HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.04 Traffic Mitigation Fee Study 550 _
CITY OF DUBLIN
AGENDA STATEMENT
City Council Meeting Date: February 13, 1989
SUBJECT: Traffic Mitigation Fee Study
(Report by Public Works Director Lee Thompson)
EXHIBITS ATTACHED: Map of Tentatively Proposed Impact Areas
RECOMMENDATION: /__) / A�ty�horize Staff to proceed with traffic mitigation fee ,
t�Jl udy and ordinance.
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
Budgeted in 1988-89 CIP: $10,000
Estimated costs:
Traffic-related work by TJKM: $ 4,000
Refined cost estimates of individual
project work by Santina & Thompson: $ 5,000
Staff time: 1,000
$10,000
The cost of the City Attorney's work is covered in the Operating Budget for
General Government Legal Services; however, this work could have a fairly
large impact on that budget if the ordinance or ordinances become complicated
or highly controversial. The City Attorney's office has represented another
City in adopting a transportation fee ordinance, for which the cost of their
services was approximately $13,000.
DESCRIPTION:
This study was identified in the City's 1988 Goals and Objectives and was
subsequently included in the approved 1988-89 Capital Improvement budget.
On January 1, 1989, State Legislation (AB 1600) became effective, which, in
general, requires a city or county to go through a process to establish a
reasonable relationship between a development project or class of development
project and the public improvement for which the developer fee is charged, and
to segregate and account for the money separately from General Fund monies.
In terms of traffic generation, the City would be required to make a
connection (or nexus) between the mitigation of the offsite traffic impacts
that is being required of a development and the actual impact that the
development is creating. Within the last year, Staff has been performing
traffic studies on new commercial development requests to determine each
development's impact on City streets and that respective share of offsite
improvements. Although the City method complies with AB 1600, it is a
cumbersome method and does not result in a uniform levy of offsite improvement
costs.
The study and resulting ordinance(s) proposed in this agenda statement would
seek to establish uniform traffic impact fees, which would then be used to
supplement the City's Capital Improvement Program for the areas for which the
fees are levied. In addition, a mechanism could be set up to reimburse the
City's General Fund, if and when the City advances funds to complete the
project prior to collecting the fees.
The scope of the study is as follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
ITEM NO. y. y COPIES TO: TJKM
Task 1: Determine Build-Out Land Use
The starting point is for the Planning Department to identify the type,
amount, and location of land use associated with the buildout of the City.
For the purposes of the fee study, it is assumed that the area east of the
Dougherty Road/SPRR Corridor, as well as the proposed Eden Canyon development,
will not be included in the fee study. This information should be developed
as a part of the current general and specific plan studies. Therefore, the
primary effort will include the primary planning area and the Hansen Ranch and
Blaylock/Gleason properties of the western hills.
Task 2: Determine Needed Improvements
TJKM would coordinate the data gathering and prepare a map showing the
improvements that are necessitated by new development identified in Task 2.
The map would be included in the traffic mitigation fee report. This task is
based on the premise that City Staff and TJKM can identify the future
improvements needed without additional detailed analysis and studies and that
this level of effort would satisfy the "rational nexus" tests required by AB
1600.
Task 3: Determine Costs of Improvements
Most of this would would be done by Santina and Thompson and would include a
detailed cost breakdown.
Task 4: Determine Available Revenue Sources
The purpose of this task is to determine how much of the costs identified in
Task 2 will be funded by non-fee sources. Most of the effort here would be
provided by City Staff.
Task 5: Determine Future New Trips
These are the new trips from new development which create the need for
improvements which would be funded by the mitigation fee. The major role of
TJKM here would be to determine the amount of daily and peak hour trips
generated by the proposed uses described in Task 1 and to make sure these
trips have a linked relationship with the improvements to be included in the
fee (Task 2) .
Task 6: Calculate Fees and Draft Ordinance
The fees could be based on peak hour trips generated, daily trips, or
associated with types of land use. (Example: $X per square foot of retail,
$X per residential unit, etc. ) . Different zones may be identified where
different fees are appropriate based on land uses within those zones. The
consultant team, Staff, and the City Attorney's office would work together in
arriving at logical and justifiable fees.
Task 7: Legal Counsel
The City Attorney's office would be included in discussion of progress of the
study, would prepare the draft ordinance, and would counsel City Staff and the
City Council through the hearings and final adoption of the ordinance(s) .
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council authorize Staff to proceed with the
study as outlined in this report. It is anticipated that the study portion of
this proposed ordinance would be completed by the end of May, 1989.
-2-
Primary Eastern Planning Area.
Planning_ Area_
Western Hills
_
n
0
1 ♦ v: ai X
1 0
j •t �� �1� n o
� 1
HANSEN RANCH 11 Z
• v
BLAYLOCK/GLEASON •
`` ,. • �• 1-580
O
Potential Fee Zone Areas.
-r