HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 6.4 TranspImpactFeeOrd (2)
..' '~.,;;::-::,:> '~!!
". ... ,,"~"'. ""-'-~~"T' ",'~"'""'~'-"-"-' -".~... .~",.,-_.. -,.."- '<'.....' .. ". .
...
....
.
.
'"
f,.
. .
CITY OF DUBLIN
MBtfDA STATEMENT
euy Cllu.-crL MEETING DATE: December 12, 1994
SUBJ:BCI';:
Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance
(prepared by: city Attorney Elizabeth H. silver)
1. ~Draft Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance
2. ~Eastern Dublin specific Plan, pages 149, 151-153
and 165
3. /Government Code section 65913.2
EXBDlt'DB A'TTILCHED:
REOdRKENDATIONV. 1.
2.
3.
4.
open Public Hearing
Receive staff Report and Public comment
Close public hearing and deliberate
waive reading and ADOPT Transportation Impact Fee
Ordinance
FIBANCIAL STATEMENT:
The cost of preparing the Transportation Impact
Fee Ordinance can be recovered from property
owners applying for approval of development.
DESCRIPTION:
The council introduced a Transportation Impact Fee ordinance at its
November 28, 1994, meeting. Since that time, staff has revised the
ordinance to be an urgency ordinance which would become effective
immediately pursuant to Government Code section 36937, subdivision (b).
section 7.82.020 A has also been revised to delete reference to the time
for payment of the fees inasmuch as 7.82.020B provides that the resolution
shall set forth the time for payment.
The Eastern Dublin specific Plan was adopted in 1993. The Plan includes
financing goals including a goal that new development in the specific Plan
area should pay the full cost of infrastructure needed to serve the area.
The Plan anticipates that the cost of new infrastructure will be paid for
in a variety of ways. These include:
. Hello-Roos Community Facilities Districts which authorize a special
tax to finance public facilities ( and some public services)
. special Assessment Districts which authorize an assessment against the
property; bonds are typically issued secured by the lien of the
assessment and annual assessments are paid along with property taxes
for the term of the bonds
. Harks-Roos Bonds which are a bond pool made up 'of other bonds that the
Ci ty has issued or plans to issue for the purpose of reducing the
costs of issuance of the bonds
. Infrastructure Financing Districts which allow the formation of a
diistrict which then receives "tax increment" property tax monies to
fliiDam::eldesignated pUblic facilities
. In.._iIlap..: Imvact Fees which are established pursuant to Government
JC~! me&1:lltiom 64000 et seq. (IIAB 1600") for infrastructure such as
-l'~f ~arJm. amd community buildings
. Fi:re Impact I'ees wi-,ell are established by the Dougherty Regional Fire
Autlliority to. fund tile cost.nf new fire stations
. school Impact Fees which are established by the school districts
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ITEM NO. _6.4
COPIES TO:
CITY CLERK
FILE~
\
;<" "''''\ r ~.
.
.
. Sewer and Water Connection Fees which are established and charged by
the Dubliu Ban Ramon services District and Zone 7
The specific PlaD (page 152) recoqnizes that the entire cost of new
illfrastracture cannot be financed over time through an assessment district
or a HeI,1o-Roos special tax because to do so would impose an excessi ve
b'nn_ 0111 future property owners. The specific Plan contemplates,
th.refore, that part of the cost of infrastructure will be financed through
"developer impact fees" to be adopted by the council pursuant to AB 1600
(GOvernment Code sections 66000 et seq.)
AB 1600 was enacted by the state LegiSlature in 1989 and is contained in
Sections 66000 et seq. of the Government Code. These prov1s10ns
contemplate a two-step process prior to the imposition of impact fees on
new development. The first step is adoption of an "implementing
ordinance." The second step is adoption of a resolution setting the amount
of the fee, the type of improvements to be funded by the fee or fees, and
the properties SUbject to the fee or fees
The draft ordinance is the first step. It is an implementinq ordinance
which, if adopted, will establish the mechanism for imposing a fee or fees.
No fees will be imcosed bv the ordinance.
The second step - adoption of a resolution setting the fees - requires a
pUblic hearing. It also requires that information regarding the amount of
the proposed fee be available to the public at least ten days in advance.
This informa tion would be in the form of a study which would show the
relationship between development projects and the public improvements for
which the fee is proposed to be oharqed.
Fees to pay for transportation improvements necessary to implement the
Eastern DUblin Specific Plan could be adopted by resolution once the
implementing ordinance is in place. These would include not only roadway
improvements but buses and mass transit.
The adoption of a Transportation Impact Fee which is applicable to
properties within the Eastern Dublin specific Plan area will not preclude
developers from picking and choosinq from the various financing options
available to them. Developers are required to prepare Financing Plans
which are to be part of the Development Agreement. The Financing Plan is
the vehicle for a developer to propose the "mix" of financing options
available to him so that the property is not overburdened with assessments
and/or special taxes.
In addition to a fee to finance improvements to implement the Eastern
Dublin specific Plan, fees to pay for traffic improvements to implement the
General Plan and Downtown specific Plan could also be adopted by resolution
once the ordinance is in place. On October 25, 1993, the Council
authorized a traffic study to establish a uniform traffic impact fee. When
this study is completed, staff will recommend a traffic impact fee.
Adoption of that fee would be authorized by this ordinance and would
actually be levied by resolution.
Government Code Section 65913.2 requires the Council to consider the effect
04 an ordinance such as this with respect to the housing needs of the
r.qian in which the city is located. The Government Code requires the city
tll' rMlfr.ain from imposing regUlations which would make housing infeasible
fan ~~. sagment of the community. This ordinance would not make housing
il!lf'8asJDlle far any segment of the community because it is necessary to
a~low ~lo~ent t~ occur. This ordinance is one step in the
implBmeattatiolll Qf: 1tU :bstern Dublin speoific Plan which contemplates close
to- 1.4, oel _eJl.lii.q \1l1d.t;s at. huildout, and which will have a beneficial
effect on ~ h~~ Beeds of the region. It will help the city to meet
the HAG projected howd,Dq Deed in Dublin.
. .__" .L.......'.~~',;;.~~~.:~-'--
'CJ--~-'-'--- - ...."'_....tfiE'r"-....~...~~
'.
.
~option of'the draft ordinance is consistent with and will implement the
Eas~ern DUbAiB specific Plan and the Downtown specific Plan. The adoption
of the draft ordinance is not subject to CEQA (Public Resources Code
section 21080(b) (8).)
staff recommends that the council find that the ordinance is necessary for
the immediate preservation of the public health and the economic health of
the City, in particular, and should be effective immediately for the
following reasons: The City has received an application from Homart
Development Co. ("applicant") tor development within the specific Plan area
of a 75-acre retail shopping center ("center"). The center is considered
pivotal to implementation of the specific Plan because of its size,
location and type of development. In order for the applicant to meet its
schedule tor development at the center, it must know the amount of any
traffic or transportation impact fees before entering into a development
agreement with the city, as required by the specific Plan. To meet the
applicant's schedule, the council's meeting schedule and procedural
requirements related to the adoption of fees, approval of development
agreements and other actions required for approval of the center, the
implementing ordinance must be in effect prior to the council's next
regular meeting.
The adoption of the ordinance as an urgency measure requires a four-fifths
vote.
staff recommends that the city council conduct a pUblic hearing,
deliberate, waive the reading and ADOPT the ordinance.
a: 1128tren.agenda#16
· DEC-07-34 WED 12: 06
P. 02/05
.
.
ORDINANCE NO. 94-___
AN ORPXNANCB OF TRm aXTY OF DUBLIN
ADDING CHAPTER 7.82 TO ~HE
DUBLXH.KVNICIPAL CODE ESTABLISHING A
TRANSPORTATION IKPAC~ PRR POR pumUR2
DEV3~OPHBNTS WITHIN THE CITY OF DUBLIN
AND CBCLARING THIS ORDlKAHCB TO BE AN
URGENCY KEASURB TO TAXE EFFECT IMKEDIATELY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1.
Chaptor 7.82 is added ~o ~he Municipal Code of the City of Dublin
to read 'as follows:
"Section 7.82.010 PUrDOSQ
In order to implement the goals and objectives of the
Ci-r.y of Dublin's ("city") General Plan and the Eastern
Dublin Specific Plan, the Downtown Specific Plan and
the san Ramon Road specific Plan and to mitigate the
impacts caused by future development in the city,
oertain transportation facilities must be
constructed. The city Council has determined that a
transportation impact fee is needed in order to
finance these transportation facilities and to pay
for each deveiopmen~'s fair share of the con$truction
and acquisition costs or the necessary transportation
improvements. In establishing the fee described in
the followinq sections, the city council has found the
fee to be consistent with its General Plan and the
above Specific Plans, and pursuant to Government Code
S 65913.2, has considered ~hQ effeo~s of the fee with
respeot to the city's housing needs as establisbed in
the Housing Element of the General Plan."
USection 7.82.020 'l"ranaport:ation 11Ilp.Q~t ~ee Established
A. A Transportation Impact Fee (UFee") is hereby
established to pay for transportat.ion facilities.
B. The City Council shall, in a council resolution or
resolutions adopted after a duly noticed pUblic
hear1nq, set forth the amount of the Fee, describe the
benefit and impact area on which the Fee is imposed,
list the transportation facilities to be financed,
descriDe the estimated cost of these facilities, and
describe the reasonable relationship between the Fee
/
DEC-07-34 WED 12:07
P. 03/05
.
.
and the various types of future developments and SQt
forth time for payment."
"Section 7.82.Q30 Use of Fee Revenues
A. The revenues raised by payment of the
Transportation Impact Fee shall be accounted for in
the City's capital Project Fund ("Fund"). Separat:.e and
special accounts within the fund shall be used to
account for revenues, along with any interest earnings
on SUCh account. These monies shall be used for the
following purposes:
(i) TO pay tor design, engineering, right-of-way
acquisition and construction of tho transportation
facilities designatod in the Oouncil resolution and
reasonable costs of outside consultant s~ud1es related
thereto;
(ii) To reimburse the City for Qesiqnated
transportation facilities constructed by the city with
funds (other than gifts or grants) from othQr souroes
together with accruQd intQrsst;
(iii) To reimburse developers who have designed and
construc~ed d.si~nated transportation faoili~ies
which are oversized with supplemental size, length, or
capaci~y; ana/or
(iv) To pay for and/or ~eimburse costs of program
development and onqoing administration Of the Traffic
Impact Fee Program."
"Section 7.82.040 Developer construction of Facilities
If a developer is required, as a oondition of approval
of a permit, to conatruct.a transportation facility
that has been designated to be finanoed with
Transportation Impact Fees and if the facility has
supplemental size, length, or capacity ovor that
needed for the impacts of the development, a
reimbursement agreement with the developer and a
credit aqainst the ree otherwise levied by this
ordinance on the development project shall be offered
by the city. The reimbursement amount shall not
includQ the portion of the improvement needed to
mi~i9ate ~he burdens oroatod by the development."
"Secti~m. 1......a.a.._QM ,Administration Guidelines
The city Council ~ay, by resolution, adopt
Administrative Guidelines to provide procedures for
the oalculation; reimbursement, credit or deferred
payment and other administrative aspects ot the
Traffic Impact Fee."
,~
~~:"'f_,;...,.., ,.....,.:,.
J, ..._ ';."'"
...... ~...~..,' ._..oii.~~.;~
,', . .,;.., . .J.~ " ,...
::. ~ .of'I" '"." ~',. . .l.l, .',
DEC-q7-34 WED 12:07
P. 04/05
.
.
Sec:;tion 2.
This ordinanoe was adopted at a noticQd public hearing, for
which notice was given pursuant to Government Code S 6062a.
section 3.
This ordinance pursuant to Cal. Gov. Code S 36937,
subd. (b), shall become effective immediately. The facts
constituting the urgency are as follows: The eastern
Dublin specific Plan is considered critical to the 10n9-
term economic health of the city. The specific Plan
requires that new development pay for the infrastructure
necessary to serve ehe new development and provides that
developer impact fees should be analyzed as a mean6 of
paying for road improvements. The Council has determined
that impaot fee for transportation improvements should be
authorized by this ordinance. The City has received an
application from Homart Development company (the
lIA,pplic8i'ltll) for development within the specific Plan area
for a 75-aore retail shopping' center (the "Centerll). In
order for the Applicant to meet its schedule for
development of the Center, it must know the amount of any
traffic or transportation impact fees before entering into
a development agreement within the city a5 required by the
specific Plan. TO meet the ~pplicant's sChedule, the
Council's meeting schedule and procedural requirements
related to adoption of fees,' approval of development
agreements and other actions required for approval of the
Center, this implementing ordinance must be in effect prior
to the Council's nQxt regular meeting. The council
therefore finds, based on the foregoing facts, that this
ordinance is an urgenoy ordinance necessary for the
immediate preservation of the public health and, in
particular, the economic health of the city of Dublin, and
shall become effective immediately.
Sec'tiOD 4.
~he City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause this
ordinanoe to be publishad or to be posted in at least three
(3) public places in city in accordance with seotion 36933
of the Government code ot the state ot California.
;DEC-0,7-34 WED 12:08
p, 05/05
.
.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the city Council of
the city of Dublin on this ____ day of , 1994,
by vote as follows:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
114\ord\traffie.3
.
..
I
..
tI
I
I
)
I
I
I
I
It
I
I
I
I
I
]
I
I
" .
be heard regarding the extent of the benefit.
The assessment district is ordinarily initiated by petition of 60
percent of the property owners in the area. The types of Infra-
structure and support structures that can be financed in this way
include grading, slope stabilization and slide repair, street
paving, sidewalks, street lighting, curbs and gutters, sanitary and
storm sewers, and water supply facilities (onsite or offsite),
among other items. The amount of the bond issue may also
cover architectural and engineering fees as well as the cost of the
bond issue.
The public agency that institutes the district raises money by
levying special assessments against the benefiting property
owners. The assessment formula must be based on the degree to
which each property benefits, and in this regard public agencies
have traditionally considered such factors as acreage, building
size, number of units, front footage, units of water or sewer
usage, and land value.
Assessments are due either upon application for building permit
or, if bonds have been issued to finance infrastructure,annual
assessments are due along with ad valorem property taxes.
In addition to the general-purpose assessment districts autho-
rized by the 1911 and 1913 ActS, several other types of assessment
districts exist. These districts include the following: Vehicle
Parking Districts (1943 and 1951), Pedestrian Mall Districts
(1960), and Landscaping and Lighting Districts (1972).
SB-308 INFRASJRUCIVRE FiNANCING DISJ'RJCJS
(SEYMOUR BIlL)
Recent legislation introduced by Senator Seymour and passed by
the Legislature on September 1990 authorizes counties and cities
to form infrastructure financing districts to fund public capital
facilities using a method called "tax increment" financing.
Prior to this legislation, redevelopment agencies were the only
entities authorized to incur debt and fund capital projects from
this method of financing. Under redevelopment law (Section 16,
Article XVI, of the California Constitution), property tax base is
frozen when a redevelopment project area is established. The tax
yields on increments in the value of taxable property is then set
aside for repayment of debt incurred to finance redevelopment
projects.
SB 308 authorizes cities and counties to use a similar method of
tax increment financing to fund infrastructure development.
FINANCING
However, it exempts school districts from participating and
requires the cooperation of all other special districts affe:ted by
the diversion of property tax. The amount of annual fiscal
surplus accruing to affected districts as a result of the develop~
ment is a key factor in the negotiation process. Tax increments
are redistributed back to affected districts once infrastructure
projects are paid.
The constitutionality of S8-308 is currently being challenged.
DUBIlN DEVELOPER IMPACI' FEES
All cities estimate and program for the potential future demand
for capital improvements that serve the entire city; these items
may include wider roads, new freeway interchanges, new
community buildings, and new parks. ThESe items are com~
manly described and scheduled in a capital improvements
program. In many growing cities, the portion of costs that can
be allocated equitably to new development is then fund~
through a system of impact fees, whereby new development, at
the time of issuance of building pennits, is charged a set amount
to provide for its pro- rata sh3Ie of the nw infrastnlcrure. I t is
important to stress that the coordination of infrastrucrure
development of the scale required in eastern Dublin \11111 probably
require the establishment of such a system of developer impact
fees.
OtheIWise, for most publJc infrastructure, Dublin currently does
not have an impact fee program in place and therefore must
fund capital improvements within the existing city boundaries
out of other revenues. The exception is that Dublin does require
residential subdividers to dedicate park land and/or pay an in-
lieu fee for acquiring park land. In the case of eastern Dublin,
the Specific Plan calls for 241.5 acres of public parks. If the City
finds the land allocated for park dedication acceptable, no in-
lieu fee would be required. If no~ some or all of the estimated
$12 million in p3Ik in-lieu fees would be payable at the time of
Final Map approval for mdividual subdivisions.
DRFA FIRE IMPACT FEES
In addition to these CIty of Dublin impact fees, the Dougherty
Regional Fire Authority (DRF A) currently assesses a fire impact
fee for new development projects. With a current fire impact fee
set at $600 per residential development unit and $600 per 2,000
squareieet for other types of occupancies, the eastern Dublin and
Santa Rita fire impact fees would total more than n 1 million.
Based on 1992 costs, the cost estimate for the fire stations
149
::;~~ "0;: ~,~: {::] '-:~ J.....l
'4" . .' L ;.. ~.. . :
. . . ,. \. .
., I "
~:~'_"':.'.1.- _ _ ,0',.',. '\
I'
I
I
I
.
II
I
I
tl
I
~'fl
.
biI.
~
[I
I' .
~. I
. I
I
I
;t
II
It
a~
I
;I
10.4 FINANCING GOAlSAND
POliCIES
The following goals and policies, apply to the Eastern Dublin
specific plan area.
Goal: New development in the
Specific Plan area should pay the
full cost of infrastructure needed to
serve tbe area, and should fund the
costs of mitigating adverse project
impacts on the City's existing infra-
strtlcture and services.
Goal: The financing plan should
provide for reimbursements from
any other benefiting areas for costs
that Specific Plan area owners are
required to advance, and should
provide a fair allocation of costs
among land uses.
Policy 10-1: Fund the full costs oftbe on-site and off-
site public infrastructure and public sernces required
to support development in the Specific Plan area from
revenues generated by development Vrithin that
Specific Plan area. These revenues may include City,
County, State, or Federal revenues generated by
development within that Specific Plan Area.
Policy 10.2: Allocate the backbone infrastructure costs
to property within the Specific Plan area based on the
general principles of benefit received. "Backbone
infrastructure" means public infrastructure outside of
building tracts.
Policy 10-3: Adopt an Area of Benefit Ordinance and
form an Area of Benefit for the Specific Plan area that
establishes a fair share cost allocation fOJ: public
improvements required to serve development of the
Specific Plan area.
FINANCING
Policy 10-4: Use pay-as-you-go financing to the extent
possible. Use debt financing only wh.en essential to
provide facilities necessary to permit development or
to Illilintain service standards.
Policy 10-5: Require development projects in the
Specific Plan area to fund the oversizing of facilities if
required by the City, subject to reimbursement from
future developments benefiting from the oversizing.
Policy 10-6: Require developers who proceed ahead
of the infrastructure sequencing plan to pgy the costs
of extending the backbone infrastructure to their
project subject to future reimburSement
Policy 10-7: Require dedication ofland for road
improvements, park and other public facilities, and
construction of such improvements consistent Vrith
City-wide policies.
Policy 10-8: Provide for reimbursements from any
other benefiting areas for costs that specific Plan area
owners are required to produce.
Policy 10-9: Issue Bonds (such as :tie1Ier Roos andlor
Assessment District bonds) only so long as the security
for those bonds equals 300 percent (or more) of the
bond ralue. Developers sball be required to finance
privately any infrastructure costs that would cause
bond issues to fail to meet the above-stated criteria.
Policy 10-10: Issue Bonds (such as Mello~ Roos and!
or Assessment District bonds), only so long as the
annual special assessment or special tn: and 1.0
percent regulM property tax and existing bonded
indebtedness does not exceed 2.0 percent of property
value.
10.5 CAPITALFlNANCING
SOURCES AND BURDEN ON .
lAND USES
This section Illustrates how development in eastern Dublin could
be financed in accordance with the above-described goals and
policiES. Table 10.1 (at the end of the chapter) estimates sources
. of funding for each of the infrastructure costs. In general, the
developers will be required to pay for streets and utilities within
their traCts. Note that the costs of in-tract improvements are not
r included in Table 10.1. In addition, developer impact fees
151
FINANCING
, .
...J
L already in place or established In the future by the City or special
districts will serve as a major source of financing. For e.xample,
some school costs may be covered by AB 2926 fees, which the
builders are responsible for paying at the time building pem1its
are issued. Similarly, in-lieu fees for park dedications are
payable by the developer at the time of Final Map approval.
Developers are also currently required by the Dublin San Ramon
Services District to pay for a large amount of the water treatment
and water service infrastructure costs through fees. Ye~ these
existing fees are not sufficient to cover all the infrastructure
costs. The City will have to consider creating a system of
developer and builder impact fees to fund remaining costs,
particularly those costs which Gould not be funded by one or
more Area of Benefit assessments (via either a Mello-Roos ern or
Special Assessment District) due to the e.'(cessive burden the costs
would impose on future homeowners. k5 a general guideline,
"excessive" refers to yearly assessments (including property tax)
of more than 2.0 percent of the assessed value of the home. In
Table 10.1, it has been estimated that roughly 75 percent of the
costs of streets and mass grading would have to funded by a
system of impact fees or in-kind contributions by developers in
order to keep the Mello- Roos debt service load bearable on future
property owners.
Table 10.2 presents total infrastructure costs and development
phased over a 17 -Yf:2J period. The start of construction occurs in
1994 with nf:2J 100 percent completion during 2010. This
phasing schedule reflects WRT team discussion regarding the
sequence of development that is likely to take place in eastern
Dublin. DKS Associates (transportation consultants) and
Kennedyl]enks (water and sewer engineering consultants)
provided estimates of infrastructure costs for three phases of
development ERA then used these cost estimates to create this
annual phasing schedule.
Table 10.3 presents an analysis of the project's capacity to
support bonds issued for infrastructure finanCing. The first
section of the table outlines the infrastructure expenditures over
time and adds in financing costs to arrive at estimates of annual
and cumulative bond issues. The second section compares
annual average residential debt service (the annual special
assessment or Mello-Roos special ta>:) to the cumulative value of
homes sold and finished and unfinished lots. Once all the bonds
have been issued, the annual infrastructure debt service, on
average, would equal 0.8 percent of the value of the homes and
residential lots. During the entire period of development, the
annual infrastructure debt service is equal or less than 1 percent,
except during 1996. The general guideline is that total annual
assessments, which include regular property taxes as well as
special ta.xes or assessments, should not exceed 2.0 percent of the
value of the home. Because 1.0 percent is already: accounted for
in regular property taxes, only 1.0 percent remains available for
Special taxes or special assessments, and this project's capital
. infrastructure requirements would place these homes within that
limit.
The third part of the table compares the infrastructure bonds
issued year-by-year to the value of the entire property that would
be security for the those bonds. The bonds are easiest to sell
when the property is worth at least three times the bond issue. k,
the last line of the table shows, this deVElopment would meet that
cri ten a.
Table 10.4 allocates the costs borne by the Area of Benefit (Mello-
Roos ern or Special Assessment) among the land uses proposed
in the deVElopment. Costs are apportioned according to various
factors; for instance, road costs are allocated on the basis of trips
generated by each land use, and school development costs are
allocated on the basis of average number of children per unit.
Several lines in the middle of the table indicate the total capital
cost per housing unit (or per 1,000 square feet of non-residential
development), the proportion of total value this amount
represents, the estimated yearly assessment each unit would have
to pay to retire bonds sold, and the proportion of the unit's
market value represented by that yearly assessment.
The generally accepted standard is that total annual assessments
(ad-valorem property taxes plus Mello-Roos or other assess-
ments) should be less than two percent of property value. Since
one percent is already accounted for in the ad-valorem property
tax, the assessments should not exceed one percent. Note that in
Table 10.4 all of the residential and commercial units would
have annual assessments equal or below one percent. In short,
this financing plan would spread the debt burden amongst the
various land uses Without placing any undue burden on anyone
land use.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
AC110N PROGRAM: FINANCING
The City of Dublin should take the foll<ming actions to carry out the
finan~ing policie; of the Specific Plan.
DeveloJmwnt Agreement. For each property in the Planning Area,
prepare and adopt a development agreement that spells out the
precise financial responsihilities of tbe der:elnper.
152
.. .
.
Ifj
.
IIIJ]
~
.
.
'.
,
,,'
,
Area of Benefit Ordinance. Adopt an Area of Benefit Ordinance
and form an Area of Benefit for tbose properties benefitingfram
construetion of public improvem<mts described in tbe specifIC
Plan.
. Special AsSessment District or Mello.Roos CFD. Create one or
more Mello.Roos epn or specialAsSessment Distrkls tofinance
construction oftbe infrastructure (outlined in Table 10.1) to
serve tbe Area of Benefit. Some of tbe special /a:tes or special
assessments may be dus upon applicationfor building permits,
. and the remainder may be financed witb tbe appropriate bond
mecbanisms.
. Marks.Roos Bond pooling. Have bond counsel evaluate whether
tbe City would save mOlley and refrain from incurring undue
risk by pooling bonds issued for eastern and western Dublin, or
for eastern Dublin alnne, under the Marks.RODS Bond Pooling
Act.
I
. City-wide Develnper and Builder impact Pee systems. Analyze
city.Wide infrastructure needs to assess the usefulness of
implementing an impact fee program, in compliance with AB
1600, that could draw some funding from new delielopmtn t
whmfinal map or building permits are issued. TJJefees cou.!d
pay for infrastrudure of city-wide importance, s~h as
downtown infrastructure or new arterial streeIJ tbrvugh eastern
Dublin.
Actions needffi by other agenciei include:
School impact Fees.. The City and the School nist",t should
coordinate efforts tofund necessary scboolfadiities and collect
payable fees.
Highway Intercbange Funding. The City and CalTrans should
coordinate efforts to fimd necessary freeway imprcn:ements and
collect det'elopers' share of costs.
Utilities Impact Pees. The City, Dublin San Ramon Services
IJistrict and Zone 7 should roordinate efforts to fund utilities
services and collect dll1:elnj>eTS' share of costs.
Bonding capadty. The City of Dublin and its oond OJunsel will
coordinate with all affected agencies to develop a TTU!thod of
financing infrastrzuture tbat wiUjairly apportion the assess.
ment burden among the agencies expected to ptrJ!.ide serviaS,
and not allow tbe lxmding Cl1padty to be maximized by any one
agency or infrastructure need.
"
153
/0.
I
I
~
I
I
]
I
I
I
.
II
II
.
~
.
.
d
.
II
11.3.2 AREA OF BENEFIT ORDINANCE
The City shall adopt an Area of Benefit Ordinance and form an
Area of Benefit for those properties benefiting from construction
of public improvements described in the SpecifiC plan. Area of
Benefit fees may be enacted by the City of Dublin through
adoption o.f an ordinance, without voter approval. The fee must
be directly related to the benefit received. It does not create a lien
against property, but must be paid in full as a condition of
approval. Benefiting properties may be given the option to
finance the fees by entering into an assessment district 0913-
1911 Act) or Mello-Roos CFD.
11.3.3 ANALYSIS OF FINANCING
TECHNIQUES
Further analysis of various publiC financing techniques is
required to identify and develop the most flexible and lowest cost
financing program for necessary public infrastructure and
facilities in the project area. Each technique or combination of
techniques should be evaluated for its suitability of funding
public infrastructure and facilities costs and its capacity to insUre
both adequate and timely provision of infrastructure and
facilities, and lowest possible burden to new residents. In
addition, the financing program developed should be consistent
with financing policies set ou't i!1 the Specific Plan. Public
financing mechanism's that the City should consider as part of
this analysis may include: .
. Special Assessment District or Mello-RooS r;FD. The City
shall analyze the use of a Mello- Roos CFD, Special
Assessment District, or a combination of these and other
financing mechanisms to finance construction of the
required public improvements (outlined in Tables 10-1
and 10-4 in Chapter 10) to serve the Area of Benefit. Some
of the special taXes orsp.ecial assessments may be due
upon application for building pennits, and the remainder
may be financed with the appropriate bond meChanisms.
. Landscaping and Li~ting District. The City shall analyze
the use of a district to fund certain ongoing costs such as
maintenance of street lights and landscaping.
. Geologic Hazards Abatement District (GRAD). The City
shall analyze use of a GHAD to periodically inspect and
maintain unstable slopes in the eastern Dublin area. A
GHAD would provide for the assessment of a special fee on
property owners in the area to pay for inspections an~
IMPLEMENTATION
maintenance as well as create a reserve fund from which
to make any necessary repairs.
11.3.4 MARKS-ROOS BOND POOLING
The City should have impartial bond counsel evaluate whether
the City would save money and refrain from incurring undue
risk by pooling bonds Issued for western and eastern Dublin, or
for eastern Dublin alone, under the Marks-Roos Bond pooling
Act.
11:3.5 CITIWIDE BUILDER IMPACT FEE
SYSTEM
CityWide infrastructure needs should be analyzed to assess the
usefulness of implementing an impact fee program, in compli-
ance with AB 1600, that could draw some fundincr from new
o
developme.f1t when building pennits are issued. The fees could
pay for infrastructure of citywide importance, such as a eomrm
nity park or freeway interchange.
11.3.6 RESPONSIBIIlTIES FOR OTHER
IMPLEMENTING ACTIONS
Table 11-3
RESPONSffiIilTIES FOR OTHER IMPLEMENTING
ACTIONS
Re5f<lIlSibility
for Document
Other lmplementin~ Actions prepara tiQn Maptian Ry
Development Agreements
. M15ter Development Agreement City not applicable
. Individual Development Agreements Developers City
Area of Benefit ordinance Developers City
Special Assessment District or
Mello-Roes eFD Developers City
Landscaping and Lighting District Developen City
Geologic Hawds Abatement District DeYelopen City
Marks- Roos Bond Pooling City City
Cityv.'ide Builder Impact Fee System City City
SOURCE: wallace Robern & Todd, March 1992
165
('- .:.
- .. ." .'
__....~..........040._~~.;. ......
IE
S 65913.2
GOVERNMENT CODE
ng
CHAPTER 4.2
HOUSING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS
on
nd
w-
It.-
19
J.)
}S.
Section
65913.4. Repealed.
65913.5. Density bonus for developer of housing
within one-half mile of mass transit
guideway station.
Section
65913.8. Public capital facility improvement relat-
ed to development project; prohibition
. of fee or other payment including
. amount for maintenance and operation
115 condition for approval; exceptions.
~ 65913. Legislative findings and declarations
;e
:h
enough for production of
o
,9
"
11
e
d
d
'L
'.
Law Review Commentaries
Growth control by the ballot box; Calliornia'B experi.
cncc. Daniel J. Curtin, Jr. Ilnd M. Thomas JacobBon, 24
Loy.L.A. L.Rev. 1073 (1991).
~ 65913.2. Limitations on local government regulation of subdivisions
by underline; deletions by asterl~ks · · ·
31. ,
~.... ,...-r"'''T':,''~1
_...,.., .. . . I ., f: t, "j jfj .,j,
~,.i\itl M~:~ :;1 \1
....-.-.0:--..---"""'---
..._.............____n____..~r~____~..., _.....un.... ~..-- - .
....-1
3