HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 6.1 AmendFwyInterchgFee (2)
CITY CLERK
File # ~~@]reJ..[f]~
.
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 3,1998
SUBJECT:
. ATTACHMENTS:
RECOMMENDATION:
v/
FINANCIAL
STATEMENT:
Public Hearing: Amendment of Freeway Interchange Fee
Report Prepared by Richard C. Ambrose
1.
2.
Agenda Statement (January 23, 1996, Item 6.2)
Draft Resolution Amending Freeway Interchange
Fee as Adopted by Resolution No. 11-96
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Open Public Hearing
Receive Staff presentation and public testimony
Question Staff and the public
Close public hearing and deliberate
Adopt Resolution Amending Freeway Interchange
Fee as Adopted by Resolution No. 11-96
The amount of the Freeway Interchange Fee will increase
gradually over time by an amount equal to the average
annu~l Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) interest rate
.
DESCRIPTION:
On January 23, 1996, the Council adopted a Resolution Establishing a Freeway Interchange Fee for
Future Developments within the Eastern Dublin Area (see Attachment 1). The purpose of the Fee was to
reimburse Pleasanton for the costs of making improvements to the interchanges on Interstate 580 at
Hacienda Drive and at Tassajara Road/Santa Rita Road that benefit development in both Pleasanton and
future development in Eastern Dublin. Pleasanton had already constructed the two interchanges and the
Fee would be imposed on new development in Eastern Dublin that benefits from the interchange
improvements to repay Pleasanton.
Resolution 11-96 provided that the Fee would not be effective until an agreement was entered into
between the City and the City of Pleasant on regarding transfer of the Fee revenues. The City Council
approved the agreement with Pleasanton at its October 6, 1998 meeting. That agreement provides for an
automatic escalator in the Fee. The reimbursement to Pleasanton was calculated in 1995 dollars. The
purpose of the automatic escalator is to reimburse Pleasanton with equivalent dollars. It is anticipated that
the application of an escalator will provide Pleasanton with equivalent dollars over time. This fee
escalator will also result in a more equitable distribution of responsibility for the fee by assuring that the
.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
COPIES TO:
G/ cc- mtgs/98-qtr4/nov / 11- 3~98/ as-freeway
ITEM NO.
6~ t
fees paid by development in the future are roughly equivalent in value to the fees paid by development
today.
The average annual Local Agency Investment Fund interest rate ("LAIF Interest Rate") received
by the City on its funds was selected as the index for the automatic escalator. Staff believes that the LAIF.#
Interest Rate will provide Pleasanton with the portion of the initial funds it expended on the interchanges
which represents its development's share ($7,384,000), adjusted for the time value of money.
The draft resolution (Attachment 2) would amend the Freeway Interchange Fee to include an
automatic escalator in the amount of the LAIF Interest Rate. The first adjustment would be made on
September 1, 1999. No other changes to the Fee would be made.
Thus, for example, if the Base Fee in December 1998 is $21.46/single family unit and the LAIF
Interest Rate for 1998-99 is 5.8%, beginning September 1, 1999, the Fee will automatically increase to
$22.70 (Base Fee of$21.46 and Escalator Fee of$1.24). If the LAIF Interest Rate for 1999-2000 is again
5.8%, beginning September 1, 2000, the Fee will automatically increase to $24.02 (Base Fee of$21.46
and Escalator Fee of$2.56). And, if the LAIF Interest Rate for 2000-01 is again 5.8%, beginning
September 1, 2001, the Fee will automatically increase to $25.41 (Base Fee of $21.46 and Escalator Fee
of$3.95).
Staff recommends that the Council conduct a public hearing, deliberate and adopt the proposed
resolution (Attachment 2).
.
.
.2.
CITY CLERK
. Fif e # D[8][Q][Q]-[3J[QJ
.:-.
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: January 23,1996
SUBJECT:
EXHIBITS ATTACHED:
RECOMMENDATION:
~
.':
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
Establishment ofI-580 Interchange Fee for Eastern Dublin General
Plan Area
Report Prepared by: Lee S. Thompson, Public Works DirectGr
Resolution establishing a Freeway Interchange Fee for future
developments within the Eastern Dublin area, including:
Exhibit "A": Land Use Map
Exhibit "13": Report of Cost Sharing ofI-SSO Interchanges at
Hacienda Drive and at Tassajara/Santa Rita Road
Exhibit "e": Fee Schedule
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Open Public Hearing
Receive Staff presentation and public testimony
Question Staff and the public
Close Public Hearing and deliberate
Adopt Resolution Establishing a Freeway Interchange Fee
for Future Developments within the Eastern Dublin Area.
This fee is proposed to collect $7,384,000 from future development
in the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment Area to repay the
City of Pleasant on for Pleasanton's advancing costs over its "fair
share" for the construction of two interchanges on I-580.
DESCRIPTION: In the early and mid-eighties, Pleasanton, through the funding of its
North Pleasanton Improvement District, constructed several freeway improvements which benefited
Dublin as well as Pleasanton. These include the interchanges at Hacienda Drive and at Tassajara/Santa
Rita Road with I-580, which were descirbed as existing improvements in the environmental impact repvrt
for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan (SCH No. ~ 1.103064, pp. 3, 3-1)
Pleasanton had requested that Dublin pay its "fair share" of these improvements, as the improvements
would help Dublin's future eastern development to take place. The two cities undertook a benefit study in
1989 entitled the Dublin Extended Planning Area Infrastructure Study, prepared by John H. Heindel,
Consulting Civil Engineer (the "Heindel Study").
.----------------------------------------------------------------~--
COPIES TO:
g:\:1gcn misc\inlcrchg
ATTACHMENT 1
11. December of 1989, the Dublin City Council accepted the concept of assigning cost sharing on the basi.
of benefit to the traffic generated on both sides ofI-580 and determined that Dublin's contribution would
be subject to actual development taking place north ofI-580 and within Dublin. The Council also
determined that funding mechanisms be established within the Dublin Extended Planning Area. These
commitments were reaffirmed by the City Council in January of 1995 by Resolution No. 7-95.
Several meetings have been held with the property owners of the Eastern Dublin General Plan Area
regarding the method of funding this reimbursement. It was decided to establish a new traffic impact fee
specifically for the purpose of repaying Pleasanton. The consensus of the property owners at one of the
meetings was to update the Heindel Study but to cap the exposure to the previous estimate of $8.S million.
Staffhas now updated the study, based on the adopted General Plan and Specific Plan. Average daily
traffic assignments on the various interchange ramps were determined using the Tri-Valley Transportation
Commission Traffic Model for the Year 2010. The raw traffic information was then assembled into
tabular form to determine traffic percentages assigned to the various jurisdictions. The various costs and
cost estimates for the interchange improvements were assembled and the "fair share" costs for Dublin and
Pleasanton (Exhibit B of Resolution) were calculated based on the relative traffic assigned to each of the -
two jurisdictions. The cost split is based on the traffic from all areas of the two jurisdictions as that is the
w:y that the model was able to break down the traffic at these two interchanges; however, it should be
noted that the bulk of the traffic will be from and to the Eastern Dublin area and Pleasanton's eastern area
due to the proximity of the interchanges to these two developing areas. The result of the updated study is
that OV\'I1ers of property in the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment area should be required to pay e:::.
fees when they develop their proprety to generate funds to pay Pleasanton $7,384,000.
It is proposed that this fee use the same land use traffic generation factors and schedule as the existing
Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee (Resolution No. 95-1)" The proposed fee is based on the relative trip
generation for the various uses. The resulting fee for low (0 - 6 units/acre) and medium (6 - 14 units/acre)
density residential uses is $214.60 per unit, for medium~high density (14 - 25 units/ acre) is $150.22 per
unit, and for high density (over 25 units/acre) is $128.76 per unit. The fee is $21.46 per trip for non-
residential uses (see Exhibit "C" of proposed resolution).
Staff will need to do periodic review of the fee to see if the land use assumptions are following the
original General Plan and Specific Plan densities.
Once the fee is established, Dublin and Pleasanton will need to enter into an agreement to transrer the fees
from Dublin to Pleasanton.' . .
S,;'Jfrecommends that the City Council conduct a"public hearing, delibe"rate, and adopt the Resolution
Establishing a Freeway Interchange Fee for Future Developments within the Eastern Dublin Area.
.:.
Paae 2
.
RESOLUTION NO. 11-96
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
WHEREAS, the City Council 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 approximately 4176 acres
v..1.thin 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 vvithin the GPA area nearest to the City; and
WHEREAS, the GPA and SP areas ("Eastern Dublin") are shovm on the Land
Use Map contained in the GPA (attached hereto as Exhibit A) and exclude the area
shovvn 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 bicycle paths ("Necessary
Im~rovements"); 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 1-580fTassajara/Santa Rita Road Interchanges ("1-580
Interchange Improvements"); and
WHEREAS, the 1-580 fnterchange 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 II, 1989, meeting at which time the Council by motion:
I. Acknowledged that Dublin's Eastern Planning Area, when
developed, will benefit from the new interchange work 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 taking place north of 1-580 and within Dublin; and
TIF Rosol
2
.
.
.
.
.
.
4. Determined that funding mechanism(s) be established vvithin the
Dublin Extended Planning Area; and
WHEREAS, on Jan~ary 31, 1995, the City Council 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
WHEREA.5, the City Council adopted a "Mitigation Monitoring Program:
Eastern Dublin Specific.Plan/General Plan Amendment" by Resolution No. 53-93
which requires development vvithin Eastern Dublin to pay its proportionate share of
certain transportation improvements necessary to mitigate impacts caused by
development vvithin 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
2010, and contain an analysis qf the need for new public facilities and improvements
required by future development within Eastern Dublin; and
WHEREAS, 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 1-580 Interchange Improvements, and the costs of the 1-580
Interchange Improvements; and
WHEREAS, the Study was available for public inspection and review 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, which improvements have already been constructed
TIF Rosol
3
and are needed to reduce the traffic-related impacts which will be caused by future
development in Eastern Dublin. The 1-580 Interchange Improvements are
improvements to the Haci~nda Drive and Tassajara/Santa Rita Road interchanges
with Interstate 580 and are hereafter defined and referred to as "Improvements and
Facilities". The Improvements and Facilities 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 the 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 99 15061 (b)(2) and (3) and 15273(a)(4) (Title 2, Calif. Code of
Regulations) and Public Resources Code 921080(b)(8)(D).
TIF R~sol
4
.
.
.
.
.
.
E. The record establishes:
I. That there is a reasonable relationship between the need for the
Improvements and Facilities 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 Facilities; 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
Facilities) 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 Facilities or portion thereof attributable to
development in Eastern Dublif\ 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 vvithin
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.
TIF Rosol
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 Facilities" 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 Interchan~e 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 issue~ for such building or structure. except where the building or
structure will require a later stage of discretioI.1ary 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 Rosol
6
.
.
.
.
.
.
5.
(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
de~olished provided that the building permit for new
reconstruction is obtained 'Within one year after the
building was destroyed or demolished and the
reconstructed building would not increase the destroyed
or demolished building's trips based on Exhibit C.
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 Rosul
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 Costa County and in
the vicinity, 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 make findings each fiscal year pursuant
to Government Code Section 6600 I (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 Rc.olF
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. Severabili tv.
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
~!~
ArrEST:
~~
.
EHS:rja
J :\WPD\MNRSVV\114\RESOL\FREEW AY.RES
TIF Resol
9
, I
!
: !
1
I
\
;
;,
: .:
;)
~
,
"" CI) 11 . ~ .i '. . ,
CO ~ ,;. ...; ~ l~~ ~
III !-. .1.:... ;~~ .;.1 if
-<< u g:.l ~ 2 ., ;i";;':);:,.~1 z
.. ~ il g 8 ... ..... ~..~. ,.,.
~ 1 z ~ ! ~ ~ '.: J .. ~,. ,:,'~ tAtt-h~:rt ,g '!
C .., N - '" <:> i . :i:';;;''- ;1" .!,:i;. wi'~1 <( :: i
~ I ~ Ii L ~ H ~, ~! 5 J~ ~ ~J: .,,:~@ :i~~~~ i~.~'
iJ) 8 _ ' Ii ~ ~ Jl en UJ - 't ~ 0.. D a 0 _. ,.,. //J~. ;...' 1~ ~;.~ft!:>i:j}:~~ Xu.
-g 0. " ~ .. ~ C ~ ~ e ~ ~ r 2 'i . ~ -!! ~ ~ i ..:g 10= ~ III w.,Z' i!; .::";..~,'h.':-1,.:;!I ,W 0
:;..! : i ~ ~ II.. .i ~ Iii ~ ii g =E ~ ~ .\l!!! .. r. ~ j 0 u <; :'~.! Ii l W .....} '''..
.c: ~ w ..J ~ j j- ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~m~f~ ;e~~j ~ ~ . i.~ ~lll~'~ f-'!ir"i!: :h, ..f:" ,t::~.~ :I~:
._ c .en :s .. Iii ;! fi. ~ i ~ ; ~ ~ ~ .1r ~ ~ Q%....'5 l!!15~ Ii (IJ.I"II'\"~' ~:~i~" i>':'.':: . .-;.
l'!! Ui.::l "li!Z.Cl. ...... ~::;;:::;;:..J II; UI 1I..@~<!>av 1I..€l<IDIDz 0 W.....~ () .....wClw .......: ,.' ,... , .. . ~:
< ~.."5;;;~'.. &';~~~I.. @..:. ~B~BB@ gl" ill:." ~~~.'OO.j f ::.!..r II .,.c:t:.,:J;H.- ~;~;~;.~t );~','.(~' ~'
., 'II 'w" <.; . 0. '0 .; ;:;= w,. i ~ J '" /1J '.:11' ."." ~ I I I I I we '1' :"'~ .'., -. :--' .
.c ,.-;...l . .,r u ~;' :: :l! '" ;i;'3: ~.'..,~ u ... I II' ...... -,!t.:,. .~:.." .... r:
. ,........,.
r------~-----__, ..-1--d----l
i <{ L-.--.P !
· UJ I
i 0: W en I
: <1::cc ~
'\---.-_________.....J >- => :;,
\ 0 ~
, ~ ~
, ~ ......J
\ CI) 0
,
\ UJ 0:
. ~ 9
, ::> .......
\ ~
\ ::>
~. ~
....B
~..(.
C(,~
~;{
~\
,
,
?
o
fr
.,,: c
== .S)
!3 '5
<n-
o
... ~
..e.~ c..
N'E:i
-....<u
;;;.= :s
-.<>
::: :a "g
t:i~j
Ol
CO;
....
....
N
III ......
~ ~
<> en
<: e
j'; .':t';~~~.~'~~:}
"....;;'.~y
f!!ll'
I'
.
"
.... 0
c: -iI;
o ~
.- 0
~ <.>
B ~
~ ...
'CI 1;;
~c.
.!'! 8
~ <.>
8~
b -
i ~
.. ..
- ..
..~
:: <
-a.
::: <
'" 1:
U .":"
e ~
ll. -
Iii
i~
N 8
_ u
c: ,I:
j .1
~ t
" -
c .'
" ~
E ~
'" 1:
Zi: ~
'" ..
,..~
<>'5
'C _g
~ '"
-~ ~
.. "
o ~
..
~~
.. or>
~ "
'i'q
to; ...
E 0
~ ~
u ..
.. 8
~ u
.
.
REPORT OF COST SHARlNG OF 1-580 INTERCHANGES
AT HACIENDA DRIVE AND AT TASSAJARAlSANTA 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 w~th Interstate 580 at
Hacienda Drive and at Tassajara Road/Santa Rita Road.
The City of Pleasant on 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
L~blin, 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- I). Funding for the interchange completions is already included in the existing
Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee (Resolution No. 9S-1).
Dublin proposes to establish and levy an Eastern Dublin I~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
ajay 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 Pleasant on 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 nm for the Year 2010 (attached).
4) Pleasanton' s costs for constructing the interchanges (based on
Pleasanton cost breakdown):
Hacienda Interchange: $18,716,000
Tassajara/Santa Rita Interchange: 9.846.000
Total: $18,562,000
5) Dublin's future costs to complete interchanges already included in the
Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Resolution 95-1 is $9,656,000.
6) Total project cost is therefore $38,218,000
.
Page 1
Exhibit B of Resolution No. 11-96
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:
.
46%.
36%
18%
100%
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
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
43%
Total:
36%
21%
100%
Therefore, with the assumption that 100% of the cost is
split between the two jurisdictions, the cost split for the
Tassajara/Santa Rita Road interchange calculates to be:
Pleasanton
Dublin
.
54.4%
45....'1%
100.0%
The cost obligations are then as follows:
Hacienda Interchange:
Tassajara/Santa Rita Rd.
Interchange
Pleasanton
Obligation
$12,775,000 (56.1%)
Dublin
Obligation
$9,997,000
Total
Interchange
Cost
(43.9%) $22,772,000
$8.403.000 (54.4%)
Total: $21,178,000
$7.043.000
$17,040,000
(45.6%) $15.446.000
$38,218,000
Reimbursement due Pleasanton:
Pleasanton Advance:
less Pleasanton Obligation:
Reimbursement due Pleasanton from property
owners in Eastern Dublin:
$28,562,000
($21.178.000)
.
$7.3S4.000
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 gene~ated 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
level~ 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 2S units/ acre)
High density (over 25 units / acre)
Non-residential uses (based on trip generation
schedule)
.
*Trips Per Unit
10
10
7
6
Fee Per Unit
$214.60
$214.60
$150.22
$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
~,.,...nspo..at;on Consultan's
.
April 12, 1995
The charts below illustrate the source of traffic, by percent, using each of four 1-580 interchanges:
1) Hopyard Road/DOugheny Road; 2) Hacienda Drive; 3) Tassajara Road/Santa Rita Road, and
4) Fallon Road/El Charm Road in 2010 according to the Tri- Valley Transportation Model.
In the first chart, the amount 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 Pleasanton and East Dublin is
considered.
Dougherty T=joro
Pleosanton N.Livermore Livermore E.DubJin Dublin Volley Volley Son Romon Donville Totol
I 4~ 3,; ; 1m;. 7,; 26,; 6'; I~ 3,; ~ I CXl1:. .
~ 46'; 4'r. 9'1. :1 3~ 4'; r 1'; 2'l. I,; I,; 1 CC'i.
43'; 5~ II':{, 3.,3':{, 3,; I':{, 3':{, I':{, O'l. I CXl1:.
4 21':{, ]':{, 23':{, 3e<.t 2'l. 5':{, I,; I':{, I':{, 10J'i,
Pleosonton E. Dublin Totol
I 85':{, 15~ I(:()':{,
2 59'I. 41':{, I(:()':{,
3 56'r, M'r, I(:()':{, -
4 36'; b<l'r. 1 CO'i;.
157-066
.
PAGE 4
~637 Ch:lbol Drive. Suile 21~. PleaS:lnlon. C:lliforni:l 94588.2754. (510) ~63-0611. F:l\ (510) 463-3690
.
.
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
$21.46/trip
(Based on the following table)
LAND USE
(Non-Residentiall
ESTIMATED WEEKDAY VEHICLE
TRIP GENERATION RA TE*
(WITH PASS-BYS)
HOTEUMOTEL OR OTHER LODGING:
10lroom
OFFICE:
Standard Commercial Office
Medical/Dental
20/1,000 sf
34/1,000 sf
RECREA TION:
Recreation Community Center
Health Club
Bowling Center
Golf Course
Tennis Courts
Theaters
Movie
Live
Video Arcade
26/1,000 sf
40/1,000 sf
33/1,000 sf
8/acre
33/court
220/screen
0.2/seat
9611,000 sf
EDUCA TION (Private Schools):
1.5/student
HOSPITAL:
General
Convalescent/Nursing
Clinic
12/bed
3/bed
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 1 of2
Exhibit C of Resolution No. 11-96
TRIP GENERATION RAT::S
LAND USE
{Non-Residential}
ESTIMA TED WEEKDAY VEHICLE
TRIP GENERATION RATE
(WITH PASS-BYSl
.
RESTAURANT:
Quality (leisure)
Sit-down, high turnover (usually chain other than fast food)
Fast food (with or without drive through)
BarfTavern
63/1,000 sf
133/1,000 sf
511/1,000 sf
100/1,000 sf
AUTOMOBILE:
Car Wash
Automatic
Self-Serve
Gas Station with or without food mart
Tire Store/Oil Change Store
Auto Sales/Parts Store
Auto Repair Center
Truck Terminal
585/site
lO/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
FINANCIAL:
Bank (Walk-In Only)
Savings and Loan (Walk-In Only)
Drive-Through/ATM (Add to Bank or Savings & Loan)
91/1,000 sf
40/1,000 sf
65/lane or machine
COMMERCIAURET AIL:
.
Super Regional Shopping Center
(More than 600,000 SF; usually
more than 60 acres, with
usually 3+ major stores)
22/1,000 sf
Regional Shopping Center
(300,000 - 600,000 SF; usually
30 -.60 acres, w/usually 2+ major stores)
33/1,000 sf
Community or Neighborhood Shopping Center
(Less than 300,000 sf; less than 30 acres
w/usually 1 major store or grocery store
and detached restaurant and/or drug store)
46/1,000 sf
Commercial Shops
Retail/Strip Commercial
Commercial with unknown tenant
Supermarket
Convenience Market
Discount Store
Lumber Store/Building Materials
Garden Nursery
Cemetery
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
Page 2 of2
g:VcrmsVntrfees.xls
.
EXHIBIT "C" OF RESOLUTION
TRIP GENERATION RATES
,
i
A •
RESOLUTION NO. - 98
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
**************
RESOLUTION AMENDING FREEWAY INTERCHANGE FEE
AS ADOPTED BY RESOLUTION NO. 11-96
- WHEREAS, on January 23, 1996,the City Council adopted Resolution No. 11-96, establishing a
"Freeway Interchange Fee"for future developments with the Eastern Dublin Area; and
WHEREAS,the purpose of the Freeway Interchange Fee ("Fee") is to reimburse the City of
Pleasanton for expenditures previously made for the I-580 Interchange Improvements identified in
Resolution No. 11-96 (see Finding A of Resolution No. 11-96); and
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 11-96 does not provide for an automatic annual increase in the
amount of the Fee; and
WHEREAS, the City of Pleasanton has proposed that the Fee be amended to include an automatic
escalator so that the amount of Fee revenues it receives as reimbursement will take into account the fact
that repayment will be with less valuable dollars over time; and
WHEREAS,the City Council desires to amend the Fee to increase the Fee by an automatic
escalator; and
WHEREAS,the purpose of this resolution is to amend the Fee so that it increases automatically on
an annual basis in an amount equal to the average annual Local Agency Investment Fund interest earned
by the City on its investment earnings for the preceding fiscal year;
NOW, THERE FORE,the City Council of the City of Dublin does RESOLVE as follows:
1. Automatic Escalator
The amount of the Fee, as shown on Exhibit C to Resolution No. 11-96, shall increase
automatically by an automatic escalator as follows: The automatic escalator shall result in an automatic
increase in the amount of the Fee each September 1 at a rate equivalent to the average annual Local
Agency Investment Fund ("LAIF") interest rate earned by the City of Dublin, as reported by the state
controller, for the preceding fiscal year. The average annual LAIF interest rate (the "LAIF Interest Rate")
shall be calculated by averaging the rates for the four quarters of the fiscal year. For example, if the
quarterly rates are 5.7%, 5.75%, 5.85% and 5.9%,the average annual interest rate will be 5.8%.
The automatic increase in the Fee shall be referred to as the "Escalator Fee" and the
amount of the Fee as established by Resolution No. 11-96 shall be referred to as the "Base Fee".
The first increase in the Fee shall occur on September 1, 1999. The City Manager shall
calculate the increase no later than September 1, 1999 and each year thereafter.
ATTACHMENT 2
The City Manager shall apportion each Fee dollar between the Escalator Fee and the Base
Fee.
2. No Other Changes to Fee
Except as provided in paragraph 1 above,there shall be no other changes in the Fee.
3. Effective Date of Automatic Escalator •
The automatic escalator described in paragraph 1 above shall be effective 60 days
following the date this resolution is adopted.
•
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
G/cc-mtgs/98-gtr4/nov/11-3-98/reso-freeway