necessary
to accf3rr modate that traffic. The Circulation Element also estimates the
tori'- tructi c in costs of the proposed _street improvements and provide=- a
basis for determining a fair allocation of those costs among the users OT
the 'qtr eet3, i5nd
E. The Sari Rafael General Plan 2000 protects tip to 5.00 new comes and
6,2150 new job:_, bq the year '2100 a and ultimate "holding capacity" housing
and lobs growth projections of lip to 6700 ne`,,,v homes and 1 73..0 0 jobs. It
has been found that all categories of development - residential,
commercial, industrial - will generate additional traffic. The General
Pian further- identifies_, the location and type of projected growth; and
F. The current , !4:=;tpm of :street in can Rafael i:3 not sufficient to
accommodate the amount of traffic to be generated by the new
development. 11any streets and intersections are already at or near level
of service staridard:s et:tablistied by the City Council. Witfni+;t significant
circulation improvement=,, the level of :service available on the City's
streets ,brill seriously deteriorate, resulting in a failure to attract
economic development, a decrease in land 'values, a decrease in tax
revenue's, more traffic accident:=;, lower level Of employee prldi_cti'tiitil,
and lower resident quality of life; and
G. The Cit!4 Council finds that the estimated cost of ac corp modati nq the
increased traffic through intersection widening, 'street extensions and
%videnirig, insta11ation of traffic signals and other local traffic mitigation
i:s appro,`,imately $57,0100 `000 t`,eptember 1`9+ 5 dollars), divided inti
three traffic subareas identified and mapped in the General Plan
Circulation Element: NorthgateiSt. 'Y'incent'J:'Silveira ($222,337,000);
Downtown and Environs ($2.A2)5..000); and East San Rafael./Francisco Blvd
West ($3�t,.347,2150)These traffic_: subareas are separate Zones of benefit:
fee's collected from each zone will be expended in those Zones; for -
2
RESOLUTION NO. 7882
area-:=;pecific circulation improvement project_.
Traditional tran_portation improvement funding sources will not keep pace
Ydth the need for and cost of transportation iniprover�ients caused by new
development. The City therefore seeks to r-equire all new developments in
the three traffic subareas to contribute t� i the cost a if mitigating traffic
problems in thei r subareas by imposing traffic_ mitigation fees for
circulation imprri'.ments. The amity has determined that it shall raise a
portion of the needed funds through mechanisms ether than traffic
mitigation fees, such as Redevelopment. Agency funding, property t7 ,e_;,
:=,tate and federal subvention_,, and possible tie.;' regional soiarces.
H. Although the City has the authority to adopt a fee structure designed
fc ir_ c:c irnpl ete f i_indi rig of the needed i mpr o vernents, the Ci tib C ounci l t i rill-
that such a fee structure would be inequitable t o new development, �pment, as
regional traffic will _;hare portions of the local circulation system and
should share in the costs for i_ertain needed improvements., and
additionally, portions of the improvements are needed for redevelopment
of a designated redevelopment area. The local traffic mitigation fee :_hare
i s approxi mat& y $ 51,761,250 agai n clivi ded i this 3 subareas or zones of
benefit: Nor thgate/St. Vincents/Si1'veira: $17,797,000; Dovimtown and
Environs $1,525,000; and East San Rafael {'Francisco Blvd. West:
est:
$12,4736,500. In Northgate/St. Vinc:ents/Silveira and East Sari
Rafael/Francisco Blvd. West traffic mitigation fees have been collected
for several year unspent fees have been subtracted from thos=e subarea
totals. in these area.;, the fees established by this resolution are less
than fee=; previously charged.
I. The Citia C ounci i finds that there is a reasonable relationship between
the treed for the improvements to be funded by the fee and the type of
development project upon which the fee is iriipo:_;ed. Specifically, every
project In v'thit_h the fee is imposed generates increased traffic
throughout the Cite. This generation of traffic in turn requires that, in
Order to maintain acceptable Ieve] s of service, traffic imprc+vements be
made to acccincii ±c date the increa`.=ed tr of f ic. There is a reasonable and
direct connection between the need for the impro'vments and the type of
development project upon which the fee is imposed.
J. The City Council find'; that there is a reasonable relationship between
the fee's use and the type of development for which the fee is charged.
The fee will be used exclu'si'vely to construct circulation improvements,
3
RESOLUTION NO. 7882
such as roadway and intersection improvements; right of way acquisition,
and the engineering, planning and administrative costs directly related to
such improvements. The use of the funds will therefore directly relate to
and benefit the development projects upon which the fee is imposed; and
K. The City Council finds that there is a reasonable relationship between
the amount of the fee and the cost of the projected required improvements.
Cost of improvements have been identified by subarea using standard
engineering practices. A project's share of the total local trip share has
been determined by using the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE)
publication entitled Trip Generation (Third Edition, 1982) and the Caltrans
Publication Proaress Resorts on Trio Ends Generation Research Counts, as
a base and adjusted by traffic model calibration factors on a subregional
basis to determine the number of P.M. peak trips per unit or per gross
square foot of floor area generated by each land use category, as identified
in the General Plan Circulation Element. Thus the fee per project is
proportional to that project's contribution to increased traffic.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of San
Rafael does hereby establish traffic mitigation fees for developments
within the City of San Rafael as more particularly set forth hereinafter.
1. Definitions
(a) "Development" means any new construction or use that requires
the issuance of a building permit or other City use entitlement and which
generates additional traffic impacts above that generated by the previous
use of the land.
(b) "Development Permits" means a building permit required by and
issued pursuant to Chapter 12 of this code, or other City use entitlement
such as but not limited to a conditional use permit, an environmental
design review permit, a zone change, variance or subdivision required by
Chapters 14 and 15 of this code.
(c) "Zone of Benefit" is an identified subarea of the City within which
fees are collected for circulation improvements located within that
subarea.
(d) "Circulation Improvements" includes but is not limited to the
construction of or improvement to street rights of way, traffic signals,
El
RESOLUTION NO. 7882
overcrossings, underpasses, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, street pavement,
and drainage improvements incidental to street improvements necessary
to provide traffic circulation consistent with the Circulation Element of
the San Rafael General Plan. For purposes of this definition street
includes highway or road.
(e) "PM Peak Hour Trip" means the number of one-way vehicular trips
generated by a gi ven 1 and use duri ng the one-hour peri od of hi ghest traf f i c
volume during the PM peak period of 4-6 PM.
2. Fee Imposed
(a) A traffic mitigation fee shall be charged and paid at the time of
issuance of a building permit for development. The amount of the fee shall
be as set forth in this resolution.
(b) To the extent permitted by law, the fee established by this
resolution shall be paid prior to occupancy for any project not required to
obtain a building permit from the City of San Rafael.
3. Fee Amount Calculations
(a) By Traffic Subarea Zones of Benefit
Northgate/St_ Vincents/Silveira:
Traffic Mitigation Fee = a project's peak hour trips X the local share of cost of new
improvements ($17,797,000) - unused fees previously paid or promised
( $2,137,000) _ $15.660.000
total trips paying 7169 = $2185 per P.M. peak trip
bovntovn and Environs:
Traffic Mitigation Fee = a project's peak hour trips X the local share of cost of new
improvements ($1.525.000)
total trips paying 2245 = $680 per P.M. peak trip
East San Rafael/Francisca Blvd_ Vest:
Traffic Mitigation Fee = a project's peak hour trips X the local share of cost of new
improvements ($12,438,500) - unused fees previously paid or promised
( $1,023,880) = $11,414,620
total trips paying 5290 =$2,158 per P.M. peak trip
RESOLUTION NO. 7882
(b) Construction Cost Index. All fees are calculated in Seatember.
1986 dollars and shall be ad i usted according to the Lee Saylor
Construction Cost Index to take into account changes in construction costs
from the date of the estimates to the date fees are paid.
(c) PM Peak Trips. PM Peak hour trip generation rates for various
categories of land uses are identified in the Circulation Background of the
San Rafael General Plan. Where trip generation rates for land uses are not
published in the Plan, reference sources such as the ITE Trio Generation
Manual gill be used by the Traffic Engineer in determining peak hour trips.
For unique land uses not covered in these reference sources, special
studies at comparable locations shall be required.
(d) Local Retail and Restaurant Uses. Local retail sales uses and
restaurants uses generate significant sales tax revenues which support
many City services of benefit to all new development. In recognition of
their sales tax benefits, traffic mitigation fees for those uses are
calculated using 40% of their P.M. peak hour trip generation, consistent
with the prior Northgate Activity Center Plan Traffic Mitigation Fee
Ordinance.
(e) Contingencies. A 10% contingency is assumed for purposes of
calculating fees for the following considerations: uncollectable debts and
uncertainties in construction costs.
4. Exemptions.
(a) Projects to be exempted from the imposition of traffic mitigation
fees include:
(1) Non revenue generating public buildings and facilities
(2) Reconstruction or remodel projects where there is no
increase in use or intensity causing an increase in traffic
(3) Accessory uses creating no increase in traffic
5. Payment of other Fees Required
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this resolution, all new
RESOLUTION NO. 7882
development projects are responsible for the payment of all other
applicable fees adopted by the City.
6. Use of Fee Revenues, Public Facilities Accounts.
(a) From and after the effective date of this resolution, the revenues
raised by payment of the traffic mitigation fee shall be placed in separate
and special accounts as provided herein and such revenues, along with any
interest earnings on each account, shall be used for the following
purposes:
(1) to pay for the planning, design and construction of designated
circulation improvements;
(2) to reimburse the City for designated circulation improvements
constructed by the City with local funds from other sources,
unless the City funds were obtained from grants or gifts;
(3) to reimburse developers who have designed and constructed
designated circulation improvements having size, length or
capacity beyond that needed to mitigate impacts of that
developer's individual development project;
(4) to pay for and/or reimburse costs of development and
ongoing administration of the traffic mitigation fee program.
7. Traffic Mitigation Fee Accounts. The fees collected pursuant to this
resolution shall be deposited into the following traffic mitigation fee
accounts:
(a) East San Rafael/Francisco 81 Yd. West Traffic Mitigation Fee
Account
(b) Downtown and Environs Traffic Mitigation Fee Account
(c) Northgate/St. Vincents/Silveira Traffic Mitigation Fee Account
S. Expenditure of the Fees.
(a) Fees in the Traffic Mitigation Fee Accounts shall be expended only
for those facilities identified in the Circulation Element and only for the
purposes for which the fee was collected.
D. Review and Reporting
(a) No later than January 30 of each year, the City Manager shall
prepare a report for the City Council to make findings with respect to any
7
,'I2�]SOLUTION NO. 7882
portion of the traffic mitigation fees remaining unexpended or
uncommitted in its account five or more years after deposit of those fees
to identify the purpose to which the fees are to be put and to demonstrate
a reasonable relationship between the fees and the purpose for which they
were charged. The required findings need only be made for moneys in the
possession of the City.
(b) The City Council shall review the report at a noticed public
hearing. The City shall ref and to the then current record owner or owners
of the development project or projects on a prorated basis the unexpended
portion of the fee, with interest, for which need cannot be demonstrated
pursuant to subsection (a) above.
10. Subsequent Analysis of Fees. The Council may revise the fee based on
subsequent comprehensive studies/Circulation Element updates that have
been prepared by the City. When additional information is available, the
City Council shall review this fee to determine that the fee amounts are
reasonably related to the impacts of developments. The City Council may
revise the fee to incorporate the findings and conclusions of further
studies.
11. Effective Date of Public Facilities Fee. The traffic mitigation fee for
circulation improvements shall be effective December 19, 1988.
I, JEANNE M. LEONCINI, Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that
the foregoing resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at
a regular meeting of the Council of said City on MONDAY
the NINETEENTH day of DECEMBER 1988, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:Boro, Breiner, Frugoli, Thayer & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ANNE M. LEONC I N I, City Clerk
9
J.
�[A)�
.r I `� ` •-ter ��- f �f ''! .� I� I -A I
I I� • ��`'�//n� ` ,ry •� ` � �/�//p-/�,/•/)fir .n� •... {
SLE { �, % I {g ,. �.:,�`•• I
LOW
— � I -- 1 I' F���,f/ � ��,'�� J .•7,.. J T!�•-�' rAf. ,.W. �nr�_.... •
• - F _ .. � - - _ I _ 1�'�•,,...-.� �`)�..._7.''l �...!..�=.LTi AI L��,�J��„}-�•. r _,. _- ,
�_1. \ i 4 .. � ` � ��i j�``�`rwo� _ `�'7,.•�' .I I�" r ` ,fff _.4 � , . �• � '1
L E G E N D„
FEE AREP►S
1. Northgate/----
�rb a� Jj -
St V�ncent'�%Si lva� iro►u2�-�_ i�,`��,� ;,� +� C t
• a
2 Downtown and its
! ��� , ``";''�'�' ,,,�� f ;y•!'r_ �4
Resick teal
f
3. East San Rajaev
Franscisco Sl d. West
Nore: nT represents�.
x `jam ''�%•,\„1/�,',' a ��1.fr'�--'� �►v.r/L ,-
,U O W f1TOW n •elf eourn..t
C ON.mQrG1AI pmza '—•—•— f.r ....�� arr .iw„� l,� /'y� , rr �-�
T'l TRWIFIC MITIGA- l u F