HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 6.5 TriVly Trans Dev FeeCITY CLERK FILE # 390-20
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL .MEETING DATE: October 19, 1999
SUBJECT:
Public Hearing: Amendment to the Tri-Valley
Transportation Development Fee
Report Prepared by: Lee S: Thompson, Public Works Director
ATTACHMENTS:
l)
2)
3)
Proposed Resolution amending the Tri-Valley Transportation
Development Fee
Resolution No. 89-98 establishing Tri-Valley Transportation
Development Fee within the City of Dublin
Resolution No. 85-99 amending Tri-Valley Transportation
Development Fee Resolution
RECOMMENDATION:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Open public heating
Receive Staff Report and public comment
Close public hearing
Deliberate
Adopt Resolution amending Tri-Valley Transportation
Development Fee (Attachment 3)
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
This amendment will reduce the Tri-Valley Transportation
Development Fee for projects that do not fall into the five standard
use categories.
DESCRIPTION: On May 5, 1998, the City Council approved the Joint Exercise
of Powers Agreement for the Tri-Valley Transportation Development Fee (TVTD Fee). The Council
adopted Resolution 89-98 (Attachment 2) establishing thi TVTD Fee on June 16, 1998. The purpose of
the TVTD Fee is to finance transportation improvement projects needed to reduce traffic-related impacts
caused by future development in the Tri-Valley area, including Dublin. The TVTD Fee will be used to
partially finance eleven projects. The TVTD Fee became effective on September 6, 1998.
The City Council, on May 4, 1999, also approved Resolution 85-99 (Attachment 3) amending the
effective date of annual adjustments of the fees and clarifying Section 4(g) of Resolution 89-98 regarding
fee exemptions.
COPIES TO: BIA
ITEM NO. ~ ~
g: lagenm isc lamendtvtd~ O-I 9-99. doc
The Tri-Valley Transportation Council (TVTC) met in August of 1999 and discussed the item brought up ~'
by the Tri-Valley Technical Advisory Committee regarding the TVTD Fee for ,'Other Uses/Altemative
Rate" category. It was determined that the $1,525 fee per trip rate for the "Other Uses/Alternative Rate"
category of the TVTD Fee Program is significantly higher than the similar trip rates for "Retail", "
"Office", and "Industrial/Warehouse" categories. The TVTC approved a rate of $610 per trip rate for
"Other Uses/Alternative Rate" to make it more equitable and is requesting all seven jurisdictions of the
TVTC to amend their TVTD Fee resolutions.
Staff reviewed the proposed fee amendment and concurs that the current fee rate of $1,525 per trip rate
for "Other Uses/Altemative Rate" is significantly higher than similar trip rates for other categories such as
"Retail", "Office", and "Industrial/Warehouse',. The proposed reduction of the fee from $1,525 to $610
per trip rate for "Other Uses/Alternative Rate" will make it more equitable to the fee rates of the other
categories.
Staff recommends that, following the public hea[.ing, the City Council adopt the proposed resolution
amending the Tri-Valley Trar~sp.o. rtation Development Fee to revise the fee rate for "Other Uses/
Alternative Rate" to $6 10FAM/PM Average Peak Hour Trip.
Page 2
RESOLUTION NO. - 99
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
REVISING THE RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE
TRI-VALLEY TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT FEES
RECITALS
WHEREAS, in June 1998, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 89-98 imposing a Tri~Valley
Development Fee (TVTD Fee);
WHEREAS, all Tri-Valley jurisdictions, including the City of Dublin, have resolved to
cooperatively participate and adopt uniform TVTD Fee Rates, and
WHEREAS, the Tri-Valley jurisdictions agree that the nexus between a developments regional
traffic impacts and the rate must be substantially equal, and
WHEREAS, a review of the $1,525 per trip rate for the "Other Uses/Alternative Rate" was
determined by the Tri~Valley Transportation Council to be significantly higher than the similar trip rate
for "Retail", "Office", and "Industrial/Warehouse" land uses, and
WHEREAS, a fee of $610 per trip rate was determined to be equitable.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Dublin that:
Section 1. Attachment D of Resolution No. 89-98 is hereby amended as follows:
Land Use Type Fee
Single Family Residential $1,525
Multi-Family Residential $1,068
Office $1.02
Retail $ 1.02
Industrial/Warehouse $ 0.76
Other Uses/Alternative Rate $610
Per Unit
Dwelling Unit
Dwelling Unit
Square Foot of Gross Floor Area
Square Foot of Gross Floor Area
Square Foot of Gross Floor Area
Average AM/PM Peak Hour Trip*
*Peak-Hour trips will be determined from the latest revision to the Institute. of Transportation
Engineers' Trip Generation Manual or other rate schedule as agreed to by the TVTC.
Notwithstanding the foregoing an applicant for a Land Use Entitlement who is dissatisfied with
the number of peak-hour trips, as calculated by the Public Works Director, may appeal the
determination to the Council. If such an appeal is granted by the Council, and the Council adjusts
the number of peak-hour trips, the City shall have such decision ratified by five members of the
TVTC. Absent such ratification, the full amount of the fee must be paid by the applicant.
Section 2. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and adoption.
The revised rate shall be effective on November 1, 1999 provided that a similar amendment is
adopted by the other member jurisdictions of the Tri-Valley Transportation Council.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of October, t 999, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
Mayor
City Clerk
g: ~agenm isc~reso trans Jke. doc
RESOLUTION NO. 39 - 98
A RESOLUTION OF ~ CITY COU'NC~
OF Tn'E CiTY OF DUBLIN
EST,~LBI I~G A ~-IL~LLEY ~SPORTA~ON DE~ZLO~h~ ~E
FOR ~~
V, rI-Tk'RI~S, Chapter 7.g2 ofth~ DffDrm Midpal Code creoles and er~b~shes
authority for imposing and charging tmr_~o~on impact fees; and
the Ciry's General Plan outlines fm~.n-e t~d uses ~?~ ~e CiD' ~d ~
~~_AS: the Ea~em Dubtin SpeSnSc Plan ("SP") provides more ~ecL~c detailed
~o~s, poii~e.s and amjon pro_m-Eros for appro~msle]y 33 13 acres w~jn~n the CiTj.-, and
V~HEE,EAS, rue Gcnm-aI Man, the SP, ~c Ea~ Dnb~ Em~-omcn~ ~Daa Kcpon
(SCH ~91103 6~) md Add~da despot ~c ~ccway, ~ecway h~crSnm~e md road
kDrov~ ncccss~ for ~Dlcmm~on of~c ~c~ PIm =d ~ SP; ad
~rI'qEREAS, the "Tri-Val/ey Transporafion Council" ('qTVTC') cons;_c~ of one
re.orescntzL~vc of each of the following enijffes: CounD, of_flame,do, CouniJ of Corm Cot4 Ci~
of Du'Dtin, City of Lived.more, City of Plcsanton, City of San Ramon and Town of Danville; and
W'EER_i~i,S, a r~oon was prepared for the TVI'C by Bmon=~cE Jzsodaes hc.,h
a docmc~ ~ed 5~y 1995 ended "T~-V~cy T~or~on Pl~A~on Pi~ for Rouz~s of
K~on~ S]~cmce" ~rc~cr 'T]~"), ~sh is ~so~orat~d bcr~ s A~chmcnt _~ md
~ri-~'-~"KEAS,-a second report was prepared for the TVTC and Dowrmg Assosisles by CCS
P3~nn~g and E~-~e~_., inc. -in a document dated December 6, 1996 en!jtted '7ri-Va!ley
Combined Stndy/Tcchnica! Rcporic. Stares and Funding ofi-~ff~ Priorivy Projes'rf' (hereafi~
"Study'D, w:nish is inco~oraed h~ein as At-*,achment B: and
V~x~.%WRZ~q, the Study includes a 13-pzge report entitled 'Tri-Vsltey lKe~onal
Tr-~sp. or.~.~on improvemere Fee Pro=~-am/Ne~ts ~Inat),sYs" prepared by Cambridge
inz.; and
V~~AS, the Plan and Study deszfibe the knpas-,s of comemptmied future dcvc]opmcm
on c~E p~Sc ~c~cs h ~c T~YV~cy Dcvdopmcm _~-c~ ~ch hzludes thc hzo~oracd
~d nn~nco~o~cd po~a~ Of_~e~ Co~ ~d Corn Corm Co~ on is m~D.~ncd
h~o ~ A~dmsf C ~d ~fish ~c]udes D~D~ i-ou~ ~ yem- 2010, md con~ ~
t3,~s of to n~d for new pff~c ~c~des ~d ~provcm~s rsq~ed by i~-e dsvelopmsnl
~jn~ ie Tfi-V~sy Dcvclopm~t ~-sa, ~slud~g Dnbii~j md
V~~.AS, fie County of Ahmeda, County of Contra Cos'~ City of Dublb, City of
Livermore, City of Pleasantoa, City of San Ramon and Town of Danvi//e are parties ~o an
_a~cement entitled "Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement Pertaiig to Tri-Valley Transportation
Development Fees for T~c Ivfrdgation," dated A4~n] 9_29, I998 CJPA"); and
~-]EREAS, the California Department of Transporta~on/Catifomia Transporta,lon
Commission approved a Negative Declaration (SCH~ 96042087) on September 19, 1996 for the
1-580/680 Interchange Project C580/680 tnterchsmge Negative Decimation'D; and
WER!&S, the Plan and Study 's~ forth the relationship between future developmem in
Dubiir4 the needed improvements and hies, and the estima!ed c~sts of those improv~-ments
and hc:fiifies; and ;'
V~I-IKE,~S, the Plan and Study were available for public inspection and revL-~v for ten
(]0) days prior to this public hemin:g; and
WI--TiP-REAS, the City Cotmoil finds as follows:
The purpose of the TS-Valley T~n-~ortation Development Fee Cser~er "B,~
Fee") ~ to ~ce T~o~on ~rovemem Proje~ n~ded to reduce ~e ~c-re!aed
~pa~ c~d by ~s d~e]opm~ ~ ~e T~-V~ey D~v~lopm~ _e~ ~du~i~g ~bli~
~r~ ~e exs~on of'~p M~g" ~j(n is not a Tr~n?or~on ~provement ?roje~ ~e
T~po~on ~mprov~mcnl Proj~ ~e ~cd ite PI~ i T~le 8-3 ~d co~ oft~
foHo~ng ct~ (11) projc~ w~ch ~e here~er deicd md ref~e~ 1o ~
so~bo~ P680 t~e~bomd P5E0 ~yov~ md ~so~ed -
~Drovm~ (not to exc~d S5,548,300)
l~,nprovcmcnts to State Rome 84 between 1-580 and 1-680
3. Am-a2iary lanes along 1-680 @ore Diablo Road to. Bolti~Zcr
Canyon Road
4. West Dublin/Plea~--rntcrn BART Sty,ion
5. t-580 HOV lanes b~zw__~n Santa Kits Road and Gre~vilte Road
6. 1-680 ItOV tan~ from_ the Stab Route 84/I-680 intm-dn~mge to
the top of the SunoI C_rade
7. tmprov_~nsn+.s to the I-S80/Foo,hill Road/San l~mon Boulevard.
inter~nan~_e
g- tzaprovcmen+,s to t-680/A3c-os'm Boulevard interchange
Crow Canyon React safety ~rnprovement wes~ of BolT~n_~er
CEnyon Road
] 0. Vasco Road szfe~ improvemen~ north ofI-Sg0 w~t]~n A]azn~da
County
I 1. Exlmress bus s~rdce in the T~-Va!Iey area
The Tr~.spor',~-~on Improvement Projects are all necessm7 to accommodate new development
projected within the Tri -VaI]ey Development .Area by the year 20 ] 0, including development
within
B. The fees collected pursuant to this resolution shall be used to finance the
T~'anspor'~on ImprovemLmt Projects.
C. .After considering the P]m4 the Study, the A-~i, enda Statemen,., the Oen~a] Plan,. the
SP, the 580/680 interchange Negm-~ve Declaration, v/1 correspondence received and lhe ~es~jmony
received at .the noticed public heaxing hdd on june ] 6, ]9Pg Cnereafter the "resort"), the Counc{7
approves and atiopts the Plan and Study and ingorporates ~em herein, and fi-r'~er finds that
i~u-e deyelopment in i)ubtin ~itl generae the n~d for ~e Tmp-~porta~on Improvement Projects
and the Traaspo~,ion Improvement Proj~as are consis~en~ with the Ciry's Oener~ Plan and the
SP.
D. For the purposes of CBQA, the Council finds t the adoption of the TVTD Fee
is not a '=project" under section 15378, subdivi~on Cv)(5) of the CEQA Guide'fines. ~rnile the
?VID F~'~e is intended to offs~ development impaces on re~onaI tr~c fadtkies by ~_nding
improvem-~n+-s ~o those fa~n:ies, the proceeds of the TVTD Fe.e are not, a this ine, being
comm~ed ~to any spe,.dfic proje~ ~,/nich '~may resuit in a poicndalty s]~o'nificant physical imvact on
the enviro~,-nent," and, with one exertion, it is not lmown at its r~-_gc ~;nich re_zionaI wz,~c
~urovem-~a~ ~ be funded with such proceeds. The only improvement for x~;nich the proceeds
of the TV'fD. F~ are being committed is the improvement of the I-5g0/I-6S0 hterchange, for
v-~ni~'n th~ C~]~ornia Dcpm'nnenl of Transpor'~j on/Californiz Tr~-~-Tormiion Commission
approved a Negaive Deslarazion (SCH~ 9604.20g7) on September 29, 1996. Because a negative
decimation ~.~-~ been adopted for this projc~ h cannot be said that the inierchange improvement
"may resuk in a poI~alty si=o~,ficant physical impact on the environment." In any event,
purs'uant to section 25096, subdivision (O, ~b*s Council has reviewed said negajvc dedara~on,
and the cnvL-ozLm~ml effects idenfa]ed in said negative declaration. Pursualrt tO semen 15096,
subdivision (g)(2), the Counc~ finds fact none of the mitigation measures iden~ed in said
negative dczlarmion are witB~ the jmisdiction of the Cry of Dub~in
E. The rscord es~a%iis'ne~: ,'
1. The fnere is a re2.sonable rela~ionshiD between fee need for the
Y~p-~o~on Improvem..-~at Project~ ~d ~e impa~ of~e ~es of developm~m for ~;~h ~e
co~e~on~ fee is charged ~ '~al new dcve]opmenl ~ ~e C~' of~b~ - bo'~ re~dend~ ~d
non~e~d~ - ~ gen~e ~ .~ ~fich aenen~es or scribbles ~o ~e n~ed for ~e
T~or~on ~rovement Proices; ~d
2. That there is a reasonable re]ajonsbjp between the TV]D Fee's use (to pay
for the conmruc~on of the Transportation Improvemen~ Projects) and the type of deve]opment for
which the TWID Fee is charged in thai alI development in Dubfro - both residential and non-
resid~ntiaI -- gengr-ales or conm'butes 1o the need for the Transportation Improvemere Projects;
and
3. Thai the cost esinaies set fomh in the PIan and Study are reasonabie cost
estimates for sonsma~g the Transporta~on Improvement Projects, and the TVTD Fees
expected to bg genoated by future deveiopm_-n~ will no1 exceed the projected costs of
cons-m~g the Transport~on Irnpfovement Projects; and
4. The method ofallocadon of the TVTD F~ ~o a particular development
· bears a fair and teachable relationship to each d=velopment's burden ore and bene~it from, the
Transpor~-,~on Trnprovement Projects to be funded by the TWiD Fee, in thai the TVTD Fee is
cal guhted based on the number of automobqe trips each pm'-fimjar developmeni will generaze.
NOW TICgREFORE, the City Council of the City of Dublin does RESOL~/E as foltows:
I. D~n*dons
m "Crfoss Floor A:ea" refers to The sum of the area ai each floor level,
including but not tknked to, cellars, basements, mezzanines, penthouses,
corridors, lobbies, stores, and o~ces, thai are included ~&h~n the principal
outside faces of exterior walls, not indurlir~g archkecmM setbacks or
proje~qions. Included are all stories or areas thai have floor sm-faals v~
dear r~qnding hem room (six f~ six inches mindre,m) regardless ofthek
use. ~rhare a _ground level area, or part th=eo~ wPrh~n the pri~n~cipal
oreside faces of the exterior walls is left unenclosed, the gross area of the
unenc]osed portion iEio be cons~d~d as a part of the overall square
footsee of the building. All unroofed areas and unena]osed roofed-over
spaces, excerpt as defined above, are to be excluded from ar~ calculations.
The ~oss area of any parldng garages within the building shall nol be
included withlm the ~m-osS arm of the entire buiM~nZ_
b. "Industrial" rjers to d=vetopm_~ats for the purpose ofms_nufastnare
or fabfigation ofprodusts,. the proc,~.ssing of materials, the warehousing of
merchandise for sale or dastn%trfion, rcs-amch and dev"aopmmut of indtst~al
products and processes, and the wholesaling of merchandise.
c, "Land Use Entitlement" me~,= a permit or approval _granted for a
development project as That im-zn is ctcined in Govmmment Code §66000.
d. "Multi Fsm~Dy Residential" refers to bm]d~gs or parts fn~eof
designed and used exclusively as a dwclting ~mit among oth~ 'dwelling
units, eith~ on the same parc~ (e.g, aparnn-~uts and mobile home parks)
or und~ separate ownership (e.g., ceondomininms, townhomes, duplexes,
or duets).
4
e. "O~ce" refers to deve]opmenls for the pu~ose ofhousing non-
cornmercia~ non-manufacaning businesses.
£ "C~er Uses" refers to land use categories not implicitly included
within the land use categories of "Sin~e F~mily Residential", '~vluki Family
Residential", "Retai/", "Ofice", or "industrial", and for which alternative
rates can be found in the Institute of_Trnm'~orZafion Endricers Irip
Gensran'onMarrud or in a list of peak-hour Irip ra~es that the Tri-Va!ley
Transportation Council has ex3Dlici'jy zpproved.
g. "Retail" refers to developments for the propose of ~e re'-,~il sate
ofm~chandise and s~dces.
h_ "SinMe Fam~y Resid~-mtia/" refers to detached buildings designed
for ocSupation as the residence of one fami/y.
i. "Subsilzed Housing Deve]opm=nf' refers to housing faciii,~es
developed by pubic ~des, limit~ ~d~d ho~g ~ar~ons, or
non-profit ~o~o~, ~d m~in~i~d excl~iv~ly for p~o~ or
fd~s ofv~ 1o~ low or moa~ ~me, ~ deiea ~ Sec~on
50093 ofte He~i ~d Sf~ ~as.
(l) Trnprcrv_~m~sts to fne 1-580/I~680 inter(hinges: con~-nmct a
soulbound 1-680 to earZDomd !-580 ftyov~ ~nd asso~iect
improv,~nsnts (not to excee~ S5,548,300)
(2) improv~znsn+.s to S'-~_te*~ Rome 84 b~esn !-580 and !-680
(3) _A_~--y bmes along 1-680 from Diab]o Roa~ to
Bo]]i~, t.~r' Canyon Road
(4) West Dub]in/P/easzmion BiT Station
(5) t-580 i-iOV lanes b_~-,_~e_~n Santa Rite Road ~nd
Gre~.;42.1e Road
(6) !-680 HOV lanes from ts State Rome 84/!_-680
i,-ni.~r~nzmge to the Iop offne Snno! Grade
(7) ~,:nprov_~mem. s io fne 2[-5 8O/Foo.+hi]] Road/S~m R ~mon
Bon]~'. '-~d intochange
(s)
~mpmvcmcn~ ~o 1-680/~oor~ Boulc~r~ interchange
(9) Crow Canyon toad safety improvemini west of Boltinger
Canyon toad
(l O) Vasco Road safety ~mprovcmcnis nor'Ja ofI-SSO wi~Y~{n
AImneda County
(] 1) Express bus s~ce in the Tfi-Valt~ sea
'7rcasurc~' refers to the l=mancc DL-ccior of the city or county
desi_znzted by the TVTC to act as wczsurer pm~aan/to the JPA.
I. "Tri-Vallcy DcvMopmcnt Area" rcfm~ m zhc inco~orateci and
tminco~orated portions of AtameAa County and Conwa Corm Co,an~
sho~m on the map attached as Attachment C.'
9
Fee imposed.
m A Tri-Valtey Trznspo~a~ion Developmeni F~ CTVTD Fee") shall be
chm-_ged and p~jd for each Land Use Entitlement _m-anted for each ELude Fza~y Residentaft unit
and ~c'n Multi Fzm~y Residential Unii wig~ DffoEn by the daIe thai ~e bm]din~ p~mil is issued
for any such residential btu]~i~g or mmcUn-c.
b. A TV'fD Fee shsN be charged and paid for ~ch Land Use Enti'fi-~mcn/
_m-znled for hdu~-ial, Cr~ce, Rctz~ and Other Uses w?vh~ Dubiin by the daic thai ~ae buij ding
oermil is lsmed for any building or suucmrs whirl fizs wi~,b~ the defiffn~on ofindusn~a!,
Re+~jI or C~i~ Uses.
Axnount of TVTD Fee.
a_ Tnc amount of the Tv'fI) Fee shall be as set forfin on Aliachment D
attached hez~o and incorpor~ed hcrcin.
ExemPtions Prom T'v'ID Fee.
The TVYD i~ee shall noi be ~nposcd on my of the following:
a_ Any ah_~zazion or addiZion io a residential sumcture, except to the cx-teni
Tha~ a residcnfia! ~mk is added ~o a sin~e family residential ~mk or another ~mk is added 1o an
cx~s'fing mui.~-f~mi]y residcnfiaI unk.
b. .~my rcplacem~-mt or reconstruction of an cxir~ng residenfizd su-u~are ihal ·
has b~.n des-~oyed or dmoiished provided Iinat the braiding permit for reconmmcfion is obtained
~x~thiu one year after the braiding was destroyed or aleroD'fished ~ml~s The replacement or
rszorsu-nc-dOn increases the square foomge of the su-uctm-e fLt~'y pemcnt or more.
c. ,Any replac~emcat or reconsn-uction of an ex~s-ffng non-residential snmctn.tr~
tha has been des-~oyed or dcmolishcd provided tha the building p~nit for new resorra-ucfion is
obfainod v~h~n on~ year m~er the buEding was des*a-oyed or demolished and the recons~-ucted
building would not increase the destroy~ or demolished bm]a~n~'s f~ based on Attachment D.
Pubi~c s~hools,
e. Sub~dized Housing D~velopments.
GovernrnLmtal buj]dings owaed by any pubYj~ en~' unless a developm~m
agreement provides for pa~nt of ~e B~ F~ for a gov~ent~ b~.
~ Development projecis which are sffOj~ci to a d~vdoDmen/am-cement
adopted mff~ J~u~ 1, 1998.
h~c~cs ~ s~c feeble of ~provc~ O~cc); (~) cxt~on oft~ of dcvc]opmcni
T~']'D F~ Ad~us'n-ngnts.
m The TVTi) F~ shall be adjusted au~oma~cslty cash Ma~ch l by fine
increase or dca~_sc in the Endue%m-Lug News-Record Consu~c~on Cosi index for flue San
Frsmdsso Bay _~-ca for ~he period ~nding Desemb~ B 1 of fine pressfling salenda~ yek.
b. In addition to fluc mrff~ma~c adjusmmt ofsubsc~on (a) above, fluc CiD'
may mend ~jzis resokrfion to sdjust the T~/YI) Fec to rc~e~--I revisions in flue Trarsponation
T~provemem Projess, kneeaces in land values over fluc ~afionm-y ina~c~c or o~cr fa~ors.
6. Use of T~vTD Fee Revenues.
s_ The TVTD Fees snail be placed in flue Czpkal Project Fund. Sepm-ae and
~.-?edal acsoL~wr.~ v~f/n~ flue Cz,~al Projecl Fund shall be used 1o accounl for s~ch revenues, along
wifu auy int_.~-es-t em-n~gs on cadn account
· b. W]tB~n 3 0 days of the end ofeadn qt:znsr, flue Finance Direaor shall
n-zu~mit not less rum 80% of alI rV'i'D F~s colje~ed dm-ing the quarter, and any intereK~ or
:roseroe g_~n_~--Ensd on such g0% amoun% to flue Tr~nsurcr, s]ong ~ a rmiem~nl setting forth flus
Tr~n~o~on Inaprovement IVoje~--t flusI ~c C~ ~tcn~ io ~d ~ ~e rc~ed po~on of~c
d. The TVTD F~'~,s (and interest or income _generated on sash fee revenues)
shall b~ used for the following purposes:
O)
To pay for desi~, gs~nemin~ rif__hi-of-way acquisition and
com~truction ofthe Transportafon Improvgm~t Projects;
(2)
To satisfy the City's obligatbn to the .4j~meda County
Trzn~port~on Authority C.~CT,&") pursuant to Lhe 'Loam
Match A=creement'' betwere fie Cky and ACYA for funding for
the I-agO/agO interchange projezt (s~ Sealion 7 of the tiPA);
(3)
To reimburse Dublin or any of the pardes to the ffPA for
conre'buttons to ACTA for the I-SS0/6S0 tnt~ahange Project
made prior to Septt~mber 1, 1998 if such contn'butions qualify for
rs4mbursdm~-nt pursuant to Sesfon 7(d) of the
To rehnbursc Dmbrm or any of the pro-des to the IPA for
conmira'dons to ACTA for the I-S g0/6g0 htcrchangc Projcal
made on or after Septb:n:ffD:- !, 199g ifFach conm]~utions qu~j~T-y
for rehnbnrsement pursuant to Section 7(c) of the 7P,4~
To reknburse developers v~no have consroasted alI or a portion of
any of the Transpo,-iation Improvement Projec~ if such
r~;Enbursm~nt qvsl~fies for rjmbursmen/pursuant to Sca-~on 7
of this resolution and Section 15 of the/PA4 '~
(s)
To pay for and/or rcimbmrsc costs ofpro_~m development and
on_aoing adm~n;-stralion of the iVII) Fcc pro_m-am.
7. Credit ofR. eimbursemLmt for Dsvs]oD~-Cor_~-m-uctsd ProieL!s.
A dsve]op~ may be entitled to credii m~ffainst the TVTD F~ or to reimbursemere
Z-ore TVTD iFc~_s if is developer ~onstmcts all or a portion of one of the Transp. orm~on
J-,,-mrovmem t~rojs~s. Cr~dil or reimbursemint snail be provided in the m~nncr s~ forth in
Samion 15 of rue .TP,4~ provided fnaI fie City Mana=~ h~_~ approvcd fie construction by the
developer of aII or a portion of the Transportation hprovsmsni Proje~.
s_ The standards upon which tlns nscds for the Transpomfion Improvement
Projs~.s are bssd are the standre-de of foe panics to the JPA, -,he State Dsparunsnt of
Yxmsparm~on (Caln'~us) and the Bay _Area Rapid Transit Dismist.
b. i'he Cotmc~ deterre{nee That The need for The Tr~spor~adon improvement
Projects is _aen~_raled by new deve]oprnent within Dub]in and within olherjurisdict]ons in the Tri-
VaI]ey Development Area; therefore, The Plan and Study have aleterm{ned the proportionate share
of The cost of the TransportaTion Improvement Projects for which development within Dublin is
· respop_~'b]e.
9. PeriodSc Re~4ew.
a_ Dm-ing .each fiscal year, The City Manzg_~er shall prepare z report for the
Cj~ Counc~ pm--suznt to Government Code section 66006, for ~hose T~,TD Fees retained by The
Ci~.
b. During each fiscal 3,ear, The Tre~urer shall prepare a report for The City
Coun~ pury.~z_~t to Government Code s~on 65006, for ~osc ~ F~s ~~ed to ~c
Tre~sr.
c. Pm-suant to Governmere Code se~--~fion 66002, ~e CiD,Counc]/ sh~H]]
rexjew, as p~-.-~ of any adopted C~pkal improvement Proffj-~-m each ye.=% -jne approximate
location, she, Hme ofzva~abEiL7 and esima~es of cost for zli Tr~3por~zSon ,improvement
Proje~s to be ~mnsed wkh the TV'TD Fee. The City Coun~ shall make findings jdeni'Ving
pmTose to whSzh ~e e~sing T~TD Fee balances are to be put and demonsn-z:ing a reasonable
re]adons~p b~rween ~jne TvTD Fee mad the pm~pose for whSch it is chm~gei
] 0. Esnem Dublin Tra~c Imoact Fee.
The Ez~em Dublin Trz~c impa~ Fee (Resolution No. 4t46) ~dudes Lmprovemen~
-~ ~e E~ed ~ e~er Scion ~ Scion E or Scion ~ ~provem~n~. Fore- ~provement~
~-e EZed ~ Scion ~ ~provemenm The fo~ Scion ~ Lmprovemenzs ue 5 fo~ows: (~) I-
5gUfg0 ~t~[~Dge Proje~; (2) I-5g0 A~m7 Lines; (3) S-~te Rou~e 84; ~d (4) ~prove
T~n~ Sense. ~ese ~rovem~ ~e ~e s~e ~ ~e Ty~DO~fiOn ~rox,emen~ ~ojez~
~ed ~ Scion l ~) ofi reso]io~
L~Don !he e~eztive date 'ofie ?vTD Fee and so ]ong ~ ~e ~ Fee
r~ ~ eE%% ie po~on of~e E~em Dub~ Tr~c Tmpa~ Fee a~aable to
~ ~provem~ fn~ be m~ended ~d sh~ not be co~e~ed. However, ~ie ~ Fee
5esomes ~eff~e for Ey r~on before ie Sssfion ~ ~arovemen~ have been co~.
ie po~on ofie Eb~em D~a~ Tr~c ~o~ct Fee a~bu~a]e to ~ne Scion ~ ~Drovements
s~ ~ere~ be
i !. E~e~ve Date.
This reso]ut]on sh~ll bec~me effective immeiate]y. The ~ Fee ~n~ be
~fe~ve on S~z~er !, 1998, prox~ded it a ~mi]~ fee ~s adopte~ by ~e Co~
ie Co~ of Co~ Cor~ te C~es ofPie~to~ S~ ~ ~m0n ~d L~ve~ore ~d te To~ of
D~e to be eEe~ve on Sept=mber 1, 199S. ~"~=h j~s~o~ Mve not ~ adopzed
f~s to be e~e Septeffoer t. 1998, -~en ~e ~ Fee ~n~ be effective ~;nen
~ Fee bczomes effe~ve ~ ~ of rash s~ jmdsdic~o~.
22. Sev~-abi!itv.
Each component of the TVTD Fee and all portions ofthi_~ resolution ~re severab]e.
Should my indi~qduaI component of the TVTD Fee or other provision of this resolution be
adjudged to be invalid and unenforceable, the rern~ining provisions sD,1/be and continue ~o be
fi2ity effective, and ie TVTD Fee shall be fully effec'dve except as to foat portion that has been
.iudgect to be invalid.
ADOPTED _42,,rD APPR6VED this l &h day of June, 1998, by the follo~iog vote:
Cozmcijmembers ~,arnes, ~urzon, EcTw,ard, LoH:hm,l mzd 3fayor f-fougon
NOES: None
A.B SE2N, "2': None
!LBST.~__TN: ]Vi~ne
doe
Mayor
TRI-VALLEY
TRANSPORTATION PLAN/
ACTION PLAN
FOR
ROUTES OF
REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE
Prepared for
Tri-VaIley TranspoFtation Cc~unciI
Pr~z;ared by
Td-Valt~y Te:hni=al Advisory CommitL~e
.in canjun~tian w~h
E~arton-Aschrnan Associates, inc.
Juty 1995
T~-ValIey Combined Study
.':'.':'l .- ..
TechnicaI Repo.~:
Stares and Funding of High Priority Projects
IL~.tl:l
I/dSt~l/OlA /
r311
f? :1
,~.
,- t~ls t
-,. , ~! , ~,a~ ItrJ
!
'-I,'\/'J-'C Ju~ut
v[l'Owex's Agj,'de~l~dut.
Jt-;Xl ibll
I
I
AYYACHA~ENrf D
l'hE Y~-Vsjj~3, Yran.sporcs-don D:velopmQnt Fee she-l] b= as follows:
Lmnd Use
Sh-~gle iFam~y ResidEnzial
Multi FarmSfly lssid~n-da/
li Et
$1,500
5I ,050
$t .00
Par Ur~t
DwaJ~ing unit
Dwe/!ing unit
foot bf gross floor ar:a
$0.75
Squm-s foot of yoss floor area
Squm-a foot of yoss floor ares
Uses $1500 AvEra,~ a.m./p.m. peak horn- n=m~
P~-ho~ ~s ~ b~ d~tm~n~d ~om ~: latest rcx~sion to ~n~ hs~mt: of
app~ is ~ad by -~a Com~, md ~a Com~ a~ -~c nmb= of ~Ds, ~n= Cig~ sh~ hays su~ derision ra-~ad by ~ rumbas of-~=
RESOLUTION NO. 85 - 99
A RESOLUTION OF ~ CITY COUNCI2L
OF TILE, CITY OF DUBLIN
REVISING THE RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE
TRI-VALLEY TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT FEES
WHEREAS, in June 1998 the City Council adopted (Resolution No. 89-98 imposing a Tri-Valley
Transportation Development Fee (TVTD Fee);
WHEREAS, Resolution 89-98 was intended to reflect the provisions of the Joint Powers
Agreement that Dublin had entered into with Livermore, Pleasanton,' San Ramon, Danville, Alameda
County and Conira Costa County, which JPA provides that each party agrees to collect the TVTD Fees on
development that receives a land use entitlement, to levy the TVTD Fees on all development project not
legally prediuded from paying the Fee (including projects subject to development ~oTeements), and to apply
the Fee to projects exempt from payment of the Fee by the terms of the development agreement when
there is a sLmificant change (as defined) to the development a~m-eement; and
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 89-98 contains language that could be read to exempt from the T~TD
Fee all projects with development a~eements, not just those projects with development a~eements that
exempt such projects from the Fees; and
WHEREAS, the intent of the IPA and Resolution No. 89-98 was not to exempt all projects with
development _a=.5-eements, but to exempt only those projects with development a_m-eements with terms that
expressly exempt them from the Fee; and v
WH2EREAS, TVTD EE includes an annual adjustment as of March 1 but the ira~>rmation for
determining adjustments is not available until after March 1.
NOW, THEEFOE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Dubtin that:
Section 1. Resolution No. 89-98 is hereby amended by.revising Section 4 thereof as follows:
"Section 4. Exemptions From T'vTD Fee.
The TVTD Fee shall not be imposed on any of the following:
(Subsections a - f, no change.)
Development projects which are subject to a
development agreement (which by such
a=~eement' s terms would exempt the
developer from paying the TVTD Fee), except
that the TVTD Fee shall be applicable to any
such development project when, after January
1, 1998, there is a "sigrfificant" change to the
project's development agreement. As used
herein, "significant" means any of the
following: (i) change in land use type (e.g.,
office to retail); (ii) intensification of land use
types (e.g., increases in square foot~e of
approved Office); Cii) extension of the term of
the development agreement; and (iv) reduction
or removal of project mitigation requirements
or conditions of approval."
Section 2. Resolution No. 89-98 is hereby mended by revising Section 5(a) as follows:
(a) The TVTD Fee shall be adjusted
automatically each July 1 by the increase or
decrease in the Engineering News-Record
Construction Cost Index for the San
Francisco Bay Area for the period ending
December 31 of the preceding calendar
year.
(b) no change
Section 3. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of May, 1999, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Councilmembers Howard, Lockhart, McCormick, Zika and Mayor Houston
/
V
ABSENT: None
ABST_~I2N: None
Ci,TY~LEP, K ~
~:/G,/54-99/i-eso-trans fee
\XI)IFBLINFS2\ClvlXCC-MTGS~9-QTR2XMsy~-4-99u-eso4mns f~.do: