Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 011-96 Freeway Fee EDub RESOLUTION NO. I 1-96 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL · OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A FREEWAY INTERCHANGE FEE FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS WITHIN THE EASTERN DUBLIN AREA WHERE&S, the City Coundl of the City of Dublin has adopted Ordinance No. 14-94 which creates and establishes the authority for imposing and charging a Transportation Impact Fee; and WHEREAS, the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment ("GPA") and Specific Plan ("SP") were adopted by the City in 1993; and WHEREAS, the GPA outlines future land uses for approxdmately 4176 acres within the City's eastern sphere of influence including approximately 13,906 dwelling units and 9.737 million square feet of commercial, office, and industrial development; and WHEREAS, the SP provides more specific detailed goals, policies and action programs for approximately 3313 acres ~vithin the GPA area nearest to the City; and WHEREAS, the GPA and SP areas ("Eastern Dublin") are shoxvn on the Land Use Map contained in the GPA (attached hereto as Exhibit A) and exclude the area shown on the Land Use Map as "Future Study Area/Agriculture"; and WHEREAS, a Program Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") was prepared for the GPA and SP (SCH No. 91103604) and certified by the Council on May 10, 1993 by Resolution No. 51-93, and two Addenda dated May 4, 1993 and August 22, 1994 ("Addenda) have been prepared and considered by the Council; and WHEREAS, the SP, EIR and Addenda describe the freeway, freeway interchange and road improvements necessary for implementation of the SP, along with transit improvements,.pedestrian trails and bicyde paths ("Necessary Improvements"); and WHEREAS, the EIR and Addenda assumed that certain traffic improvements would be made ("Assumed ImProvements") and that development within Eastern Dublin would pay its proportionate share of such improvements; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee by Resolution No. 1-95 on January 9, 1995, to fund the cost of the Necessary Improvements and the Assumed Traffic Improvements; and WHEREAS, the City of Pleasanton has made improvements to the I- 580/Hacienda Drive and 1-580/Tassajara/Santa Rita Road Interchanges ("I-580 Interchange Improvements"); and WHEREAS, the 1-580 Interchange Improvements were funded by the City of Pleasanton through the North Pleasanton Improvement District; and WHEREAS, a report entitled the "Dublin Extended Planning Area Infrastructure Study," dated November 1989, was prepared for the Cities of Dublin and Pleasanton by John H. Heindel, Consulting Civil Engineer ("Heindel Study"); and WHEREAS, the Heindel Study was considered by the City Council at its December 11, 1989, meeting at which time the Council by motion: 1. Acknowledged that Dublin's Eastern Planning Area, when developed, will benefit from the new interchange ~vork being funded by Pleasanton through the North Pleasanton Improvement District (NPID); 2. Accepted the concept of assigning cost sharing on the basis of benefit to the traffic generated on both sides of 1-580; 3. Determined that Dublin's contribution be subject to actual development talcing place north of I-580 and within Dublin; and TIF Resol 2 4. Determined that funding mechanism(s) be established within the Dublin Extended Planning Area; and WHEREAS, on January 31, 1995, the City Coundl reaffirmed its December 11, 1989 motion by Resolution No. 7-95; and WHEREAS, the SP, EIR and Addenda assumed that the 1-580 Interchange Improvements were existing improvements; and WHEREAS, the City Cotmdl adopted a "Mitigation Monitoring Program: Eastern Dublin Specific'Plan/General Plan Amendment" by Resolution No. 53-93 which requires development within Eastern Dublin to pay its proportionate share of certain transportation improvements necessary to mitigate impacts caused by development within Eastern Dublin; and WHEREAS, the SP, EIR and Addenda describe the impacts of contemplated future development on existing public facilities in Eastern Dublin through the year 201 O, and contain an analysis of the need for new public facilities and improvements required by future development ~vithin Eastern Dublin; and WHERF~S, a report was prepared by the Public Works Director of the City of Dublin, in a document dated' December 1995, entitled "Report of Cost Sharing of 1- 580 Interchanges at Hacienda and at Tassajara/Santa Rita Road" (hereafter "Study~'), which is attached hereto as Exhibit B; and WHEREAS, the Study sets forth the relationship between future development in Eastern Dublin, the I-580 Interchange Improvements, and the costs of the 1-580 Interchange Improvements; and WHEREAS, the Study was available for public inspection and revie~v for ten (10) days prior to this public hearing; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds as follows: A. The purpose of the Eastern Dublin 1-580 Interchange Fee (hereafter "Fee") is to reimburse the City of Pleasanton for expenditures previously made for the 1-580 Interchange Improvements, ~vhich improvements have already been constructed TIF Resol ~ and are needed to reduce the traffic-related impac£s which will be caused by future development in Eastern Dublin. The 1-580 Interchange Improvements are improvements to the Hacienda Drive and Tassajara/Santa Rita Road interchanges with Interstate 580 and are hereafter defined and referred to as "Improvements and Facilities". The Improvements and Fadlities are needed to accommodate new development projected within Eastern Dublin along with existing and future development in the City of Pleasanton and other development in the nearby vicinity, including future development in Contra Costa County, and development within Eastern Dublin will pay its fair proportional share of such Improvements and Facilities with the implementation of this Fee. B. The fees collected pursuant to this resolution shall be used to finance the Improvements and Facilities. C. After considering th'e Study, the Agenda Statement, the GPA, the SP, the General Plan, the EIR and Addenda, the Heindel Study, all correspondence received and the testimony received at the noticed public hearing held on January 23, 1996 (hereafter the "record"), the Council approves and adopts the Study and incorporates it herein, and further finds that future development in Eastern Dublin will generate the need for, and will benefit from, the Improvements and Facilities and the Improvements and Facilities are consistent with the GPA, the SP and the City's General Plan. D. The adoption of the Fee does not have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment because the 1-580 Interchange Improvements are already existing improvements. The Council therefore determines that the adoption of the Fee is not an activity which is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act. This determination is made pursuant to CEQA guidelines §§ 15061(b)(2) and (3) and 15273(a)(4) (Title 2, Calif. Code of Regulations) and Public Resources Code § 21080(b)(8)(D). TIF Resol 4 E. The record establishes: 1. That there is a reasonable relationship between the need for the Improvements and Fadlities and the impacts of the types of development for which the corresponding fee is charged in that new development in Eastern Dublin -- both residential and non-residential -- will generate traffic which contributes to the need for, and benefits from, the Improvements and Fadlities; and 2. That there is a reasonable relationship between the Fee's use (to reimburse the City of Pleasanton for the construction of the Improvements and Fadlities) and the type of development for which the Fee is charged in that all development in Eastern Dublin -- both residential and non-residential -- generates or contributes to the need for the Improvements and Facilities; and 3. That there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the Fee and the cost of the Improvements and Fadlities or portion thereof attributable to development in Eastern Dublin in that the Fee is calculated based on the number of trips generated by specific types of land uses, the total amount it cost to construct the Improvements and Facilities, and the percentage by which development within Eastern Dublin contributes to the need for the Improvements and Facilities; and 4. That the costs set forth in the Study are reasonable costs for constructing the Improvements and Facilities, in that they are the actual costs and the Fees expected to be generated by future development will not exceed the costs of constructing the Improvements and Facilities; and 5. The method of allocation of the Fee to a particular development bears a fair and reasonable relationship to each development's burden on, and benefit from, the Improvements and Facilities, in that the Fee is calculated based on the number of automobile trips each particular development will generate. TIFResol ,5 NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Dublin does RESOLVE as follows: 1. Definitions a. "Development" shall mean the construction, alteration or addition of any building or structure within Eastern Dublin. b. "Eastern Dublin" shall mean all property within the "General Plan Amendment Study Area" as shown on the Land Use Map (Exhibit A hereto) excluding the property designated as "Future Study Area/Agriculture." c. "Improvements and Fadlities" shall include the 1-580 Interchange Improvements to the Hacienda Drive and Tassajara/Santa Rita Road interchanges described in the Study. 2. Eastern Dublin 1-580 Interchange Fee Imposed. a. An Eastern Dublin 1-580 Interchange Fee ("Fee") shall be charged and paid for each residential unit constructed within Eastern Dublin no later than the date of final inspection for the unit. b. A Fee shall be charged and paid for non-residential buildings or structures constructed within Eastern Dublin by the date that the building permit is issued for such building or structure, except where the building or structure will require a later stage of discretionary approval by the City before it can be occupied, in which case, with the approval of the Public Works Director, the Fee for that building or structure may be deferred for payment to the date the City makes the last discretionary approval which is required prior to occupancy. 3. Amount of Fee. a. The amount of the Fee shall be as set forth on Exhibit C attached hereto and incorporated herein. 4. Exemptions From Fee. a. The Fee shall not be imposed on any of the following: TIF Rcsol 6 (1) Any alteration or addition to a residential structure, except to the extent that a residential unit is added to a · single family residential unit or another unit is added to an existing multi-family residential unit; (2) Any replacement or reconstruction of an existing residential structure that has been destroyed or demolished provided that the building permit for reconstruction is obtained within one year after the building was destroyed or demolished unless the replacement or reconstruction increases the square footage of the structure fifty percent or more. (3) Any replacement or reconstruction of an existing non- residential structure that has been destroyed or demolished provided that the building permit for new reconstruction is obtained within one year after the building ~vas destroyed or demolished and the reconstructed building would not increase the destroyed or demolished building's trips based on Exhibit C. 5. Use of Fee Revenues. a. The revenues raised by payment of the Fee shall be placed in the Capital Projects Fund. A separate and special account within the Capital Project Fund shall be used to account for such revenues, along with any interest earnings on each account. The revenues (and interest) shall be used for the following purposes: (1) To reimburse the City of Pleasanton for design, engineering, right-of-way acquisition and construction of the Improvements and Facilities and TIF Resol 7 reasonable costs of outside consultant studies related thereto; (2) To pay for and/or reimburse costs of program development and ongoing administration of the Fee program. b. Fees in the account shall be expended only for the Improvements and Facilities and only for the purpose for which the Fee was collected. 6. Miscellaneous a. The standards upon which the needs for the Improvements and Facilities are based are the standards of the City of Dublin, including the standards contained in the General Plan, GPA, SP, EIR, and Addenda. b. The City Council determines that the need for the Improvements and Facilities is generated by new development within Eastern Dublin and other existing and new development in Pleasanton, Contra Cosl~a County and in the vidnity, and therefore, the Study has determined the proportionate share of the cost of the Improvements and Facilities for which development within Eastern Dublin is responsible. 7. Periodic Review. a. During each fiscal year, the City Manager shall prepare a report for the City Council, pursuant to Government Code section 66006, identifying the balance of fees in the account. b. The City Council shall mal~e findings each fiscal year pursuant to Government Code Section 66001 (d) identifying the purpose to which the existing Fee balance is to be put and demonstrating a reasonable relationship between the Fee and the purpose for which it is charged. TIF Resol 8 8. Effective Date. This resolution shall become effective immediately. The Fee provided in Sections 2 and 3 of this resolution shall be effective 60 days from the effective date of the resolution or the date the City enters into an agreement with the City of Pleasanton for transfer of Fee revenues, whichever is later. 9. Severability. Each component of the Fee and all portions of this resolution are severable. Should any individual component of the Fee or other provision of this resolution be adjudged to be invalid and unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall be and continue to be fully effective, and the Fee shall be fully effective except as to that portion that has been judged to be invalid. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 23rd day of January, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers Barnes, Burton, Howard, Moffatt and Mayor Houston NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ATTEST: EHS:rja J :\WPDkMNRSWM 14LRESO LkFREEWAY.RES TIF Resol 9 rr' : LU >- ~ < co 0 ~ ~ <c LLJ rr' I · I I ... ! /. . I[ REPORT OF COST SHARING OF 1-580 INTERCHANGES AT HACIENDA DI~IVE AND AT TASSAJARA/SANTA RITA ROAD (December 1995) Prepared by Lee S. Thompson, City Engineer City of Dublin It is the intention of this study to establish the fair share costs between development within the Cities of Dublin and Pleasanton for the construction of and improvements to interchanges with Interstate 580 at Hacienda Drive and at Tassajara Road/Santa Rita Road. The City of Pleasanton has already purchased right of way and constructed the basic improvements for the two interchanges. Dublin will need to complete the two interchanges as development occurs in Eastern Dublin, as the two interchanges will be needed to serve development in Eastern Dublin and were assumed as existing improvements in the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan EIR (SCH No. 91103064, page 3.3-1). Funding for the interchange completions is already included in the existing Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee (Resolution No. 95-1). Dublin proposes to establish and levy an Eastern Dublin 1-580 Interchange Fee for the purpose of repaying Pleasanton for the amount of money over and above Pleasanton's "fair share" costs of the total interchanges that Pleasanton has advanced based on the relative projected traffic from and to each jurisdiction at the two interchanges in the Year 2010. The property owners in Eastern Dublin should not pay Pleasanton interest on the "advanced money" inasmuch as Pleasanton has the benefit of the exclusive ~--"se of the interchanges until the Dublin development comes on line. Following is the calculation for establishing reimbursement due Pleasanton from property owners in Eastern Dublin of $7,384,000: Assumptions 1) Cost split based on all of Dublin traffic vs. all of Pleasanton traffic using the interchanges. (Note that the bulk of traffic using the two interchanges will be from Eastern Dublin and Eastern Pleasanton and the interchanges are required for the level of development approved by the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan.) 2) Dublin and Pleasanton to pay 100% of costs based on their relative share of the traffic using the interchanges. 3) Traffic split is based on TJKM analysis of the Barton-Aschman Tr;- Valley traffic model run for the Year 2010 (attached). 4) Pleasanton's costs for constructing the interchanges (based on Pleasanton cost breakdown): Hacienda Interchange: $18,716,000 TassajareJSanta Rita Interchange: 9,846,000 Total: $28,562,000 5) Dublin's future costs to complete interchanges already included in the Eastern Dublin Traffic hnpact Fee Resolution 95-1 is $9,656,000. 6) Total project cost is therefore $38,218,000 Page 1 EXHIBIT B OF RESOLUTION From TJKM analysis: Pleasanton's share of total traffic using the Hacienda Drive interchange Dublin's share of total traffic using the Hacienda Drive interchange Other jurisdictions' traffic Total: Therefore, with the assumption that 100% of the cost is split between owners of property in the two jurisdictions, the cost split for the Hacienda Drive interchange calculates to be: Pleasanton Dublin 46% 36% 18% 100% 56.1% 43.9% 100.0% Pleasanton's share of total traffic using the Tassajara/Santa Rita interchange Dublin share of the total traffic using the Tassajara/Santa Rita interchange Other jurisdictions' traffic Total: Therefore, with the assumption that 100% of the cost is split between the two jurisdictions, the cost split for the TassajaraJSanta Rita Road interchange calculates to be: Pleasanton Dublin The cost obligations are then as follows: Hacienda Interchange: TassajaraJSanta Rita Rd. Interchange Pleasanton Obligation $12,775,000 $8,403,000 Total: $21,178,000 Reimbursement due Pleasanton: Pleasanton Advance: less Pleasanton Obligation: Reimbursement due Pleasanton from property owners in Eastern Dublin: (56.1%) (54.4%) Dublin Obligation $9,997,00O $7,043~000 $17,040,000 (43.9%) (45.6%) $28,562,000 f$21,178,000) _$7,384,01)0 43% 36% 21% 100% 54.4% 45 5% 100.0% Total Interchange Cost $22,772,000 $15,446,000 $38,218,000 Page 2 The fee will then be based on dividing the expected number of trips generated by the Eastern Dublin ~'-'~evelopment (344,078) into the total monies to be generated ($7,384,000) to obtain the fee per trip. The 344,078 trips estimated is generated from the Eastern Dublin General Plan/Specific Plan study of 346,525, modified slightly downward by redefining the density tiers for residential development from two levels to four levels and the resulting refinement of the traffic generated at these density levels. The calculation is then: $7,384.000 344,078 trips $21.46 per trip For residential units, the fee would be: Residential Category Low density (up to 6 units / acre) Medium density (over 6 to 14 units / acre) Medium high density (over 14 to 25 units/acre) High density (over 25 units / acre) Non-residential uses (based on trip generation schedule) *Trips Per Unit Fee Per Unit 10 $214.60 10 $214.60 7 $150.22 6 $128.76 $21.46 per trip * TRIPS PER UNIT - These trip generation factors were developed by the City's Traffic Consultant, TJKM, using the Institute of Traffic Engineers case studies. Page 3 Transportation Consultants April 12, 1995 The charts below illustrate the source of traffic, by percent, using each of four 1-580 interchanges: 1) Hopyard Road/Dougherty Road; 2) Hacienda Drive; 3) Tassajara Road/Santa Rita Road, and 4) Fallon Road/E1 Charro Road in 2010 according to the Tri-Valley Transportation Model. In the first chart, the mount of traffic to/from each of nine Tri-Valley areas using each of the four interchanges is shown. In the second chart, only the traffic to/from Pleasantonand East Dublin is considered. Dougherty lassajara Valley Valley ReasantonN.Uvermcxe Livermore E.Dublin Dublin San Ramon DanvflleJ I 42% 3% 10% 7% 26% 6% 1% 3% 43% 5% 11% 33% 3% , 1% 3% 1% 21% 7% 23% 38% 2% 5% 1% 1% l%J Total la0% 10C~ 157-066 PAGE 4 4637 Chabot Drive. Suite 214, Pleasanton, California 94588-2754. (5t0) 463-0611. Fax (510) 463-3690 Pleasanton . Sacramento . Fresno . Santa Rosa CITY OF DUBLIN FUNCTIONAL FILING SYSTEM GUIDE 400 - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (Continued) 440- INSPECTION SERVICES - 10 Administration - 20 Regulations/Fees - 30 Contract Services (I_P~A) - 40 Code Enforcement - 50 Permits 450 - ZONING - 10 Administration - 20 - 30 - 40 - 50 - 60 - 70 - $0 Policy/Regulations/Zoning Code Amendments Rezoning Case Files Variances Use Permits code Enforcement Home Occupation Permits Zoning conformance Review 460 - REDEVELOPMENT - 10 Administration - 20 Policy/Regulations - 30 Redevelopment Agency 470 - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - 10 Administration - 20 Policy/Regulations/Procedures - 30 Grant Applications/Reports - 40 Master Plans - 50 special Programs (Business Task Force) - 60 Business Closings 480 - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PGM - 10 Administration - 20 Policy/Regulations/Procedures - 30 Applications/Program Reports Rev 10/95 500 CITY OF DUBLIN FUNCTIONAL FILING SYSTEM GUIDE 500 - HEALTH, SAFETY & WELFARE - ANIMAL CONTROL - 10 Administration - 2O - 30 - 40 - 50 - 60 - 70 - 80 Regulations/Fees Contract Services Code Enforcement Disease Prevention licenses/Permits Reports/Statistics Shelter 510 - CONSUMER AFFAIRS - 10 Administration '- 20 Complaints/Investigations - 30 Regulatory/Advisory Groups 515 - EDUCATION - 10 Administration - 20 School District - 30 Public Schools - 40 Private Schools - 50 Colleges/Universities - 60 Special Education Programs 520 - -10 - 20 - 30 - 40 - 50 - 60 ~ 70 EMERGENCY SERVICES Administration Communications (911) Disaster Preparedness Plan~Planning Assistance Programs (Homeless) Mutual Aid Programs Advisory Groups Emergency Medical Services 530- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION - 10 Administration - 20 City Beautification/Property Maintenance - 30 Bay/Estuaries/Delta - 35 Noise Pollution - 40 Open Space - 50 Air Quality - 60 Ridgeline Protection ~ 70 Agricultural Preserves Rev 10/95 1-580 INTERCHANGE FEE FOR EASTERN DUBLIN GENERAL PLAN AREA Low Density Residential (0 to 6 units per acre) Medium Density Residential (over 6 to 14 units per acre) Medium High Density Residential (over 14 to 25 units per acre) High Density Residential (over 25 units per acre) Development Other Than Residential: $214.60 per unit $214.60 per unit $150.22 per unit $128.76 per unit $21.461trip (Based on the following table) LAND USE (Non -Residential) HOTEL/MOTEL OR OTHER LODGING: OFFICE: Standard Commercial Office Medical/Dental RECREATION: ESTIMATED WEEKDAY VEHICLE TRIP GENERATION RATE* (WITH PASS-BYS) 10/room 20/1,000 sf 34/1,000 sf Recreation Community Center 26/1,000 sf Health Club 40/1,000 sf Bowling Center 33/1,000 sf Golf Course 8/acre Tennis Courts 33/court Theaters Movie 220/screen Live 0.2/seat Video Arcade 96/1,000 sf EDUCATION (Private Schools): HOSPITAL: 1.5/student General 12/bed Convalescent/Nursing 3/bed Clinic 24/1,000 sf CHURCH: 9/1,000 sf INDUSTRIAL: Industrial (with retail) Industrial (without retail) 16/1,000 sf 8/1,000 sf * Source of information for Trip Generation Rates: Based on Institute of Transportation Engineers and San Diego Assoc. Government Trip Generation Rates. These trip generation rates are based on averages. Retail commercial has been given a 35% pass-by reduction. Page I of 2 EXHIBIT "C" OF RESOLUTION TRIP GENERATION RAT:ES LAND USE (Non-Residential) RESTAURANT: Quality (leisure) Sit-down, high turnover (usually chain Other than fast food) Fast Food (with or without drive through) Bar/Tavern AUTOMOBILE: Car Wash Automatic Self-Serve Gas Station with or without food mart Tire Store/Oil Change Store Auto Sales/P&rts Store Auto Repair Center Truck Terminal FINANCIAL: Bank (Walk-In Only) Savings and Loan (Walk-In Only) Drive-Through/ATM (Add to Bank or Savings & Loan) COMMERCIAL/RETAIL: Super Regional Shopping Center (More than 600,000 SF; usually more than 60 acres, with usuaIly 3+ major stores) Regional Shopping Center (300,000 - 600,000 SF; usually 30 - 60 acres, w/usually 2+ major stores) Community or Neighborhood Shopping Center (Less than 300,000 sf; less than 30 acres w/usually I major store or grocery store and detached restaurant and/or drug store) Commercial Shops Retail/Strip Commercial Commercial with unknown tenant Supermarket Convenience Market Discount Store Lumber Store/Building Materials Garden Nursery Cemetery Page 2 of 2 g:Vorms~trfees, xls ESTIMATED WEEKDAY VEHICLE TRIP GENERATION RATE (WITH PASS-BYS) 63/1,000 sf 133/1,000 sf 511/1,000 sf 100/1,000 sf 585/site 70/wash stall 97/pump 28/service bay (no pass-bys) 48/1,000 sf (no pass-bys) 20/1,000 sf (no pass-bys) 80/acre 91/1,000 sf 40/1,000 sf 65/lane or machine 22/1,000 sf 33/1,000 sf 46/1,000 sf 26/1,000 sf 33/1,000 sf 98/1,000 sf 325/1,000 sf 46/1,000 sf 20/1,000 sf 23/1,000 sf (no pass-bys) 4/acre EXHIBIT "C" OF RESOLUTION TRIP GENERATION RATES