The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPW Traffic Mitigation Fee Report FY2012-13Agenda Item Meetint! Date: March 17, 2014 Prepared by: ��ity Manager Approva Director of Public Works SUBJECT: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL ACCEPTING THE ANNUAL TRAFFIC MITIGATION FEE REPORT AND APPROVING THE DETERMINATION THAT A REASONABLE RELATIONSHIP EXISTS BETWEEN THE CURRENT NEED FOR TRAFFIC MITIGATION FEES HELD OVER FIVE YEARS AND THE PURPOSES FOR WHICH THEY WERE ORIGINALLY COLLECTED. OxceJur-Tan-aw wmi ' iii rmxym, ffe"s, IVACKGROUND: Impact fees are a monetary exaction, other than a tax or special assessment, charged by a city to a project as part of the project approval process. Their purpose is to defray the cost of public facilities necessitated by the development project. Assembly Bill 1600 (California Government Code 66000 — 66025) established requirements for how cities collect, maintain and spend impact fees. The focus of this report is on the impact fee portion of the law. Impact fees must demonstrate a reasonable connection between the fee charged and the improvemen cost, must be deposited in a separate accountsegregated from the city's general fund, and used only fo -the identified improvements. AB 1600 requires cities to spend or commit the fees within 5 years o )11 collection, or return •them to the developer unless a finding can be made that a reasonable relationshi remains between the current need for the fee and the purpose for which it was collected. I A review of the City's various development fees determined that the Traffic Mitigation Fee is the onl such fee subject to AB1600 reporting. Cities must publish annual reports on these fees, which are to b available to the public within 6 months of the end of a fiscal year. In addition, the city must review th report at a public meeting not less than 15 days after the information is made available. To assur ongoing AB1600 compliance, staff will submit annual and 5 year reports no later than December 31 o each year. This is the second annual Traffic Mitigation Fee report-, a 5 year report will be due at the en of fiscal year 2017-18. FOR CITY CLERK ONLY File No.*. Council Meeting,,, Dispositiow. 6TO"JAI VA M ANALYSIS: The Traffic gation Fee report consists of the following elements: I Fee description.- The Traffic Mitigation Fee is charged to new development projects. It is intended to pay for those circulation system improvements identified in General Plan 2020 needed to accommodate the development. 2. Amount of the fee: Each new A.M. and P.M. peak hour trip generated by a development is charged $4,624 3. Account beginning and ending balance, fees collected and interest J Fund balance July 1, 2012 $8fi19,931 Revenue Years Interest income 15,141 Model run charges 21322,562 Total revenue 29337,703 Expenditures 989 Model Updates 74,5609 Total Expenditures 74,609 Net Change Fund Balance 2,2631094 Fund Balance June 30, 2013 $1098839025 4. List of improvements on which fees were expended, amount of expenditure and total percentage of cost covered hyfee: The number of peak trips generated by a development, the basis for the fee calculation, is determined by a traffic model developed and maintained in the Public Works Department Traffic Division. For FY 12-13, the total cost of staff time to update and maintain the model was $74,609. 5. Approximate date by which construction will commence when City has determined that sufficient funds have been collected: Projects identified in General plan 2020 are major infrastructure improvements which almost always require substantial state and federal funding in addition to Traffic Mitigation Fees. A rare exception is the Freitas Parkway/Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection and Roadway Improvements project. That project is listed in City's five year Capital Improvement Program, approved by the City Council on July 15, 2013. The current schedule calls for FY 14/15 design and construction', at a projected cost of $1,500,000. By contrast, the Lucas Valley/Los Gamos Southbound 101 Off Ramp project, also listed in General Plan 2020, is projected to cost in excess Of $10!OKPOO. 6. Any interfund loan or transfer, including the public improvement where it will be spent: No interfund transfers were made. 7. Refunds made due to sufficientfunds being collected: No refunds were madcl An analysis of the accumulated balance follows. A first in, first out (FIFO) accounting method assumes that the first revenue received is the first spent. Staff analyzed the annual balances for the past 5 fiscal years and determined that $8,037,198 has been held for more than 5 years, as shown in the followino, table. - Years -5 Years + ears Current Balance 1� FY 09-10a 989 $10 $2337 70i i883.025 i $3. 427 $67 7541[ $288502 i F& I 'r-f-M A finding must be made that there is a reasonable relationship between the current need for the fees and the purposes for which they were originally charged. Current traffic conditions continue to warrant the improvements listed in General Plan 2020. The cost estimates for these improvements indicate that the funds available are not sufficient for design and construction until such time that state and federal funds are secured to supplement City resources. FISCAL IM[PACT-. There is no fiscal impact unless the required finding identifying a reasonable relationship between the current need for the fees for funds held over 5 years and the purposes for which they were originally charged cannot be made. In that instance, the accrued funds must be returned to the developers who paid the fee. OPTIONS: • Accept the report and findings as recommended • Amend the report and finding • Reject the report and finding ACTION REQUIRED: Accept the Traffic Mitigation Fee Report and adopt the resolution making a finding that a reasonable relationship exists between the current need for the Traffic Mitigation Fees held over 5 years and the purposes for which they were originally charged. RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL ON TRAFFIC MITIGATION WHEREAS, the City's Circulation Element of General Plan 2020 identifies improvements necessitated by continued development in the City-, and WHEREAS, the City has adopted a Capital Improvement program that has been developed to prioritize and guide the construction of the needed improvements and allocates funds to construct the improvements as mitigation for continue development in the City; and WHEREAS, these improvements are scheduled to be constructed over time as sufficient funds become available; and WHEREAS, these identified improvements are of such size that sufficient funds have not been collected or obtained in order to construct these improvements by expending fees collected within the five year expenditure period provided by Government Code Section 66001 (d)-, and WHEREAS,, there continues to be a distinct nexus between continued development and the necessity to mitigate development impacts on traffic circulation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby finds that a reasonable relationship exists between the current need for the Traffic Mitigation Fees held over 5 years and the purposes for which they were originally charged. 1. ESTHER C. BEIRNE, 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 City Council of said City held on Monday, the 17th day of March, 2014 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Bushey, Colin, Connolly, McCullough & Mayor Phillips NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ESTER C. BEI E, City Clerk CITY OF SAN RAFAEL INSTRUCTIONS: USE THIS FORM WITH EACH SUBMITTAL OF A CONTRACT, AGREEMENT, ORDINANCE OR RESOLUTION BEFORE APPROVAL BY COUNCIL / AGENCY. SRRA / SRCC AGENDA ITEM NO. 4.f DATE OF MEETING: March 17, 2014 FROM: NADER MANSOURIAN 1911101:9010 019][011 &1 z 10 11 Department Head (signature) (LOWER HALF OF FORM FOR APPROVALS ONLY) APPROVED AS COUNCIL / AGENCY AGENDA ITEM: City manager (S)6nature) 101 rol I w N 'Iffifl, 71 APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney (signature)