Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 6.1 East Dub TIFG~~~ OF DU~~~ /~~~ O'ILIFOR~~ STAFF REPORT CITY C L E R K DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL File # ^©~0-00 DATE: March 16, 2010 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Joni Pattillo, City Manager SUBJE Resolution Adopting Revisions to the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee (EDTIF) and Area of Benefit Fee Prepared By: Mark Lander, City Engineer EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City Council, in adopting the 2009 Update to the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee, directed Staff to determine if a fee reduction for residential development within the Eastern Dublin Transit Center was warranted due to lower vehicle trip generation. Staff has prepared the 2010 Update, which provides a 25% trip reduction rate for the Transit Center, resulting in a total fee reduction of 27% for residential development within the Transit Center. The fee for all other development will be reduced by 1-3% based on minor adjustments to construction costs. Additional adjustments are also proposed as they relate to classifications of uses. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Fees collected are used to finance public infrastructure and improvements needed to reduce the traffic-related impacts caused by development in Eastern Dublin. The EDTIF (Fee) was last revised in April 2009, and needs to be updated to reflect the current cost of acquiring land and constructing traffic impact improvements, as well as a lower factor proposed for the trip generation rate for development within the Transit Center. The cost of preparing the 2010 EDTIF Update is included in the Fee. RECOMMENDATION: 1) Open Public Hearing; 2) Receive Staff Presentation; 3) Receive Public Testimony; 4) Close Public Hearing, determine value of protests (to Area of Benefit Fee only); 5) Deliberate; and 6) Adopt the Resolution revising the Traffic Impact Fee and Area of Benefit Fee for future developments within the Eastern Dublin Area, as previo ly established by Resolution 1-95 and revised by es s 41-9 225-99, 111-04, and 41-09. _ ~ ,~_~~ ~ S fitted By Reviewed By Revie By City Engineer Administrative Services Director Assistant City Manager Page 1 of 13 ITEM NO. ~ ' ~ ~ , DESCRIPTION: The Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee (EDTIF or TIF) was originally established in January 1995, and was subsequently revised in April 1996, December 1999, June 2004, and April 2009. The City Council approved the 2009 Update to the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee (EDTIF or TIF) following a public hearing on April 7, 2009. At that time, the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority (ACSPA), along with Avalon Bay Communities and DR Horton, owners of underdeveloped properties within the Eastern Dublin Transit Center, provided both written and verbal testimony before and at the public hearing requesting that the EDTIF be modified to provide a fee reduction for residential development within the Transit Center. This request was based on provisions in State Government Code Section 66005.1., which allows local government to consider a fee reduction on the basis that transit-oriented developments generate less vehicle traffic, since residents will instead use public transit. The City Council, in adopting the 2009 Update, directed Staff to prepare a work plan to develop a fee reduction for the Eastern Dublin Transit Center. Staff subsequently developed a work plan, which was adopted by the City Council on May 19, 2009. Accordingly, a 2010 TIF Study Update has been prepared, the details of which are discussed in the body of this Report. As a result of the 2010 Study Update, a revision to the EDTIF rates is recommended for adoption by the City Council. The Study Update includes a 25% reduction in the trip generation rate for high-density residential development at the Eastern Dublin Transit Center. The trip generation rate is one factor that is used to calculate the amount of fees owed. Section 11 of the proposed resolution also includes an automatic annual fee adjustment applicable beginning July 1, 2011 and continuing annually until the next update and / or adoption of a revised fee. The automatic annual adjustment is based on indicators measuring the annual increase in land and construction costs. The automatic annual adjustment does not apply to the BART Garage component which contains a fixed cost. Proposed TIF Rates (Per Trip): The calculation of Traffic Impact Fees begins with a cost per trip that is then multiplied by a factor depending on the land use. The TIF also has different categories of fees that are collected (i.e. Section I fees relate to financing projects required to service development generated within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area. Section II fees may be within or outside of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Area). Chart 1 on the following page depicts a summary of the current cost per trip compared to the proposed fees. CHART 1. COMPARISON OF CURRENT AND PROPOSED TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE RATES Page 2 of 13 (PER TRIP BASIS) LAND USE RESIDENTIAL NON-RESIDENTIAL Fee Category Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change (711/2009) (7/1/2009) Section I $579 $579 -0% $579 $579 -0% Section I $47 $27 -43% N/A N/A N/A Residential Section II $160 $156 -3% $160 $156 -3% Total Section I and 786 762 -3% 739 735 -1 %* II (Development within Transit Center Section II $77 $79 3% N/A N/A N/A Residential BART Parkin Fee Total Section I and 863 841 -3% 739 735 -1 II (Development Outside Transit Center "KOUnded up trom 0.54"/0 As shown above, the proposed per trip rate utilized for residential uses located within the Transit Center is $762 per trip, while the proposed per trip rate utilized for residential uses outside the Transit Center is $841 per trip. Both of these rates are proposed to decrease by 3%. The per trip rate for non-residential uses is proposed at $735 per trip, which is a 1 decrease from the current fees. All residential uses are subject to the Section I Residential adjustment of $27 per trip, which allocates to the residential fee certain improvements that benefit residential uses, specifically the Tassajara Creek Regional Trail and certain Park and Ride facilities. This residential fee reduction is accounted for as part of the overall Section I fees and will be discussed later in this report. Residential uses outside the Transit Center are also subject to the Section II Residential BART Parking Fee Component, which allocates a portion of the Transit Center BART parking structure to the Fee. This fee is proposed to increase from $77 to $79 per trip. The Section II Residential BART Parking fee is collected and tracked separately from the remainder of the Section II fees. Non-Residential Fee The fee for non-residential development is determined by applying the proposed per trip fee of $735 to the estimated average weekday trip generation of the particular development, utilizing the trip generation rates detailed on Exhibit C to the proposed resolution entitled, "Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Schedule." Page 3 of 13 During the EDTIF update process, Staff discussed the possibility of revising the trip generation rates for restaurants to be consistent with the trip generation rate in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 8th Edition, which allows for both a 35% pass-by and a 5% internalization reduction. Exhibit C to Attachment 1 has been modified under the 2010 Update to include modified and additional trip generation rates for restaurants. These revised rates provide greater flexibility in assigning appropriate trip generation rates to different restaurant types. The 2010 Study Update will revise Exhibit C to create the following trip generation rates for restaurants: Located Within a Shopping Current Trip Generation Proposed Trip Generation Center (May be a separate legal Rate Rate parcel but with shared parking and internal vehicle/ pedestrian connections to adjacent commercial arcels Quality (leisure) Appropriate Shopping Appropriate Shopping Center Rate Center Rate Sit-down, high turnover (usually Appropriate Shopping Appropriate Shopping chain other than fast food) Center Rate Center Rate Bar/Tavern Appropriate Shopping Appropriate Shopping Center Rate Center Rate Fast Food (w/o drive through) 465/1,000 sf Appropriate Shopping Center Rate Fast Food (with drive through) 465/1,000 sf 306/1,000 sf Located On A Separate Parcel Current Trip Rate Proposed Trip Rate (w/o shared parking and Generation Generation internal vehicle/ pedestrian connections to adjacent commercial arcels Qualit leisure Not Provided 56/1,000 sf Sit-down, high turnover (usually Not Provided 79/1,000 sf chain other than fast food Bar/Tavern Not Provided 98/1,000 sf Fast Food Not Provided 306/1,000 sf Consistent with the previous study, commercial uses in two areas, the ground-floor retail uses within the residential portion of the Transit Center and the retail uses within The Groves (Fairway Ranch) high-density residential development, are exempt from paying the fees. This exemption is due to the fact that these retail uses are considered ancillary to these developments, will serve the adjoining residential areas via pedestrian access, and will not generate additional vehicle trips. These areas are shown on Exhibit D to Attachment 1.. Residential Fee Residential fees are determined by applying the proposed per trip fee ($841 if outside the Transit Center and $762 if within the Transit Center boundaries), which is multiplied by the estimated average weekday trip generation of the particular housing type, based on the land Page 4 of 13 designation included in the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan. As previously noted, one of the reasons for this update was to consider the development of a special category and rate for residential development within the Transit Center area. All residential property within the Transit Center is currently designated in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan as High Density. Chart 2 below provides a summary of the current residential fees compared to the proposed fees as well as the new fee category for the Transit Center. CHART 2 CURRENT FEE COMPARED TO PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL PER UNIT FEE BASED ON TRIP GENERATION Land Use Type Density Trips per Current Fee Proposed %:Change Day per per Unit Fee" Per ; Fee per ''` Unit Unit ' Unit Low Density Up to 6 units/ 10 $8,630 $8,410 3% acre Medium Density 6.1-14 units/ 10 $8,630 $8,410 3% acre Medium/ High 14.1-25 units/ 7 $6,041 $5,887 3% Density acre High Density 25.1 or more 6 $5,178 $5,046 3% Outside Transit units/ acre Center High Density within 25.1 or more 4.5 $4,716 $3,429 27% Transit Center units/ acre New Second Units Sec. 8.80 6 $5,178 $5,046 3% Municipal Code Background: Attachment 2 to the Staff Report provides a brief description of the development of the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee. It outlines the land use and environmental studies conducted prior to adoption of the fee as well as updates and adjustments that have occurred between 1995 and 2009. The 2010 Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Update, dated February 22, 2010, prepared by the City of Dublin Public Works Department (2010 Study Update), attached as Exhibit B to Attachment 1, utilizes similar methodology to that used in the various studies and study updates described in Attachment 2. This approach first estimates the cost of all TIF improvements left to be constructed, and then allocates these estimated costs to new development left to be constructed, based on the estimated average weekday trip generation of different types of land uses. Page 5 of 13 2010 Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Update EDTIF improvements are categorized in three sections: Section I improvements are those within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Area which are needed solely to accommodate new development projected within Eastern Dublin and are funded 100% through the EDTIF. Section II improvements refer to improvements within or outside the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Area which are needed, in part, to support new development projected within Eastern Dublin, and the EDTIF funds the proportionate fair share by Eastern Dublin development. Section III improvements were originally necessary to accommodate new development projected within the region. Section I improvements include two projects funded solely by residential development: (1) the Park and Ride lots, and (2) the Tassajara Creek Bike Path. These residential components are accounted for as part of the overall Section I fees and improvements. The remainder of the Section I improvements are funded both by residential and non-residential development. In addition, Section II improvements also include an East Dublin BART Garage project funded solely by residential development outside of the Transit Center. The Section II Residential BART Garage Fee collected to fund this project is treated as a separate fee for the purpose of collection and accounting. The 2010 Study Update calculates the appropriate Fee rates for Section I and Section II improvements, as well as for the Section I and Section II residential adjustments. The Section III portion of the Fee was suspended with the adoption of the Tri-Valley Transportation Development Fee (TVTDF) in 1998; thus, the 2010 Study Update does not include a Fee rate for Section III fees. In the event that the Section III portion of the Fee becomes effective again, the rate will be adjusted to account for all changes in land and construction costs since the effective date of the TVTDF. The 2010 Study Update accounts for EDTIF improvements that have been completed or are currently under construction by private developers in return for EDTIF credits, as well as for current EDTIF funds that have been received to date. The 2010 Study Update also refines the aggregate trip generation estimates and determines the remaining trips upon which to base the revised Fee. Table 1 of the 2010 Study Update (Table 1 -Exhibit B) details the calculation of the revised EDTIF rates. The following discussion highlights specific issues that were considered in calculating revised TIF rates: Transit Center Trip Rate Reduction The City Council approved the 2009 Update to the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee (EDTIF or TIF) following a public hearing on April 7, 2009. At that time, the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority (ACSPA), along with Avalon Bay Communities and DR Horton, owners of underdeveloped properties within the Eastern Dublin Transit Center, provided both written and verbal testimony before and at the public hearing, requesting that the EDTIF be modified to provide a fee reduction for residential development within the Transit Center. This request was based on provisions in State Government Code Section 66005.1, which allows local government to consider a fee reduction on the basis that transit-oriented developments generate less vehicle traffic, since residents will instead use public transit. Government Code Section 66005.1 states that, effective January 1, 2009 if residential development near a transit center meets certain criteria, the traffic impact fee shall be "set at a Page 6 of 13 rate that reflects a lower rate of automobile trip generation associated with such housing developments in comparison with housing developments without these characteristics." These characteristics are (1) an accessible pedestrian path to the transit station, along a pathway not exceeding one-half mile in length; (2) provisions for limited parking within the site, to discourage vehicle ownership and attract residents who will use transit; and (3) location within one-half mile of "convenience retail uses, including a store that sells food." This requirement is deferred until January 1, 2011, if the development is located within an area covered by a capital improvement plan for traffic facilities which are funded by a development impact fee. The Eastern Dublin Transit Center is subject to the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee, and therefore the reduced fee rate is deferred until January 1, 2011, provided the above three criteria are met. Development within the Eastern Dublin Transit Center does not currently meet the three criteria. In the event a development does not satisfy the above criteria, the agency may charge a fee "that is proportional to the estimated rate of automobile trip generation associated with the housing development." In summary, while the intent of the law would be to recognize the value of transit-oriented development in fostering transit use in lieu of vehicle trips, the law is vague as to how the reduction will be determined, and assigns that task to the local agency. The City Council, in adopting the 2009 Update, directed Staff to prepare a work plan to review if a fee reduction was warranted for the Eastern Dublin Transit Center. Staff subsequently developed a work plan, which was adopted by the City Council on May 19, 2009. The fee reduction would be based not on the three criteria established by Government Code Section 66005.1, but rather on review of actual completed transit-oriented developments. The 2010 Study Update conforms to the work plan. In conformance with the work plan, the City commissioned a study by Fehr & Peers, Transportation Consultants, to develop the likely range of vehicle trip reductions for transit- oriented residential development adjacent to the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) stations in Dublin. The study results, contained in a technical memorandum dated December 16, 2009, recommend a reduction of 25% for multi-family residential development located in a mixed-use environment within abarrier-free half-mile walk of a BART station. The study is attached to the Study Update (Exhibit B to Attachment 1). The 2010 Study Update incorporates the recommendations of the study. The trip generation rate for high-density residential development within the Transit Center has been reduced by 25%, from 6 trips per day per unit to 4.5 trips per day per unit. The impact to the fee per unit can be seen in Chart 2 presented above. Cost Estimates The 2010 Study Update relies on a number of data sources to determine the costs that must be financed by the revised EDTIF, which are listed below: 1. The Public Works Department has prepared a new cost estimate for remaining improvements (included as Attachments 1-5 in the 2010 Study Update). This estimate updates cost estimates for all EDTIF improvements remaining to be funded, excluding `Page 7 of 13 improvements already completed or currently being constructed by private developers under existing development agreements. 2. The Finance Division has provided information regarding the outstanding balance due on prior funding advances and EDTIF credits, as of July 1, 2009, as well as the cash balance of EDTIF funds collected and unallocated as of July 1, 2009 (Attachments 6 and 7 in the Study Update). Costs and credit estimates in Item 1 above rely on updated right-of-way values provided in the Valuation Analysis Report for Traffic and Facilities Impact Fee Study, Eastern Dublin, prepared by Associated Right-of-Way Services, dated September 10, 1999. The Valuation Analysis was updated in June 2003 and again in June 2006. Right-of-way values were based on the same methodology used in past studies, but were updated to reflect land values in the Tri-Valley area as shown in the 2006 appraisal. Cost Adjustment For Section I Residential Improvements (Park And Ride) Certain EDTIF improvements have changed in scope since the 2009 Study Update and are reflected in the 2010 Study Update. Specific changes include the deletion of the Park and Ride Lot on Fallon Road at Interstate 580. The Park and Ride Lot would have been located within the Fallon Gateway Retail Center. In lieu of dedicating land within the center and constructing the Park and Ride Lot, the Retail Center is conditioned to restripe the existing Koll Center Park and Ride Lot on Tassajara Road at Interstate 580 in order to provide the 200 parking spaces required under the General Plan and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. This results in a reduction of the Section I Residential surcharge of approximately $1.5 Million. Cost Adjustment Zone 7 Flood Control Charges Levied On Impervious Surface The 2009 Study Update set the rate for the Zone 7 Water Agency Impervious Surface Fee at $1.82 per square foot. This fee is collected by Zone 7 for all developments (including public projects) which create new impervious surface in order to finance construction of additional flood control facilities to mitigate the increased runoff from these developments. At the time of adoption of the 2009 Update, Zone 7 had proposed a revision to the fee at the rate of $1.82 per square foot. In May 2009 (following the adoption of the 2009 Study Update), Zone 7 adopted a lower fee revision, which set the rate for 2009 at $0.87 per square foot and increases the fee annually to an ultimate rate of $1.42 per square foot in 2014. The next anticipated update of the EDTIF is in 2012; the Zone 7 fee will at $1.10 per square foot at that time. The 2010 Study Update uses a rate of $1.10 per square foot. Contra Costa County Contribution The City of Dublin and Contra Costa County entered into a Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement (dated June 1, 2000) whereby the Dougherty Valley development will contribute toward the costs of certain portions of EDTIF improvements needed as the result of development in the Dougherty Valley. The original amount of fees to be collected based on the Agreement was $13.5 Million. Since the rate charged contains an annual escalator, the total amount to be collected will be approximately $17 Million. The 2010 Study Update estimates the remaining Page 8 of 13 amount of fees to be collected from the Dougherty Valley development and applies these fees toward costs in the EDTIF. Trip Generation The 2010 Update Study refines the estimated trip generation (413,090 trips) from land subject to the EDTIF based on actual land use proposals. The new figure is a decrease of approximately 1,572 trips in comparison to the 2009 Update Study. A history of total Trips estimated for the area covered by the fee is shown below: History of Estimated Number of Total Trips Generated In The Area Subject To The Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee YEAR OF FEE STUDY TOTAL NUMBER OF TRIPS 1996 344,078 1999 356,359 2004 361,432 2009 414,662 2010 413,090 The decrease is due to the proposed new 25% reduction of residential trips assigned to High Density Residential uses within the Eastern Dublin Transit Center. This reduces the residential trips generated within the Transit Center from 6,288 to 4,716. The 2010 Study Update, with the exception of the regional County Government Center land north of Gleason Drive, excludes trips generated by and from public facility land uses, including public schools and parks, because the trips to and from these land uses are generated by new development. This information is shown in Attachments 9 and 10 to the Update Study. Based on building permits issued in Eastern Dublin through July 1, 2009, and on construction activity pursuant to existing entitlements, the 2010 Study Update estimates the number of trips remaining by estimating the trip status as shown in the Table below: Estimated Number of Total Trips Remaining In The Area Subject To The Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee STATUS TRIPS Be innin Balance Total Number of Tri s 413,090 LESS: Number of Tri s Where Fee Has Been Paid 116,471 Number of Tri s Since Jul 1, 2009 until new Fee is Effective 1,430 Estimated Remainin Tri s Sub~ect To Pro osed Fee 295,189 As stated above, the estimated remaining trips are based on a combination of actual unit count for entitled developments and mid-range densities as shown in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan for unentitled properties. Of the estimated 295,189 trips that will be subject to the new Fee, 63,213 (21 % of the total) are estimated to be generated from residential development and 231,976 (79% of the total) are to be generated from non-residential development. Proposed TIF Rates Page 9 of 13 Based on the updated cost estimates and trip generation rates, the 2010 Study Update proposes a revised EDTIF rate of $735 per trip for non-residential uses, $762 per trip for residential uses within the Transit Center, and $841 per trip for residential uses outside the Transit Center. The application of these per trip rates to particular non-residential and residential land uses is described at the beginning of this Report. Exemptions The EDTIF includes full exemptions for building construction that would not increase vehicle traffic to and from the site. Full exemptions are granted for reconstruction, alteration, or addition to residential structures that do not add another dwelling unit and to non-residential structures where the increased building footprint is less than 500 square feet. The EDTIF includes partial exemptions for non-residential construction based on pre-existing uses at a site. Partial exemptions are granted to replacement, reconstruction, or additions for non-residential structures which are 500 square feet or greater based on the vehicle trip generation of the building as it existed prior to the changes. Future Adjustments to the TIF Consistent with prior policy, the proposed resolution includes a process for making future adjustments to the EDTIF, either based on further study and analysis of the then-current circumstances or on an automatic adjustment. The proposed resolution provides that the City will continue to conduct further study and analysis to determine whether the Fee should be revised. When additional information is available, the Fee shall be reviewed and revised to include amounts that are reasonably related to impacts of development in Eastern Dublin. The proposed resolution further provides that, beginning July 1, 2011, in years in which the Fee is not adjusted based on specific studies and analysis, it shall be automatically adjusted (on July 1) based on a formula that accounts for changes in construction and land costs. The formula applies indicators of the change in construction and land costs to the Fee rates, based on the relative allocation between the cost estimates for construction and land acquisition for certain improvements included in the 2010 Study Update. This allocation is 80% for improvements and 20% for land, and the formula will be weighted accordingly. The allocation is shown on Attachment 3 of the Staff Report. It should be noted that the Section II Residential BART Parking Fee has a fixed cost of $6 Million. Therefore, this component of the fee will be a fixed amount and will not automatically increase. Future TIF Updates will evaluate the number of residential units remaining to be built and the amount of the $6 million that remains to be collected, which may result in adjustments to the fee at that time. Based on the timing of this Fee Update, the first automatic adjustment to the fee will not occur until July 1, 2011 as proposed in section 11 of the Resolution (Attachment 1 to the staff report.) Area of Benefit Fee The adoption of an Area of Benefit Fee is required by the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and covers the cost of construction of the major thoroughfares and bridges within the Specific Plan. Page 10 of 13 Exhibit D to the proposed resolution identifies the major thoroughfares and bridges included in the Specific Plan Area. Exhibit D also includes cost estimates for construction of these improvements, using the updated cost estimates included in the Update Study for improvements that have not yet been constructed or bonded. Exhibit D does not include credits due for construction of portions of these major thoroughfares and bridges, but provides that, in the event the Area of Benefit becomes effective, these credits will be calculated and the Fee will be adjusted accordingly. The improvements included in the Area of Benefit Fee are also included in Section I of the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee. Imposition of both the Traffic Impact Fee and the Area of Benefit Fee would be duplicative. In order to eliminate any doubt as to the validity of the EDTIF to pay for the construction of such improvements, Section 12 of the proposed resolution has been added to satisfy both the procedural requirements for the adoption of a fee under the Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance (No.14-94) and the Area of Benefit Ordinance (No. 10-94). Section 14 of Ordinance 10-94 provides that the Area of Benefit Fee would be collected only in the event that the Traffic Impact Fee for the same improvements is held to be legally invalid. Thus, there would be no duplication of fees. Administrative Guidelines The City Council last adopted administrative guidelines for the Fee program on February 20, 2007. No changes to the administrative guidelines are proposed at this time. A copy of the current guidelines is attached (Attachment 4). Payment of Fees Since enactment of the EDTIF in 1995, the fees have been payable upon issuance of building permits. An exception to this practice was the adoption of Resolution No. 127-09 by the City Council on September 1, 2009, which approved a process in which developers can request a deferral of payment from building permit to occupancy for non-residential projects only. The special program is planned to sunset after atwo-year period. Adoption of the resolution (Attachment 1) will not preclude the City Council from adopting further fee deferrals in the future. Review Process for 2010 Update Study An informational meeting was held on February 24, 2010 to discuss the fee update with developers and affected property owners in Eastern Dublin. A notice of the meeting was sent to developers and property owners in Eastern Dublin, as well as interested parties. A total of 60 notices were sent. The meeting was attended by Mr. Dave Chadbourne of Land Planning Associates, representing the Lin Family and James Tong, owners of land within Dublin Ranch. Mr. Chadbourne had one minor comment which was addressed through changes to the staff report and supporting documents. Page 11 of 13 Mr. Pat Cashman, representing the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority, provided a written letter of support for the proposed revisions, dated February 24, 2010 (Attachment 5 to the Staff Report). Mr. Jeff White, representing Avalon Bay Communities, Inc., provided an additional written letter of support for the proposed revisions, dated March 5, 2010 (Attachment 6 to the Staff Report). No other comments were received. Environmental Analysis The EIR and Addenda, together with supplemental CEQA documents, including supplemental environmental impact reports, mitigated negative declarations, negative declarations and addenda have been prepared for Eastern Dublin development since the EIR was certified in 1993 (collectively "the Environmental Documents") that describe the freeway, freeway interchange, and road improvements necessary for implementation of the SP, along with transit improvements, pedestrian trails, and bicycle paths. The adoption of the Fee is within the scope of the Environmental Documents. The Improvements and Facilities were all identified in the Environmental Documents as necessary to accommodate traffic to mitigate impacts of development in Eastern Dublin. The impacts of such development, including the Improvements and Facilities, were adequately analyzed at a Program level in the Environmental Documents. Since the certification or approval of the Environmental Documents, there have been no substantial changes in the projections of future development as identified in the Environmental Documents, no substantial changes in the surrounding circumstances, and no other new information of substantial importance so as to require important revisions in the Environmental Documents' analysis of impacts, mitigation measures, and alternatives. Subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA of the Specific Improvements and Facilities is not required at this stage as they will be implemented over at least a 20-year period, and specific details as to their timing and construction are not presently known. Conclusion In accordance with Government Code Sections 66016 and 66017, notice of this public hearing was mailed to those requesting such notice 14 days before this public hearing. Also in accordance with Government Code Sections 66016 and 66017, the Attachments to this Staff Report and the Background Documents (listed on page 1 of this Report) were made available for public review 10 days prior to this public hearing. The 2010 Study Update will continue to ensure that new development will pay its fair share of the improvements needed to mitigate the resulting new traffic and that those needed mitigations will be constructed. The revised fee will become effective sixty (60) days following adoption of the Resolution. It is anticipated that the next update will be completed in three years (2013). NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH: Page 12 of 13 An informational meeting was held on February 24, 2010 to discuss the fee update with developers and affected property owners in Eastern Dublin. A notice of the meeting was sent to developers and property owners in Eastern Dublin, as well as interested parties. A total of 60 notices were sent. In addition, a notice of the public hearing to adopt the 2010 Study Update was sent on March 2, 2010 to the same list of property owners and interested parties. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Resolution Revising the Traffic Impact Fee and Area of Benefit Fee for Future Developments within the Eastern Dublin Area, as Previously Established by Resolution 1 -95 and Revised by Resolutions 41-96, 225-99, 111- 04, and 41-09, including the following Exhibits: Exhibit A: Land Use and Boundary Map Exhibit B: 2009 Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Update, dated February 22, 2010, prepared by the City of Dublin Public Works Department (including Tables 1-2 and Attachments 1-11) Exhibit C: Traffic Impact Fee Schedule Exhibit D: Non-Residential Uses on Residential Properties Map Exhibit E: Area of Benefit/Major Thoroughfares and Bridges 2) Narrative Record of the Development of the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee 3) Allocation Between Land Acquisition and Construction Costs 4) Administrative Guidelines for the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee, approved February 20, 2007 5) Letter of Support from Alameda County Surplus Property Authority 6) Letter of Support from Avalon Bay Communities BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS: 1) (to be available at 2) City Council meeting) 3) 4) 5) 6) General Plan (Updated to March 2008) Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (Updated to March 4, 2008) Resolution No. 1-95 (with all Exhibits) Resolution No. 41-96 (with all Exhibits) Resolution No. 225-99 (with all Exhibits) Resolution No. 111-04 (with all Exhibits) Admin Services G:\TIF\Eastern Dublin\EDTIF Transit Center Fee Reduction, 2010\staff report 3-16-10.doc Page 13 of 13 /~; iia RESOLUTION NO. -10 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN REVISING THE TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE AND AREA OF BENEFIT FEE FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS WITHIN THE EASTERN DUBLIN AREA, AS PREVIOUSLY ESTABLISHED BY RESOLUTION NO.1-95 AND REVISED BY RESOLUTION N0.41-96, RESOLUTION N0.225-99, RESOLUTION NO. 111-04, AND RESOLUTION N0.41-09 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 were adopted by the City in 1993; and WHEREAS, the Specific Plan has been the subject of various amendments, and all references herein to the "SP" are to the Specific Plan as amended to date; and WHEREAS, the GPA outlined future land uses for lands within the City's eastern sphere of influence, including approximately 13,906 dwelling units and 9.737 million square feet of commercial, office, and industrial development; and WHEREAS, the SP provides more specific detailed goals, policies, and action programs for the lands covered by it; and WHEREAS, the GPA and SP areas ("Eastern Dublin") are included on the Land Use and Boundary Map of the Eastern Dublin TIF Area, attached hereto as Exhibit A; 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"), were prepared and considered by the Council; and WHEREAS, the GPA and SP provided for, and the EIR and Addenda analyzed, future buildout of Eastern Dublin and identified freeway, freeway interchange and road improvements, as well as transit improvements, pedestrian trails and bicycle paths necessary to implement the SP; and WHEREAS, the GPA, 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 of the need for new public facilities and improvements required by future development within Eastern Dublin; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a "Mitigation Monitoring Program: Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment" by Resolution No. 53-93 which requires development within Skm 6.1 3-1b-~~ ATTACHMENT / ~~ iia Eastern Dublin to pay its proportionate share of certain transportation improvements necessary to mitigate impacts caused by development within Eastern Dublin; and WHEREAS, supplemental CEQA documents, including supplemental environmental impact reports, mitigated negative declarations, negative declarations and addenda have been prepared for Eastern Dublin development since the EIR was certified in 1993; and WHEREAS, the SP, EIR, addenda and supplemental CEQA documents assumed that certain traffic improvements would be made and that development within Eastern Dublin would pay its proportionate share of such improvements; and WHEREAS, a Program EIR ("the Transit Center EIR") was prepared for the Dublin Transit Center project, and certified by the Council by Resolution 215-02; and WHEREAS, the Dublin Transit Center project area was added to the SP area and the Transit Center EIR identified new improvements beyond those identified in the EIR; and WHEREAS, no new improvements or changes to the improvements described in the EIR and the Transit Center EIR have been identified in any of the supplemental CEQA documents, except for the CEQA documents or other documents referenced in the 2010 Study Update, attached hereto as Exhibit B; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 1-95 on January 9, 1995, establishing an "Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee" for development within Eastern Dublin; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 1-95 relies upon and incorporates a report prepared for the City of Dublin by Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc., in a document dated November 1994 and entitled "Traffic Impact Fee-Eastern Dublin" (hereafter "Study"), which was attached as Exhibit B to Resolution No. 1-95; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 1-95 further relies upon a second report which was prepared for the City of Dublin by Santina and Thompson in a document dated December 30, 1994, entitled, "Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Study/Roadway Costs, Initial Level" (hereinafter "Cost Report"), which was attached as Exhibit C to Resolution No. 1-95; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 41-96 on April 9, 1996, revising the fee established under Resolution No. 1-95, and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 41-96 relies upon and incorporates a report prepared for the City by TJKM ("1996 Study Update") and cost estimates prepared by Santina and Thompson ("1996 Cost Estimate Update"); and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 225-99 on December 7, 1999, revising the fee established under Resolution No. 41-96, and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 225-99 relies upon and incorporates a report prepared by the Public Works Department ("1999 Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Update", hereinafter "1999 Study Update"), and 2 3~ pia WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 111-04 on June 15, 2004, revising the fee established under Resolution No. 225-99, and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 111-04 relies upon and incorporates a report prepared by the Public Works Department ("2004 Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Update", hereinafter "2004 Study Update"), and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 41-09 on April 7, 2009, revising the fee established under Resolution No. 111-04, and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 41-09 relies upon and incorporates a report prepared by the Public Works Department ("2009 Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Update", hereinafter "2009 Study Update"), and WHEREAS, Section 8 of Resolution No. 41-09 provides that the City will periodically review the fee and make revisions as appropriate; and WHEREAS, testimony was received during the April 7, 2009 public hearing, requesting that the City Council incorporate into the EDTIF a provision for reducing fees within the Eastern Dublin Transit Center (Transit Center), as allowed under State Government Code Section 66005.1, on the basis that transit-oriented developments generate less traffic than conventional development due to proximity of public transit; and WHEREAS, the City Council directed Staff at the Apri17, 2009 public hearing to prepare a work plan to develop a fee reduction study for the Transit Center, to determine if further revision to the EDTIF is appropriate to reflect lower trip generation rates for development within the Transit Center; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 65-09 on May 19, approving the work plan and directing Staff to proceed with the fee reduction study; and WHEREAS, the City's Public Works Department has prepared a revised report, incorporating the recommendations of the fee reduction study, dated February 22, 2010, entitled, "2010 Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Update" (hereafter "2010 Study Update") which is attached hereto as Exhibit B; and WHEREAS, the 2010 Update Study includes and incorporates Tables 1 and 2 and Attachments 1 to 11; and WHEREAS, the 2010 Study Update demonstrates the appropriateness of modifying the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee in certain respects; and WHEREAS, the 2010 Study Update, which includes updated cost estimates, together with a copy of the Agenda Statement and proposed Resolution were available for public inspection and review for ten (10) days prior to this public hearing; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was provided as required by law; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds as follows: 3 y~ iia A. The purpose of the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee (hereafter "Fee") is to finance public improvements and facilities needed to reduce the traffic-related impacts caused by future development in Eastern Dublin. The public improvements and facilities are listed in the Study, the 1996 Study Update, the 1999 Study Update, the 2004 Study Update, the 2009 Study Update, and the 2010 Study Update under Sections I, II, and III and are hereafter defined and referred to as "Improvements and Facilities." The Improvements and Facilities listed under Section I refer to Improvements and Facilities within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Area, which are needed solely to accommodate new development projected within Eastern Dublin, and such Improvements and Facilities are funded 100% through the Fee. The Improvements and Facilities listed under Section II refer to Improvements and Facilities within or outside the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Area, which are needed, in part, to support new development projected within Eastern Dublin, and the Fee funds the proportionate fair share by Eastern Dublin development to construct such Improvements and Facilities. The Improvements and Facilities listed under Section III ("Section III Improvements") are all necessary to accommodate new development projected within the wider region, including development within Eastern Dublin. Although the City has adopted the Tri-Valley Transportation Development Fee by Resolution 89-98, as amended by Resolution 85-99, and Section 10 of Resolution 89-98 suspends Section III fees, the portion of the Fee attributable to Section III improvements will be adjusted if and when Section III portion of the Fee becomes effective again by any adjustments made to the cost of improvements and/or right-of--way from the effective date of Resolution 89-98 to the date the Section III portion of the Fee becomes effective. B. The fees collected pursuant to this Resolution shall be used to finance the Improvements and Facilities. C. After considering the Study, the 1996 Study Update, the Cost Estimate Report, the 1996 Cost Estimate Update, the 1999 Study Update, the 2004 Update Study, the 2009 Study Update, Resolution No. 1-95, Resolution 41-96, Resolution 225-99, Resolution 111-04, Resolution 41-09, the Agenda Statement, the SP, the General Plan, the Environmental Documents, all correspondence received and the testimony received at the noticed public hearing held on March 16, 2010, the Council reapproves and readopts the Study, as revised by the 1996 Study Update, the 1999 Study Update, the 2004 Update Study, the 2009 Study Update and the Cost Estimate Report, as revised by the 1996 Cost Estimate, the 1999 Cost Study Update the 2004 Study Update, the 2009 Study Update, and the 2010 Study Update, and incorporates each herein, and further finds that future development in Eastern Dublin will generate the need for 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 is within the scope of the EIR, Addenda, Transit Center EIR and supplemental CEQA documents ("Environmental Documents"). E. The Improvements and Facilities were all identified in the Environmental Documents as necessary to accommodate traffic from and/or to, to mitigate impacts of development in Eastern Dublin. The impacts of such development, including the Improvements and Facilities, were adequately analyzed at a Program level in the Environmental Documents. Since the certification of the Environmental Documents, there have been no substantial changes in the projections of future development as identified in the Environmental Documents, no substantial changes in the surrounding circumstances, and no other new information of substantial importance so as to require important revisions in the Environmental Documents' analysis of impacts, mitigation measures, and alternatives. Subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA of the Specific Improvements and Facilities is not required at this 4 y ~ ~~a stage, as they will be implemented over at least a 20-year period and specific details as to their timing and construction are not presently known. E. The record establishes: 1. 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 generates or contributes to the need for the Improvements and Facilities; and 2. That there is a reasonable relationship between the Fee's use (to pay 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 Dublin in that the Fee is calculated based on the number of trips generated by specific types of land uses, the total amount it will cost to construct the Improvements and Facilities, and the percentage by which development within Eastern Dublin contributes to the need for the Improvements and Facilities; and 4. That the cost estimates set forth in the Study, as revised by the 1996 Study Update, the 1999 Study Update, the 2004 Study Update, the 2009 Study Update, and the Cost Estimate Report, as revised by the 1996 Cost Estimate, the 1999 Study Update, the 2004 Study Update, the 2009 Study Update, and the 2010 Study Update, are reasonable cost estimates for constructing the Improvements and Facilities, and the Fees expected to be generated by future development will not exceed the projected costs of constructing the Improvements and Facilities; and 5. The method of allocation of the Fee to a particular development, set forth in the Study, as revised in the 1996 Study Update, the 1999 Study Update, the 2004 Study Update, the 2009 Study Update, and the 2010 Study Update bears a fair and reasonable relationship to each development's burden on, and benefit from, the Improvements and Facilities to be funded by the Fee, in that the Fee is calculated based on the number of automobile trips each particular development will generate. NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Dublin does RESOLVE as follows: Definitions a. "Development" shall mean the construction, alteration or addition of any building or structure within Eastern Dublin. b. "Eastern Dublin" shall mean all territory depicted within the Eastern Dublin TIF Area on the Land Use and Boundary Map attached hereto as Exhibit A. c. "Improvements and Facilities" shall include those transportation and transit improvements and facilities as are described in Section I, II and III of the Study and as described in the 1996 Study Update, 1999 Study Update, the 2004 Update Study, the 2009 Study Update, the 2010 Study Update, the 1996 Cost Estimate, SP, and the Environmental Documents. "Improvements and Facilities" shall also include comparable alternative improvements and facilities should later changes in projections 5 ~ 6 iia of development in the region necessitate construction of such alternative improvements and facilities; provided that the City Council later determines (1) that there is a reasonable relationship between development within Eastern Dublin and the need for the alternative improvements and facilities, (2) that the alternative improvements and facilities are comparable to the improvements and facilities in the Study, 1996 Study Update, the 1999 Study Update, the 2004 Update Study, the 2009 Study Update, the 2010 Study Update and (3) that the revenue from the Fee will be used only to pay Eastern Dublin development's fair and proportionate share of the alternative improvements and facilities. d. "Low Density Dwelling Unit" shall mean a dwelling unit as defined in the Uniform Building Code (UBC) as adopted by the City of Dublin constructed or to be constructed on property designated by the SP and GPA for up to six units per acre. e. "Medium Density Dwelling Unit" shall mean a dwelling unit as defined in the Uniform Building Code (UBC) as adopted by the City of Dublin constructed or to be constructed on property designated by the SP and GPA for over 6 to 14 units per acre. f. "Medium/High Density Dwelling Unit" shall mean a dwelling unit as defined in the Uniform Building Code (UBC) as adopted by the City of Dublin constructed or to be constructed on property designated by the SP and GPA for over 14 to 25 units per acre. g. "High Density Dwelling Unit" shall mean a dwelling unit as defined in the Uniform Building Code (UBC) as adopted by the City of Dublin constructed or to be constructed on property designated by the SP and GPA for over 25 units per acre. h. "Second Unit" shall mean a dwelling unit as defined in the Uniform Building Code (UBC) as adopted by the City of Dublin that is issued a building permit as a second unit pursuant to Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 8.80 (Second Unit Regulations) of the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance. 2. Traffic Impact Fee Imposed a. A Traffic Impact Fee ("Fee") shall be charged and paid for each Low Density Dwelling Unit, Medium Density Dwelling Unit, Medium/High Density Dwelling Unit, High Density Dwelling Unit and Second Unit within Eastern Dublin no later than the date of final inspection for the unit, provided that the Fee shall be payable by the date that the building permit is issued for any such Unit from and after the date the City Council approves a Capital Improvement Program for the Improvements and Facilities. b. A Fee shall be charged and paid for non-residential buildings or structures within Eastern Dublin at the time of issuance of the building permit for such building or structure, except where the building or structure will require a later stage of discretionary approval by the City before it can be occupied, in which case, with the approval of the Public Works Director, the Fee for that building or structure may be deferred for payment to the date the City makes the last discretionary approval which is required prior to occupancy. c. The Fee includes the Section I Fee which includes the Section I Residential Fee; Section II Fee; and Section II Residential BART Parking Fee. The Section II Residential BART Parking fee is a separate fee but it, together with the Section I Fee, Section I Residential Fee and Section II Fee, are referred to as the "Fee." 6 /~ i~a 3. Amount of Fee a. Low Density Dwelling Units (Outside Transit Center). The amount of the Fee for each Low Density Dwelling Unit shall be $8,410 per unit. b. Medium Density Dwelling Units (Outside Transit Center). The amount of the Fee for each Medium Density Dwelling Unit shall be $8,410 per unit. c. Medium/High Density Dwelling Units (Outside Transit Center). The amount of the Fee for each Medium/High Density Dwelling Unit shall be $5,887 per unit. d. High Density Dwelling Units (Outside Transit Center). The amount of the Fee for each High Density Dwelling Unit shall be $5,046 per unit. e. High Density Dwelling Units (Within Transit Center). The amount of the Fee for each High Density Dwelling Unit shall be $3,429 per unit. f. Second Units (Outside of Transit Center). The amount of the Fee for each Second Unit shall be $5,046 per unit. g. Non-Residential Buildings or Structures. The amount of the Fee for each Non- Residential Building or Structure shall be $735 per average weekly trip. The amount of Traffic Impact Fees for Residential and Non-Residential Uses are shown attached hereto as Exhibit C. 4. Minimum Cash Payment a. The minimum cash payment for Section I and the Section I Residential fees shall be 11% of those total fees due. The minimum cash payment for Section II fees shall be 25% of those total fees due. Developers may utilize credits for the remainder of the fee, if authorized by the Administrative Guidelines. 5. Exemptions From Fee a. Residential Alteration or Addition: Any alteration or addition to a residential structure is exempt from payment of the Fee, except to the extent that a residential unit is added on a parcel containing asingle-family residential unit or is added to an existing multi-family residential unit. b. Residential Replacement or Reconstruction: Any replacement or reconstruction of an existing residential structure that has been destroyed or demolished is exempt from payment of the Fee, provided that the building permit for the replacement or reconstruction is obtained within one year after the building was destroyed or demolished. c. Non-Residential Replacement or Reconstruction: Any replacement or reconstruction of an existing non-residential structure that has been destroyed or demolished is exempt from payment of the Fee, provided that the building permit for the replacement or reconstruction is obtained within one year after the building was destroyed or demolished and the use of the new or reconstructed building would not increase the trips over those from the existing non-residential structure, calculated as provided in Exhibit C. 7 ~~ ~d ~%~ d. Non-Residential Replacement or Reconstruction (Partial Exemptions Any replacement or reconstruction of an existing non-residential structure that has been destroyed or demolished is entitled to a partial exemption from the Fee if: i).the building permit for the replacement or reconstruction is obtained within one year after the building was destroyed or demolished; and ii) the use of the new or reconstructed building would increase the trips over those from the existing non-residential structure calculated as provided in Exhibit C. The partial exemption from the Fee shall be equal to the square footage of the existing non-residential structure that was destroyed or demolished multiplied by the number of trips shown on Exhibit C for its previous use, which total is then subtracted as a "Partial Fee Exemption" from the fees owed based on the use and square footage of the new or reconstructed building as provided in Exhibit C. The new development shall not accrue any credit or reimbursement rights in the event that the fee for the new or reconstructed building is less than the "Partial Fee Exemption" as calculated above. e. Non-Residential Alterations: Any alteration to an existing non-residential building or structure is exempt from payment of the Fee unless the alteration includes an addition of 500 square feet or more. f. Non-Residential Additions: Any addition to an existing non-residential building or structure is exempt from payment of the Fee if the addition is less than 500 square feet. g. Non-Residential Additions More Than 500 Square Feet (Partial Exemption))^Any addition of 500 square feet or more to an existing non-residential building or structure is entitled to a partial exemption from payment of the Fee. The partial exemption from the Fee shall be equal to the square footage of the existing non-residential building or structure calculated as provided in Exhibit C. h. Non-residential Uses within the Eastern Dublin Transit Center and the Groves (Fairway Ranch) High-Density Residential Development: These uses are considered ancillary to the adjoining residential uses and will not generate outside vehicle trips, and are exempt from the fee. The locations are shown attached hereto as Exhibit D. 6. Use of Revenues a. The revenues raised by payment of the Fee shall be placed in the Traffic Impact Fee Fund. Separate and special accounts within the Traffic Impact Fee 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 pay for design, engineering, right-of--way acquisition and constructions of the Improvements and Facilities and reasonable costs of outside consultant studies related thereto; 2) To reimburse the City for Improvements and Facilities constructed by the City with funds from other sources including funds from other public entities, unless the City funds were obtained from grants or gifts intended by the grantor to be used for traffic improvements. 3) To reimburse developers and/or public agencies who have constructed Improvements and Facilities; and 8 ~fil lld 4) To pay for and/or reimburse costs of program development and ongoing administration of the Fee program. b. Fees in these accounts shall be expended only for the Improvements and Facilities and only for the purpose for which the Fee was collected. 7. Standards 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, SP, and the Environmental Documents. 8. No Existing Deficiencies The City Council determines that there are no existing deficiencies within Eastern Dublin and that the need for the Improvements and Facilities in Category I (Section I) of the Study, 1996 Study Update, the 1999 Study Update, the 2004 Update Study, the 2009 Study Update, and the 2010 Study Update, is generated entirely by new development within Eastern Dublin and, further, that the need for the Improvements and Facilities in Category II and III (Section II and III) of the Study, 1996 Study Update, the 1999 Study Update, the 2004 Update Study, the 2009 Study Update, and the 2010 Study Update, is generated by new development within Eastern Dublin and other new development and, therefore, the Study, as revised by the 1996 Study Update, the 1999 Study Update, the 2004 Update Study, the 2009 Study Update, and the 2010 Study Update has determined the proportionate share of the cost of the Improvements and Facilities for which development within Eastern Dublin is responsible. 9. Periodic Review a. During each fiscal year, the City Manager shall prepare a report for the City Council, pursuant to Government Code Section 66006. b. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66002, the City Council shall also review, as part of any adopted Capital Improvement Program each year, the approximate location, size, time of availability and estimates of cost for all Improvements and Facilities to be financed with the Fee. The estimated costs shall be adjusted in accordance with appropriate indices of inflation. The City Council shall make findings identifying the purpose to which the existing Fee balances are to be put and demonstrating a reasonable relationship between the Fee and the purpose for which it is charged. 10. Subsequent Analysis of the Fee The Fee established herein is adopted and implemented by the City Council in reliance on the record identified above. The City will continue to conduct further study and analysis to determine whether the Fee should be revised. When additional information is available, the City Council shall review the Fee to determine that the amounts are reasonably related to the impacts of development within Eastern Dublin. The City Council may revise the Fee to incorporate the findings and conclusions of further studies and any standards in the GPA, SP and General Plan, as well as increases due to construction costs and land values. The City will evaluate land values through an appraisal approximately every three (3) years, as determined by the Public Works Director. 11. Automatic Increase in Fee 9 yd~ ~~a The purpose of this section is to provide for an automatic annual adjustment to the Fee in years when the City Council does not revise the Fee pursuant to Section 10 above. The City Manager shall adjust the Fee automatically, effective July 1, 2011, and each July 1 thereafter, as follows: a. The costs of construction of the Facilities (which as shown in the 2010 Study Update account for 80% of the improvement cost) shall be increased/decreased each July lst by the annual percentage increase/decrease in the Engineering News Record's Construction Cost Index (20-city average) for the preceding month of December over the same Construction Cost Index for the month of December of the prior year. The City Manager may round the Fee adjustment to whole dollars. b. The Land Cost per acre for the Facilities shall be increased/decreased annually by the percentage increase/decrease between the land cost per acre in the most recent land appraisal (prepared for the City for purposes of adjusting the Fee) over the land cost per acre in the immediately preceding appraisal (prepared for the City for purposes of adjusting the Fee and using the same methodology), calculated as an annual increase/decrease. For example, if the appraised land value in Year One is $10/acre and in Year Two is $11 /acre, that is an annual increase of 10% which will result in a yearly increase of 10%, until the Fee is revised by the Council pursuant to Section 10 above. The City Manager may round the Fee adjustment to whole dollars. For the 2010 Study the "land" comprises 20% of the improvement costs financed by the fees. c. The Section II Residential BART Parking Fee shall not be subject to the automatic fee increase and shall remain at the amount shown in Exhibit B. 12. Area of Benefit Fee A portion of the Fee shall also be deemed to be an Area of Benefit Fee adopted pursuant to Ordinance No. 10-94. This is the portion of the Fee designated for the construction of those improvements and facilities identified in Category I (Section I) of the Study that are major thoroughfares and bridges. These improvements and the estimated cost of such improvements are listed on Exhibit E attached hereto. The "Area of Benefit" is Eastern Dublin as defined herein. The fee shall be apportioned over the Area of Benefit in the same manner set forth in Section 3 of this Resolution and in the Study, 1996 Study Update, the 1999 Study Update, the 2004 Study Update, and the 2009 Study Update, with the amount to be assessed for residential and non-residential as shown on Exhibit E. The Area of Benefit Fee shall be deposited into the City's Traffic Impact Fee Fund into separate accounts established for each of the improvements identified in Exhibit E. 13. Administrative Guidelines The City Council may adopt administrative guidelines for the fee program to provide procedures for reimbursement, credit or other administrative aspects of the Fee. The amount of any reimbursement or credit shall be determined by the Public Works Director using the costs of construction and value of right-of--way used by the City in calculating and establishing the Fee. The amount of any reimbursement or credit, once established, shall not be increased for inflation nor shall interest accrue on such amount. No credit or reimbursement shall be given unless the improvements constructed are the Improvements and Facilities described herein. Reimbursement shall only be from revenues raised by Payment of the Fee. 10 /D ~ iia 14. 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 and shall supersede the Fee established by Resolution No. 411-09 sixty (60) days from the effective date of the Resolution. The Area of Benefit Fee established in Section 12 of this Resolution shall be effective only if the Fee provided in Sections 2 and 3 hereof is declared invalid for any reason. 15. Severability Each component of the Fee, including the Section I fee, Section I Residential, Section II, Section II Residential Parking Garage Fees and each and every improvement financed by the Fee or any of the component fees, and all portions of this Resolution are severable. Should any- individual component fee 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. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of March, 2010, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor G: ITIFIEastern DublinlEDTIF Transit Center Fee Reduction, 20091reso 3-16-IO.DOC 11 ll ~ il~ ~~ ~ ~ ~-~ 1~t~~sni~~te~u~~~~u~~~~~~e~~~nn~~ i • ^ •~n~~~~nsc~~~~u~u • ^ ~ ,. co L m Q~ (/~ -~ V a~~ ~~~ ~,-~ a m~~ LL _ ,, , o X U r-I W Q- rv ~..~ l~ ~4- L L -1--~ Cn w 1~n~u~n~uu~~~ • w • r I p^ • ''~ FHF~ • mow, • • • • i i `-- %r -... :^ ~~~~~~~~ U f9 7 ~ a O o m U U m ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ U O 7 f0 i Q c ~ ~ 7 ~ o (9 ~ a o O ~ ~ N _ V m ~' E U m ` ~ a a m f"' ~ U ~ Q ~ °' ~ m _ V _ + ~ o 'C N ' _ f0 '~ E E a i a o ~ ~ ~ m a d = ~ 'E :' a ~~ y c ~' a o o °o ~ m c t0 ,~ m a a~ ~ ~ m 0 p ~~ U U L O a ~ c ~ ~- ~ o in ~ ~ d R ~ a> j 2 ~ t9 m m a ~ w ~ E C °~ m ° 5 ~' m m m ~ c c O1 E ~ ~ : a ~ ; t,:. ~ v i - ~ a ~ a O a cn ~ ~ in ~ . ~ _ ~ a i U i ~ a U ~ z v O 0 j ~.... 1 ~i• ^ • i i ~~ N ~ ^ i a~ ^ i~,6 iia Exhibit B City of Dublin 2010 Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Update Prepared by Public Worl~s Department February 22, 2010 The following is the 2010 update ("the 2010 Study Update") for the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee ("the TIF"). This memorandum explains the methodology used in updating the previous reports prepared by TJKM Transportation Consultants and Santina and Thompson for the 1996 fee update, and by the Department of Public Works for the 1999, 2004 and 2009 fee updates. The following documents are attached and are made a part of this 2010 Study Update: • Table 1, which summarizes the calculations of the revised per trip traffic impact fee for Section I improvements, Section I residential improvements, Section II improvements, and Section II residential BART parking improvement; • Table 2, which provides detail of total (unadjusted) improvement costs by section and project segment: • Attachments 1-5, which includes revised cost estimates for roadway improvements that have not yet been constructed or guaranteed; • Attachment 6, which provides a summary of outstanding loans, cash advances, or credits to developers for construction of improvements or dedication ofright-of--way; • Attachment 7, which provides a summary of unencumbered Section I, Section I Residential, Section II, and Dougherty Valley traffic mitigation fees which are currently on hand in reserve accounts; • Attachment 8, which provided a summary of remaining Dougherty Valley Traffic Impact Fees not yet received by the City; • Attachments 9, which provides detailed information on the estimated number of trips generated for each parcel in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Area (including the parcels within the Transit Center) that will be subject to the existing and proposed fee rates; and • Attachment 10, which provides detailed information on the estimated number of residential trips generated for each parcel in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Area (including the parcels within the Transit Center) that will be subject to the existing and proposed fee rates. Page 1 of 13 /~ ~ //d • Attachment 11, Technical Memorandum by Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants, Ciry of Dublin Transit Oriented Development Transportation Impact Fee Assessment, December 16, 2009 Summary The following Summary Table identifies the changes on the per trip TIF for Section I and Section II improvements for both residential and non-residential development projects. All Residential property located in the Transit Center is designated in the Specific Plan as High Density, and therefore only one rate is shown. Proposed TIF Summary Table -Per Trip Factors RESIDENTIAL NON-RESIDENTIAL LAND USE Existing Proposed % Existing Proposed °fa (7/1/2009) Change (7!1/2009)- Change. Section I $579 $579 -0% $579 $579 -0% Section I Residential $47 $27 -43% N/A N/A N/A Section II $160 $156 -3% $160 $156 -3% Total Section I and II $786 $762 -3% $739 $735 -1% (Development within Transit Center) Section II Residential $77 $79 3% N/A N/A N/A BART Parking Fee Total Section I and II $863 $841 -3% $739 $735 -1% (Development Outside Transit Center) The per trip fee rate for non-residential development will see a 1 % decrease below the current fee. The per trip fee rate for residential development will see a 3% decrease below the current fee. The per trip fee rate for development within the Transit Center will see a 3% decrease below the current fee. Page 2 of 13 ~~~ iia The revised fee results in the following fees per housing unit: Proposed Per Unit Residential TIF Summary Table and Use Type Densit~~ Trips per Current Fee Proposed Fee % Change, Day per per Unit per. Unit Fee per Itnit Unit Low Density Up to 6 units/ acre 10 $8,630 $8,410 3% Medium Density 6.1-14 units/ acre 10 $8,630 $8,410 3% Medium/ High 14.1-25 units/ acre 7 $6,041 $5,887 3% Density High Density 25.1 or more units/ 6 $5,178 $5,046 3% Outside Transit acre Center High Density 25.1 or more units/ 4.5 $4,716 $3,429 27% within Transit acre Center ew Second Units Sec. 8.80 6 $5,178 $5,046 3% Municipal Code Development within the Transit Center will see a 25% decrease in the trip generation rate for high-density residential development, which results in a total decrease of 27% of fees ep r umt• Section I fees pay for improvements within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Area, which are needed solely to accommodate new development projected within Eastern Dublin, and these improvements are funded 100% through the TIF. Section II fees pay for improvements within or outside the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Area, which are needed, in part, to support new development projected within Eastern Dublin, and the TIF funds the proportionate fair share by Eastern Dublin development to construct these improvements. Section I fees include a Residential Adjustment that is applied to all residential development in Eastern Dublin to pay for two Park and Ride lots and the Tassajara Creek Regional Trail. These improvements benefit only residential development. Section II fees include a Residential BART Parking Fee that is applied to all residential development outside of the Transit Center in Eastern Dublin to pay for a portion of the BART parking structure within the Transit Center. Residential development within the Transit Center is within walking distance of the BART Station and would not utilize the BART parking facility. The Section III fee rate was not updated, as the collection of the Section III fee was suspended with the adoption by the City (Resolution No. 89-98) of the Tri-Valley Page 3 of 13 i5 ~6 iia Transportation Development (TVTD) Fee. The TVTD Fee, which is collected from new development in addition to the Section I and II TIF, funds improvements formerly covered by the Section III fee. In the event collection of the Section III fee becomes necessary at some point in the future, the fee rate will be adjusted at that time for all adjustments made to the Section III portion of the TIF since the effective date of the TVTD Fee. Background The Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee was initially adopted in January of 1995, and subsequently updated in 1996, 1999, 2004, and 2009. The 2004 Update included annexation of the Eastern Dublin Transit Center. The City Council approved the 2009 Update to the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee (EDTIF or TIF) following a public hearing on April 7, 2009. At that time, the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority (ACSPA), along with Avalon Bay Communities and DR Horton, owners of underdeveloped properties within the Eastern Dublin Transit Center, provided both written and verbal testimony before and at the public hearing requesting that the EDTIF be modified to provide a fee reduction for development within the Transit Center. This request was based on provisions in State Government Code Section 66005.1., which allows local government to consider a fee reduction on the basis that transit-oriented developments generate less vehicle traffic, since residents will instead use public transit. The City Council, in adopting the 2009 Update, directed Staff to prepare a work plan to develop a fee reduction for the Eastern Dublin Transit Center. Staff subsequently developed a work plan, which was adopted by the City Council on May 19, 2009. The 2010 Study Update conforms to the work plan. The boundaries of the properties proposed to be subject to the fee are shown on Exhibit A to the Resolution. The boundaries include all properties currently within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (which includes the Transit Center) as well as remaining properties within the City's Sphere of Influence that have been annexed to the City or are expected to be annexed to the City. The 2010 Study Update Fee Reduction As part of the 2010 Study Update, the City Commissioned a study by Fehr & Peers, Transportation Consultants, to develop the likely range of vehicle trip reductions for transit-oriented residential development adjacent to the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) stations in Dublin. The study results, contained in a technical memorandum dated July 30, 2009, recommends a reduction of 25% for multi-family residential development located in a mixed-use environment within aharrier-free half-mile walk of a BART station. The study is attached to the Study Update as Attachment 11. Page 4 of 13 ld~ lla In conformance with the recommendations of the study, the trip generation rate for high-density residential development within the Transit Center has been reduced by 25%, from 6 trips per day per unit to 4.5 trips per day per unit. Trip Generation Rate for Restaurants The 2010 revises the trip generation rates for restaurant uses, as shown on Exhibit C. Currently, the rate for fast food restaurants is set at 465 trips per thousand square feet. The rate does not distinguish between restaurants with or without adrive-thru lane. The rate will be revised to reduce the trip generation rate to 306 trips per thousand square feet, which accounts for external pass-by trips and internal shared trips; in addition, fast food restaurants without drive- thru lanes AND that are in-line with other shops in a shopping center will use the lower shopping center rate. In addition, the current rate for all restaurants except fast-food is set at the shopping center rate. Rates will be added for specific restaurant types located on separate stand-alone parcels. The 2010 Study Update will revise Exhibit C to create the following trip generation rates for restaurants: Located Within a Shopping Center (May be on a separate parcel but with shared parking and internal vehicle/ pedestrian connections to adjacent commercial arcels Quality (leisure) See appropriate Shopping Center Rate Sit-down, high turnover (usually chain See appropriate Shopping Center other than fast food) Rate Bar/Tavern See appropriate Shopping Center Rate Fast Food (w/o drive through) See appropriate Shopping Center Rate Past Food (with drive through] __ 306/1,000 sf I Located On A Separate Parcel(w/o shared parking and internal vehicle/ destrian connections to adiacent commercial parcels ~6,~` 1.000 sf Sit-down, hi~~h turnover (usually chain other dean ~ 791 1,000 sf fast foodl 9~/ 1,000 st ~ast Food 306/1,000 sf Shaded uses will pay at the individual trip rate as these uses tend to generate destination trips. Fallon Road Park and Ride Lot The 2009 Study Update included a Park and Ride Lot on Fallon Road at Interstate 580. The Park and Ride Lot would have been located within the Fallon Gateway Retail Center. In lieu of dedicating land within the center and constructing the Park Page 5 of 13 l~~d lld and Ride Lot, the Retail Center is conditioned to restripe the existing Koll Center Park and Ride Lot on Tassajara Road at Interstate 580 in order to provide the 200 parking spaces required under the General Plan and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. This results in a reduction of the Section I Residential surcharge of approximately $1.5 Million. Zone 7 Water Agency Impervious Surface Fee Rate Adjustment The 2009 Study Update set the rate for the Zone 7 Water Agency Impervious Surface Fee at $1.82 per square foot. This fee is collected by Zone 7 for all developments (including public projects) which create new impervious surface in order to finance construction of additional flood control facilities to mitigate the increased runoff from these developments. Following the adoption of the 2009 Study Update, Zone 7 adopted a revised fee rate, which set the rate for 2009 at $0.87 per square foot and increases the fee annually to an ultimate rate of $1.42 per square foot in 2014. The next anticipated update of the EDTIF is in 2012; the Zone 7 fee will at $1.10 per square foot at that time. The 2010 Study Update uses a rate of $1.10 per square foot. Calculation of the Fee. The following is a detailed description of the methodology used to calculate the new fee, as shown on the attached Table 1, dated November 30, 2009. Table 1, Line 1-Cost of Improvements/Right-of--Way Not Currently Guaranteed The cost of remaining improvements and right-of--way to be funded by the TIF is shown in Attachments 1 through 5. These costs are as of July 1, 2009. The revised cost estimate (Attachment 1, Cost Estimate Summary) includes the following changes: a) The costs of improvements that have already been completed or are guaranteed have been removed from the total estimate. The cost of the improvements for the remaining street segments not guaranteed under existing improvement agreements has been modified to reflect the cost revisions and to add the additional improvements listed above. The costs for the remaining improvements have been summarized in four categories: Section I Im rovements $ 93,412,721 Section I Residential Im rovements $961,640 Section II Im rovements $ 34,017,988 Section II Residential BART Parkin $4,827,906 Total Costs $133,220,255 Page 6 of 13 lB~ lia The Section I improvements are required solely to accommodate development of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Area. This report assigns 100% of the cost of each Section 1 improvement to the Section I TIF. An exception is the portion of the Dublin Boulevard extension from Fallon Road to Airway Boulevard which is outside the City of Dublin sphere of influence. The City of Dublin and the City of Livermore will each contribute 50% of the cost of the 3,000 foot portion of the roadway. It is expected that this segment will remain in unincorporated County of Alameda lands between the two cities. The Section I Residential Improvements category includes several improvements that benefit only the residential development in Eastern Dublin. These improvements include the Tassajara Creek Regional Trail and one Park and Ride lot near Fallon Road (a second Park and Ride Lot has been constructed by the Koll Corporate Center on Tassajara Road). The costs associated with these improvements are allocated solely to fees collected from residential units. The Section II improvements are needed to accommodate development of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Area, as well as serve traffic generated outside of the Specific Plan Area. Therefore, it is appropriate that the Section II TIF fund only a share of the improvement costs based on the proportion of traffic generated within the Specific Plan Area. The Section II TIF is assigned 50% of the total cost of the Fallon Road/ I- 580 Interchange, with the remainder of the costs shared equally at 25% between the Cities of Pleasanton and Livermore. (The interchange project will be completed in two phases. The City of Dublin has taken the lead in designing Phase I and is funding this project largely with Section II TIF fees; the cost participation by the three Cities for the remaining Phase 2 work will be adjusted to account for Phase 1 contributions by the City of Dublin to maintain a 50:25:25 overall share between the Cities). Scarlett Drive and portions of Dougherty Road and Dublin Boulevard are partially funded by prior traffic mitigation fees paid by development in the Downtown area. The costs for the remaining Section II improvements are assigned at 100% of the total cost. The Section II Residential BART Parking category includes that portion of the Eastern Dublin BART Parking Garage that serves parking generated from residential development in Eastern Dublin (this is approximately 500 spaces out of 1,680 total spaces). This report assigns this cost to the Section II Residential BART Parking fee. This fee will be paid only by residential development outside the Transit Center to a maximum of $6 Million, as development within the Transit Center would not travel by automobile to access the BART Station. Table 1, Line 2 -Balance Due on Advances and TIF Credits The City of Dublin received funding advances from County of Alameda, the City of Pleasanton and the Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) for construction of certain improvements needed to serve Eastern Dublin development ("the funding advances"). In addition, between 1995 and the present, several developers in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area constructed or guaranteed various improvements Page 7 of 13 l9~ iii funded by the TIF. Pursuant to the TIF, each such developer received TIF credits in return. Portions of the funding advances have been repaid. Further, developers have utilized portions of their credits against TIF fees that would otherwise be due with building permits, reducing the value of the remaining credits. A summary of balances remaining as of July 1, 2009 for credits and advances by developer is shown on Attachment 6. The three advances made by other public agencies are subject to interest payments on the unpaid principal. The BART Long Term Advance was fully repaid July 1, 2009, the remaining balance owed to the City of Pleasanton was fully repaid in November 2009. Currently only the amount owed to County of Alameda is outstanding and subject to interest payments on the unpaid principal. The interest to be paid must be added to the TIF. The Administrative Services Department has prepared an estimate of repayments and reductions in the loan balances for a period of five years beginning July 1, 2009. The current projections indicate that amounts will still be owed to the County of Alameda at the end of the five year period based on projected development. The amount projected to be owed is included in the amounts shown on Attachment 6. The outstanding TIF credit balances as of June 30, 2009 are shown below: Credits Loans TOTAL Section I Improvements $82,589,298 $158,092 $82,747,390 Section I Residential Im rovements $779,717 $779,717 Section II Im rovements $12,755,797 $5,823,229 $18,579,026 Section II Residential BART Parkin N/A Total Costs $96,124,812 $5,981,321 $102,106,133 The above costs must be included in the revenue to be raised under the revised TIF Section I and Section II fees, in order that adequate funds are available to reimburse the credit holders and agencies that advanced funding Table 1, Line 3 -Total Cost of TIF Improvements (Lines 1 and 2~ This line, which is the sum of Lines 1 and 2, shows the total cost of all improvements remaining to be funded under the TIF. Total costs by category are as follows: Section I Im rovements $176,160,111 Section I Residential Im rovements $1,741,357 Section II Im rovements $52,597,014 Section II Residential BART Parkin $4,827,906 Page 8 of 13 as a //~2 Total Costs $235,326,388 Table 1, Line 4 -Current TIF Fee Account Balance, Section I Fees collected from the building permits issued to date that have not been allocated to specific TIF improvements, remain in a reserve account and can be deducted from the total revenue to be raised by the revised fees. The cash balance of Section I TIF fee revenues as of July 1, 2009 has been provided by the Finance Division, as shown on Attachment 7. The current balance is $1,010,671. Table 1, Line 5 -Current TIF Fee Account Balance, Section II The cash balance of Section II TIF fee revenues as of July 1, 2009 has been provided by the Finance Division. The current balance is $2,945,769, as shown on Attachment 7. Table 1, Line Sa -Current TIF Fee Account Balance, Section II Non-Residential BART Parkin The cash balance of Section II TIF Non-Residential BART Parking fee revenues as of July 1, 2009 has been provided by the Finance Division. The current balance is $97,629, as shown on Attachment 7. Table 1, Line 6 - Dougherty Valley Traffic Mitigation Fee Account Balance The cash balance of Dougherty Valley Traffic Mitigation Fees as of July 1, 2009 has been provided by the Finance Division. The current balance is zero, as shown on Attachment 7. Table _1 ~ Line 7 -Adjusted Cost of Remaining_Improvements (Line 3 -Lines 4-6) The total cost of the TIF improvements and credits (Line 3) is decreased by the current balance of fees not encumbered for specific projects (Lines 4-6) Table 1, Lines 8a and 8b -Estimated Section I and Section II Fees from Estimated Remaining_Trips (1,430) Collected at Current Rate A list of remaining development projects in Eastern Dublin as of July 1, 2009 is shown on Attachment 9. Certain projects are shown as receiving building permits during the 2009-10 Fiscal Year, based on projections by the City's Building Division. These projects account for 1,430 new trips. For the purpose of developing the revised EDTIF fee, it is assumed that payment of the EDTIF will be made at the existing rate (actual payment will be at the rate in effect at the time the permits are issued). The revenue raised from fees applied to these trips can be deducted from the total revenue to be raised by the revised fees. Estimated revenues from the remaining trips collected at the old rate are $827,970 for Section I and $228,800 for Section II. Page 9 of 13 ~ti ~ pia Table 1, Line 9a -Estimated Section I Residential Fees From Remaining Residential Trip~1,320) Collected at Current Rate A list of remaining residential development projects in Eastern Dublin as of July 1, 2009 is shown on Attachment 10. Certain projects are shown as receiving building permits during the 2009-10 Fiscal Year, based on projections by the City's Building Division. These projects account for 1,320 new trips. For the purpose of developing the revised EDTIF fee, it is assumed that payment of the EDTIF will be made at the existing rate (actual payment will be at the rate in effect at the time the permits are issued). The revenue raised from fees applied to these trips can be deducted from the total revenue to be raised by the revised fees. Estimated revenues from the remaining trips collected at the old rate are $62,040. Table 1, Line 9b -Estimated Section II Residential BART Parking Fees From Remaining Residential Trips (1,320) Collected at Current Rate A list of remaining residential development projects in Eastern Dublin as of July 1, 2009 is shown on Attachment 10. Certain projects are shown as receiving building permits during the 2009-10 Fiscal Year, based on projections by the City's Building Division. These projects account for 1,320 new trips. For the purpose of developing the revised EDTIF fee, it is assumed that payment of the EDTIF will be made at the existing rate (actual payment will be at the rate in effect at the time the permits are issued). The revenue raised from fees applied to these trips can be deducted from the total revenue to be raised by the revised fees. Estimated revenues from the remaining trips collected at the old rate are $101,640. Table 1, Line 10 - Remainin D~oughe Valley Traffic Mitigation Fees The City of Dublin has negotiated an agreement with the County of Contra Costa for the payment of funds to provide traffic improvements on City of Dublin streets necessitated by development in the Dougherty Valley. The original estimated level of contribution was $13,250,220. Under the terms of the agreement, these funds must be spent on selected roads impacted by Dougherty Valley traffic, specifically Dougherty Road, Scarlett Drive, Tassajara Road, and Fallon Road. The fees are increased each year based on current construction costs; therefore, the total amount of fees received will exceed the above amount. The current fee effective 7/1/2009 is $2,161 per unit for units in the Shapell Development and $1,786 for units in the Windermere development. A summary of payments from Contra Costa County for Dougherty Valley Impact Fees has been provided by the Finance Division, as shown on Attachment 8. A total of 7,795 residential units had received building permits in Dougherty Valley as of July 1, 2009, out of a total of 11,000 units. This leaves 3,205 units to be permitted in the future, for which fees in the amount of $6,760,630.00 are estimated to be paid. For the purpose of the TIF update, the balance is split equally between Section I and Section II, or $3,380,315.00 for each account. Revenues are split equally between the two Sections based on the agreement between the City and the County of Contra Costa, which calls for the Dougherty Valley fees to be used for the improvement of Page 10 of 13 ~~6 ~~a Dougherty Road, Scarlett Drive, Tassajara Road, and Fallon Road. The Section I (Tassajara Road and Fallon Road) and Section II (Dougherty Road and Scarlett Drive) costs are approximately equal for these four roadways, and revenues will be assigned in equal amounts to each section. Table 1, Line 11 -Remaining Costs to be Financed by Revised Fee (Line 7 - (Lines 8, 9 andand 10)) The adjusted cost of the remaining improvements (Line 7) must be further adjusted to subtract the estimated fees to be collected under the old rate as well as the estimated remaining Dougherty Valley revenue (Lines 8, 9, and 10). Section I Im rovements $170,941,155 Section I Residential Im rovements $1,679,317 Section II Im rovements $46,042,130 Section II Residential BART Parkin $4,628,637 Total Costs $223,291,239 Table 1, Line 12 -Total Remaining Trips Subject to Fees A list of pending and buildout projects subject to the Eastern Dublin TIF is shown on Attachments 9 and 10. Trip generation is based on General Plan land use designations and densities approved within the Eastern Dublin TIF area. Land uses for each specific property and anticipated densities were determined by the Community Development Department. For the purpose of estimating the revised fee, it is assumed that these projects will all receive building permits after the revised fee has gone into effect. The list has been revised to reflect the current status of land use entitlements. The revised total number of trips subject to the TIF is 296,761. A list of residential-only projects is shown on Attachment 10. The total number of residential trips is 64,785, with 58,497 trips generated outside the Transit Center. There are a total of 6,288 residential trips remaining in the Transit Center. Based on the Fehr & Peers study, these trips will pay a fee which is 25% lower than trips outside of the Transit Center. This results in a reduction of 1,572 trips. The number of total trips subject to the TIF is reduced to 295,179; the total number of residential trips subject to the TIF is 63,213. One commercial project is shown as creating no vehicle traffic. This is the retail use within the Transit Center. The retail use will serve residents within the development through pedestrian access, and will not generate vehicle trips from the outside. This retail use will be exempt from paying the TIF. There is a nominal amount of ancillary retail use within the Fairway Ranch high- density residential project, which is not shown in Attachment 9. This retail use will also be exempt from paying TIF fees, as it will not generate additional vehicle trips. Page 11 of 13 a3~ ~~~ A "second unit" as defined in the Resolution, would pay a fee of $5,034 per unit, which is equal to the rate for High Density Residential Units. The Community Development Director estimates that approximately 50 "second units" could be constructed within Eastern Dublin. Because second units can be no larger than 1,000 square feet (Dublin Municipal Code, Chapter 8.80), the Public Works Department estimates that the number of vehicle trips per day will be similar to the trips generated from dwelling units on property designated for over 25 units per acre, or six trips per day per unit. The total trips from the "second units" is considered de minimus and will not affect the amount of the fee. It should be noted that the purpose of the Attachments 9 and 10 is to develop an estimate of trips for the purpose of calculating the fee, and should not imply approval of land uses or densities for specific properties beyond any existing entitlements for those properties. Also, actual fees will be based on the trip rates for land uses shown on Exhibit C, and not the projections shown on Attachments 9 and 10. Table 1, Line 13 -Revised Fee (Cost per Trip~Line 11 divided bYLine 12) The revised fee for each section is determined by dividing the cost of improvements (Line 11) by the number of trips subject to the fee (Line 12). The Section I fee will remain at $579 per trip. The minor increase in the fee rate due to the 25% reduction of trips within the Transit Center was offset by the reduction in the Zone 7 impervious surface fee rate. There is a decrease in the Section I Residential fee of 43%, due to the removal of the Fallon Road Park and Ride Lot from the TIF. The Section II fee will decrease by 3%. This is largely due to the final costs for the Dublin Boulevard/ Dougherty Road Intersection and the Interstate 580/ Fallon Road Interchange costs being slightly lower than the costs used in the 2009 Update. The minor increase in the fee rate due to the 25% reduction of trips within the Transit Center was offset by the reduction in the Zone 7 impervious surface fee rate. The Section II Residential BART Parking fee will increase by 3%. This is because the 2009 Update presumed that a number of building permits would be issued prior to the 2009 Update going into effect, and that fees would be collected at the pre-2009 Update rate of $140 per trip and not the post-Update rate of $77 per trip. Because of the economic downturn, these permits were not issued, and the fees will be collected at the lower post-Update rate. The difference in fee rates ($140-$77 per trip) is lost revenue that must be spread to the remaining permits, increasing the fee per trip from $77 to $79. The overall change for fees charged to non-residential development is a 1 % decrease below the current costs. The overall change for fees charged to residential development is a 3% decrease below the current costs. Page 12 of 13 ~~~ ~~~ Since residential development within the Transit Center will see a 25% reduction in the trip generation rate, the net reduction in fees per unit for residential development within the Transit Center is a 27% reduction below current levels. Payment Plan for Interest-Bearing Loans The TIF program is liable for payments on certain loans /advances by third parties for TIF infrastructure. As many developers pay the TIF with credits, very little cash is available to repay these loans. The 2004 Update used an projected eight-year payoff period in determining the interest costs for the three interest-bearing loans. In order to generate adequate cash flow to meet the eight-year payoff, the 2004 Update included the provision that the minimum Section I cash payment be increased from 3% of the total fee to 11%, and that the minimum Section II cash payment be increased from 12.4% to 25% of the total fee. These minimum payments were continued with the 2009 Study Update. The 2010 Update proposes to maintain the same minimum cash payment requirements, as principal remains on the two of the three loans. The City will utilize the fee revenue for loan repayment, for use on capital improvements funded by the fee or for administrative costs associated with the fee program, and for distribution to holders of aright to reimbursement in accordance with the adopted Administrative Guidelines. G: ITIFIEastern DublinlEDTIF Transit Center Fee Reduction, 20101Study Update Exhibit B, 2-08-]O.DOC Page 13 of 13 a5~d ~l~ Exhibit B, Table 1 ~ ~ /iz W Q a ~ c O 0 0 r N N N W a v LL LL_ U ~ m Q a~ a ~ a ~ ~ ci - m o vat LL m O w ~ O O ~ fn Iy6 J O w m W ~ a ~ U N Z ~ W K U 00 00 t0 I~ ~ O O ~ 0 0 O O O ~ r ~ 00 M h O O O IA O O O O O to ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N OO O O O O O O O 0 0 O 01 ~ N W ~ ~ OO I~ O N V> ~- f~ O R V M M fR J Q N O N CD O M t0 N CO O 1~ ~ O 1~ M N O h W W O N O O O N r T N O N r M O V Q~ m tR n N N eD N N t9 to O CD 01 M ~ ~ fA fR fA f~ ~ N N N N M O M 69 M fH _ EA _ 69 fR IA fA ~ O O O O O O O O O O I~ h O I~ I~ Q .O-~ Q (O l0 O) h O h ~ V M O ~ t0 ~ Z N m C O O O N ~ ~O ~ ~ = U m ~ ~ I~ o o N N y C '~ ~ N N O M O a N m ~ m ~ m ~ eo ao u9 n _ ~ ~o V~ fH U f` ~ ~ HP ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O O N M N M tf) O O O 1~ N O O O O 1~ N CO a0 00 N h O c0 f0 N N Oa O O 00 CO a O O IA O tf) O I~ N ~ r N If ~ O _ m O O ~ ~ N W M r QOi (D r ~ ~ t0 IA N ~ O f~ O /~ ~ r 00 O N N N M A O ~ O ~ N ~ t0 N M O N ~ t0 ~ M O N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ EA b9 fH a IR a V- O O O O O O 00 00 r M N _ fC r r ~ O N M b~9 ~~ V CO h h M h M ~ O M ~ f0 f0 r M CD N .O O) r r N Oi {A N r h t0 I.L w w v~ 00 ~f CO ~O a O r 1~ -~ N O O O O n N O O W N n O) W Of 1~ a ~ O O ~ ~ r OOf r tf - N I~ 00 co r r co a a ~ rn M ~ r O 0 O r ~ rn IR ° o ~ ~ O N O N N N r i n a W ~ _ V ~ f~ ~O r _ O ~} r N a0 W M ~ 07 ~ rn N n v n ~ ~ o t0 r to h ~ m > n ~ ~ ~ ~ t` r N w ~ ~ N r O O ( O ( O O O N ~ 0 Q' 6 ~' f0 l6 N V (D ~ O O O O O ~° c o 0 0 0 Q a~ ~ 0 0 0 ~ o Y m N N ~ -O L O O t}' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Oi N N [Z O N C N fO N U N U ~ pp ~ W o o m ~ e a~ ~~ a~ ~U o U o U aci ~ J F c q a i _ a _ i w II C O O ~ ~ C O U O U N N N m ~ ~ .-. C .N n n ~ m v M M E L.L LL ~ ~ ~ N .X N r N ~ C O O r r c '8 L.L O to N N r 7 W r y N 7 O w C ~ ~ !A Vl O O d N ~ ~ r G1 C J N C ~ N y O O ~ U d r r ._ H ._ ~ ~ (0 ~- ! N N ~ ~ 00 p ~ J o ~ c O O o Q m m m a ~ ~ n ~ ch Z c J N fa Z N > ._ .- .~ ~ w ~ W. ~ r C r N > U U ~ O F- H ~ ~ 7 U Q O o N ~ C > Q w N N V C C C a ~ ~ C N N p X > o m ~ m ~ ~ £ c 'c a`~i aNi N m ~' c d ~ J co x ~ E 'm 'm ~ ~ rn a i U c o cfl L N ~ y .N.. ~ m m ~ C N ' N ' C C oO (d lL . •~ U N ++ c N 00 ~ a ~ C C j R ~ Q C C O Q ~ C ~ .- m ~ C O C E ~ ~ Q' ~ N v N U U U V d O O E E N O C H w ~ ~ W LL v v Q ~ ~ li li a~ a> vi L ~. c c _ ~ o ~ > ~ ~ N N N O N N ~ O N ~ N ~ 'm U J U N ~ N E E O ~ ~ O O LL LL LL m H O LL LL ~ ~ d 0 U Q' F C a~ m m Q ~ to c N p O > U N O ~ a ~ j m ~ -o N O ~ ~ H ~ ~ rn ~ ~ C m i a c U ~ ~ ` m N V C d O N N N c ' N C ... ~ d ~ N C L ~ N L N E E W LL ~ £ 7 ~ f6 C 7 ~ _ ~ N W ~ N ~ w 7 7 ~ N tl1 ~ ~ to N ' ~ N ~ f` m Z .N. .~ w o m O 7 7 (~ O ~ W W W W N ~ d Q W ~ H Q ~ W 7 O c O ~ U m N F- M U V U ~ ~ ~ ~ (O Q h m aD ~ a0 ~a O a 01 - Q o ~ r ~ M V 47 ~ r.. W ~ W - O F ~ N U 6 N N ~ N N O a a o N d ~ c ~a ui a~e~ ua ~~ a°o `~ LL ~ a` 0 ui ~~~ i~~ Exhibit B, Attachments 1-11 ~~ ~~~ Attachment 1 -Cost Estimate Summary Dou he Road - Se ment 1 4,300 feet, 104 feet curb to curb Ci Limits to Amador Valle Widenin Portion of Existin Im rovements to be Re-Used Ci Ca ital Im rovement Pro'ect Number Not Assi ned Totals for TIF Share Civil Im rovements Eastern Portion, 4300 feet to be widened $ 4,923,753.69 Intersection Im rovements $ 600,000.00 Ri ht-of-Wa None $ - Subtotal $ 5,523,753.69 Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW Ac uisition, 20.0% $ 1,104,750.74 Contin enc Im rovement, Ri ht-of-Wa , 10.0% $ 552,375.37 Subtotal $ 7,180,879.79 Traffic Miti ation Contributions er Finance, Reserve Account as of 7/01/09 $ 429,592.64 $ 6,751,287.15 Zone 7 Fees $ 146,630.00 Total $ 6,897,917.15 Dou he Road - Se ment 2 4,150 feet, 104 feet curb to curb Amador Valle Bouldevard to Houston Place Portion of Existin Im rovements to be Re-Used Ci Ca ital Im rovement Pro'ect Number 96850 Totals for TIF Share Civillm rovements 3300 feet to be widened $ 3,754,376.36 Intersection Im rovements $ 704,200.00 Ri ht-of-Wa None $ 272,000.00 Subtotal $ 4,730,576.36 Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW Ac uisition, 20.0% $ 946,115.27 Contin enc Im rovement, Ri ht-of-Wa , 10.0% $ 473,057.64 Subtotal $ 6,149,749.27 Traffic Miti ation Contributions er Finance, Reserve Account as of 7/01/09 $ 201,198.80 $ 5,948,550.47 Zone 7 Fees $ 141,515.00 Total $ 6,090,065.47 Dou he Road - Se ment 3 Houston Place to Dublin Boulevard 900' Dou he Road - Se ment 4 Portion Dublin Boulevard to North of I-580 Off-Ram 500' Dublin Boulevard - Se ment 6 Dublin Court to Dou he Road 700' Dublin Boulevard Extension - Se ment 7 Dou he to Southern Pacific Ri ht-of-Wa 1650' Ci Ca ital Im rovement Pro'ect Number 96852 Com lete Totals for TIF Share Total Cost to EDTIF Category II and Dougherty Valley Fees $ - Attachment 1, Attachment 2, and Zone 7 Fees/Attachment 1-Cost Estimate Sum Page 1 of 16, 2/26/2010 zD ~1~ lI ~ Dou he Road - Se ment 4 Portion Dublin Boulevard to North of I-580 Off-Ram 500' Totals for TIF Share Civillm rovements Westbound On-Ram Im rovements $ 1,500,000.00 Subtotal $ 1,500,000.00 Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW Ac uisition, 12% $ 178,050.00 Contin enc Im rovement, Ri ht-of-Wa 0% $ - Subtotal $ 1,678,050.00 $ 1,678,050.00 Total $ 1,678,050.00 Dou he Road Subtotal Se ments 1, 2, and Portions of 4 $ 14,377,887.62 (Note that the City of San Ramon and Contra Costa County are responsible for that portion of Dou he Road from the Ci Limits north to Old Ranch Road Zone 7 Fees Se menu 1 8~ 2 $ 288,145.00 Subtotal S 14,666,032.62 Attachment 1, Attachment 2, and Zone 7 Fees/Attachment 1-Cost Estimate Sum Page 2 of 16, 2/26/2010 3/g I/z Dublin Boulevard - Se ment 5 1,800 feet, 108 Ri ht-of-wa , 6 Lanes East of Villa a Parkwa to Sierra Court Widenin Under Construction Ci Ca ital Im rovement Pro'ect Ci Ca ital Im rovement Pro'ect Number 96920 Com lete Totals for TIF Share Total $ - Dublin Boulevard - Se ment 6 Sierra Court to Dublin Court 1300' Ci Ca ital Im rovement Pro'ect Number 96930 Totals for TIF Share Civil Im rovements Sierra Court to Dublin Court, er Ci CIP $ 1,763,748.00 Ri ht-of-Wa Sierra Court to Dublin Court, er Ci CIP Se ment 6 $ 556,511.00 Subtotal $ 2,320,259.00 Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW A uisition $ 376,837.00 Contin enc Im rovement, Ri ht-of-Wa 0% $ 57,858.00 Subtotal $ 2,754,954.00 Zone 7 Fees $ 109,417.00 Traffic Miti ation Contributions er Finance, Reserve Account as of 7/01/07 $ 718,623.29 Total $ 2,145,747.71 Dublin Boulevard Subtotal to Southern Pacific Ri ht-of-Wa Se menu 5 and 6 $ 2,036,330.71 Zone 7 Fees Se menu 5 and 6 $ 109,417.00 Subtotal $ 2,145,747.71 Dublin Boulevard Extension - Se ment 8 1,950 feet, 6 Lanes Southern Pacific Ri ht-of-Wa to East BART Access Com lete Totals for TIF Share $ - Subtotal $ - Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW Ac uistion, 20% $ - Contin enc Im rovements, Ri ht-of-Wa 10% $ - Subtotal $ - Zone 7 Fees N/A Total $ - Attachment 1, Attachment 2, and Zone 7 Fees/Attachment 1-Cost Estimate Sum Page 3 of 16, 2/26/2010 3~ ~' I la Dublin Boulevard Extension - Se ment 8A 2,650 feet, 6 Lanes East BART Access Iron Horse Parkwa to Hacienda Drive Totals for TIF Share Civil Im rovements Path on north side no other roadwa im rovements $ 307,824.00 Intersection Im rovemnts w/o ri ht of wa $ 172,500.00 Ri ht-of-Wa none $ - Subtotal $ 480,324.00 Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW A uistition, 20% $ 96,064.80 Contin enc Im rovements, Ri ht-of-Wa 10% $ 48,032.40 Subtotal $ 624,421.20 Zone 7 Fees $ 34,980.00 Total $ 659,401.20 Dublin Boulevard - Se ment 9 4,600 feet, 6 Lanes Hacienda to Tassa'ara Road Com lete Exce t as Noted Totals for TIF Share Civil Im rovements $ - Intersection Im rovements w/o ri ht of wa $ 222,500.00 Ri ht-of-Wa $ - $ - Subtotal $ 222,500.00 Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW Ac uistition, 20% $ 44,500.00 Contin enc Im rovements, Ri ht-of-Wa 10% $ 22,250.00 Total $ 289,250.00 Dublin Boulevard - Se ment 10 6,320 feet, 6 Lanes Tassa'ara Road to Fallon Com lete Exce t as Noted Totals for TIF Share Civil Im rovements Tassa~ara Road to Branni an Street: Overla 900 feet use $1.50/sf x 48' x 900' $ 64,800.00 Tassa~ara Road to Branni an Street: Stri in , Markin s 900 feet use $2/If x 6 x 900' $ 10,800.00 Tassa'ara Road to Branni an Street: Median Landsca in 900 feet use $4/sf x 30' x 900' $ 108,000.00 Lockhart Wa to Fallon Road: Median Landsca in 38,520s :use $4/sf x 38520sf $ 154,080.00 Intersection Im rovements $ 67,500.00 Subtotal $ 405,180.00 Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW Ac uisition, 20% $ 81,036.00 Contin enc Im rovements, Ri ht-of-Wa 10% $ 40,518.00 Subtotal $ 526,734.00 Zone 7 Fees $ - Total $ 526,734.00 Attachment 1, Attachment 2, and Zone 7 Fees/Attachment 1-Cost Estimate Sum Page 4 of 16, 2/26/2010 ~~a na Dublin Boulevard Extension - Se ment 11 8,000 feet, 6 Lanes Fallon Road to Airwa All New Roadwa Included Totals for TIF Share Civil Im rovements $1750/If; TIF =center 50% for 5,OOOIf w'/in Dublin; TIF = 100% for 3,000 If w/in Alameda Coun $ 9,625,000.00 Intersection Im rovements $ 725,160.00 Bride $ 2,400,000.00 Storm Runoff Treatment = $13,000/ acre x 11.57 acres $ 150,413.22 Habitat Miti ation $ 1,500,000.00 Ri ht-of-Wa $ 9,099,040.00 Subtotal $ 23,499,613.22 Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW Ac uistition, 20% $ 4,699,922.64 Contin enc Im rovements, Ri ht-of-Wa 10% $ 2,349,961.32 Subtotal $ 30,549,497.19 Ci of Livermore Contribution Civil Im rovements -Livermore Contibution for 3,000 w/in Alameda Coun $1750/If, TIF = 100% for 3,000 If w/in Alameda Coun x 50% $ 2,625,000.00 Ri ht-of-Wa $ 1,344,000.00 Ci Administration and Contin enc 30% $ 787,500.00 Total Ci of Livermore Contribution $ 4,756,500.00 Subtotal $ 25,792,997.19 Zone 7 Fees $ 512,050.00 Total $ 26,305,047.19 Dublin Boulevard Extension SP RNV to Airwa Subtotal without Freewa Interchan e $ 27,233,402.39 Subtotal $ 27,233,402.39 Zone 7 Fees Se ments 8, 8A, 9, 10 and 11 $ 547,030.00 Subtotal $ 27,780,432.39 Freewa Interchan e - Se ment 12 Dublin Boulevard Extension with I-580 Airwa Boulevard Com lete Totals for TIF Share Civil Im rovements n/a Ri ht-of-Wa n/a Subtotal $ - Cit Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW Ac uistition, 20% n/a Contin enc Im rovements, Ri ht-of-Wa 10% n/a Total $ - Attachment 1, Attachment 2, and Zone 7 Fees/Attachment 1-Cost Estimate Sum Page 5 of 16, 2/26/2010 3ye~ Ild Hacienda - Se ment 13 1,525 feet, 6 Lanes I-580 Not includin interchan a to Dublin Boulevard Extension Com lete Totals for TIF Share Civillm rovements $ - Intersection Im rovements $ - Ri ht-of-Wa $ - Subtotal $ - Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW A uistition, 20% $ - Contin enc Im rovements, Ri ht-of-Wa 10% $ - Total $ - Hacienda - Se ment 14 2,640 feet, 6 Lanes Dublin Boulevard Extension to Gleason Drive Totals for TIF Share Civil Im rovements 800 ft and 1800 ft len the $ 660,459.23 Intersection Im rovements $ 37,500.00 Ri ht-of-Wa none $ - Subtotal $ 697,959.23 Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW A uistition, 20% $ 139,591.85 Contin enc Im rovements, Ri ht-of-Wa 10% $ 69,795.92 Subtotal $ 907,347.00 Zone 7 Fees $ 34,848.00 Total $ 942,195.00 Hacienda Road Subtotal Without Freewa Interchan a Se menu 13 and 14 $ 907,347.00 Zone 7 Fees Se menu 13 and 14 $ 34,848.00 Subtotal $ 942,195.00 Freewa Interchan e - Se ment 15 Hacienda Road with I-580 Widen Offram sand Overcrossin er EDPO EIR Totals for TIF Share Civil Im rovements E/B Offram Additional Lane $ 2,152,500.00 W/B Offram Additional Lane and N/B Overcrossin Additional Lane $ 6,397,500.00 Storm Runoff Treatment = $13,000/ acre x 3200' x 12' Lane lus 100% contin enc $ 22,920.11 Subtotal $ 8,572,920.11 Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW Ac uistition, Included in Above $ - Contin enc Im rovements, Ri ht-of-Wa Included in Above $ 857,292.01 Total $ 9,430,212.12 Attachment 1, Attachment 2, and Zone 7 Fees/Attachment 1-Cost Estimate Sum Page 6 of 16, 2/26/2010 ~d lla Arnold Road - Se ment 16 2,640 feet, 4 Lanes Dublin Boulevard Extension to Gleason Cam Parks is on one side of Roadwa Totals for TIF Share Civil Im rovements $ 3,248,418.86 Intersection Im rovements $ 573,000.00 Ri ht-of-Wa $ - Subtotal $ 3,821,418.86 Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW Ac uistition, 20% $ 764,283.77 Contin enc Im rovements, Ri ht-of-Wa 10% $ 382,141.89 Subtotal $ 4,967,844.52 Zone 7 Fees $ 81,312.00 Total $ 5,049,156.52 Central Parkwa - Se ment 16A 1,400 feet, 4 Lanes Arnold to Hacienda Totals for TIF Share Civil Im rovements one 12ft lane and 16 ft median $ 461,556.78 Intersection Im rovementsw/o ri ht of wa $ 37,500.00 Ri ht-of-Wa none $ - Subtotal $ 499,056.78 Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW Ac uistition, 20% $ 99,811.36 Contin enc Im rovements, Ri ht-of-Wa 10% $ 49,905.68 Subtotal $ 648,773.81 Zone 7 Fees $ 38,500.00 Total $ 687,273.81 Central Parkwa - Se ment 17 4,575 feet, 4 Lanes Hacienda to Tassa'ara Totals for TIF Share Civillm rovements 2500 feet of remodeled median $ 542,936.03 2000 feet of median and #1 lane in each direction; no ark im rovements $ 994,404.28 Storm Runoff Treatment 2000' x 2 Lanes x 12' lane x $13,000/acre $ 14,325.07 Intersection Im rovements $ - $ 112,250.00 Brid e $ 800,000.00 Ri ht-of-Wa none, aid b ark fees $ - Subtotal $ 2,463,915.38 Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW Ac uistition, 20% $ 492,783.08 Contin enc Im rovements, Ri ht-of-Wa 10% $ 246,391.54 Subtotal $ 3,203,089.99 Zone 7 Fees $ 125,812.50 Total $ 3,328,902.49 Attachment 1, Attachment 2, and Zone 7 Fees/Attachment 1-Cost Estimate Sum Page 7 of 16, 2/26/2010 add iia Central Parkwa - Se ment 18 4 Lanes Tassa'ara to Kee an Street, Western 3,640 feet All New Roadwa Com lete Exce t as Noted Totals for TIF Share Civil Tassa'ara Road to Branni an Street: Overla 900 feet use $1.50/sf x 24' x 900' $ 32,400.00 Tassa'ara Road to Branni an Street: Stri in , Markin s 900 feet use $2/If x 6 x 900' $ 10,800.00 Tassa'ara Road to Branni an Street: Median Landsca in 900 feet use $4/sf x 30' x 900' $ 108,000.00 Intersection Im rovements $ 52,500.00 Subtotal $ 203,700.00 Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW Ac uistition, 20% $ 40,740.00 Contin enc Im rovements, Ri ht-of-Wa 10% $ 20,370.00 Total $ 264,810.00 Central Parkwa - Se ment 18A 4 Lanes Kee an Street to Fallon, 2,230 feet Com lete Exce t as Noted Totals for TIF Share Civil Im rovements Lockhart Wa to Fallon Road: Median Landsca in 1,600 feet :use $4/sf x 16' x 1600' $ 102,400.00 Intersection Im rovements $ 30,000.00 S orts Park $ - Ri ht-of-Wa $ - Subtotal $ 132,400.00 Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW Ac uistition, 20% $ 26,480.00 Contin enc Im rovements, Ri ht-of-Wa 10% $ 13,240.00 Subtotal $ 172,120.00 Zone 7 Fees Total $ 172,120.00 Central Parkwa and Arnold Drive Subtotal Se menu 16, 16A, 17, 18 and 18A $ 9,256,638.32 Zone 7 Fees Se ments 16, 16A, 17, 18 and 18A $ 245 624.50 Subtotal $ 9 502 262.82 Attachment 1, Attachment 2, and Zone 7 Fees/Attachment 1-Cost Estimate Sum Page 8 of 16, 2/26/2010 37~ //~ Gleason - Se ment 19 1,600 feet, 4 Lanes Arnold Road to Hacienda Roadwa Com lete, Future Traffic Si nal at Arnold Drive Totals for TIF Share Civil Im rovements none $ - Intersection Im rovements $ 75,000.00 Ri ht-of-Wa none $ - Subtotal $ 75,000.00 Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW Ac uistition, 20% $ 15,000.00 Contin enc Im rovements, Ri ht-of-Wa 10% $ 7,500.00 Total $ 97,500.00 Gleason - Se ment 19A 4,650 feet, 4 Lanes Hacienda to Tassa'ara Com lete Totals for TIF Share Total $0.00 Attachment 1, Attachment 2, and Zone 7 Fees/Attachment 1-Cost Estimate Sum Page 9 of 16, 2/26/2010 .~~ pia Gleason - Se ment 20 4,800 feet, 4 Lanes Tassa'ara to Fallon Com lete Exce t as Noted Totals for TIF Share Civil Im rovements Tassa'ara Road to Branni an Street: Overla 900 feet use $1.50/sf x 24' x 900' $ 32,400.00 Tassa'ara Road to Branni an Street: Stri in , Markin s 900 feet use $2/If x4 x 900' $ 7,200.00 Tassa'ara Road to Branni an Street: Median Landsca in 900 feet use $4/sf x 16' x 900' $ 57,600.00 Intersection Im rovements $ 52,500.00 S orts Park $ - $ - Ri ht-of-Wa $ - Subtotal $ 149,700.00 Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW A uistition, 20% $ 29,940.00 Contin enc Im rovements, Ri ht-of-Wa 10% $ 14,970.00 Subtotal $ 194,610.00 Zone 7 Fees $ - Total $ 194,610.00 Gleason Drive Subtotal Se ments 19, 19A and 20 $ 292,110.00 Zone 7 Fees Se ments 19, 19A and 20 $ - Subtotal $ 292,110.00 Scarlett Drive - Se ment 21 2,400 feet, 52 feet curb to curb, 80 ft RNV Dou he Road to Dublin Boulevard Extension All New Roadwa Totals for TIF Share Civil Im rovements er BKF En ineers Estimate, 6-15-06, $ 4,437,000.00 Estimate Ad'ustment, 2006-2008, 5% er ear $ 443,700.00 Intersection Im rovements included in BKF En ineers estimate $ - Miscellaneous Costs $ 1,300,000.00 Ri ht-of-Wa $ 4,916,220.00 Subtotal $ 11,096,920.00 Cit Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW Ac uistition, 15% $ 1,664,538.00 Contin enc Im rovements, Ri ht-of-Wa 10% $ 1,109,692.00 Subtotal $ 13,871,150.00 Zone 7 Fees $ 137,280.00 Traffic Miti ation Contributions er Finance, Reserve Account as of 7/01/07 $ 113,677.82 Total $ 13,894,752.18 Attachment 1, Attachment 2, and Zone 7 Fees/Attachment 1-Cost Estimate Sum Page 10 of 16, 2/26/2010 33~ na Tassa'ara Road - Se ment 22 5,660 feet, 6 Lanes 5000 ft north of Gleason to Contra Costa Coun Line All New Roadwa Totals for TIF Share Civil Im rovements median and 2 lanes, each direction $ 7,799,097.47 Intersection Im rovements $ 446,563.00 Miscellaneous Im rovements $ 1,237,563.00 Brid e $ 4,072,000.00 Ri ht-of-Wa $ 4,531,128.00 Subtotal $ 18,086,351.47 Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW Ac uistition, 20% $ 3,617,270.29 Contin enc Im rovements, Ri ht-of-Wa 10% $ 1,808,635.15 Subtotal $ 23,512,256.91 Zone 7 Fees $ 305,074.00 Total $ 23,817,330.91 Tassa'ara Road - Se ment 22A 5,000 feet, 6 Lanes Gleason to 5,000 ft north of Gleason All New Roadwa Totals for TIF Share Civil Im rovements 1 lane, each direction, Gleason to North Dublin Ranch Drive (1300'); median and 2 lanes, each direction, North Dublin Ranch Drive to north 3700' $ 4,441,261.90 Intersection Im rovements $ 53,250.00 Miscellaneous Im rovements $ 402,288.00 Ri ht-of-Wa $ 868,611.00 Subtotal $ 5,765,410.90 Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW Ac uistition, 20% $ 1,153,082.18 Contin enc Im rovements, Ri ht-of-Wa 10% $ 576,541.09 Subtotal $ 7,495,034.17 Zone 7 Fees $ 235,180.00 Total $ 7,730,214.17 Attachment 1, Attachment 2, and Zone 7 Fees/Attachment 1-Cost Estimate Sum Page 11 of 16, 2/26/2010 ~a~ ~i~ Tassa'ara Road - Se ment 23 2,470 feet, 6 and 8 Lanes Dublin Boulevard Extension to Gleason Road All New Roadwa Totals for TIF Share Civillm rovements 1 lane in each direction $ 760,352.62 $ - Intersection Im rovements $ 159,750.00 Ri ht-of-Wa $ - Subtotal $ 920,102.62 Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW A uistition, 20% $ 184,020.52 Contin enc Im rovements, Ri ht-of-Wa 10% $ 92,010.26 Subtotal $ 1,196,133.41 Zone 7 Fees $ 67,925.00 Total $ 1,264,058.41 Tassa'ara Road - Se ment 24 800 feet, 8 Lanes Dublin Boulevard Extension to I-580 not includin Interchan e All New Roadwa Totals for TIF Share Civil Im rovements Add 1 12foot lane; $1750/ If x 12'/ 128' x 800 If $ 131,250.00 Intersection Im rovements $ 53,250.00 Ri ht-of-Wa Storm Runoff Treatment $ 2,865.01 800' x 12' Lane x $13,000/ acre $ - Subtotal $ 187,365.01 Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW A uisition, 20% $ 37,473.00 Contin enc Im rovements, Ri ht-of-Wa 10% $ 18,736.50 Subtotal $ 243,574.52 Zone 7 Fees $ 10,560.00 Total $ 254,134.52 Tassa"ara Road Subtotal without Freewa Interchan a Se menu 22, 22A, 23 and 24 $ 32,446,999.01 Zone 7 Fees Se menu 22, 22A, 23 and 24 $ 618,739.00 Total $ 33,065,738.01 Tassa'ara Road - Se ment 25 at Freewa Intersection Freewa Interchan e Totals for TIF Share Civil Im rovements E/B Offram Additional Lane $ 2,152,500.00 Storm Runoff Treatment = $13,000/ acre x 1500' x 12' Lane lus 100% Contin enc $ 10,743.80 Subtotal $ 2,163,243.80 Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW Ac uistition, 20% $ 432,648.76 Contin enc 10% $ 216,324.38 Total $ 2,812,216.94 Attachment 1, Attachment 2, and Zone 7 Fees/Attachment 1-Cost Estimate Sum Page 12 of 16, 2/26/2010 ~/r~ ua Fallon Road - Se ment 26 8,080 feet, 4 Lanes Tassa'ara to Gleason Road is Existing From Signal Hill Drive to Gleason Drive, Road is Under Construction and Nearing Completion From Silvera Ranch/ Dublin Ranch Bounda to Si nal Hill Drive Totals for TIF Share Civil Im rovements Lin Pro a 2200' , $1500 er LF x 38% -Under Constrcution -See Pendin Credits Silveria Pro a 1500' , $1500 er LF x 38% $ 855,000.00 Storm Runoff Treatment = $13,000/ acre x 1500' x 12' Lane x 2 Lanes $ 10,743.80 Intersection Im rovements South Le at Tassa~ara Road $ 84,500.00 Brid a Includes Storm Runoff Treatment for Lin Se ment -Under Construction -See Pendin Credits Estimate er MacKa and Som s Ri ht-of-Wa $ - Subtotal $ 950,243.80 Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW Ac uistition, 20% $ 190,048.76 Contin enc Im rovements, Ri ht-of-Wa 10% $ 95,024.38 Subtotal $ 1,235,316.94 Zone 7 Fees $ 41,250.00 Total $ 1,276,566.94 Fallon Road - Se ment 26A 4,840 feet, 6 Lanes, 128-140' RNV Gleason to Dublin Boulevard Extension Gleason to Bent Tree Drive: Street is Com lete Exce t for Median Island Landsca in Under Construction Bent Tree Drive to 300' S/O Positano Parkwa Under Construction 300' S/0 Positano Parkwa to Central Parkwa :West 20' of Street is Com lete Central Parkwa to Dublin Boulevard: West 34' of Street is Com lete, Totals for TIF Share Civil Im rovements Gleason Drive to Bent Tree Drive Median Island Landscaping (Under Construction w/ Fallon Sports Park Contract Chan a Order in amount of $148,777 $ 148,777.00 Positano Parkway to Central Parkway: 128-140' R/W; Remaining TIF Portion = 64' (Center 64'); Use 64/128 x $1750/ If x 11001f $ 962,500.00 Central Parkway to Dublin Boulevard: 140' R/W; TIF Portion =Remaining TIF Portion = 62' (Center 76' - 14' existin avement ;Use 62/76 x $900/ If x 1270 If $ 1,655,280.00 Intersection Im rovements $ 105,060.00 Pedestrian Overcrossin at S orts Park era roved Sta e I PD Zonin Plan $ 2,000,000.00 Storm Runoff Treatment = $13,000/ acre x 155,580sf $ 46,431.13 Ri ht-of-Wa Jordan Pro ert $ 2,500.00 Subtotal $ 4,920,548.13 Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW Ac uistition, 20% $ 984,109.63 Contin enc Im rovements, Ri ht-of-Wa 10% $ 492,054.81 Subtotal $ 6,396,712.57 Zone 7 Fees $ 127,743.00 Total $ 6,524,455.57 Attachment 1, Attachment 2, and Zone 7 Fees/Attachment 1-Cost Estimate Sum Page 13 of 16, 2/26/2010 Yaa~ lla Fallon Road - Se ment 27 680 feet, 8 Lanes, 188' R/W Dublin Boulevard Extension to North of I-580 Im rovements are Existin on Westside Median island, Northbound Lanes and Fronta a Im rovments on Eastside do not Curren Exist Totals for TIF Share Civil Im rovements 166' R/W; TIF ortion = 100' 6 lanes lus 28' median ;TIF cost = $1150/ If Stn. 18+02 to Stn. 30+91: Median 28' lus 3 N/B Lanes 36' :Use 64/100 x $1150/ If x 1289' $ 948,704.00 Intersection Im rovements $ 96,720.00 Ri ht-of-Wa $ - Storm Runoff Treatment = $13,000/ acre x 1289' x 12' Lane x 3 Lanes $ 13,848.76 Subtotal $ 1,059,272.76 Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW Ac uistition, 20% $ 211,854.55 Contin enc Im rovements, Ri ht-of-Wa 10% $ 105,927.28 Subtotal $ 1,377,054.59 Zone 7 Fees $ 69,477.10 Total $ 1,446,531.69 Fallon Road Subtotal without Freewa Interchan a Se ments 26, 28A and 27 $ 9,009,084.10 Zone 7 Fees Se ments 26, 26A and 27 $ 238,470.10 Total $ 9,247,554.20 Fallon & I-580 Freewa Interchan a with Si nals - Se ment 28 Totals for TIF Share Freewa Interchan a includes ri ht-of-wa new 6 In Br; Ph1=$15,971,365 er CIP & Ph2=$16,774,499 2004 U date Estimate lus 50% $ 32,745,864.00 Subtotal $ 32,745,864.00 Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW Ac uistition, 20% included Zone 7 Fees $ 229,850.97 Total $ 32,975,714.97 Dublin a s 50% of cost; Livermore and Pleasanton will contribute the remainin 50% $ 16,487,857.49 Phase 1 Cost $ 15,971,365.00 Cit of Pleasanton/ DSRSD Phase 1 Contribution $ 2,294,963.00 Dublin Phase I Contributions $ 13,676,402.00 Remainin Phase 1 Construction Costs and/ or Credits Due Not Funded in Current CIP Remainin Dublin EDTIF Costs $ 2,811,455.49 Tassa'ara Creek Bike Path - Se ment 29 6,100 feet EBPRD Sta in Area to Contra Costa Coun Line Totals for TIF Share Bike Path 12ft $9/st 100% $ 658,800.00 Ri ht-of-Wa none $ - Subtotal $ 658,800.00 Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW Ac uistition, 20% $ 131,760.00 Contin enc Im rovements, Ri ht-of-Wa 10% $ 65,880.00 Subtotal $ 856,440.00 ',Zone 7 Fees $ 79,200.00 Total $ 935,640.00 Attachment 1, Attachment 2, and Zone 7 Fees/Attachment 1-Cost Estimate Sum Page 14 of 16, 2/26/2010 y3 ~ //~ Park & Ride 40,000 sf for 150 cars Totals for TIF Share Fallon Road Park and Ride to be rovided b restri in Tassa'ara Road Park and Ride Use $20,000 for restri in er Fallon Gatewa Conditions of A royal $ 20,000.00 Ri ht-of-Wa $ - Subtotal $ 20,000.00 Ci Administration, Desi n, Construction Mana ement, ROW A uistition, 20% $ 4,000.00 Contin enc Im rovements, Ri ht-of-Wa 10% $ 2,000.00 Subtotal $ 26,000.00 Zone 7 Fees $ - Total $ 26,000.00 Transit Center BART Parkin Structure Cost Allocation for 500 S aces Totals for TIF Share Parkin Structure 1680 S aces $ 20,000,000.00 Alameda Coun Contribution For Re lacement of Existin 1,180 Parkin S aces in BART Lot $ 14,000,000.00 EDTIF Cost Pro ortionate Share of Cost for Additional 500 S aces Used B Eastern Dublin $ 6,000,000.00 Fees Collected to Date $ 1,172,094.00 Remainin Cost $ 4,827,906.00 Re ort U date Totals for TIF Share Re ort U date Total $ 40,000.00 Totals for TIF Share OTHER COSTS Section I Ci Entrance Si ns at Hacienda Drive, Tassa'ara Road, Fallon Road $ 100,000.00 Eastern Dublin Travel Demand Model U date $ 200,000.00 $ - Total of Other Section I Costs $ 300,000.00 Section II Villa a Parkwa /Amador Valle Boulevard S/B left Turn Lane Modifications $ 150,000.00 Amador Valle Boulevard/ Bri hton Drive Traffic Si nal $ 350,000.00 $ - Total of Other Section II Costs $ 500,000.00 Attachment 1, Attachment 2, and Zone 7 Fees/Attachment 1-Cost Estimate Sum Page 15 of 16, 2/26/2010 4Jdd lia Table 1; Cate o One Costs used to determine RESIDENTIAL/COMMERCIAL FEE Dublin Boulevard Extension; SP r/w to Airwa Boulevard $ 27,780,432.39 Hacienda Drive; excludin I-580 Interchan e $ 942,195.00 Hacienda Drive I-580 Interchan e; 100% of cost, excludin $3.762M Alameda Coun Loan $ 9,430,212.12 Central Parkwa and Arnold Drive $ 9,502,262.82 Gleason Drive $ 292,110.00 Tassa~ara Road $ 33,065,738.01 Tassa'ara Road I-580 Interchan e; 100% of cost $ 2,812,216.94 Fallon Road $ 9,247,554.20 PSR Re orts included in se ment take-o Re ort U date $ 40,000.00 Other Costs $ 300,000.00 SUBTOTAL OF TABLE 1 $ 93,412,721.48 Table 2; Cate o Two Costs used to determine RESIDENTIAL FEE/COMMERCIAL FEE Dublin Boulevard/ Dou he Road Widenin CIP Pro'ect 96852 $ - Dublin Boulevard; Villa a Parkwa to Southern Pacific Ri ht of Wa $ 2,145,747.71 Scarlet Drive; Dublin Boulevard to Dou he Road $ 13,894,752.18 Dou he Road; I-580 to CCCo $ 14,666,032.62 I-580 Fallon/EI Charro Interchan a 50% of cost to reflect Dublin's share after PH. 1 construction $ 2,811,455.49 I-580/Airwa Boulevard Interchan a COMPLETE $ - Other Costs $ 500,000.00 SUBTOTAL OF TABLE 2 $ 34,017,988.00 Table 3; Cate o One Ad'ustment Costs used to determine RESIDENTIAL SURCHARGE FEE Tassa'ara Creek Bike Path $ 935,640.00 Park and Ride Lots $ 26,000.00 SUBTOTAL OF TABLE 3 $ 961,640.00 Table 4; Cate o Two Ad'ustment Costs used to determine RESIDENTIAL BART PARKING SURCHARGE FEE Transit Center BART Parkin Structure 500 S ace Cost Allocation $ 4,827,906.00 $ - SUBTOTAL OF TABLE 4 $ 4,827,906.00 Summation of Tables 1, 2, 3, and 4 $ 133,220,255.48 Attachment 1, Attachment 2, and Zone 7 Fees/Attachment 1-Cost Estimate Sum Page 16 of 16, 2/26/2010 ys~ iia Attachment 2 -Cost Estimate Detail I i Dougherty Dougherty Dougherty Dougherty Road Road Road Road SEGM'T 1 SEGM'T 1 SEGM'T 2 SEGM'T 2 DESCRIPTION PRICES UNITS QUANTITY COST QUANTITY COST Saw Cut $ 2.00 LF 4,300 $8,604 9,900 $19,810 Grind $ 3.00 LF 17,200 $51,600 0 $0 Remove Ex Pvm'Usw $ 2.00 SF 30,100 $60,200 46,200 $92,400 Full Pavem't Section $ 8.00 SF 189,200 $1,513,600 108,900 $871,200 Curb & Gutter $ 25.00 LF 4,300 $107,500 3,300 $82,500 Sidewalk $ 6.00 SF 34,400 $206,400 26,400 $158,400 Median Curb. Std $ 20.00 LF 8,600 $172,000 6,600 $132,000 Median Curb. Glue $ 8.00 LF 0 $0 0 $0 Overlay $ 2.00 SF 189,200 $378,400 184,800 $369,600 Earthwork $ 40.00 CY 6,667 $266,680 5,452 $218,080 Drop Inlets & MH's (1) $ 4,000.00 EA 14 $56,000 11 $44,000 Storm Drain Pipe $ 125.00 LF 4,500 $562,500 4,500 $562,500 Storm Runoff Treatment $ 13,000.00 AC 5.13 $66,731 3.11 $40,379 Striping (2) $ 2.00 LF 32,000 $64,000 25,600 $51,200 Markings $ 200.00 EA 32 $6,400 28 $5,600 Signs (3) $ 100.00 EA 40 $4,000 32 $3,200 Electroliers (4) $ 6,000.00 EA 14 $84,000 11 $66,000 Signallnterconnect $ 30.00 LF 4,000 $120,000 3,200 $96,000 New Utilities $ - LF 0 $0 0 $0 Existing Utilities $ - LF 0 $0 0 $0 Landscape 8 Irrig (5) $ 5.00 SF 103,200 $516,000 79,200 $396,000 Grading Depth 1 $0 1 $0 Signal Legs 1 $0 0 $0 Signal Price (not included) 0 $0 0 $0 Bridges (not included) SF 0 $0 0 $0 Demolition __ Building (not included) EA 0 $0 0 $0 Median Gut $ 3.00 SF 0 $0 01 $0 Exist curb $ 7.00 LF 0 $0 0 $0 RAN Cost (not included) SF 0 $0 0 $0 Other RM/ CosUSF 0 Length 4,OOOI 3,200 Curb-to-Curb Width 104 _ 104 TIF width n/a Subtotal $4,244,615 $3,208,869 Survey 1% $42,446 $32,089 Mobilization 10% _ $424,462 ' $320,887 Traffic Control 3% $127,338 $96,266 Clear & Grub 2% $84,892 $96,266 Total, civil only _ $4,923,754 $0.00 _ $3,754,376 COST/LF _ Footnotes: (1) @200 ft. Intervals along length of roadway (2) per strip T j __ (3) @ 50 ft. intervals along all lanes _ (4) @ 150 ft. intervals along all lanes, including conduit __ 5 16'+4'+4' and/or area of fronts a restoration Attachment 1, Attachment 2, and Zone 7 Fees/Attachment 2 -Cost Detail Page 1 of 6, 2/22/2010 yb 6 nz Attachment 2 -Cost Estimate Detail Hacienda Hacienda Arnold Arnold Arnold Arnold Road Road R oad Road Road Road SEGM'T 14 SEGM'T 14 _ _ SEGM'T 16 _ SEGM'T 16 SEGM'T 16A __ SEGM'T 16A DESCRIPTION PRICES UNITS QUANTITY COST QUANTITY COST QUANTITY COST Saw Cut $ 2.00 LF 2,600 $5,203 2,326 $4,654 0 0 Grind $ 3.00 LF 2,600 $7,800 0 $0 0 0 Remove Ex Pvm'Usw $ 2.00 SF 17,600 $35,200 32,564 $65,128 0 0 Full Pavem't Section $ 8.00 SF 39,200 $313,600 74,432 $595,456 16,800 134,400 Curb & Gutter $ 25.00 LF 800 $20,000 2,326 $58,150 0 0 Sidewalk $ 6.00 SF 0 $0 18,608 $111,648 0 0 _ Median Curb. Std $ 20.00 LF 1,800 $36,000 4,652 $93,040 1,400 28,000 Median Curb. Glue $ 8.00 LF 0 $0 0 $0 0 0 Overlay $ 2.00 SF 0 $0 see x-sect $43,000 0 0 Earthwork $ 40.00 CY 2,119 $84,760 0 $0 1,452 58,080 Drop Inlets ~ MH's (1) $ 4,000.00 EA 5 $20,000 8 $32,000 0 0 Storm Drain Pipe $ 125.00 LF 100 $12,500 see x-sect $1,500,000 0 0 Storm Runoff Treatment $ 13,000.00 AC 0.90 $11,699 2.14 $27,767 0.39 5,014 Striping (2) $ 2.00 LF 6,600 $13,200 18,608 $37,216 2,800 5,600 Markings $ 200.00 EA 6 $1,200 14 $2,800 4 800 Signs (3) $ 100.00 EA 26 $2,600 24 $2,400 0 0 Electroliers (4) $ 6,000.00 EA 0 $0 8 $48,000 9 54,000 Signallnterconnect $ 30.00 LF 0 $0 0 $0 0 0 New Utilities $ - LF 0 $0 0 $0 0 0 Existing Utilities $ - LF 0 $0 0 $0 0 0 Landscape & brig (5) $ 5.00 SF 0 $0 32,564 $162,820 22,400 112,000 Grading Depth 1 $0 0 $0 1 0 Signal Legs 0 $0 0 $0 0 0 Signal Price (not included) 0 $0 0 $0 0 0 Bridges (not included) SF 0 $0 0 $0 0 0 Demolition 1 0 Building (not included) EA 0 $0 0 $0 0 0 Median Gut $ 3.00 SF 0 $0 0 $0 0 0 Exist curb $ 7.00 LF 800 $5,600 2,326 $16,282 0 0 R/W Cost (not included) SF 0 n/a 74,432 n/a 0 n/a Other ~ R/W Cost/SF n/a . 20 _ Length 800 __ 2,3 2 6 1,400 Curb-to-Curb Width n/a _ _ 104 TIF width _ _ 28 _ _ Subtotal _ $569,361.41 $2,800,361.08 $397,893.77 Survey 1 % $5,693.61 $28,003.61 $3,978.94 Mobilization 10% $56,936 ' $280,036 $39,789 Traffic Control 3%: $17,081 $84,011 $11,937 Clear & Grub 2% $11,387.23 $56,007.22 j _ _ $7,957.88 Total, civil only $660,459.23 ~ _ $ 3,248,418.86 ~ $461,556.78 COST/LF ~ _ __ ___ Footnotes: _ __ (1) @200 ft. Intervals along length of roadway --- _ _ _ _ __ _ _ ~?) Per strip - - (3) @ 50 ft. intervals along all lanes ~_ __ ---- (4) @ 150 ft. intervals along all lanes, including con _ _ __ ' _ _ 5 16'+4'+4' and/or area of fronts a restoration Attachment 1, Attachment 2, and Zone 7 Fees/Attachment 2 -Cost Detail Page 2 of 6, 2/22/2010 y~ed i~a _ Attachment 2 -Cost Estimate Detail ~ Central Pkwy Central Pkwy Central Pkwy Central Pkwy Scarlet __ __ Scarlet 2250 2250 2000 ft 2000 ft Drive Drive SEGM'T 17A SEGM'T 17A SEGM'T 176 SEGM'T 176 SEGM'T 21 _ SEGM'T 21 DESCRIPTION PRICES UNITS QUANTITY COST QUANTITY COST QUANTITY COST Saw Cut $ 2.00 LF 4,500 $9,005 0 $0 1,400 $2,801 Grind $ 3.00 LF i 4,500 _ $13,500 0 $0 2,800 $8,400 Remove Ex Pvm'Usw $ 2.00 SF 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Full Pavem't Section $ 8.00 SF 36,000 $288,000 48,000 $384,000 120,000 $960,000 Curb & Gutter $ 25.00 LF 0 $0 0 $0 3,400 $85,000 Sidewalk $ 6.00 SF 0 $0 0 $0 8,000 $48,000 Median Curb. Std $ 20.00 LF 0 $0 4,000 $80,000 4,800 $96,000 Median Curb. Glue $ 8.00 LF__ 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Overlay $ 2.00 SF 0 $0 0 $0 60,000 $120,000 Earthwork $ 40.00 CY 0 $0 1,778 $71,120 7,000 $280,000 Drop Inlets & MH's (1) $ 4,000.00 EA 0 $0 0 $0 20 $80,000 Storm Drain Pipe $ 125.00 LF 0 $0 0 $0 _ 3,400 $425,000 Storm Runoff Treatment $ 13,000.00 AC 0.83 $10,744 1.10 $14,325 2.94 $38,200 Striping (2) $ 2.00 LF 9,000 $18,000 8,000 $16,000 12,000 $24,000 Markings $ 200.00 EA 6 $1,200 4 $800 10 $2,000 Signs (3) $ 100.00 EA 11 $1,100 10 $1,000 40 $4,000 Electroliers (4) $ 6,000.00 EA 4 I $24,000 15 $90,000 15 $90,000 Signallnterconnect $ 30.00 LF 0 $0 2,000 $60,000 1,000 $30,000 New Utilities $ - LF 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Existing Utilities $ - LF 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Landscape & brig (5) $ 5.00 SF 10,500 $52,500 28,000 $140,000 40,000 $200,000 Grading Depth 1 $0 1 $0 1 $0 Signal Legs _ 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Signal Price (not included) 0 $0 0. $0 _ $0 Bridges (not included) SF $0 0 $0 n/a n/a Demolition 1 $50,000 $0 $0 Building (not included) EA 0 $0 $0 $0 Median Gut $ 3.00 SF 0 $0 $0: , $0 Exist curb $ 7.00 LF 0 _ $0 $0 $0 RM/ Cost (not included) SF 0 n/a ~ ; n/a n/a n/a Other trail $48,000 R/W Cost/SF 0 Length _ 2,250 2,000 2,400' Curb-to-Curb Width __ TIF width Subtotal $468,048.30 $857,245.07 $2,541,401.58 Survey 1%! $4,680.48 $8,572.45 $ 25,414.02 Mobilization 10% $46,805 $85,725 $254,140 Traffic Control 3% $14,041 $25,717 $76,242 Clear & Grub 2% $9,360.97 $17,144.90 , $50,828.03 Total, civil only $542,936.03 $994,404.28 $2,948,025.84 COST/LF _ Footnotes: _ __ (1) @200 ft. Intervals along length of roadw ay ___ _ ____ _ __ (2) per strip i __. _.-- _ -- (3) @ 50 ft. intervals along all lanes _ (4) @ 150 ft. intervals along all lanes, including con _ _ 5 16'+4'+4' and/or area of fronts a restoration _ Attachment 1, Attachment 2, and Zone 7 Fees/Attachment 2 -Cost Detail Page 3 of 6, 2/22/2010 ys~ iia Attachment 2 -Cost Estimate Detail I ! - -- I Tassajara Tassajara Tassajara Tassajara Tassajara Tassajara _____ Road Road Road Road Road Road SEGM'T 22 SEGM'T 22 SEGM'T 22A SEGM'T 22A SEGM'T 23 SEGM'T 23 DESCRIPTION PRICES UNITS QUANTITY COST QUANTITY COST QUANTITY COST Saw Cut $ 2.00 LF 0 _ $0 0 $0 4,940 $9,885 Grind $ 3.00 LF 0 $0 0 $0 4,940 $14,820 Remove Ex Pvm'Usw $ 2.00 SF 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Full Pavem't Section $ 8.00 SF 271,680 $2,173,440 208,800 $1,670,400 59,280 $474,240 Curb 8 Gutter $ 25.00 LF 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Sidewalk $ 6.00 SF 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Median Curb. Std $ 20.00 LF 11,320 $226,400 7,400 1 $148,000 0 $0 Median Curb. Glue $ 8.00 LF 0 $0 __ 0 ' $0 0 $0 Overlay $ 2.00 SF 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Earthwork $ 40.00 CY 80,498 $3,219,920 30,934 $1,237,360 2,927 $117,080 Drop Inlets & MH's (1) $ 4,000.00 EA 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Storm Drain Pipe $ 125.00 LF 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Storm Runoff Treatment $ 13,000.00 AC 6.24 $81,080 4.79 $62,314 1.36 $17,691 Striping (2) $ 2.00 LF 33,960 $67,920 30,000 $60,000 9,880 $19,760 Markings $ 200.00 EA 160 $32,000 18 $3,600 4 $800 Signs (3) $ 100.00 EA 0 $0 0 $0 12 $1,200 Electroliers (4) $ 6,000.00 EA 50 $300,000 40 $240,000 0 $0 Signallnterconnect $ 30.00 LF 5,660 $169,800 3,700 $111,000 0 $0 New Utilities $ - LF 0 __ $0 0 $0 0 _ $0 Existing Utilities $ - LF 0 $0 0 i $0 0 $0 Landscape & Irrig (5) $ 5.00 SF 90,560 $452,800 59,200 $296,000 0 _ $0 Grading Depth 6 $0 1.0 $0 1 $0 Signal Legs 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Signal Price (not included) 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Bridges (not included) SF 2 $0 1 $0 0 $0 Demolition Building (not included) EA 2 houses $0 Median Gut $ 3.00 SF Oi $0 0 $0 0 $0 Exist curb $ 7.00 LF 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 RAN Cost (not included) SF 0 $0 0' $0 0 $0 Other R/W Cost/SF Length 5,660 5,000 2,470 Curb-to-Curb Width i, TIF width _ Subtotal $6,723,359.89 $3,828,674.05 $655,476.40 _ Survey 1%I ; $67,233.60 $38,286.74 $6,554.76 Mobilization 10% i $672,336 $382,867 $65,548 Traffic Control 3% $201,701 $114,860 $19,664 __ Clear & Grub 2% $134,467.20 $76,573.48 _ $13,109.53 Total, civil only $7,799,097.47 $4,441,261.90 $760,352.62 COST/LF _ Footnotes: _ (1) @200 ft. Intervals along length of roadw ay ______ _ (2) Per strip ---- ----- (3) @ 50 ft. intervals along all lanes (4) @ 150 ft. intervals along all lanes, including con j 5 16'+4'+4' and/or area of fronta a restoration __ Attachment 1, Attachment 2, and Zone 7 Fees/Attachment 2 -Cost Detail Page 4 of 6, 2/22/2010 y9~d l~ Attachment 2 -Cost Estimate Detail __ __ 4 inside lanes 4 inside lanes of typical of typical 4 Lane Rdwy 4 Lane Rdwy 6 Lane Rdwy 6 Lane Rdwy 6 Lane Rdwy 6 Lane Rdwy Typical Typical Typical Typical w/28ft median w/28ft median DESCRIPTION PRICES UNITS QUANTITY COST QUANTITY COST QUANTITY COST Saw Cut $ 2.00 LF 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Grind $ 3.00 LF 0 $0 0 _ $0 0 $0 Remove Ex Pvm't/sw $ 2.00 SF 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Full Pavem't Section $ 8.00 SF 128,000 $1,024,000 176,000 $1,408,000 96,000 $768,000 Curb & Gutter _ $ 25.00 LF 4,000 $100,000 4,000 $100,000 0 $0 Sidewalk $ 6.00 SF 32,000 $192,000 32,000 $192,000 0 $0 Median Curb. Std $ 20.00 LF _ 4,000 ___$80,000 4,000 $80,000 4,000 $80,000 Median Curb. Glue $ 8.00 LF 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Overlay $ 2.00 SF 0 $0 0 $0 0 __ $0 Earthwork $ 40.00 CY 7,704 $308,160 _ 9,481 $379,240 5,630 $2 25,200 Drop Inlets 8 MH's (1) $ 4,000.00 EA 10 $40,000 10 $40,000 0 . $0 Storm Drain Pipe $ 125.00 LF 4,000 $500,000 4,000 $500,000 500 $62,500 Storm Runoff Treatment $ 13,000.00 AC 3.67 $47,750 4.78 $62,075 2.20 $28,650 Striping (2) $ 2.00 LF 12,000 $24,000 12,000 $24,000 12,000 $24,000 Markings $ 200.00 EA 80 $16,000 8 $1,600 _ 6 $1,200 Signs (3) $ 100.00 EA 40 $4,000 40 $4,000 20 $2,000 Electroliers (4) $ 6,000.00 EA 14 $84,000 14 $84,000 14 ___ $84,000 Signallnterconnect $ 30.00 LF 2,000 $60,000 2,000 $60,000 2,000 $60,000 New Utilities $ - LF 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Existing Utilities $ - LF 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Landscape & Irrig (5) $ 5.00 SF 48,000 $240,000 48,0 00 $240,000 56,000 $280,000 Grading Depth 1 $0 . 1' $0 1 $0 Signal Legs 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Signal Price (not included) 0 $0 0 __ $0 0 $0 Bridges (not included) SF O I $0 0 $0 0 $0 Demolition Building (not included) EA 0 $0 0, $0 0 $0 Median Gut $ 3.00 SF 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Exist curb $ 7.00 LF 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 RNV Cost (not included) SF i 0 ~ $0 0 $0 0 $0 Other _ R/W Cost/SF Length 2,000 _ 2,000 ~ $0 2,000 Curb-to-Curb Width 104 128 140 _ TIF width __ 40 64 76 _ Subtotal __ $2,719,910.23 $3,174,915.30 $1,615,550.14 Survey 1 % $27,199.10 $31,749.15 $16,155.50 Mobilization 10% ___ $271,991 $317,492 $161,555 Traffic Control ___ 3%' $81,597 $95,247 $48,467 Clear & Grub i - 2% ___, $54,398.20 $63,498.31 $32,311.00 Total, civil only _ _ $3,155,095.87. _ $3,682,901.75 ---- -. $1,874,038.16 COST/LF _ $1,577.55 ' $1,841.45 _ ___ _ $937.02 Footnotes: use $1600 use $1850 _ use $ 9 50 (1) @200 ft. Intervals along length of roadway _ _ _ _ (2) per strip _ ~ __- -~ __ _ -- - (3) @ 50 ft. intervals along all lanes _ __. . _~ _ _ _ _ (4) @ 150 ft. intervals along all lanes, including con ---- 5 16'+4'+4' and/or area of fronta a restoration Attachment 1, Attachment 2, and Zone 7 Fees/Attachment 2 -Cost Detail Page 5 of 6, 2/22/2010 `r a6 /l~ nt 2 -Cost Estimate Detail Attachme _ 6 inside lanes 6 inside lanes _ of typical of typical 8_Lane Rdwy _ _ 8 Lane Rdwy _ __ w/28ft median w/28ft median DESCRIPTION PRICES UNITS QUANTITY COST Saw Cut $ 2.00 LF 0 _ $0 Grind $ 3.00 LF 0 $0 Remove Ex Pvm't/sw $ 2.00 SF 0 $0 Fu1lPavem'tSection $ 8.00 SF 144,000 $1,152,000 Curb & Gutter $ 25.00 LF 0 $0 Sidewalk $ 6.00 SF 0 $0 Median Curb. Std $ 20.00 LF 4,000 _$80,000 Median Curb. Glue $ 8.00 LF 0 $0 Overlay $ 2.00 SF 0 $0 Earthwork $ 40.00 CY 7,407 $296,280 Drop Inlets & MH's (1) $ 4,000.00 EA 0 $0 Storm Drain Pipe $ 125.00 LF 500 $62,500 Storm Runoff Treatment $ 13,000.00 AC 3.31 $42,975 Striping (2) $ 2.00 LF 18,000 $36,000 Markings $ 200.00 EA 6 $1,200 Signs (3) $ 100.00 EA 20 $2,000 Electroliers (4) $ 6,000.00 EA 14 $84,000 _ Signallnterconnect $ 30.00 LF 2,000 $60,000 New Utilities $ - LF 0 $0 Existing Utilities $ - LF 0 $0 Landscape & Irrig (5) 5.00 $ SF 56,000 $280,000 Grading Depth _ 1 $0 Signal Legs 0 $0 Signal Price (not included) 0 $0 Bridges (not included) SF 0 $0 Demolition $0 Building (not included) EA O I $0 Median Gut $ 3.00 SF 0~ $0 Exist curb $ 7.00 LF 0 $0 R/VV Cost (not included) SF 0 $0 Other R/W CosUSF ~ - Length 2,000 Curb-to-Curb Width 140 TIF width 76 Subtotal $2,096,955.21 Survey 1 % $20,969.55 Mobilization 10% $209,696 Traffic Control 3%i $62,909 Clear & Grub __ 2%~ $41,939.10 Total, civil only ___ $2,432,468.04 _ COST/LF $1,_216.23 Footnotes __ ; use $1250 (1) @200 ft. Intervals along length of roadw ay ___ (2) per strip (3) @ 50 ft. intervals along all lanes _ _ __ _ (4) @ 150 ft. intervals along all lanes, including con _ 5 16'+4'+4' and/or area of fronts a restoration Attachment 1, Attachment 2, and Zone 7 Fees/Attachment 2 -Cost Detail Page 6 of 6, 2/22/2010 t~.ti.i+~(11TZc:TIt T'a_c~ t t~f` l I='a~;T~r'Ir t~Ilt~lill `traffic: Irll~~.l~ ~'ee< 2t~1() [.~~iat: I~~It'r~<°~:~Itm. I3ri~I~~~ ll~~l ~liscttiaz~~c~~ C:'~t~ .~. trltc:r~`ccti{~r1 t t~~iti: ``ri"tI<il ~ t,~(~. ~ ~~<~ ~ ~,t~i){i ~,~>r~ y~_,~ ,,r'*;'~Ita-~~a{l ~,tl ;r:i:iic ~i~~rl..l 5/ //a R,~'~~' C`<:>,t~. [.,~~~ ~,~6(~ ~;#`~ic.`i 1~:~~~: It~,~' a:iil?3llin,~ (Z ~~' ~.;~;t t,+ t't~r!tlir;c' {;,l~~t {'I\ 1( { !( I~;I'1t' { ~„•jti i ^.~' 1,,{.t ~}{"}(} ,~`>i 7~ ~ '.t?r r,_'ii;)i[ :~Ii;j~l'I~. ttlCh ;iI't! _ :iC?~'[. l{C11i1.S~'C', 11uh3:;.c<l(~Irr ~. c°h . r~~~•,{a, I~; ~~~ rC,~ld~~t~3, tt~~ ~t,~3-t~irk~ z ~ I. C Cti,tlt't>1I~: ~(`->~~ lily lli. ~' ,i Wit;<,~,t;t~;la Gd'~T`; t1, 1? 91?t ilt>E°i Itl f"{~~T ~~tit"L-~:~1`^ it,'c't itt~ L`IIC t3~'t<lil~`~f ~`:' i,1:Ti :'t+,l~I ;3~'!`II2;.'?lt. {I . ctl:i~' t'.3~C~, .t:1 ,~lllt7~~a(~tct' ~°i,l5 (?C'tli ~~r;;\ t~~~i~ III'~IC ~~ ~~+C l t)ti~frfit `[Iiil, i,f'~rt ~tlt a'G ttil(~It?~LII1G'rl?~ (([lit li+~[i(i( ?ltt-llla~~' ?'.` i'tt'1~1i"tli?itj ~°~`~ I(lt' a~~t >1?1+.', ('rt+f!~'l; i:)`,~"I'~'r tl~~Ot~ (~~Sc'li~f}Ili~ili i~t :(}C (?i~+('i'I~t: ~Il I~i~ ~3~ti;~, l~?C ~I(1lilliii" ~~It'~t+C?~I'tiS ~i^.~'ti (f[ll?I~'i~ tIC\C(t`f3t1?~'I1t (~t`Il'itila(: r1r_( IL tilrll~ (`•>_' rit'LC d'" fiat l~r~ ~ Il', t r t~:~3~'I ~~~~'i`ttti~~t^~ I±~ iil~i;.d~~ ~~i)il)~ itt" >U( i7I t}ls.` tl't~'ll,t',;.`i: 1IT:~jt"!3lC'IIlC'=1ti+ 11[ t~ri(~'r Its j~i+t~ICIE' lui~ l~~i~ ,:,)~:; ,i;i~t Oi`+,(CI`1~~ ,~t~t'+tI )I'}l~'('li t~l I}1.' C+~i1~~~:7t~"_ (Ilt(U`-rt~Tl t+I iil~ `;G' t t'~;t' ?TI `:(?C ~ ~} ~~t+C;~ I'€ii( I.('~"t'rl' tjlt' ' ( ~`I"t#?f'>~II1 t?ltil<'r'+.+; !(;~: Citi~>t'!:I`,i(lilll I(?I" I(l~ ;~' ~ tr^,(~ (i3` t~('(I'.':llt:' lilt` t ;S !t? 3:1'^iai(( ;f]l'tIl :lr +llt?f it ~'ts~ti 'lti; l~t+~'. it ('ittt't:(~iI i}ice ~ ae`. ±;"~'ii1 ',t tltill"ii1~ '(.c"~:' ii~~,I', tit i ,.;~:'i tj,t?', ~+~~:mc'r~f 1 - 1')c~rl~~hc`rt~ Rdr~rdl, f°it~= I.ruit~ f~~ 1rl~ad{~r ~';alte~ l3{tuI{~~'Iarr ~Lll;l~ 'i? aii1~ ;tIC` ~''•~3~i:11.~_' :2i .~Iaat~i?l~ ~l !lf(t:`, I~t''lt~Cl;1I:~ 1dI1~{ 1~ ,r;`t'~A~ ~_.~~;f. (~t"[~i: i:~ ~'`~{{>C ';1~(l;lf i~'l(~^I~;1! l~ I(("~, ( i'~+.'~, ~)ii1.'t: r;li~tlil,lti?ti til;.( (?~ ,;-., {., j It'>,l~'t.:t,r,tilliii(~Ii: ~tIC~C:t '':tIt~C`I;171:~ t~rtllTl itt;l}' It) ^=I~; ~ilil~'4' ;1t;ilt, ~t`}{)' 1)f i,lf 1 c 1„~ t°t ~1t.'I ~~, >. C.ii`1`t 1I1?~?'';~'t.`ilt+Ii ~{)!" ~' ,>:~2t~,',td£}22 fti{:ytTlE'il~ ~ - Ud?tl;,~,~1~'2"` ~~{lil{~~ ~tll.li~tli' ~s:l~~t'~ ~~d)tl~l"l .1C{~ '~{) ~~{ftl~{{tt7 ~x~iCk' sde~ ~~,~ 1tt~ichln~z~t f(1I~Y~~':tl(~11 iTll(~It~ltl11~[it~ t"~.l~t :i~ `i~r1i'}~tt ()e-itc' 4lili~ ~~)Ll~~~}Ii ~'I:!c'~`. 111tc'1~~~11t~'1 ITl(~i~ItlCdt](lI1S aT<: tiCC'~,c_'~} G1( t},C ~t";12}ttt ~~Ti~~' ttltel>eCC.1i~ZC ~(1 Cittc~.,lt'-1t'r~jat:° ,t 1C~!?Eli~ Jt~r11}1~?i)lCli} }~'SC tttt'Il }:ltit. } }i,:' I1s.Eltll}~t~lil2~} ,as~~P~~CIi:}? f~°t}} I1t'~.'~} t!J }mot' E'.h)t~ltii.:t} Its at~~~tllli~~~~3:rt~ t:I~ 1<ill~ ~}~il~t~_ th< ~~~~til1~ r~,~~rt}~}~~}~niri ti~f}at ti~~I~ l;l;IC ~~.i}1 ai~c~ r1~'~~d tip },L I11~>i}1?lt~j. }>i?~}1 It:~.?~ t~"l~} t~'t}UII'~ ~E"?'.;i} Il,t!t}?tlt'i!t':l1IlS. i}'«' }i~`+~7 (.j}~(.itL :!`~l'i} ~~-}.,t`j ~,j it~I' t i'!_(1:-t~t-+'~,.€: .i~}~} 3(j~, 11';~ '','~ tii. } }l r. *tliilu;i?i~ G1~°l~ t;C`~:t~ ('~.'~"~' }~t'~'Cl lt~~;it'i ~tt ~.~Ct:?il1il ( ! ft~rtt,~iii~ ~~}Ilt:~=1 ~~It .tEt r°~i~i~rlt4' .,ti ~;~t: I<'~';, ^,; ~ Ali ~"iii{} t~{,r ~ llt~ Ct!`~t*; S -f~}€!' _ `~~'-T~}.{„?t„}{~~ ~~~)~Y~~~l~ 4e~rrzent ~ - l)au~hc~rtz° 1Zr)~lt~, Iilrrr~tr,rr {~lac•~ to I)ut>In~ ~3aul+~~r.~rc1 `~e~~n~cnt ~ - Dau~h~rt~° ~~>:r~l, !?uC~lin t~rflr}~~3 xrrci to earth of 1-~ t)f=Rangy ~c~„rattrlt ~? -- Dcahln C~r~ule~°arcl, 'illrartc~ i'alr~:~~•;~~, to ~+icrr~ t'~~u~~t (« ic~enn) ~~1C ~~i~tT},'Ct ~`~ ~.t~Il1(~(~i~'. 4r~rnc~rzt f -~- Dcflif'rn ~3aulc~~.rr-~(, ~ir.•r-r.r tw'c>urt tt~ I)r,u<~Ircrtti IZt,a€1 It~i~'t~<cE: €~ ,;: ~( .>>i;~t~lLEr1~•i~~:~ ~-~~.~~ :.rc ;nlLlc~t !. !r t(~~ <r~t-~ . ~.;;~r ~~trt ~,~ is i~.. f!« (:"`it~° ~~II' i~s~~ ~i~~t t. 4c<~nrcr~t 7 -~ I~u~lrr F3~-ult~~~4tr~i, l~r?r~hcrt~° Ka:~cl t€, :s:%~' IZ~ht-of-llr~ i ~~ ~~a :1tt.~~:Plr~errt :~ 1~;f~'t' ;, Cll. '4e~rrrcrr>tt ~ - Drril{in I3rfu(ct'<rr€1, STI' I2~,r{rt-~r#=~"~'~~' ttr iron Hrrr~~ i'arl:« r~ ~t~~'~:~ iinz~rcl~°~r7rlcr":t~ ~~:it: r~c~ ir~t~rA~Gti~~r? :ii?E~rt-1~~;.r7~~rtt~ <rre r~~c~;s~;ar~. ~eent .~-- I)rrhlin I3t>ule~<rrd, {r-«rr {ftr~: {'arka~. t+~ {{aeicYrrt{~ I)ri~~ ti~r~:~:? inl~lrt~'.~'rn~'rI(~ ~'.~i~?: nt> it?t~'t~z'~ti~}tr ir7~~~:~r~,~~:r~~,~rt:~,<r~: ?~;:~~~...,~;..i ,~~~~~<~~. ~a,il~t~t>ti~l lrtt 7urrl ltrt~t i~ rt~z'~<'~i lti?Itiri .}e ~~,~?i~,~ lata~~-:~.1E~tt1 r.it'~fi:tli ai :lrr?t~":ti ~.)Tl;t'~ ~~,C~1"t;_ Sl1~{ r~~yL2I3C CIy 11 Iitlij ~ttlill~ ?Ilt'>i~i ~it>Lti{~Ii~ ~~Il }~ ~t)°~t-~ ~i,i'`t L ~~'~II }'I~~atc.'t~ (~,) z3~'~i~~tllt ~C~2" i'~aff2~; t't?iiCl°t~~~ t1R ~l'<I t'1I`-YIIZC' *(iC~'t. ~.~(35~: j ~~',y ~; ~~ti fl{ii°t ~~'; i~~ ts~t' `~1~!';3~4 v: ~~~~,~ ~, ;7, (s(i ~~'~' 0. ;',~i)-(,tlPi7 ~. _~'I?~~~,tr ~,I`t,l,11{li! ~~ ~~{l~} fit~;,rrrcrrt c} ~ llukrlin I3rriri~~iarcl, {irrc~ic~rtdrr L)ri+c~ try `T.R~~r.jrrr.r it~a '4itt'~:~ 7P7i~~Ci'`~Lrt1t'i1~S ~'4T5i. ~ I~'.'~`.~'tt 111iT1 ~.;I~1~' t'? 7[4~'.~~:'~l '+c ;i,,~lt'?Cl ~lI ~~_l~l~'f;~.~ii ~~?l`~~`- ~t1~j;1-it`-'.'>.3ti, ~~.t l~~ll' (tll";< Milt .'~:1: tti..~iU'I,~ii 'aI?t~~~itlt;3t'.i~'.IS V~. @~~ i?C i':i'L~"a':4T"i ' ~ - ' (~}°. (, Ci'~~t^~ !iii' ~ ~~t£'?1 ,11f'littctl ha ei~.~tryti]t It+i` Ii'.,. i,u i ~)[at~`ti {>il Ott"i C\, ~alF?~- 'zll'%;vt. ( i ~;?. TT~. "..774 ~, ~1),t it.}{I (',:::'I-~ :' \ i,it 3` , ~,tt 1, i, 11 ifl I~Ctirr~l;tr~ ~-. ;(i t if 3 } sR~ y ~~ti{~~} .'+r ;meat 1 - Tlu{}{irr i3~}trlc'ti .rz-~l. I ~r4~<r jars RcrFtci to ~'.r{l{,n {trl<tcI ~~iii't11~.ti?~?I't~1C'111ctIt5 <IiG 2YC'~~it'i~ C~lT ltt';d Iz," i_?~ Ll1c' ~~~9~~~III ~~<<ii~C';~it~~?~~":1~It~rI ~tit~:iv I'rltit'E;i'l:tlt??1 ~~ilf~ :iti~{ `~r~`[];1~ t?ltli~i~ll:i(3t~Ii1 [~~f?`~.il ::ti~ii"tit..'?;,~'t;i`> i.I~:??L't't~:`ii t?t .~'.L' C'~i~( TEL i?~ ilt' ~~11,'"i3?1 ~~{''tj~~ <1Ti~ ~,i~~.ti ;- ~~~~;.,~ li;.~?'~L:tir'tttj' (Viii} i t CCJSIi a f i ..„_ ....... ... ....~._ _.._..._._.............. .....,,,,.,e.,....... ~d era ~~~t.l~:Ii~l~~~~c f'~~~~~ ~ ~}i 1 ~t':_ \ ~,~,.("~`ii~ I'~'t° ~rr'~~ Iti X11 ,~ Ci~T' (71~~I(fl4,iiitln _ ' it'.'"~ ~, S,T(`!,#1Sitl jjti ~:'.' ~UI'Cltll ~~t~?'}; I.~~ ~ ~:tt~~ r . ?~1 ~~~~~~~ ~i~~.;n"teat l ~ - )u#~litt f~utt(c'ti ,trti, .Fttfl~,rt lCttaci tt~ :li#r}~•~'~` I3~ttt1~~~ ~trd ~~Ill(?~4~~ Ii'flt~'rtt\i11~Ct.'t`~ Ili'' tIC~~C~~.'.~ .:'t ~'.:~~(?tl ~~t5,';~~ (~'.L:( ICv ~7 .1?l~j ~)t,t~~zlii ~~'++~<t~f { ~Ctt3.~` F~~~} C,etttil -: ~ i~,,`~ ~ ~"'; #°!(1t) t'~`-'r I~':_' [ur ,,j.'1`i.i~ ~ j7~.{'+(1+1 f {+~ _' ~ ~ `tai? 1 `,1 ~'.i i[} _ `fi(~,„} ) :~s ~ ~ic~'~ iaC.~~"t~ ~iI aii ~~t(i~( lIt ~ ~ ~i'i~. .Ia',.~"I?: ~ i ~~i ,_. ~~<< ~~~#~Y~ ~ ~3~{m}~ i . i ~,"l %' i ~ _ i.' '~ ~ . ',x,ici~. _ _ ._ ~ZI~I:`::Tli>Il '',1~~ r~L ;"t.~tllI"i'ti '.tj( rtt.';: tt~ ~'I:.tE l~..t. F( #~IC' ~}tl~~:'t' i:(t~ iI;". ''~TS['._.tti!'Ft I* ,. ~`C~ .tUilcif a~ ~~C I:'~~}liit~'~? i~67 .1 t~1~tt)< .a~~~i:li.lt~t,<i~ ?~ ~.'~ .',tl~ ~~, ti~lii??~ :i .(t7 ~;1i(I! ,tl.+~;i. I I{ahii,.t fltlE~r<>.~F'1?+._•iltt~t~~;t~=`= 4,~au).,;~fit ~<1~~(i.;ti ~~~ ~1C€1. I'~rr~lttl,iFt~_ "~i~tltilt)Pii1 `;~tlil_(~1O~~ '<. 1~ l~ tit)s#~ .tCt' ;"r,t°,C'i~ ++11 ii?il~T. ~'~'%1a+11 t''+# Z~lb: { 1{' IiII~?F'ti'~~.;?it'(;t`, i1f°~ ' itia?1? j ~111t1T ~~if~ITi~ ltd I~lc.'C'~Iv2 t'i::_`C t?( #f?t' ~.,f -~#i_'i31 ~)!l~~itll `~i~tl+lit' 1'1~1i1 .~;C1 (~.#Iii(! h ;alit, ~t:~r ~j,iif 13Ti~~2"i?+i'liC'l;I~ # 1 ~~ 1 i; '~#~'I+t !t) li1C' ~•llt'I'ith?!'c' Ci't'e ~lt;?lt 1.`-,Il+)11~ i, .i? 1~ LEI(I"tCll \`~l`_5 i!'i:f ,. i)f .'`i+I'[1 # :.i111t'!1, ~~t?I7~',<<Il", tlli'; ('?I~..tii11~~ IE;at ait t~"\~,'lc+~zt°I '~~i i ;; ~ti:~~l i~~ii" t3f'ilt?lli` ~I~C~II#tl~?C ICT;~'(-i)',~`t'7"lift#: it)t" ~f}~'r,.'.!'11~'I"i' ~t+I#i~"'tIi. ..atj :C7I~ i~~>i tCii~ ~T:' ~~l;i'II~ ~~" #~'it' 1~~`. ~e~tnet l~ - :~t-'<~ ~iF~ J3ttulee`arcli' I-:~~{{ ~ritc~r-t~Ft.zn~;f° II2~i'I'i:~?F'.F~ '~ I';1lG~i'tt'~L't?l.'t1(ti ~'\. it),itfiC~It~ttIiI11 tlll('("i.?:i;i}C'!1'~.II"t` [i~'~ititi;!?''~" ~5~~f ' 112 ~tt~l~l4~~~tt 3 1'a ~ t~ ~~ ~`rf 1 ~~~~r~~In~i• a. ~c}c~<~ Se~tr~etat 1~ - C1<rci~~rula T)ri~c, I-~"~(} i£} I?u}~Iirt ~3aule~•rc ~tiir'T IT?T~tT'tl',t'illi'ilt~ t'til4t; Il~~ :ti?~I~~t'~"XTC~211111~1i~.''~~';ii.'t it, ~<;"~" iiiii~~.t?`t`. ~c°;rttc'cit l~#- II<rric'r~cl~i I)t'i~~, llt~aln Fittrxl~'~rr~d ~:~tc~r'i~;irln ter t:(ersrrn 3r~v€~ ~?lit't't 1ltiEit'C!'~<'I11Ct;I~ t"~Lii ~"~CtC`t ;i)[' tlllt"I'11?I' I1".Sli'i: ~;:T7C~. ~"clt:~ il:+}i~;~it~tlitiil 1 Ilit'~1t'~:l ?t'I 2}1~ ~+?;t(1 ~:'`' t~( ~~1.' ~!~t'<i~tztl ~I`t~i' lit#;z t'1:t7T1 l+.} t;C'~I?tt>S'IT? 1.} iil~ c!~~t~C:t~ ~clllt. C", ,~t; 11~:~ ~. 7~,f:}f)ft ~~t'i I~'_ ~{`'„ ;;}~ ~114~ti~„~ ,=~,~I1 ~3"',;i}t1 4c';~nr'r>«t I~+- I`aciencla i"")rirel I-€~ Intt•r-rltan~e ti i~l"'?t. il.:111 L'. t' li: t^"E E~I+.iti ti I11 t'i'?`t~ ~?Ii' tii?Iii~~il':~. (>~:. I. f.'..1:`.+t t'i'll ~~.)U{~~ltl ~~1'£ljlt't"f ~' ~)« ~i~'T"~~ { E.. ~.~~..}_~ ~:1~~. ?llt';{ltt~ lllt°,I"i`~1~3Si,!t' }t17~~7'C+ii'i11C'll~;ll~i 11C4~~1'c{ 1(~ (~ E ~51~~~'TI I~7c't'.i;T{"+UL1(ti~ £~C~-I°;1I7T~~ ;1~''j~~~~~IC{I i12 ~~:.~ICIi£~<: I~T`,;rt' 11+ F~r~',ii1~ ;! I{lii~~ i',_~t{'t~?talt{ {'iI :;=1`CI ~.lI1C_ # ~'} l+,;i,'Il II"I~.' Il(+;I}.t{>t~tllh~ ~~I ili;l~~<l {)1"ilt'+~+~"<"Fl`t~1 •lti~, (i~t'I71 ~ {~ii~,t'~ t~~ -~ ~.:Ilt"i. `~Itil?e'~~ 1t+ ~'I£; ~.i~' t~lt~~'C ~i+~tt=?I1 ~.iiit''+;1""tl IlI1 t ,i~,.I~;[ic'~Ikl\,~l<<I~ ~;t'?~ {f~I~ t~h: 4't:';t}'~r.~t:I'~{ i)il-i';'.tili~'~. S it lti~+t~l~~; 2}it' ~'4~'~~~~`£?tiil~j {+°~t.)j~ ir.t-T"s~~iTlh ~i`+ i1+.'~'t~, ~ ` {-~} S,xr i ~', '~?~j~,t. ~ ~}C i':1P lz::[~i'+l+,s°t~;"1 Tt~ t~ , ~t=iii ?i.~' l E t .t. li`!t i i ._, I lIY~1l~.~c:.i thiTt~ .`..`~t1~~~:tlk ~-°filli"Il ~llf~. ~("t^~ t1°•c. Ii't I~~t' _ ~itt~i ~'i ate dI~. ._~ ~ tzi:~s~. -I:I ~1+,~~i~~ ~~` 73 (~ ~ . ~~;* ~~c"' gyp: I:~i~t!;lti~vl r+~~.a (Mitt}~#_~tij(I} ,, q"t it ~',:~ ii~~ 1.,~".i litt+3t'r ~~~r~'cr~a~5tlw,~~ ,(it ~ +, }(ti) `~e~;n'<erit 1- ~r~£~I~I T)r-i~c, I>rrt~Iin I3£~rrle3~.>rtI tv ~;Ifa~£-rt Ilr°itr i `~ttt~t ~~il~~~'t~. ~ r 1;,. c rt.~'Tltt tt~ ~S"t~lli c =`<~cl .St3t.ltl~+:hl( ,:Iic:'7 i>t1 1'tii .? ~#~~~, .,l~;t ~ItfC IS t 1?>TIi9~""; F ' ~'v"i+.jCt11I1' l~"il~ }i-tatllIc' C'i{~i~1Ci111tI11 ctii ;i~il.l~ t)II ~l~!I~i~1 ;111t~ <tit+:ll ii`"~ ~i~ ~ c't;ll'.1~ ~~7~a{il`,;1'.~ j iti~.~ Ilt~i.t~41',:?I,;ii t}II [li:~I'I~1 iSI?:~ `~t:~?!~l ~t':_'\ ?~"~ ~~i;.~tti! ~ 1t"I'tt :~ ,l`i'::l:.llz' tit !i:.?~i~?t:?l3il~i I1~'i"!~`. ttI?'J1 1:<t;C ~.t"I~1 l~l.Ltj,?"j [~l,' at~tjt't{ ;li ~}lli~~lll ~~~1~;i1C".;1?t=. T~~~tltta;;'_` I~i>~~1t-t~~-G~~a~', i'i~It.. + SG ~ lld ';tt~chrrl~.nt ~'.I~~~ ~i c'Y 1 C~Iwcc:rnrrr =~. ~~~~-~~~ (.°t~sl: -t ?~'_; l ~~'~,~tltl E~~r'1~„~ <i~I-~~,lla~ ~ irt(?'~r i~r r~i~l.:~~'rl~~r?i ~:~frf).~~~ t~:"::t1i~ ~~i~?~"t `~ i~ ~~1,~~1f Tllti' ~ <i11~' t~° 1)L3€}'l~"1 I?I~~# { }iirt.~ ~'`,i{.s't'i ~. ~.~t:W~latit~?I tt,~t tt,~-4~i1 ~~=c~r~(~~iC~~-~t3lt:~~ ~,~.r(lI~1 `*~73,~}{~Q 5~~ment tf~;i --C`crr~ral P~r{.ii.t~, ~lrnrrlct llri~•~ tra ~-1~rci~nc~at Urine ~??.'~:1'i itt1371''%\iITIi't1?`_: 31I'C' t"~.i~Illi~_' t'll'~'il? t~+C ?;lei{~c:.' i:i1:."``: til~['ttit'l'~tt~ti~ !t~I .i"[l~?iS <1Tt; <'lltitl?1'~', til~!?13~ lllt}ZililC'.tl;t~ll~ it t~~ ~L rlC:;~i~,_I t~i1 ail:' i',:~~ ice" _ t~~ lF'ltr :4lillt~it~ t.~T"i'v't;j. („'~Tl~r~~ 4ement 1? - Central Fri~~, <r} ~ ~ i~ac~ic'rtrlr [)riti e t~ 'Ta~saj~ara I~.cra~l '~Ite`~:L 1711I'i~t~i"t.'tt1~'f'1~:~ c``.1~~ C`~:~t~7~ ~ii~ 1=1`!t t' (=l s. ~. iIlii:~i`Ct?tv;. ~ii~~t :~'_'_a.11-+v'~:i ?' . ~'Tl<I t2lt~tjlili::11?t'flt; A`v'lil ~l~ iic'~i3c'~~ t>i1 (~Iz' t~,'t";t 1~'~ ~~t~`I,t.' ] ~f~.I~l):ai',1 f~t)a~i iti?~:f;~c'CIIt~i1. r~ I1C'1~' `a 'Il(1~ 3.`, il:"::~l~t~ :(I I'.C' ~.'1;:;.:1C:' (ti `~l'' ~l't t~ili. ~~.<<l ~t t't' ~ 'I!C'I..~l: t rl~ ;i ~~:3I`~ (~ ~' ~`t?:.11'~ ~tlI" r1~~H"tit ~'~ it;ll'~" M. ~. _ ~ t ~ 1, ,~~_lH,ig1 rzti~'1~~.~?t i{a~' ~, ~~w,t14jt1 .j 1 .1C ~ ;i~~zi3;71:1 1 3:`"f~ ~'~I'i~~L~ ;,II~ I;L'~'~~ 1i7 i~t: iiiz~Ctlt'ij ~:~I~TTt I;t+~ 1i1 1t1~i;" E~1I?t'>;. i ilt' `tic.%.' I`t 1C'C)' lt~n tl~t~~ 1_ tI-.t~:a i..:?~ ,il~~~ .t ~(~ ?7~~~i~It~~ s.~i(I ~~, r~~i~..=~~~~i~. C`+<~st~ E ;~~ ~ .., .r+. ~ ,~ ~?(lr,,! .t i :t Srtitft),t)t~(~ >'~t'<„;nrt'-rt lf~-('entral F'ark«<ir, T.i•srj:ir<k ttr h,t"c'~.tn ~ireet itl(~'!-'~'t:tit)tl Ii11('?i"i+'tt'ilit'lli~ t'1:~1 tI ~.i^;~:1;..":i i\t~.li~. j~::t'ltli 1~.1~,3i?it't?it'tli ;iCi.' !"l~'~'~~~'il 1~r1 l~l~ t'.t~1 it~'~..' )t [iit: (('II~I;1i 1"~ilt'~;~`,`:i; i ~t^t ~i7i?'~! i~t~~?t~ i;ltl'?'`~t'~'t(t??? ~i:101~ :;IIt~ A,;_'C;.i~ i .~ .. y, ~_lt,`+~ ~ h_'. ~; `'t <,`~_?'t~tit ~l~':.'r ~ l .``rP' ~ 11?t T?itii.~:~tl.'I~1C?Il '#l '1 s~~ ~~~ `~i?~it`}~r?7ci~t ff d tichmc~nt 18A - Contra[ >s'arkwr~iv, ~~e~~n 4trecxt t Fatlt~sn '. `~tE't't't 1rT1~lI't`lttt:t'Ili~ ~:'1i;S~, ~`;tt'il<!I iRit'('`*'t'ili)it 1;11?S {)lC'Itlt'ili.` ~ ,`l`,`? IE<<, ~+t t~t~' ~ :ii`.c?i3 ~.C7c~t~ illt~t`~4ti(?rl. C'~'~c; l lei ~; ~ :!;•(tt i~ ~ ~xt}(~6} Sent 1'1.- ~ t}r'a~~srr Urti~e, ~rncrcl T~fri~~~~ ttr t=l.it~ienc~i 1}r. ~ti`~~'t rtl?j4I'c"7YcTT1Gl"(~ t"1I~1,. ~. ':k'.t:lT'+. ~•ir~ti.el 1~, l?:~t°~,:+.( .tt ~tit.:,~~',1 T't~I`rt-ti~-x,.11 ;2=1t~ 4:15'IG tt;lt';'it', ~•,j':'iit~ .lC' . :itilli.`_' C,c~~t: i i~~~ ~, ~;'~,_~x~i ;'~r- ` ~a~.ll I~-~ e }t?21',t ~7~.()a~{ ~l ~.ti(itJ ~2~~! ~c';,srt~~'nt ~'~ - (~}t°r~atrr :!)r°i~ e, Il:teierrslz )r-iti e i~r '~`.r,•aj.tr t~~t ~ttc:t4 ttl1~'?I't7~'<"Ill~`Set~ c~i'~' t'\ `-tlti:' tie~nrent (1- (:ik'a~t~n ~rii'e •l:r~~a1rrr~.r Rtsxrc} ter E'ttlic~r`::EZ~ra<1 }tll~~i~,)lt'i1,:'I~{,~ ...c t"~;i~}lt'I~'. }~iiiii:i} :,,,( <<:~~,~c:11i~':~: ;it''--' 13t'C~lt(y} l~il ~}:~t c a`i1 ~t',' C~~ E E~ ~T~G1^+t)a'1 ~~i"11t:, ~.1~`~1<,tt.t ~~i~..~} ik1i~,,.t't'?ia~Il ~l}'+(f ~.?}l} ~r:_'Z;il! IIl!t;3i{.~.,`.f{1111 -. ~. ~ ~ - ~:{>„~f = ~ T. '~ tr° ..'~~~47 ~~~i 1~.' 1 ~' i~ ~~?: :tli,taliit.lllt?iI ,``..~}.Zt}al ~ 1~.4 .~ k :(r ili) }'l'i ~ „_' it,C C"I11~ ',~1,IEa `,l> It{!:l! E `~e~rnt~rtt 21 -~'~rarrlc'tt })t-i'+ c, 1?trrr~,}~tt°~` Kt~a~ tc~ Diul~litt 1~{sute~ ar-ti L)r~ticc~n~~~r ~. 2{~{3~~ }lc` t ~tPt~ll'il'tit)Il ttI :i l~tt?~ l'.li}ti_'t"c t~ttii~t;"lt il~?Il ,1.~} Tt;~klii ltl tllt i+.t~. ~~l :iii t.'?.l`.1'til',~ ti!}':'(1 }l.?itli:'}. ~~ l}ll t'}1~iI111C[ I` ~it'(~I`tlitli.'~I Itl }"u' ~1 ltlfi~tlii'~it?it:l} lt~'II2i;t~. it7llti~ttiti?tlil tilt ft'~~} zt'CT71~t~t ~~t~}21I1~'~ rlld\ }?L T't(E21~Ct}~r~[2 t~;1I13:ia' C1f ~;{}!}d}U~) I~: i}}~~L~'<~} ~itI ~t't'illlTitllLT ~d lia ~~tf~i~:~Tt~~~~t~1 ~._ alul ~trn~tn}t:tit?1~. . . :~I1 c'1:1`Ill}~~? C?7~ ~~}~~e~ITIC'. tl~~et tlp'i~~ ~liie.:ii1ti~ 1c.'~4t7c.:~~ 44131:'[' illle ~iCe ,tT.tli.: 1T"t t Iallrua4i ri'~i~t-i]fi=~.4'a:. I~eit~e.~ti~~n t!l~ tl~eze utiiitic°~ II~.I1 }>e IT«~i~.°~~ ~jt the Iz~~G cl~Iti~~r~ ~ r~~~';in~,~. <~TTtj:' t!r ~~~diti~~at ~rc~te~~r~t~~a I3~.I~~ ~G 1~~~-,~~~i i2 t~~~ I~lh', il'~ fc~ r~n~~iir€ ~ +?Ili'Illlijlii.i~ eiltCt>~tC~TtTtei]15 IliljeT C~le I1e41 I'tj~ti~. ~Il :I~jt~iC;(}Il. ,IIT ejll~Tltl'1? ~'rtr~e ~ti c'2~2 t!4'ei'~le~ft~ ~~~)~i tt'~ii151111551t?}I ~}ile lam; (Ii ct~ili~ICl \4"IC~1 t~l~' t"v+tl~~ i~.Stititi;tl}}. k~itCtitJilSL?~ iIl l"r4 i"I'}it'i8~~ c~151i1~~1lti~jll line. I1Yi: ITt:c`i~ [i'r ~C Cs.1t1C"altt~_ :~ I1LtIlT}>t't its <"tiltitil2~ ~~tTle ~1t2~ ~U~' C t`FIC~'S IiI~C ItrialCil lit t};c 1"lv~~lt-<~t-t4;T1. J ~<~~ Utt~itt:'~ 21.t1~; (?2`it~~C I'i;!I'I'~ iiti~~ ,til`, I'<'l+ri`~71}t!Il ~i+tit5'~~1~~ 1'C L~":' ~t!St t~~ t~2f'. ~LC!IeCL .l Cir°I vrj ~,l,~fti(i {}~IJj 5,i~~t'44et~ tint' I~i4' 1:dt~it.t115 tl1}~Ilt'S. ,1t~I;i~ ~"`~t~,ee~~:Ti?C'tJt,Cfi C°l"7S~S: e~;ruc'nt ~~-T~~sj~tr Ru.~{t, ~1)llf' '~i}rtkt cr~'tic'<I.~in ~)ri~c tta ~:"(' C"t,irnt~° .ir~~ ~~,~~.l,il.l'e tiIi'I:.`'j 1t11~`C~)ie[lhi~r`, t.i("t TIts1 il.lt"C.'1Ti~'~. t'1.1Sj, 1 lT~~ illy t"~;c'~:1}t~Il Ii7"(~`t,''s"t'[IT.'ITtS 11I'e ^;ei;'~et~ tilt CIa 5,~(11~T x~ih~ i'1t~C~~1 ~t" v~~ ?~3C 2 ,tltir~l f~~. ;51~ 7lllt't~`a'~:Sr??I t'it`jil-t~j-,,az .t:.~-l', [tit` ,. i11. lll`,t'!'*c.'~'llt)I] .at. }I]i~i,t~~l t]] tip' jt'~t;ll I','I:I t'' ~'," Dili<li~lt3~ ~ ~i~' lc?IITI~i 14';I~a~ t!~! ~~~_' .ii I~~,. I!]l~:'C`~L~t10t: 7~ ,'t 6i~ti.i~ L{]~3t~ 1(7t? j(#~d' ~li:'~Ittll 1~,°:LA ~~It,-~~~rT1 .ttl~j 1451 ~s: 711::. ~,i'~~~IT~ihiiit4 t~i~tf]:~t t3eae?<'}'-1:I II}lt'I"51'CC,C1[t ltll;rPt?4~'I]ic`(3IS tlaitlC~~ ~l ~i"e t:-CI'._`}IC ~1.`I"}? ~<t?_. ~<s.tkliil '~tj111it 1x12 ~~ .t°,'~allii.I ~;Oil(:~ ,_ ° j~1l~i!il.=~1 jE?t,' }i?ICt"~Ct:I9t~t1. 1 ~lC i:2ll~'> c1IC t-~ lt} v.4~ciiE? 1?:~ ~t.}tJ Yt?I?`f { {151 i+I .;~C';,'4 ttil~"tTtr','c`it;:'13C 1~, `~ I ~~t} 11 ~s'!" i}1~ 1 `\ ?.4 ~t~~' ~,.;::c~'t,. ~,`i~ .j r' it J ~~ (~'`~' I.~~} "~ ~ i `~ l{) `` Ott,. `~ (~,.v.;.'`>it i,1ll tiles',: ~~: f~tlrl'~e !~ tYc't't~ei~ I+.~ t.':I'.'I°1 i}...~.•>Iil.lilti 31nC~ ?3G'4ir~t4 C)~'#:T" t~1~ ~1+~:c'-j"t':`~iI tit{...~ilte..i 11~° hI"It?~~ ~' ~4itl~: 1~', a,t)` I~'IT~~ ._ Ct~::' it"i(c:t"^,'.'tllr.}I] ~i!~5: ~,]1j(~,~~? `~C4t'",TP~ ~'tt.F~~.'2'llt:~: ~l_Stc ~ir_I1_It~~1 tj~ 1C'~~1G'Il~~?~?itlirll~ c1T21j T,~7i° tli?~ t:~~'~.'C~t~l~l_ _'~Tl t}v1 l.a(.i:ti' ,~~CL't~'}~rr~ent ~ l~ei:crslr =~, ~~}{ __._ ..... ____ _.._... __.._ ~_..~ m._... _ _.... ~__ l~ ilt'~ilet~ ttl Illti [ ~~' i+~ ~''Ii~ ltlj" Illy it~'~ f7f ~Ct~ill,i. e la`2ll~Ff"+~~CIt1e11t~ €li:it T?11~ ~~L flt it<'~S:,C`~ } Iczr tli~:: itrilet"Iti~ ~t'tt~il"llititil} t>I (lie rt~a,~, ~T t-'~-``ll~~.l hi'itE?trt't~"; ~ lit l~ ~~1('j~e' IaCt~~?ei"lt": !?(.}{w1 ~1 :'~it'l~eit ~'I"Ci~?eCt~ : (~l)I~) ~:~~ ~~ ~ ~P~irit;2,!<' Iiilj'I"cal eI71e11~~ II1~:Ititl;: ~ ai 1~ .11~~ '_'tlt(~'?".:1 ~ tt'Iit el IdF?e, aT1 ~? `~~lt~tlllC'f ;tiiu cl ~?~. tiI~1C~tia31i. ~ {~`~C t~i~ IIYi(~It?1 'II1;'tli~ i~ `~l a~r~ j~ '.~!,' :l i',"]l'~:~T ~~'~ l1'i~'. s't:~:-l.t(i<' '~i1"~'~'i. ~?tlil',LlI{, tt~St ~ ~~{~.iit} ^,t~. ~,zr ~ ~~~ ?j~;~)2'.11~' ^.(tlt.:,'31~~. r(t~I.i, l (t ~ilia'~:e i'~,.j . +!()~) ~ ~t 1 ~:?~) ~ ~t,~lll .'i1) .>ti } -~ ~~'~, .t ~ ,it5~ yy ~iC~~it hcl C~IC(ztll i<''I~1', l~ ,?e.`i ~:tj ,4i{_',I~' ~~lt. I :~`'-~?~Il~i flit>:II~I~?.'. I I1L l,~iil l~ rah' ~~iile f?`, 11(fi~' It>a~ { 1"~. 1'. '',,~j'.~!O.: ~ I~`tat7~t~•IC'.I~ 1Z 3i1'i Il~r i.' I1 .t f ~,"'i '? I ~[~ .ti~~ C`.~°el, trail. _:~;~:~ 2~? r. r .. . ,< tilt.iei\t,~l, 1~+?IC't.'t:l ~l l+tll'..' tl"1:' ~t?IZ~1' ~t'~:~~I(Il.:Et':t~ ''vi~.~t i iIt~17I:iL`e~. `~lCli:i;ilh lt.It:llil 1~ f1~ iC~<1~ <<.~tl= I:r ~~~i~lil, (~t7 t` ~47.~~~I (~tr{'.1'.t'~I1::1 '~~l.a i;e~.li~t'41 lt~`i ~::1};'lhliC'! 1Cl;iiiliilt~ t:~:iti . ; ??{'t.•tlei.l alp ~tl;` t'a' ~°.c" Ii tiI~~L' tt~ ll~ie r~,,ltl aI iltc' 1'1t)1"{II:'r~ (?i llie T<1`? <iilti`~ ~)I ~ -~il~a hTtt~`?ei~iiC"~. ~'~lili .1 ~ICC<lila '~~a.'1 titil'i~~ta at t~;t ~~~~aZil eSlil Ott file I'.h;~~'I" ~~:~~.~1~~,rt,,`, a-n ~~i~"t'~all~ ~i<e i7e~.'tle+.I ,_.~ ai.tfltil I`~aCi(~, iii, ~, iL~lir1 Iiit' t:.. ~}~: ~L.t~.t~IC .'4tiit' ~ I.~ i~'~ t.t~~,#fl~::rC ~ei1~(f1 t?? t~1e. >.~a11~~ 1°; :.tE~} ,1:11 l1i~.t•,cT"a~'c hei~'lit {°F~ ~$~'. 7 ~ r t~{~t,.i ~t.l! ,. ~'~I:lll~~t~;$ ; i C?`~°"~, ~,~..fti j t, ~~{j ..$.i 7I~ _~ ~ Iat;'C 1~ 7t<tt~t'i~ Ili Ifle 111~~ ~,'1" ~i aT1zi~'C'. 1~It)~~~`I" Cyr{~~~~'1~4 ~. ~ E~ti ~'i l ~~'_;; t5 ~ ~~i ~~ ;~~<' iLTltl i F s9~ iii C 6 //2 .•'~tt<~chr3~~r~t t..~ti~:Ill}3t°r ~, ~(?f)~) ~~~l:~7~ ~ ~} t;~f t` lT~il'.7itiit'l~ tita~~l}r~tttli+ti ~'ti>C~: S~~Ct~~ Sti"Lltr'tlirTr*~ C}t" t~t}'ILt' }~Tt?~ T~~It~t;~~ t~ II*t'L~ti~ ai t}l Tl+,rt}~~t'll hl~~'~rc 1,::+ }~r<<eTlt ut't5~i1~%~ rll~r~r~~} hi_°~',t~,~ct~~T t~:t.<~ <~1~?~r thr ~~l~ait~~~ ;~ul~~~ i~ r<~In~~~tt}..111 ~T;}~lu~lllec i~ ti~«~ir41 f~lr Sta}~tii~ta13tv1 ~`~~7I-~, arlc} }~~>~,-~it~i~ l~ITfhit~at tl;iir,_a~it~Tl. ~'i~^^}Ir-<,r «ac tlr«lt°tl l;lc t}l~ sta~iEii°~Itlc~rl ~},>~~-r1~~I~.:T~tll ~~t"tht' ~}:1;5:f~ara }~i~a4~ r1~ht-t.>["_ti~~l~r~ I~, }tit"Ci1~':} l1'"It}1tI) t}1t' ~ ~lI'L',~l~-} 1't~}I 4`i ~~t"i}}}4't'Ilt~. ;i'.l .1}~t?lGatl~t' 1~+ t'14}lti:}c.'~} t:?"i4}Gt t1~}:1t-(.i~~_ .i,lL" ~+,_~`:i'~ 1(t I}j; ~it'TlT '.i,l`+ (,1114} I3CY~~}~ ~? }?~' }?.?I'w}i:l`;t11 lll~t'::t, t~( E3C'ltl', ~iG~}'4,it:,:43. "I'tat~I }~rT~}~~c casts: -~,?,C3E}C~ ~t'~.;rnertt - T~~rrjlr-a R{iac1, C~ielt`trtl I~ri~c°e fc~ :"+(){)!!' tit,r-th ~,f C:tt'.l~~,Ir Tlri~~ }".~l~It11~~' fiii?C++\~iTlf'.:~ itt~~llut.' fiT"lt' } }}" .'^;'4t}. }f:Tt~ sTti.} :t i•Illt}~L~l}?~'i! t:I~:}1.11; lit t: `!. }1 tll2i'C:Iili'1 tCi)111 ~~}t`.11t~i1 })ilSt~ Ir,~ CT ~~'i~ii?c } 3Sl(~' ;I~:~F1}L` }t.}~ i"C)i"11,1!~~:' [lil~:~it+1C:Ii~'tIL~ ilCi i}7E CTit `lit' tti itlL `:[Itit~..ill~ flf}} iiC~11~.1,'.' 1111}'1"t?~t'111~°ht~`~ ,lll~ll?"' lElc' lti~",1 ~ti~. t?i Tali' ~I£~~.'C C+~l't to}i':1~~}Tl }~I'?14' I{+;.1 }?i~(11l 1.`,t!?t li?C"4}l. ~ ~i?tt'.'~''.IY!}~C~}ti`I:l:'tll~; ITli:lt:i}~ t?it t';+(t";tllC:II()Sl C7~ hliC } E}' [t,I~;'} ~all~: ?11 ~~lir}} i}S('i'tilt>Tl its ~lt; { i~C,t°;t)II })I'l~~C Its .} f?+51t?i },a?1~1~ , ,;-:"?}L ~rl~ ~1,!}} }t: Itll},tt,~l,~II'i.til~ ~t~~'.": T}~t. ~', 1,~ ~, ~Ii =.i_ll~~i ;tCr,', ~ r };';~, '+~4 i f ,z icy ,1 1 ~. .#i t l~l ~}:'.t°;i : I t' ~ <<. +,~1'j};t'I'Il } }1~a{11 i_'.C Cit`C}i t t+ ;;1;?.i }1 I~ ^ .1~ICij~atCil I~I,EI '.CIiI I,d:`t' t7i1('t"t~~ttllCilt'~ S; [~~ t. ~C;t;tltt} :il.+ll°_' {}l~.' :fit}~Ilil`~ }?I'c+~~~i"1'~ t'~'.C`:t ~iij4'1 a'~ .! ;~''~-(f}1 (~~ !hill?'C' ~~t;~.'~~+~^i"11~tt. ~11Et'i*~it:1t+)tl lill}°'IctV~°T..~'LlI5 1tI t~~t'a-~ +Il },1',"; ', ~.: '~'ilft `:ifCil ~}~: Ii+~_}]~ic'<ti:~''1 i"~~ I}1:' It<1tt'.+~ '~;~tt~#} sill~~ it1~1;1'.~Tltltii"1 iF~ 3 y~~t~13} }i:i. t111~11 }ally ~.+T'! E}it' `:~'J"3II }i'_': T°t_}li-i"~s- 's:[t 1' i'~.1`~(ItiL'. 1i 3i:'~ ~ ```.`(~i,((`~iftf }`~1 }i'_' ?, ti() z t~''i' I?1C}t~1~1C;4~1t'il ~.~ l.~~~) 1 }~. :.' t. ,l 1`.4 3~ 3t 1 ~1.~: ~. !'. ?} l~t~t~FL ~.._~ -7 t ft 3:.3 (t}i:ii ~T1tt t~i'iE?++9"~ ~.tlSt>`;: ~~~~?^,~} t; t,.+4'III (i"t~(`t'i"il~~,.'(1 l ft' `,ic'~i ~2u~ i.i',"4' i~3T13ii'~} i}~:"~~:I+,}~;tl<'{it .tliil i~!'?li'<' 'il~lC}~"C?ittl~t~; I 1311 ,ii}ilk{'.iTlt:, 1^ :1c~t CC, fil 2}1: } 1~ Qt? ~?;2t" ~t,r [?t'+.1Ia;_'i' tt'; [~I'i'+'^ ~ .l;c l:f ;}l_ ;t' f~" ~ 7 31 ~?~ ?~c'<':~t'tc (t~T (}li' ?`~T~i'l~`. c}C1~'l"!3~1?l~~'1?~~ (i` tI"iC ?i?:9~s~ t 13itt'~:} tiT..Tt^; t;^t .1tli~tiia {('~rt~ ~'ars~: } ~~+f lt° ~t~:~rCI~:I~i~: ~ 'a1 I( i i I=~~~,IZ~a~t i1~;E~rc~~~~~n~t~t~ ~.ZL}ll~c ~:uT~~ a3~~~ ~~~T~~z'~-, .~ }~~ tr~1~~~ } _rl~., ~ln ~" ~h~,'~~alt~~r as~t~ ~t ~~ :~i4}~'lt;:i}}~;. (~t1~1 t+j llll}~Ct}i4'illt't1I~ l~ `til~`{~~ i2 }t'~i .t i`,~!l~tt} } ~~ '~'"'.ti.;t' ~?:ti-il4t~~: `itT~"'t`t. } ., ~ '~ ~ ~Tt3Ct~,ax~ Li~~t 1. ti, (, !}t} 5t, i>i ~,:t, jj tt~t ~ ~, ~I~le~~al~. ~__ _ . ._ _ _. ___ . ____._. _ ~_ . _.. ___ ~ mm ~+'~ 1/~ ~~t~~~ > I ~}t ~: ..~..~+t~at I°r~~tit.i,~c C~~~t> l~ri; ~. tt ~~() ;~ .'+! l~~) , ~i> _ ~,;~r.Ei~S F~~~~air,~t tlt~ e~i~titi~ ~~a~ttllc~ilt ~tlt„t~~ ti:4 ..t~+ ,i~' ;,i tlf`, it},i~i i~ !~~~<i~ti. 1fl a~3e~it~~r~. i1~E?klij is t~fl lti Ctll Etili~ <<1 t';~1ilt fti 11~:°ur;'t,~ tt~ ,~f"{~l'l~jt" ;tt tl tl<'C~1TIi Iii S1 ~' 7'.i i.~l~ UIi1Tll~li~' T7"i ~:`~:~2;:t.TI ~}t'llt.~tt«~", 1\Ii~l':E1TI~' i?I t(I "t> i~~ t'C~~tl it:~121 i ,iit"~ ,u! .,i`i ~.31c',. ~~ t~f.l~ ~c~%rnc~tti 3 - T.r~~r.~<rra .I2~,~rc, fluhli ~cr~tle~°arcl ts, t~i~~~r~can I.)ri~ t );t' tTC~i~~1 ~~ ~r tti ~ [:~`!`~:123 ~ ~I1','c' 111t~i'~C'~ ~?t~f`I'+lF,~ i"ti`i~llct'< `~1~_'7~61~ sif`~i~ t:IV"fl f7"iC~t~I It <EttitTl ~C~ ~i~ it!ll!TItiC~~iti.' `•<"~:}il~~ I~t~ ilf.ti ~;zti:' 1;till ~_ `~ ~,.ii (~rfit.t} !'<{il~,,,:i'. ,liii'';t~?!,,rl ii~ Ic;C~l11S" `~i.;i~ ;1i~1 ~ 1t'il IT1C2+.11t..:;.1t:tJIiJ ~tlT` ~~i t}t't ~t'~? 11,t,7 tt:!i4;~. ~,S?~l, T. ., ~ ~C ._.+'`~ ~'(1 ~.~^•, i, tit, ~~,i~i, tip' ti.?I t~~il;.iii `'. ~: `t. }1" ~f l`~~ii tilt till it.'i-I ~, t.t,? "~{d ' k~`f.~`:~~t ~e~~mc~rat-~-T:~~+~:rj.~r F~aad~.[)u1.~lirr f3t:~ulc~;~rc1 tt:rl-+~3 ~. ni~ft}I!,~~Ln;~ it~it t±ut~ l~~~ ~~ rl~c+~cc~ ~~: _)u(~<Iiit 13c>izl~~~drr~~ (~a~~titf~ rfTt t~rrt~ ~arlc'~~i1! C °~>st: I. ~t.~ .i ~',(.,,.•~()I6 t}.t. t. ?..`~ ti1j''il;_'f1i11 \ ,'i;"~.i it;' iii+.'..{: i;~'..:l:1(,if '*,;?t. '1{. i. 1 ``~'',~,4t(l(t f?~'f ~~'~ it,l" Citl' .",t~f'ti = < ,-. 'ti{{ ~i•:~trrc~rtt ~ _ "I•a~•~,j:ir:r Irr~:r<It" l-ti!~i1 Irttt•~'ettanz~t If11~T`CE1<it~~~ iltl~'tEtit'i11CflI~ a.C 'i>i';.(~I~'a:. ~~tl° (}iL' ~ .zllC°?? ~ i~jit:'C ~"~~i, luf°t}rt2` 1791~'t~~ltilL'~ I ` i fi?l~}f-(~t~~t1=c'f.(5 at~t' 11Ci't~C~~ fit) llf~i~Tl thy: t',i`,1(~t;±Ufl~~ :ii~~_t~iil~!~~ .i(t~~1'C~sit~i Lit ~.i'`~,~fl~ir,t ~ti~~1~I ~kT _.. ~~zt~l f~jc' i ''_t ~lflt;. ~ (1f"I', ti`iC°~.~ 41i 'its ~'1)~~l-y ~ ~1~~<~ti.' t4~~1 ~!1':'I~<IC `,?,t~?"~' :;? tEli:: ~ ~ !C IL':?t~~' ~.~iE~(' i ~a ~ iia ~,ttachlr~~llt 3 .)e~cl1>ht:•r~. ?4i(~l~l I'l~~c I c~f~ l Lsc~~iatic>l~ ec7t ~ (1~ ~-~-~tl ~ i)1 ~r ~f~~~i, X71 ~.~r ~l ~c';~n~ent 2f~ -- F'<iil~>n E2~r~s~3,'I':i4c,ij~ra ~vacl t>i taltti„rat 3riti~€ ~+tt'c't t i~ ~"it`+I121~' 1i?lll ~1`'Sl:1M ~~1~~ 72"11°t tt) ~)~L.,~til [.)1"l~.'. j,.it_'C~,:'t.t€t?t"1 itil~iiii;.'??;t'?lt~ ;C~ lltr'~'~i~'t~ t~:l ~-t:~tlt~l 1.~t_' iMt{ file ~ ~l~a~i12';.3 ~C)<2t~ 111t:'t' c:~tlili2. {'CtvT ~c.'~'~; ~; ~,f~~',~{){} ~i' ~t.'`~ ~t.~l. `I~tllil~ i{if l'' , ~(,~.`~~i} ~~',,? ~ ~~~',.{~){l~ ~?t.2' ~t`' ii:?C t~11`1~ 11't2~'}t't}'~ Fill<'(lt~ - ~~"* {'?"(~ i ?t~?t~£_'t` IS IlC'l'~Ii'tl :!~ t~?~` ~<++1Ii1~C21 i~t~a1(1 i,'i: C1'ct~~t(1~~. ~~t'?' ;~.._t',ti tiltl~~ i`":Ili]llll<'~ ~~(t~~~itl ~ ',1 1?`{..~~1`+ .Ultj ~t}111(~~;, tilt' #'r.~:_ is 1ti Vii' 1'rtt~:' ~"»" ; ~, ic,t?~'. ~ i,.ltjil?~ fi}I thy' ~i?'~~?Ct?:ii~l f?l c"221t~ ttit' ~~1+_~` !~';'':1?(' Ttl i~lt:: t'i+; i:? ~! I~ '~ `1"} t!r}( + ~. .;llt~ `t~l ~ if~it: ~I-Jtl .,. +.~lllf~ I !t:', ttj ;il.'xii.l~?i. ~~,il.' cl`. ,, €~!I'.:?~ f];1~ ~'`-?t711,ii~i1 tilt' ~.'ctat ~)z t{'.i `'!I it#£'C' tiilu _l.:t~;(,~. ,t, Vii;+Ilt~l', ti: ~.>1 ,1,'e fit' l:i l.i t,: ~ ,. $ ~~„~ ~' E3 t,.~.~;.~c~ '~~I`a,itiitt ~c~~~~r~~c°r~t 2~:1, - ~"~1lr~n IZc,,c1. {;Ica„~r°i t~~-i4•e tc'E t~rrbiit~ ~c~ulr~°:lr~t "E':~t~r~~ic~ LI ~ ~ilx:'l'I Iill~~lt~ti'111~I1I1 t'SI~I 3rt)71l { [}t';i~?l ~T'11:' its ~(t+t. ~ ..a~~i ts( E'i~~,It.Clat ~:zl~l'>Iit.'. ~~R;I11a4_'t' ?S~I1~~Ct+lt:'Itl~ill~ I2I"t' t 11StJi`~? tll? t~l.' i`+c'SI `.1i~t' lTt ?.ati ~ICCCt ~:t+ll; ~J4C~1`~t:+il ~_~t'i~t' it? ~.~t'.tIi! ~~..tti~1;lt' (ilt: ~;''tl?tlil,y lili~~l~>`.~"Iitlltti t:)Il l~it~ ~'l~,i tiE~lt' t+1 lit:' `il"t:<'i (i~'<~.l it> t:?~ 1`C't'+}?l~~Ii"tlitCC~ ~?t`i~ ~~?t: 1:CL1 Ii~l ~illl}t'°l~. }'I~C+It?.~'?<' tt1~~~I~i~Zt,'t11t.'li:'~ t'~1~~ ~-~ s,j~ 1.L' C+:.~~al' ~~~ I"II !«ll~ are c~~l~t;l~_t ~~~'tl~>:~en t ~?lth.,i ['~~=h~.~tit~,~ slt~lzl I)h}~11,t £3t~~tlt ~,.lrti ~~'~'~`(i'. w. ~j 1 ,~ tt.Ct[1C' Viz?: iI~2. ?`~ i'~;L^,llll~_' ?ll {_ t:21[I`~7~ [ arl"11+. .t~~ (? 1C~'~t ii~~'..~' t lil a'~ 73 I~;'_flt il!!~I? ~;lilC'. ..l'he ~''I~ ! ~~llt~ t1~1~1I ian~' i~ ~'~l,t;,?>_ ~' I)tzh~il~ k3t,E~~.<+.rt. I'~~rtit~! il:~t~.l ~tt~ilz PII1Cf31~;tI1tvl~Iy (ei1•~I, ~ ~'~ } ire. ~~~. clcc~ 1t~r the ~~.~t~th le<~ {~; (.;tlrt,l ~~d r i~ !'~r'~c`i ~~~? ~~tltli,l iC: ~' ~`c'tittti } = ~,i t;°s; V ?'Cc:' ~LI4i.' ~.~'+.`s(.~~ S~~ C`i~~t: I l~„ ~ ~'~.{iti+~ 1~~I~ l~~ €c)rc:i~°) ct,.,~ , ~3~~3",> ~.,},{l[:~tl tie~rrri'nt 27 - (~"ill«n l.orarl, I)rrirli~r t~~~t~ic"t aril t€~ ~=~~l ~li~t'( ItJt~irt?`,"t'!i'CC)~s ?tI"~ t':'~L~~lal+! t~i1 i~l 'l~~>l`~iijc'. ~Il)~~iQ~t'i~)~I?{5 elTt i~}t'~~c'tj IOi~ 1~it' 1)i~'ij1?1 t`~;'Itlij. (lt~t'1}l~~i!UIi~~~ r ~~~' ~;ir1C `~ 1tEit~'c't .:iti+,~ ;Iti)rl .1,.'.~ !t"Il(~ICt\i;';YlCtii~ ti~il I}1C l`,.,'ti)ti1l~C'. (':ir-t3:t1 r)tG'1''=~Ct;i?1 !t:)~~ic?~'I')~'ll~ {431 i. 3?,ci El'~.'lt-;}1-4`..it l it?L 1}+:'t`~t;u ~)Il 8~1t ~~tt tl2 ;?'~' i?C~ tsar 1.~?~h~iz~ ~3~~u~~'=;xl~ )3~:~~~~~ti~~n. C'c>~t: fit,,''?(} c~;,wnrcrtt 2~ _,. }'~=i11t~n it{~:irl t_~~;{I [~tterctran~e ~lll~`IC'~1~1;'t~`1' li)~I'• ..I~t i.., ~ 1,,, 1 > ~ i`. i} ~ ~ ~i~ i ~i~ i~ ~~' ~ !i ~'~ ~~}~ C l~,..~d t 3) {:« ~ ~F ~, i ,. 1 i.. t `1~ 1 ~.a_ar° I <~ t3 ti .: ~~ t 7 i i.~.~~i1aIC t'ti13?lialC i`~ ~`, iti r ~.•--~...~~1`1 ~i,2' ~~ila~~,. _.. I ~'11c1~'i`:7 ~ l1Ct~c'tiI ..?`1`C~.'illt_'flt ~~C'IL',~'i'11 {I?C ~ ?ilC' i ~'; 1~t7~~~I11, ~~~t'~15,U1)itt)..tl1C~ ~ T;~'I'I?itiCt'. ~)117~~i?I 1l il~ ~~~#'~ `31`o t1j t~1t' i~`^<T «Ili.~ ~~iE'a~.;:lrt?lt .?I~.,~ 1_ I'~l'I"IIIr ~Ct S?.}~~ ~~:~:~1 ~'.1'. ~' i~~ `;ilC G cl ~~I . ~~~mc'rrt ?~~ -- °I r,~:~r,j~r~ Creek 13i~;.cx I'att~ ~~~1C'Ct ~lY~ T)C' lii~ti~'~ I~~tt)c't?llti ti~`;'~. p;~r~C ilflE~ Hlt~t' ~'ic'tliCt ,... {r)t ~IC: ~ ~?il'tili~~:i J.J~1 I`. ~' :ir)t~ ~ i)~",..~.1.'1 E~i~;l~ ~t~j1 :tI'i. c'`.i`~i"?1_'. {`(+~j t'~ Ttit' :3}~t~l ~itS:i+t ~ii)~ 1.;i GYg i~a rlifxtcf~tllcr>t )~'il til>~r ~~1~ ~'(}(~~ ~~tittllte~3 iI ``~ i Cl"3 ttl' ~#~" C't~~t: ~).~){m} ~ It}.t}t.3. >f = ~-~~)t}.{lilts Other Galas ' ~ , .~ ~c'~t c,t ~~~.(}~tit).t"~tE~) t~ alh;llet3 f~~r ~~~s~;~,u"ltctlvtl ~h~i ;~'ll~ ~~.ll~il-t°_~ ."',t"C1~.~tIr~ ~It t~~~ I~,~'~1~'1 ~,~illiit~ tci t'c~}~IICc I~ic' t"~;iS~lCt~' ~~4iC~:ii1~? ~L~I. 11~1EC}] 1111 ~'c' ~~C1C'~f~~~Ci~ ~t5 ~1C11~ i~I I~~~ ~ I°ilIlStl~ c°itt~i". l he iii'iiCltltc' 1',11 (~xctit[t~t ;i I~~tti[ t?t j.h~it1 I'it~.llY_ ~~~(i~t~; <111~~ 1'<"i1~ Cc~~t '~'l~.ttt:3{~.3.3)tyt.)_ (1~~ :~2ainc~~I« t'~~tlnt~ `~tlrE~l!?., I'rv~~~'tI_ .~u?~Ziu"1i~' 11i?i ~~.~.~ t~~I rt°~~1~l~c~~3~rtrt {?C '~1t' t?:1tillI1L ~.~ ~jl} ~~~.ttt~ i~I11~1C 't21~I(i~t' ~tii, aI :1 Cr.'~t tsy ~,~-j.{I(jl,).t}t}{J j ~?C 1 1~' ~C'~' ',ltA~ j'~1t1 fOr.311 ,iZj%jl11~)Tla; i(ii) ~r>;1~~;~. tl?ICi1i~~'t~ l~~s t'I'i~' fiC',1 ;?I't111I~~ l£1 E..:tli~°I`11 ~~tiE~~ '1, .'.! _l Cis>t t;+j "~f7.t~(1(!,~}I~(}. ;~, Itt14 tC'!' ~;C'i l.it'il. tit" ~~~I9i?I~ ~ ~ ~~t~•it~.';t?I11~ i3 ~11 ~ ~'~iT'r~li]z?, .?I.~~l.l~!- ' _ ," ., , °~'~', lull (~:~~.~ t~1l~ ~ti5tt~i ~i° ~?.~it't t'Ell~l' ~'s I~ li?~IItI2i1 t~c'lt'rr3~„IY~',;~, .~I~i ,l~ittl;tlt'~ tti ~',(!.t}{ft> Iti ~)Ii~1 I~~C'; ~t~T ?}_~' tC'c: t!~'~.~ti ~ }I1~ ti1111 ~~ Ii :`~Gi.'I;(tTl ~ trCDti~_ ~f"ItSC' ~"f>>IS 1l?C~tiC~~' ~(.1~~T~i11'~' ('6.l (; _. _ ~ , ,Ii:I':I~ .U1t~ t =C'I~1c'..,~)~ ~~' ~~ I~,.,1C `.'._ ~tC1C~ Gt~11:~it~I~i(:( Cc~~1~; ft~l tI'.E~(iC ~1;ti~it~~ ICI' l'~~tl~. IS':flt)i~;t7 `,1~>I'~_. ~~ i:~,t s.~t ~,; i}r},r}iu~ 1, .<((~,l~~~tf lc~r t11r~L tw'it~s ~rtr~ ,,i~r1~ .:r ~r~' I-~`;{i irlit;"~:?t, r _ , yt TT.i~lca`1t1:> I:~ril~. `1,l~,~.<.~:lr:! ~~ri~~, ,~~i~ '~al~t~2~ Fri :1LI. ~1~~l.: ;~ ;~ ;iI ~~;: ~! ~~.:~tt~>I1 I l Ct?'~~ f"~~ ~"+~~(i11_i,3tlf1 3,~ ~;(jtt,1C'ti f:.?t" iI'l:~l't`~~.!!l~'i?1! ,.:1.'I:. ;1(`t.i t.~(i'ii(l.~'!li ~'Ut~IC`r;.1 •~,'~'':l:t'fi~ i'',11~] 1 ~~ 1tIlI?rt~lc°1]'i~(a~~ Ltt~~~~.' .i:C ~t'C1li~C1 1 t4x'a~~, ..~~I;l~tli' ~tlLlcilG`; II1t~IC~1tt I~i~,I ti1C ~.`it~(9I}!' `rt~:1l~?~~t~illii~ ~~~: illi~zi 1;1Cita iii IE'd~` I(tICI~4c'zll~?tl {~~» `t'ill:?~~~ 1'.lr~:~,lil1 ,lli3 ~nr<~tf~~r ~~~11'~~Y I3~=t3':'l~lr~' ~,~>i(i Iii':°t~ t~~ },~~ Itii,_[t.~'~~<'~1 t~~ ~'i,,•~i~l ~~1~~ ~)t ~T ii,iL~ (~"+~it5 a ~il~ L.I~~c'I'? I~~ ?t~C~~.:iil?~3~~.ilti t71~i'~~,~~`ii t,'~1 IIICi'.~= tltijl~'lti~' 11f1,i~~t?( ~'~i#1<1~ I3vlt~tl~lr~l ?t~ t~~'~i~~i~! l .l~,t;'r~Ii 1 ~i1~ali>Z ~'~s~-;~ ~~ : ~tt~tl.;t~~ it ~;l `~t3,~,~it7 ~h~i~, l~.,ll P~~ :j ~,t:li'.I~ til~ltjl:'~ It?t~.~';itC' I~1!( .i Il;it;t~ '~; ".l:ii ;~ \`.iJt ~'4' ',tt,a.,i;'.i.'i~ ,.I lily ?il'.:i"";C'~ (i~}li ` ~. ;~21I~l~~C?I" ~ 11~~~",~ ~~iitiitl._:~~ aI"ii~ ~jC7:'~lli~Sl ~);"il°~' ;t~ aLi'i~ISi:il~tCf~.'t' ?1tl~jidii~ll:1~ ~1_.i?h~ }~i'I'.1CCIi } ai~'C;'11 f ~tll'~ill1 (',II~ L~itE~~?11 ~ ~I~~i ~~ ~I3?i~l. C ~i>1 ?~ ~;~1`Tl.t1C'i~ :;~ `~.~ `l1 (li ill. .[ illy 'wLi~{ ~~~ :! ~~ pia Attachment 4 Page 1 of 8 Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee, 2010 Update Right-of--Way Costs November 6, 2009 Note: All right-of--way costs are for planning and estimating purposes only, and are not a commitment to reimburse property owners or provide TIF credits in the amounts shown in the estimates. Reimbursements or credits will be based on actual square footages of R/W, which are acquired or dedicated. Segment 1-Dougherty Road, City Limits to Amador Valley Boulevard Right-of--Way is existing Segment 2 -Dougherty Road, Amador Valley Boulevard to Houston Place Right-of--way is needed from the Sherwin-Williams commercial property. Use $25/ sf Right-of--way cost = 34' x 320' x $25/ sf = $272,000. Cost: $272,000 Segment 3 -Dougherty Road, Houston Place to Dublin Boulevard Right-of--way has been acquired. Segment 4 -Dougherty Road to North of I-580 Off-Ramp Right-of--way has been acquired. Segment 5 -Dublin Boulevard, Village Parkway to Sierra Court (Widening) Right-of--Way is existing Segment 6 -Dublin Boulevard, Sierra Court to Dougherty Road Right-of--way costs of $549,477 are used from Sierra Court to Dublin Court per the City CIP. Right-of--way has been acquired from Dublin Court to Dougherty Road. Cost: $556,511 66~ ilk Attachment 4 Page 2 of 8 November 6, 2009 Segment 7 -Dublin Boulevard, Dougherty Road to S/P R/W Right-of--way has been acquired. Segment 8 -Dublin Boulevard, S/P R/W to Iron Horse Parkway Right-of--Way is existing Segment 8A -Dublin Boulevard, Iron Horse Parkway to Hacienda Drive Right-of--Way is existing Segment 9 -Dublin Boulevard, Hacienda Drive to Tassajara Road Right-of--Way is existing Segment 10 -Dublin Boulevard, Tassajara Road to Fallon Road Right-of--Way is existing. Segment 11-Dublin Boulevard, Fallon Road to Airway Boulevard Costs per ARWS Impact Fee Study (June 2006) unless otherwise noted Southside, Fallon Road to 4300' east R/W = $25.00/sf Southside, 4300' e/o Fallon Road to City limits, 740' R/W = $12.00/sf Northside, Fallon Road to 900' east R/W = $0.25/sf Northside, 900' e/o to 3520' e/o Fallon Road, 2620' R/W = $25.00/ sf Northside, 3520' e/o Fallon Road to City limits, 1520' R/W = $12.00 / sf City Limits to Airway Boulevard (3000'): use $7.00/sf per ARWS Study TIF = 16' median plus four 12' lanes = 128' (64' each side) (six lane roadway, City of Livermore will contribute 50% of cost) G~~ na Attachment 4 Page 3 of 8 November 6, 2009 Right-of--Way Costs = 4300' x 32' x $25.00 = $3,440,000 740' x 32' x $12.00 = $284,160 900' x 32' x $0.25 = $7,200 2620' x 32' x $25.00 = $2,096,000 1520' x 32' x $12.00 = $583,680 3000' x 128' x $7.00 $2,688,000 $9,099,040 Segment 12 -Airway Boulevard/ I-580 Interchange Right-of--Way is existing Segment 13 -Hacienda Drive, I-580 to Dublin Boulevard Right-of--Way is existing Segment 14 -Hacienda Drive, Dublin Boulevard Extension to Gleason Drive Right-of--Way is existing Segment 15 -Hacienda Drive/ I-580 Interchange Right-of--Way is existing Segment 16 -Arnold Drive, Dublin Boulevard to Gleason Drive Right-of--way is needed along the west side of Arnold Drive. It is anticipated that Camp Parks will dedicate the needed right-of--way at no cost to the City as a condition of redeveloping the southerly portion of the property. Segment 16A -Central Parkway, Arnold Drive to Hacienda Drive Right-of--Way is existing Segment 17 -Central Parkway, Hacienda Drive to Tassajara Road Right-of--Way is existing G~dna Attachment 4 Page 4 of 8 November 6, 2009 Segment 18 -Central Parkway, Tassajara to Keegan Street Right-of--Way is existing Segment 18A -Central Parkway, Keegan Street to Fallon Road Right-of--Way is existing Segment 19 -Gleason Drive, Arnold Drive to Hacienda Drive Right-of--Way is existing Segment 19A -Gleason Drive, Hacienda Drive to Tassajara Road Right-of--Way is existing Segment 20 -Gleason Drive, Tassajara Road to Fallon Road Right-of--Way is existing. Segment 21-Scarlett Drive, Dougherty Road to Dublin Boulevard BKF Engineers, working for the City's Scarlett Drive Capital Improvement Project, has estimated the needed right-of--way for the project as follows: Camp Parks: 43,341 sf County of Alameda: 138,829 sf Scarlett Homes, LLC and SP Transportation Company: 10,495 sf Scarlett Place LLC: 53,146 sf Total: 245,811 sf The 2004 Update used $20.00/sf, based on recent acquisitions along Dublin Boulevard. Right-of--way cost: 245,811 sf x $20.00/sf = $4,916,220 ~aa iii, Attachment 4 Page 5 of 8 November 6, 2009 Segment 22 - Tassajara Road, 5000' North of Gleason Drive to CC County Line The ARWS Impact Fee Study (May, 2003) was used as the basis for costs in the 2004 Update. The 2007 Update uses the 2004 Update costs, with an escalation of 23.00% as of July 1, 2005 and 17.61% as of July 1, 2007, or a total escalation of 45% over the 2004 prices. Area F-1 (westside, 5000' n/o Gleason to CC County Line, 5660') R/W = $17.00/sf x 145% _ $24.65; use $25.00/ sf 1999 Update (eastside, 5000' n/o Gleason to Silveria, 2500') R/W = $11.00/sf + 10% _ $12.10/sf x 145% _ $17.54; use $18.00/ sf Area F-2 (eastside, Silveria and Mission Peak frontage, 1500') R/W = $6.00/sf x 145% _ $8.70; use $9.00/ sf 1999 Update (eastside, Mission Peak to CC County Line, 1660') R/W = $11.00/sf + 10% _ $12.10/sf x 145% _ $17.54; use $18.00/ sf TIF R/W is existing (TIF width = 64', existing R/W = 66'); TIF R/W needed for portions of road which shift from existing centerline; non-TIF R/W will need to be acquired along frontages of property without development potential (six lanes total) Wallis Ranch Frontage: Total /W needed 132,376 sf (per RJA Precise Plan Alignment) Non-TIF : 32' x 2300' (73,600 sf) Net TIF R/W Bragg/ Silva Frontage: Existing Fredrich Frontage: Total R/W needed Non-TIF : 32' x 685' 58,776 sf x $25.00/sf = $1,469,400 13,039 sf (Parcel 1 per RJA) 10,614 sf (Parcel 2 per RJA) (21,920 sf) Net TIF R/W 1,733 sf x $25.00/sf = $43,325 Vargas Frontage Non-TIF : 32' x 32' x Total R/W needed 325' 600 x '/2 21,488 sf (per RJA) (10,400 sf) (9,600 sf) ~o ~ i~a Attachment 4 Page 6 of 8 November 6, 2009 Net TIF R/W 1,488 sf x $25.00/sf = $37,200 Tipper Frontage: Total R/W needed 18,995 sf (per RJA) Non-TIF: N/A, will need to acquire (0 sf) Net TIF R/W 18,995 sf x $25.00/sf = $474,875 Mission Peak Frontage: Total R/W needed 21,680 sf (per RJA) Non-TIF R/W 32' x 400' (12,800 sf) Net TIF R/W 8,880 sf x $9.00/sf = $79,920 Moller Frontage: Total R/W needed 78,756 sf (per RJA) Non-TIF R/W 32' x 1200' (38,400 sf) Net TIF R/W 40,356 sf x $18.00/sf = $726,408 Right-of--Way Contingency (to be used in the event $800,000 property needs to acquired in the absence of or in advance of dedication through development) Right-of--Way Contingency for Creek Stabilization: 36,000sf x $25.00/ sf Total R/W Costs _ $900,000 _ $4,531,128 Segment 22A - Tassajara Road, Gleason Drive to 5000.' North of Gleason Drive TIF R/W is existing (TIF width = 64', existing R/W = 66'); non-TIF R/W will need to be acquired from parcels without development potential (six lanes total) The ARWS Impact Fee Study (May, 2003) was used as the basis for costs in the 2004 Update. The 2007 Update uses the 2004 Update costs, with an escalation of 23.00% as of July 1, 2005 and 17.61 % as of July 1, 2007, or a total escalation of 45% over the 2004 prices. 1999 Update used $18.00/ sf on east side of road; add 10%; use $19.80/sf x 145% _ $38.71, use $29.00/ sf EBRPD Frontage: 31' x 170' 5,270 sf x $29.00 = $152,830 Goodwin Frontage 31' x 215' USA (Camp Parks) 31' x 100' 6,665 sf x $29.00 = $193,285 3,100 sf x $29.00 = $89,990 ~~ ~ pia Attachment 4 Page 7 of 8 November 6, 2009 Sperfslage: per RJA 17,114 sf 2006 Acquisition for Bridge (2,200 sf) Net 14,914 sf x $29.00 = $432,506 Total R/W Costs $868,611 Segment 23 -Tassajara Road, Dublin Boulevard to Gleason Drive Right-of--Way is existing Segment 24 -Tassajara Road, Dublin Boulevard to I-580 Right-of--Way is existing Segment 25 -Tassajara Road/ I-580 Interchange Right-of--Way is existing Segment 26 -Fallon Road, Tassajara Road to Gleason Drive Right-of--Way is existing Segment 26A -Fallon Road, Gleason Drive to Dublin Boulevard Extension Right-of--Way is existing from Gleason Drive to the Upper Loop Road, and from Central Parkway to Dublin Boulevard. Right-of--way is needed along the Jordan property frontage between the Upper Loop Road and Central Parkway. The majority of the needed right-of way falls within the existing 30' roadway easement and/ or the 32 `frontage improvements, and is not eligible for TIF credit. There is a portion of the right-of--way opposite Central Parkway that will be eligible. The right-of--way is approximately 6,000 sf in area; an allowance of 10,000 sf is provided in the TIF. Costs per ARWS Impact Fee Study (June 2006) eastside, Old Fallon Road to 2000' south) R/W = $0.25/ sf Right-of--Way Costs: 10,000 sf x $0.20 = $2,500 7a ~ ria Attachment 4 Page 8 of 8 November 6, 2009 $2,500 Segment 27 -Fallon Road, Dublin Boulevard to I-580 Right-of--Way is existing on the westside. Additional right-of--way needed along the east side; this right-of--way is located within the existing 30' roadway easement and/or within the 32' frontage improvements, no TIF credit will be given for the dedication. Segment 28 -Fallon Road/ I-580 Interchange Right -of--Way costs are included in the overall project cost estimate. Segment 29 -Tassajara Creek Bike Path Path is located within Tassajara Creek setback open space parcels; no TIF credit will be given Park and Ride Facility Hacienda Drive and Tassajara Road lots are existing; Right-of--way is needed for Fallon Road lot (east side of road); per 1999 Update, lot is 40,000 sf The ARWS Impact Fee Study (May, 2003) was used as the basis for costs in the 2004 Update. The 2007 Update uses the 2004 Update costs, with an escalation of 23.00% as of July 1, 2005 and 17.61% as of July 1, 2007, or a total escalation of 45% over the 2004 prices. Area A-4 (eastside) R/W = $12.00'sf x 145% _ $17.40; use 17.50/ sf R/W costs = 40,000 x $17.50 = $700,000 ZONE 7 FEES TIF AREA Attachment 5 -Zone 7 Fees ~3~ i~~ Road Segment Price per ft2 Length in ft TIF width in ft Quantity in ft2 Cost: Zone 7 Fee Dou hert Road - Se ment 1* $1.10 4,300 31 133,300 $146,630.00 Dou hert Road - Se ment 2* $1.10 4,150 31 128,650 $141,515.00 Dou hert Road - Se ment 3 $1.10 900 49 0 Com lete Dou hert Road - Se ment 4 $1.10 550 49 0 Com lete Dublin Boulevard - Se ment 5 $1.10 0 Com lete Dublin Boulevard - Se ment 6** $1.10 2,030 49 99,470 $109,417.00 Dublin Boulevard - Se ment 7 $1.10 0 Com lete Dublin Boulevard Extension- Se ment 8 $1.10 1,950 0 Com lete Dublin Boulevard Extension- Se ment 8A $1.10 2,650 12 31,800 $34,980.00 Dublin Boulevard - Se ment 9 $1.10 4,600 0 Com lete Dublin Boulevard - Se ment 10 $1.10 1,975 49 0 $0.00 Dublin Boulevard - Se ment 11 $1.10 9,500 49 465,500 $512,050.00 Freewa Interchan e - Se ment 12 $1.10 0 $0.00 Hacienda - Se ment 13 $1.10 0 Com lete Hacienda - Se ment 14 $1.10 2640 12 31,680 $34,848.00 Freewa Interchan e - Se ment 15 $1.10 0 Com lete Arnold Drive - Se ment 16 all TIF $1.10 2640 28 73,920 $81,312.00 Central Parkwa - Se ment 16A $1.10 1400 25 35,000 $38,500.00 Central Parkwa - Se ment 17 $1.10 4575 25 114,375 $125,812.50 Central Parkwa - Se ment 18 $1.10 3640 0 Com lete Central Parkwa - Se ment 18A $1.10 1430 25 35,750 Com lete Gleason - Se ment 19 $1.10 1600 0 Com lete Gleason - Se ment 19A $1.10 4650 0 Com lete Gleason - Se ment 20 $1.10 4650 0 Com lete Scarlet Drive - Se ment 21 $1.10 - - 124,800 $137,280.00 Tassa'ara Road - Se ment 22 $1.10 5660 49 277,340 $305,074.00 Tassa'ara Road - Se ment 22A $1.10 5000 49 213,800 $235,180.00 Tassa'ara Road - Se ment 23 $1.10 2470 25 61,750 $67,925.00 Tassa'ara Road - Se ment 24 $1.10 800 12 9,600 $10,560.00 Tassa'ara Road - Se ment 25 $1.10 0 18,000 $19,800.00 Fallon Road - Se ment 26 $1.10 1500 25 37,500 $41,250.00 Fallon Road - Se ment 26A $1.10 2370 49 116,130 $127,743.00 Fallon Road - Se ment 27 $1.10 1289 49 63,161 $69,477.10 Fallon Road & I-580 Freeway Interch. W/ Si nals - Se ment 28 $1.10 - - 208,955 $229,850.97 Tassa'ara Creek Bike Path - Se ment 29 $1.10 6000 12 72,000 $79,200.00 Park & Ride $1.10 - - $0.00 Total 2,352,481 $ 2,548,404.57 Zone 7 Fee Current $0.87 Zone 7 Fee 1/01/10 $0.87 +ENR Zone 7 Fee 1/01/11 $0.96 +ENR Zone 7 Fee 1/01/12 $1.10 +ENR Zone 7 Fee 1/01/13 $1.30 +ENR Zone 7 Fee 1/01/14 $1.42 +ENR Fee Reduction In Effect = 4/01/10 Next Update = 4/01/12 Use $1.10 ~~ ~ ria Attachment 6 22-Feb-10 Summary of Outstanding Credits and Advances Existing Credits as June 30, 2009 Pending Credits as February 22, 2010 Develo er Section I Section II ACSPA $ 20,681,155.46 $ 1,604,592.93 DR Ac uisitions I, Fallon Road $ 2,736,612.00 DR Ac uisitions I1, Dublin Ranch Area G R/W $ 4,402,221.77 DR Acquisitions III, Fire Stn. 18 $ 82,448.00 Lin Famil $ 40,402,338.99 $ 10,613,456.14 MSSH Development $ 1,615,547.50 Toll CA II $ 49,806.90 $ 91,290.00 Toll Dublin LLC $ 456,477.52 Triad Dublin $ 336,663.01 Braddock and Lo an $ 1,548,359.62 $ 241,969.25 Standard Pacific $ 463,986.37 Dr. Sabri Arac, Tassa'ara Road Interchan e $ 135,098.75 General Motors, Tassa'ara Meadows $ 284,059.29 Pfeiffer Ranch Investors $ 473,799.54 Re ent Land investment, LLC $ 2,878,877.66 Pulte Homes $ 166,400.00 Sorrento at Dublin Ranch $ 256,384.16 $ 204,489.00 Toll Bros, Central Parkwa $ 103,656.30 Subtotal Miscellaneous $ 77,073,892.84 $ 12,755,797.32 Interest Bearin Advances ACSPA Advance $ 3,197,375.00 BART Advance $ 2,625,854.00 Ci of Pleasanton Advance (7.75%) $ 158,092.00 Subtotal Loans $ 158,092.00 $ 5,823,229.00 Subtotal Existin Creditsl Advances $ 77,231,984.84 $ 18,579,026.32 Pending Credits (Work Is Guaranteed Under An Improvement Agreement And The Credit For The Work Has Been Determined; A Credit Agreement Is Not Yet In Place But Will Be Processed Upon Adoption Of The 2008 EDTIF Update Lin Famil ,Fallon Road North Extension and Brid e, Se ment 26 $ 6,232,666.70 Kobold, Tassa~ara Road R/W, Se ment 22 $ 62,455.02 Total Credits $ 83,527,106.56 $ 18,579,026.32 Grand Total $ 102,106,132.88 ~S~ Iii Attachment 7 Eastern Dublin TIF February 22, 2010 Credit/ Fee Balance Summary TIF Category Account Source Balance 7/01/09 Section 1 Fee Administrative Services $1,010,670.77 De artment Section 2 Fee Administrative Services $2,945,769.05 De artment Section 2Non-Transit Center $97,629.00 Administrative Services Residential BART Parkin De artment Dougherty Valley Traffic $0.00 Administrative Services Mitigation Fee Department 76 ~ lla C L U (a yr Q Q~ U (0 Q U 7 L1J Q _O O N Q~ ~--~ U (~ Q. U_ ('a 7 0 U L() r O U1 LL .~ .~ 0 0 0 0 o M ~ ~ fU O M M ~ O ~ W ~ M M ~ O M M ~ EA EA fA O ~ ~ ~n tf) ~ M ~ O ( O N O ~ _ M f6 O H O O CO N O N ~ ~ f0 ~ ~ O ~ O _ } O C lL fX) ~ ~ O ~ r ~ O fog ~ ~ fU ~- N I~ ~~ r-- ~ V ~ ~ c? N a C_ > O O '7 fU O fU ~ ~ f0 r ~ O H ~ fA O } O .~ ~ ~ ~ (A ~ N ~ N O LL fR O V N f0 ~ M (D O (O M _ fp ~ O O ~ _ N ~ M N f6 t N a 0 0 0 00 ~ ~ LL LL m ~ O O f- H ~T W N O C C m r m O O M O O ~ O ~ O } (p :~ N O l0 O 'C ~ Q l L ~ ~ U ~ =O Q Q N ~ p i p L c p r N O ~ o w ~ ~ _~ 'm C o C 0 . t0 ~ U U N Q C (O p ~ Q ~U' ~ ~ ~ in (~ 77 ~d Ala a y d a ~ v ~ F ? G LL N ~ +~+ LL N O 4 ~ ~ d ~ a O LL ~ O N N a F r T ~ R ~_ •C O O C N C O .C ~3 ` •~ ~ O O_ ~ 6. LL H O C w r O .~ •£ C M a~iaa`v N ~ O 01 ~'' O •£ y ~ O a'~a`~ d N d y 7 C 10 J 10 2 c d a 0 d O O O I~ O O ~ ~ c0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O N O M O ~- O O (O O OO O O N N CO I~ (D r O N W W r O O M ~ O N N o0 N h m ~ N N Q1 M 1~ O O 1~ V m oO V' I~ ~ O O O V W Q oO O N M ~ N aO ~O O N M 1~ O 0 O 0 M ~ O a0 ~ f~ ~ M LL~ 1~ oD a0 ~ W N M r r- O N CO ~ ~ N O V I~ O ~ V' M N N E oO V 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q O M (O (O V N O O O h M c O O I~ f O M O O W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O c O M M O 0 0 1~ O f 0 (O (O O ~ i~ N N M N ~- M N ~'- V M M N ~ N N M M N N 7 N M 7 7 7 y y 7 y 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 N N N N N 7 7 7 y 7 7 7 y ~ 7 Y Y -p Y Y -p 'O 'O Y Y 'O Y 'O 'O 'O 'C 'C 'G ~ 'D 'D U 'D 'D Y Y Y Y Y 'O 'O 'O Y 'O 'C O Y U ~ O O O t D N O O O V C O O (D O O O O O O O O O O O O C O O O O M 0 0 0 O O 0 0 O O O ~O ~ O ~ ~ 0 0 0 - ~ O ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O N 0 0 0 ~ O O O O O O O (D O O M oo ~ N 00 M N ~ aO O ~- LL7 O O f~ O O ~ 7 W ~ O O O O O ~ O O 00 O O O M 4Y O LL7 M aD M ~ N ~ (O N O O M M h e- O M N (O 0 00 N M 1~ O V A ~ (D N ~t N M N M ~ t0 W ~ N (D ~ N O t~ ~ M O ~ O M M ~ ~ O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O M f0 (D 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~O M aO N O O O O O ~ O O a0 O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (D cD ~ 7 f~ ~ N ~ M O O (D ~ (D .~ O O O O M ' p O ~ u7 ~ ~ M N ~ O ~ O ~ O H O C) O O O U 7 m a0 M ~ O (O M a0 M 00 (D N ~ r O pp O ~ ~ r c D c D ~ 1~ ~ V' O N ~ O O O O ~ N ~ ~ ? O O ~ ~ O M N N O M M ~ M fV 0 M ~ ~ N ~ ~ N M I~ M CO (O N ^ M ~ M M ~ V 6) cD 00 N .- ~ a0 ~ m m m m C ~ C f0 m m f6 f6 f6 f0 <6 f6 lC i m (p C C ~ ;O y m m _ C N ~ ~ y ~ ~ C m ~ ~ C U C N C N C N C N C N C N C N C N C N C N (6 C 6 C U •` ~ (0 c0 m ~~ C N a~ ~ Vl m C m C m C ~ a N U U m ~ ` '~ a N y ~ m ~ N U m ~ . _ 9 v y a fA ~o N ~o N :o N ;o N v y ~o N :a N ,v_ y m .~ m .~ _ 2] E i U ~ v .y m ~ U m .p d .O m .6 N d LL' _ ~ _ ~ N E N E E 2 y N N E _ ~ N N 7 W N 2 N d' N d' N 2' N ~ N R' N 2 N d' N i N d' tq N y N 7 d ~ O N E N E ~ y N 2' ~ N N y N N N U N p O _ y E E ._ y d' E O ~ ._ ~ Q' Q' ._ U E E ~ ~ ._ y U ~ ~ ~ V 7 ._ y y 7 y 7 C N Q O U O U ._ fq C N Q 'y O U Vl 7 ~ N y C Vl C y C y C y C y C y C y C y C y C T - E N ~ O O D O U y 7 •Vl C N O y 7 ~ ,~ ~'] .~ O C N O E L - N - N C O L C m ~ ~ m ~ U N N N N N N N N N N ~ m ~ m U ~ O L - N - N E to C C O L E y C y C y C O - L m m a~ a~ ~ ~ a~ m LL ~ o ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ^ LL LL ~ o ~ ~ m m p m a~ a~ a~ m U U = c c ~ = c U a> 7 E E E E E E E E E E N U1 J a C c U o ~ = U ~ ~ ~ _ N N 7 L O ` - a _7 _7 _7 _7 _7 7 _7 _7 7 _7 _ Ol d L N 41 7 L L L E C~ C~ ~ E .- U C 'O 'D 'O 'O 'O 'O 'C 'O 'O 'O C C C.~ C~ 7 m 7 2 _ ~ N N N N N N N N N N _ ~ ~ N J O 7 2 2 2 7 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z ~ N N ~ ~ ~ ~ d d c c y y to d Q U ~ U U N ~ m m C~ CD Op oo U U O LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL ~ N (~ (,~ 2 2 2 m mm m ~ „4.? ~ ~ U U N N U U ~_ ~_ LL LL » > > Q U N ~ W W Q Q ~ D Q M ~ ~ N M ~ ~ (D 1~ W m 0 (~ ~ C O d C N ~ Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z N ~ V U y 7 L L L d L L L O C D C O C O C O C O C O C O C O C U C L L L C O (n C N 3 L m O iq O in O C N c N C N c N C O ~ N U U U m U U U V ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N U U U U O D U >> > > > > ~ U U U U E O O O C m C m C m ~ C m C m C m C m `o Q ~ `0 0 0 `o `o o `o o C m C m C m C 3 ~ m J C m L U L U L U +' ~ +-' w' ~, ~ _ N Q Q ~ ~ d' d' d' m ~ ~ d' LL' fA fA fQ (n fn fn fn f7 ~ a' ~ W' O U L ~ vr y y y ~ > m = ~ ~ ~ ~ ,C C C LL C C C C L L L L L L L L L C C C F C C m m m ' (` (` (d {p O C ~ Q L L L L L L D ~ C C C C C C C C C U L L .n L U ~ ~ ~ ~ a H I- F- f~ C.7 C _O 7 7 7 U 7 7 7 7 m m m m m m m m m c 7 7 7 U C 7 0 0 0 C C C C 7 m ~ ~ O m ~ ~ ~ p ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ a n a ~ a a a c o U LL 2 C c ~ L c c c c c c c c _ ~ C C ~ Q Q Q 7 ~ 7 ~ 7 ~ 7 ~ p (~ y 2] 7 _ L 7 L 7 D 7 2] 7 L 7 9 7 a 7 L .- . d ~ m j ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 7 m W D O ~ W y r N p) O m as a N O d n Q O N L U m Q Vl U O O d N O n d Q c O C N C~ n F m c m E r U m Q 9A •~ i/a r a N M M O O V (D I~ O ~ O Q1 O ~ N O ~ ~ O W O I~ O O O V V O CO r O N M M f~ O m W W N O o0 m M O O W S (O (O V ~O i~ O ~ O r O I~ O O O O X H 0 0 0 W C V +O" d M N N N (D Q O M N r N N M ~ M1 e- 01 a0 N i p V' ~ n M 00 (O M N ~ p I~ N _ y ~ m ~ N ~ d O. LL 7 ~ N r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LL M ~ a v 0 O N M B . 1 F a a, LL ~ O N o N I O' CO V O N O '- eO O 0 0 6) CO N 0 N 0 •- 0 0 1 CO cD N cD N OO f0 N O N O ~ aO O N I~ O) M M CO st O N CO N 0 E 0 0 ~ 0 N N r- M M M M 0 E 0 ~ F d ~~ . O 0 C N N ~ N ? > ? N N N > > ? > ? N N N N Vl ~ M N 3 N N Ul N N > > > N a N N > Y Y ~O Y -O -O -O Y Y Y -O -O a a a Y Y Y Y Y -tj Y Y ~ Y Y Y Y Y a p -O Y ~ Y Y a -O O m ~ C O m W ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 O M N O O O O O O O O O O O O O (O ~ O M s t N ~ CO t t O O M N a f O 0 O ~ ~ 1~ ~ LL7 O 0 f O 0 ~ 0 O O O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O C ' E O) tly N er O N h I~ CO O f0 ~ O M tY O ~ r 7 O M ~ M N V' (O O O N M ~f M ~ M .- c0 N cD ~O N O M ~ I ~!7 aD f~ ~O h c0 M M ~ CO ~ 1~ M M O O N M O I~ r oO O) gyp p O N .-- N M ~ ~ f` N N E N N E I~ ~ N N ~ m a o ~ ~ LL O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O y O O O O O O O O O O O N O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 u7 O .a ~ O M M ` m v a a W .O O Q~ 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '~ 3 '~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N ~ O a ~ a r~ N ~? ~ V' C? r W ~ ~ M O m 0 er N O O 47 7 N (O ~ _ N CO O ~ ~ O) ~ ~ V' n O O p 0 c0 a0 U1 O N N r O ~ ~ ~ O '7 o0 N N ~ p M p " n M ~ ~ M O O O N ~ M N Sr ~ O N N N ~ oO I~ ~ t D f` ') M M ~ N r N ~ ~ N C ~ ~ C ~ f0 C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m .~ (6 ~ m m m C 7 m ~ m ~ m V ~ ` .-mo ~ ~ ~ y ~ ~ N ~ N d d' C d °' v m N ~ m '~ m ~ ~` ~ y ` C a C ~ a N ~ ~ aci ~ ~ N E `'~ O M o m d N d ~ ~ ~ ~ U .o N £ U ~ N a~ ' -p ~ ~ ~ ._ .~ a~ ~ a O n m d N ~ U ~ N ~ m a V ~ ~ V a O E O E V :C O E N ~ N ~ N ~ ~ ~ C m N m d ~ E o ur M - ~ ~ d E o O a ~. N c F U ~ d - m ~ O m O .v, ~ ~ E O ~ o o - o U ~ ~ N _ C ~ _ C y C ~ Vl O G o U = C N = D .- U U = U C C C ~ O O C C N E m 7 ' N C N N m E m c N L C L N N 7 m ~ N 7 ~ N m m ~ m 61 N N ~ 2 ~ ~ O ~ ~ m LL ~ ~ a~ ~ U a~ m LL a~ U ~ o U ~ a~ m 0 ~ m L cn y a~ m ~ D ~ U L L ~ O c m U ~ - - ~ ~ ~ c d U ~ O ~ _ ~ - c m U ~ - U = c c U c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c m C7 c ~ B 3 o ? a C7 - c 3 o ~ a ~ L ~- L C7 ~ :o E m C7 d C~ o C7 > :a > :o > _ c - ~ =o ~ in ~ -~ ~ ~ ~ a = Z o ~ a~ a~ ~ a~ o c ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O C N L 7 L 7 Y Y Y N N C N ~" C C C C C C ~6 N C "' ~ L~ _ ~ _ *y _ ~ C N C N C N O J NS C ~ m O m O m O r m d C m a m '~ m "O m a m s m 'O ~ O C U y C~ O L O L O L L U L U L U 00 ` ` U U U a o ° -° » ~ ~ ~ a a mi~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q m m m - ~ ~ ~ w - ~ a c - H F- f- m ~ L d N L a ,~ U Z ~ N N N N N d N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N ~ N C C O Y ~ m m m m m ~ m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m c t 'OO O O N N C ~ ~ ~ > > ~ ~ » » » ~ > > » > ~ > > Q N w ~ ~ C 0 C 0 C 0 C 0 C 0 C 0 C O C O C O C O C O C O C O C O C O C O C C C C C C ~ O O ~ ~ O v O ~ O O O O O O ~ ~ m U U `~ i N ~ w m LL m w m LL m LL m w ~ LL m LL m LL m LL m L~ I m t m LL m L~ m LL m LL m LL m LL m LL m L~ m LL m LL m LL 0 c N m a c ~ . . ~ ~ ~ J D LL CM = D O 0 Y 0 Y LL C I.L a `LL_ r Z J W H N Q W Q~ Q Q N r .~. 0 Q -..i fA N N p) O m a ~ N O n n Q W N U m Q N U N O a` a N O O. Q C O .~ `c d n H c a~ E L U m Q ~9 ~ ~~a «,0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0. M O d a ~ ~ ~ d' M > '... r O d d H d G u•' ;.. p j N 7 ~ y w LL o 0 0 0 o D o c e o y O ~ M it .~'m~ a i F-aQ1LL ~o y N a . o 0 0 0 0 0 o r c ` F d ~~ ' a 4 - ~ - - - - - o v v o o o o o 0 ~ rn C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C~ O ~ O O O ~ O M •A ~ ~ r O m a O ~ ~ LL O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O '' 0 ~~,. ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ M ~L ~ iaav a a$~ « 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ 7 ~ ~ O O O (h N ~ 0 0 0 d y 0 ~ a ~ a r M N ~ ~ M N ~ f0 _m ~ ~ m ~ m m ~ c c N •- C c N •- c c N c U1 •- c v y ~ p m o m a a d ~ a ;~ .~ ~ ~ N 0I ~ y ~ N ~ y ~ N ~ N ~ y ~ ~ ~ •N y - y - .y y - ~ ~ . C d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ L n N' ' F 7 O LL ~ LL O ~ LL : ~ ~ . E N E ~ E E N = E ' . o c ~ - ~ C 3 ._ > ._ C ~ > . L J (n fn (n .? N i . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' , d .- N ~ M ~ d _ c N 0 a ~ t C r C s C U V y ~ ~ ~ ~ Y m m m ~ m °~ O ip m m m m t` O m 0 r _~ .~ W Q Z /J~ W Z N U W O a 0 `W a a ++ d t V ~, i~~ Q y M N p~ °a d "O N O n Q O aci E U Q y V N O a` O a Q C 0 .~ N C7 H rn c N E U (6 Q ~ ~~ lia r • r 0 V •7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 C0 00 O O (O O O O O O O O V fD O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O y++y N a0 M O N N W ~ O) M r 0 ~ r V rn o0 v r .-- 0 c0 Q) ~ oO ~ O N M r N O M ~ O a0 ~O r ~ 0 r CD Q) CO ~ O r ~ 0 M st M rn r r ~n ao rn v (O ~ r M r W O ~ et ~ O.~ m m '- M ~ ~ N CO ~ N N ~ N ~ ~ r N N M N H ~ GLL ~ N w LL 0 0 0 0 0 0 O' ~ ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~ O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O V O d 0 f` ) V N N ~ M . .~ d ~ G1 F- a ~ LL ~ O N O N o. . r o r m o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o r ao m m r o 0 0 0 0 0 o r co o r o ~ 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o r ` ~ :: ~~ . ~ O C 7 ' 7 ' 7 ' 7 ' 7 " 7 " 7 ' 7 ' 7 " 7 " 7 " 7 ' 7 7 ' 7 7 7 7 7 O 7 7 3 7 7 7 7 O 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 3 7 7 7 7 3 O 7 7 7 3 7 7 O O O O O O O O O O O O ~ O 'O 'O 'O 'O 'O 'O 'O 'O ~ 'O '6 'O 'O 'O 'O "O "O 'O 'O 'D 'O 'O '6 'O 'O 'O 'O "O "O 'O 'O '~ 'O 'O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C m • ~ ~ O O M O N O ' O 0 O 0 O 0 r 0 O 0 O 0 ~O 0 0 GO 0 r 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 y 0 t 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C ~ ' ~ (O r V 0 ~ M r ~ 0) ~ ~ (O W ~ O oO ~O O N M ~ { l a q O O O eO O s} O r (O O C° ~ O r ~ O M ~ M N V (O O aO O M sf CO ~ r M r 00 W r X 0 0 0 V' ~ O ~ ~ ~ O N M ~ M ~ N (O N M ~ M ~ N `7 ~ r N N ~ N a LL ~ ~ ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 C ~ aOn ~ O O O O O O M fO tO st O O O O O LL7 O O O O O O O O O O O O M O O O O O O O O O ~0 O O O O O O O O O ,~ ~ O O N N M M ` ' ma v a ~ , « o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ o ~ E N o O O O O O t C Y (O u~ CO M ~O G O N r 0 0 0 0 0 ~ O ~O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ O a p ~ O N • O ~ N (D M N v O ~ y ~ a-ate N M N ~ ~ r O ~ O tO V W r 0 O) O O a0 M h O 00 ~ r O) ~ W O V' N O O ~ r M O ~ ao LL) a N ( (O N M r ~ O M ~ r ~ O O O r O ~ ~ O N ~ N O N ~ a O O O - O O (O O M M M ~ O ~ M (O ~ M O W ~ ~ M N ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ CO N M ~ M e N V I CO N N 10 ~ N m m m m m m m C m ' m . C C m ~ ~ m . ~ m ~ m ~ m C m C m C m C m C m C m C m m m m C m m ; m m C m ' ~ m . m ~ m G a~ ~ m • C d m ~ m m m m _ ' m m m • m m ~ m m C ay O y N ~ fq ~ C C N ' N ' N ' N ' N ' N N " N ' 0I ' N C C ' C N ;O + C +, C +, C O C C N ~ C N C N C N V C ~ C C C C N C C ~ C C C C 'O N "O ~ N N N O O O O O U O O O :D N N C ~ -O N m m • d • y N 'O C 'O N C 'O N N 'O d 'O 'O 'O N .~ 'O N U N 'O 'O N y N ~ U ;C tp y y y y y f/1 fn N V1 .~ U .~ .N Q' ~ O O ~ 'O .y ~ ~- "O ~ ~- ~ 'O ~ 'O y '- ~ ~ .-. N ~ y U7 N N N ~ N ~ N ~ N ~ N ~ N Q' N ~ N Q' N ~ N ~ y N ' N U7 ' fq y N Q' ._ N d N W N 01 .-. M N N ~ ~ y N Q' y N ~ y N Q' ~y 01 N Q' ... N R' N a' N Q' •y N d ~ N 2' u1 N N ~ w d N Q' Ol a' y N .. y W ~ ~ rT+ r r r w ... ... .. w ... ~ a ~ N ~ ~ S •y ~ N ~ ~ y a. y ~ Vl ~ Q' ~ ~ C U1 O ... .N C C N O ... y = ~ y C y C N C N C VJ C y C y C y C y C Ul C T ~ ~ !' .-. 'y C C N ~ '- ~+ '- '- C N ~ - .-. N C ~= ... Vl C = _ . ... ~y C C N ~ w ~ .. ~Ul C C N ~ ... •V1 C ... tp C ... y C w y C ... ~y C - .. y C = E ... N C «. Vl C - E C N O Gi y L N D L C m m LL N ~ N ~ N D N O N ~ N ~ N ~ N ~ N 0 N ~ m LL m L.L y C N y ~ L y C G1 N C 0f y C N L E m L O B y C O A E m L y C y ~ L y C y ~ L N D N ~ N ~ E m N ~ y O E m m O m L L m ~ m ~ m L L L ~ .o = j = A L N - E E E E E E E E E E N N 0 ~ _ ~ ~ 0 2 L N E N ~ E L N N o E _ 2 0 E _ 2 E E E LL N E E LL N E . ~ E E . ~ 2 c m E ~ E ._ c 7 ~c 7 'v 7 v 7 =c 7 =c 7 =c 7 a 7 ~o 7 =o 7 'v rn ~ c 3 o ~ ._ -o ~ ,C t t ~ c 7 =o 3 o 7 ._ 'o - c 3 o 7 ._ -o ~ L '- 7 =o ~ X ~ 7 ~c 7 ~c - c ,> -o > ~ - c 7 a ~ 7 ~o 7 ~c ~ E J ? N .7 2 _ U N N N G1 N N N N N N ~ (~ J N .? 2 _ 2 _ 2 •7 _ U N J N ~ J N 7 2 N ~ N N N ~ y N ~ N (n N N (n .? ° C N N N Q U W C N L Y Y N _ y C L m m m m ~ LL LL LL LL L.L LL LL LL LL LL ~ N m m m w w N J °ZS 7 ~ O O N C m 'D m 'O m "O m "O L U LL LL > > ~ ~ N N Y c m <6 U U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N Q m ~ ~ O ~ M ~ ~ N M ~ ~ (O r a0 O) O ~ Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z ~ Q. O ~ C 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 C 0 C 0 N N N e C r C r C ~ O L ~ ~ N A M ~p z v v v C ~ ~ C m C d ~ C m C m ~ ~ ~ v ~ N ~ N ~ N ~ U U U °~ m m a~ a~ d a~ m m d a~ a~ ~ U ~~ ~ = ~ - `6 L a L a L a a a ~ ° C ~ ' ~ ' ~ . ~ o ( 0 U 0 (n `o (n o In `o fn o (n `o U `o U O m ~ L U L U L U =' y =' y !_' y m -_ m m __ m -_ m __ m __ m __ m __ m __ m -_ m -_ m - L ~ ._ -o ~ m ~ ~ ._ c N ao O t D L U L U L t d m 2 Q ~ ~ n (n ~ ~ C C C C C C > > > > ~ ~ > > > > > _ > ~ C = I- y Y C C C U U E ~ C C LL C L L L L L L L L L C C m ~ m ~ m ~ m m m c C C C C C C C C C C C ~ (~ p ~ 0 ~ ~ •~ _ m ~ m ~ m ~ m ' m O ~ L L L L C C C C C C C C C U L L F F"' F- X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,p m /7 y O Z ~ a Q m > 7 ~ 7 ~ 0 c m 7 p m d' m ~ m 2 m 2' m ~ m d' m Q' m 2' m 2' C m r 7 p 7 p C - L C - d C - a c _ c c _ ~ LL m Ll. m LL m LL m LL m LL m LL m LL m LL m LL m LL m LL C m N ~ '- ~ o ~ m ~ f`6 N m N m N m N m N Q ~ C_ .C C C C_ C C C C a C ^ Q Q 7 7 7 (7 = > > > ~ ~ c L L 7 L a L L L L L - L O D D (n (n (n (n (n j ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ vLI r V W 7 a N r U N N 07 O m ~ ~ N O n Q Q W C N U m Q N U N O a` d Q Q m .C O N N c 0 .~ N N a O C O L U m Q gl~ pia 0 N 0. M' ; ~n '`W ao N .r 'iV s a F a 3 ~ N w ~ O ~ r a~ ° m . ~~ N ` F 9 o a y N ~ W •a ~ m O T ~ N N I.L ~ a LL ~ Q W ~ ~~ co o M ~ ~ 3 ~ ~~ L o r> Q~ oN ~d 0 ~ N ~ ~ o ~~,~° o T ~~ ~ G ~ ~' `v ma a 7 ~ ~ o w ut{ o o~ o CI L ~ L N O o ' O H1 Q ..- m m C a-an J N M M W h ^ J Z ,/. V+ ~ C r N ° U ' W O N C N L P L ~ / ~ / li ~ ~ J c Q J ~ Z W ^ r V/ 1 ~ LL 0 W ` O N .L a a Q m E N U 2 r. : ',> C ~ N C ~ p > .t r ' F- L ~' a r . t9 L M y ~ "~: c ~ y c ' ~ O N V <.......... ~ V ~ w N m c " m F ~o h ~ I fA N U y N p> ~O d a` v N O d a Q rn C N L U f0 Q U N O d N O d Q C N a N N c O .~ `m a~i (.~ F O C a~ E U c0 Q ~a~ira 1`}-iR ~ ~aCERS T3tANSPORTATION CONSU ITANTS MEMORANDUM Date: December 16, 2009 To: Jaimee Bourgeois, City of Dublin From: Kathrin Tellez and Rob Rees, Fehr & Peers Subject: City of Dublin Transit Oriented Development Transportation Impact Fee Assessment WC08-2606 Fehr & Peers has reviewed data from a variety of sources to develop a likely range of vehicle trip reductions for transit-oriented residential development (TOD) adjacent to the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) stations in the City of Dublin. Research indicates that developments adjacent to transit service such as BART can expect to experience a reduction in vehicle trips, especially for commute trips. Further vehicle trip reductions may be possible if the residential locations are located within walking distance of retail/service amenities or employment centers. Residents of TODs tend to have a higher transit mode share than the remainder of the City as they tend to have fewer cars per person, are more likely to be single and without children, and cite location to transit as a factor for choosing the TOD residential location. The following presents the background that requires agencies to consider fee reductions for transit-oriented residential development, the relevant research summary, and our recommendations for potential trip reduction percentages to use in assessing traffic impact fees for TODs. Recommendation -Fehr & Peers suggests a reduction in vehicle trips of 25 percent for multi-family residential developments located in a mixed-use environment within a barrier-free half mile walk of a BART station BACKGROUND Assembly Bill 3005 requires local agencies to set impact fees for transit-oriented housing proportional to their vehicular traffic impacts. The bill attempts to account for the observed reduction in vehicle traffic associated with development that is mixed-use and within proximity of transit. The required impact fee re-assessment applies to housing developments that meet all of the following criteria: 1. located within one-half mile of a transit station 2. direct access between the housing development and the transit station along abarrier-free walkable pathway not exceeding one-half mile in length 3. located within a half mile of convenience retail uses, including a store that sells food 4. provides either the minimum number of parking spaces required by local ordinance or no more than one on-site parking space for zero to two bedroom units and two on-site spaces for three or more bedroom units, whichever is less. Traffic Impact Fees can be reduced at the discretion of a local jurisdiction even if not all the above criteria are satisfied. 100 Pringle Avenue, Suite 600 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 (925) 930-7100 Fax (925) 933-7090 www.fehrand peers. com s~~ iia Jaimee Bourgeois December 16, 2009 Page 2 of 4 The new housing developments within proximity of the Dublin/Pleasanton Station have the potential to meet these criteria. Figure 1 shows the one-half mile walkshed around the Dublin/Pleasanton BART station based on current and proposed street configuration. Further walkshed coverage could be achieved for parcels east of Dougherty Road, between Dublin Boulevard and I-580 with connections to the Iron Horse Trail. RESEARCH SUMMARY Project trip generation refers to the process for estimating the number of trips generated by a development site or area. Typically, only vehicle trips are calculated, but trips can also occur by walking, bicycling, or taking transit. Trip generation estimates for residential projects are typically calculated based on the number of dwelling units within that development. Vehicle estimates of the total traffic entering and exiting the project driveways are typically calculated for the AM peak hour, the PM peak hour and for an average weekday. For projects that contain a mixture of uses, such as retail and office, it is reasonable to expect that some vehicle trips at the project driveways would not occur because people within the project choose to walk from one use to another within the site. For projects that are located near transit stops, it is also reasonable to consider that some trips will occur on modes other than the automobile such as walking or transit. The combination of internal trips (those which begin and end within the project site and do not add any new trips to the external roadway network) and external trips using alternate modes accounts for the total vehicle trip reduction. Typical Trip Generation Methods Vehicle trip generation rates presented in the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) publication Trip Generation, 8f`' Edition, presents rates for a variety of land uses, including residential. The Trip Generation Handbook (March 2004), also presents guidance to estimate the number of trips that remain internal to a site based on the balance of land uses within the site. The ITE trip generation rates were developed based on surveys of mostly stand-alone suburban locations with minimal transit usage. Rates presented in Trip Generation can be a good indicator of the total number of trips that could be generated by a development, but does not account for the travel mode, such as walking, bicycling or transit. Recent Research Summary A recent article published by Cervero and Arrington' compared the trip generating rates used in the Trip Generation Handbook with observed trip generation from 17 residential TODs located within proximity to rail stations throughout the United States. Two TODs listed in the study, Park Regency and Wayside Plaza, are located near the Pleasant Hill BART station and would likely have similar trip generating characteristics as TODs constructed in Dublin. The trip reduction from standard ITE rates at the Pleasant Hill sites was 35 percent on a daily basis, 39 percent during the AM peak hour and 38 percent during the PM peak hour. It should be noted that the Pleasant Hill BART station is '/ mile from a convenience grocery store and almost 1 mile from a full service grocery store. There are barriers to walking to those grocery uses from the BART station area, including Treat Boulevard (a six lane arterial) and I-680 (a ten lane freeway). ~ Journal of Public Transportation, Vol. 11, No. 3, 2008 89~ //d Jaimee Bourgeois December 16, 2009 Page 3 of 4 Using the 2000 Bay Area Transportation Survey (BATS), Fehr & Peers compared the number of automobile trips taken by residents within a '/ mile radius of non-downtown BART stations in the East Bay with those in the surrounding region to determine the effect that BART proximity had on mode choice. The surrey shows that households within % mile of select East Bay BART Stations (Excludes downtown stations at 12th Street, 19th Street, Downtown Berkeley, and Walnut Creek; but includes all other stations, such as Concord, Pleasant Hill, Pittsburg/Bay Point, Richmond, San Leandro, and Castro Valley) have a 25 percent transit mode share on a daily basis. Trip reductions for the East Bay BART station survey data and the two Pleasant Hill Station TODs are fairly similar, with the higher trip reductions at Pleasant Hill likely due to the rise in fuel price, which occurred between the two survey periods, and the higher density of development and subsequent lower automobile ownership found at Pleasant Hill Station compared to the rest of the BART system in the East Bay. Research presented in Effects of TOD on Housing, Parking, and Travel, TCRP Report 128, states that TOD commuters typically use transit up to five times more than other commuters in the region and the mode share for TOD can be up to 50 percent. In 1990, the commute transit mode share in the City of Dublin was 2 percent according to the Census. The commute share increased to 5.4 percent by 2000, with the opening of the Dublin/Pleasanton BART station in 1997. The transit mode share has likely increased since 2000 due to increased congestion on the Interstate 580 corridor and increased fuel prices. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The goals outlined in AB 3005 may be difficult for a single residential project to achieve as they rely on factors outside the realm of an individual project, principally the requirement that retail uses, including a food serving business, are located within proximity to the new development. While it is shown that a mixture of uses does contribute to trip reductions, the significance of this factor is somewhat negligible during the AM and PM peak hours, the time of the greatest burden on the transportation infrastructure, because the many trips at this time are work-related. This is evidenced by the large trip reduction from standard ITE rates for developments around the Pleasant Hill BART station, although food serving uses are at least '/ mile for convenience grocery and almost 1 mile for a full service grocery store, with barriers to walking/biking. The literature review of TOD sites suggests that vehicle trip reductions can range from 25% (using BATS data) to 35% (using Pleasant Hill station area data), and even as high as 50% (according to TCRP Report 128). Factors influencing these rates likely include gas prices, parking availability, and relative development density/type in the area. The Pleasant Hill TOD area is well established and over time residents have developed travel patterns that reduce vehicle trips, while the Dublin TODs are fairly new in comparison. Fehr & Peers recommends a reduction in vehicle trips of 25 percent for multi-family residential developments located within a half mile walk, but south of Dublin Boulevard, of the Dublin- Pleasanton BART station, where the parking supply is limited. This reduction would correlate to a 25 percent reduction in transportation impact fees for development located. The 25 percent reduction zone is cut-off at Dublin Boulevard as this roadway is a major impediment to pedestrian travel. As the Dublin TODs become more established with a greater mixture of uses and area plans such as the Bicycle Master Plan are implemented, this reduction can be reconsidered. However, there are alternative mode improvements included in the transportation impact fee programs and 85g lld Jaimee Bourgeois December 16, 2009 Page 4 of 4 further reductions to the fees could impede the ability of the City from fully developing the non- motorized transportation network and providing other transit amenities. This completes our assessment of trip reduction percentages for multi-family residential developments within proximity of a BART station within the City of Dublin. Please let me know if you have any questions. 86~ ira N N d N N Q d d LL ~+ V R G C O ::~ W r O Q N C R F 0 F C a ~~ CC ~ W '- W ~ N L O N u ~ d _ / Z L c ~ ~I O y N p N t N ~ W ~ T~ w~~~ ~~ ~i~ NN Q w ~ ~ m E N N d N N Q d d LL V A C. C O .~ ~' O C. pl C A H 0 C a 3 w Nw 6L '~ vI w Z O N Z _O V w N a w _J m 0 H Q C~ _ w= ^ _ ~:..1 N z v (~~~\i o x d o ~ a T u ~ ~ ~ Iw~ ~ f°ol ~1 N ~ N w Z ~ O ~ TU w~=~ ~~ era Exhibit B, Table 2 Table 2 ~~/~ ~/~ %122-Feb-10 2010 Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Update VIII///// Detail of Total Costs (Prior to Adjustments) by Section and Project Segment SECTION I IMPROVEMENTS Segment 2009 Cost Estimate Credits or Advances Total Balance at 6/30/09 8 Dublin Boulevard Extension -Southern Pacific R/W to East BART Access $ - $ _ 8A Dublin Boulevard Extension -East BART Access to Hacienda Drive $ 659,401.20 $ 659,401.20 9 Dublin Boulevard -Hacienda to Tassajara Road $ 289,250.00 $ 289,250.00 10 Dublin Boulevard -Tassajara Road to Fallon Road $ 526,734.00 $ 526,734.00 11 Dublin Boulevard Extension -Fallon Road to Airway $ 26,305,047.19 $ 26,305,047.19 13 Hacienda - I-580 to Dublin Boulevard Extension (not including interchange) $ - $ _ 14 Hacienda -Dublin Boulevard Extension to Gleason Drive $ 942,195.00 $ 942,195.00 15 Freeway Interchange -Hacienda Road with I-580 $ 9,430,212.12 $ 9,430,212.12 16 Amold Drive -Dublin Boulevard Extension to Gleason $ 5,049,156.52 $ 5,049,156.52 16A Central Parkway -Arnold to Hacienda $ 687,273.81 $ 687,273.81 17 Central Parkway -Hacienda to Tassajara $ 3,328,902.49 $ 3,328,902.49 18 Central Parkway -Tassajara Road to Keegan Street $ 264,810.00 $ 264,810.00 18A Central Parkway -Keegan Street to Fallon, 2,230 feet $ 172,120.00 $ 172,120.00 19 Gleason -Arnold Road to Hacienda $ 97,500.00 $ 97,500.00 19A Gleason -Hacienda to Tassajara $ _ $ _ 20 Gleason -Tassajara to Fallon $ 194,610.00 $ 194,610.00 22 Tassajara Road - 5,000 feet north of Gleason to Contra Costa County Line $ 23,817,330.91 $ 23,817,330.91 22A Tassajara Road -Gleason Road to 5,000 feet north of Gleason Road $ 7,730,214.17 $ 7,730,214.17 23 Tassajara Road -Dublin Boulevard Extension to Gleason Road $ 1,264,058.41 $ 1,264,058.41 24 Tassajara Road -Dublin Boulevard Extension to I-580 (not including interchange) $ 254,134.52 $ 254,134.52 25 Tassajara Road -Freeway Interchange $ 2,812,216.94 $ 2,812,216.94 26 Fallon Road -Tassajara to Gleason $ 1,276,566.94 $ 1,276,566.94 26A Fallon Road -Gleason to Dublin Boulevard Extension $ 6,524,455.57 $ 6,524,455.57 27 Fallon Road -Dublin Boulevard Extension to North of I-580 $ 1,446,531.69 $ 1,446,531.69 Report Update $ 40,000.00 $ 40,000.00 Other Costs $ 300,000.00 $ 300,000.00 Existing Credits $ - $ 82,747,389.56 $ 82,747,389.56 TOTAL SECTION I IMPROVEMENTS $ 93,412,721.48 $ 176,160,111.04 SECTION II IMPROVEMENTS 1 Dougherty Road -City Limits to Amador Valley Widening $ 6,897,917.15 $ 6,897,917.15 2 Dougherty Road -Amador Valley boulevard to Houston Place $ 6,090,065.47 $ 6,090,065.47 3 Dougherty Road -Houston Place to Dublin Boulevard $ _ $ _ 4 Dougherty Road -Dublin Boulevard to North of I-580 Off Ramp $ 1,678,050.00 $ 1,678,050.00 5 Dublin Boulevard -East of Village Parkway to Sierra Court Widening $ _ $ _ 6 Dublin Boulevard -Sierra Court to Dougherty Road Widening $ 2,145,747.71 $ 2,145,747.71 7 Dublin Boulevard -Dougherty to Southern Pacific Right-of-Way $ _ $ _ 12 Freeway Interchange -Dublin Boulevard Extension with I-580 (Airway Blvd) $ _ $ _ 21 Scarlet Drive -Dougherty Road to Dublin Boulevard Extension $ 13,894,752.18 $ 13,894,752.18 28 Fallon and I-580 Freeway Interchange with Signals $ 2,811,455.49 $ 2,811,455.49 Other Costs $ 500,000.00 $ 500,000.00 Existing Credits $ 18,579,026.32 $ 18,579,026.32 TOTAL $ 34,017,988.00 $ 52,597,014.32 SECTION I RESIDENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS 29 Tassajara Creek Bike Path $ 935,640.00 $ 935,640.00 30 Park and Ride Lots $ 26,000.00 $ 26,000.00 Existing Credits $ 779,717.00 $ 779,717.00 TOTAL SECTION I RESIDENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS $ 961,640.00 $ 779,717.00 $ 1,741,357.00 SECTION I I RESIDENTIAL BART PARKIN[; IMPRr1VFMFNT Fixed Amount per Agreement $ 6,000,000.00 $ 4,827,906.00 TOTAL SECTION I RESIDENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS $ 6,000,000.00 $ - $ 4,827,906.00 GRAND TOTAL ALL IMPROVEMENTS $ 134,392,349.48 $ 102,106,132.88 $ 235,326,388.36 1 Exhibit C EASTERN DUBLIN TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE Effective May 17, 2010 Residential (Within Transit Center) High Density Dwelling (more than 25 units per acre) $3,429/unit Residential (Outside of Transit Center) Low Density Dwelling (up to 6 units per acre) $8,410/unit Medium Density Dwelling (6.1-14 units per acre) $8,410/unit Medium/High Density Dwelling (14.1-25 units per acre) $5,887lunit High Density Dwelling (25.1 or more units per acre) $5,046/unit Second Units per Sec. 8.80 of the Municipal Code $5,046/unit Non-Residential Development Other Than Residential $ 735/trip LAND USE ESTIMATED WEEKDAY VEHICLE (Non-Residential) TRIP GENERATION RATE' HOTEL/MOTEL OR OTHER LODGING: 10/room OFFICE: Standard Commercial Office 20/1,000 sf RECREATION: Recreation Community Center 26/1,000 sf Health Club 40/1,000 sf Bowling Center 33/1,000 sf Golf Course 8/acre Tennis Courts 33/court Theaters: Movie 220/screen Live 0.2/seat Video Arcade 96/1,000 sf EDUCATION Private Schools 1.5/student Daycare/ Pre-school 2.4/student HOSPITAL: General 12/bed Convalescent/Nursing 3/bed Clinic 24/1,000 sf CHURCH: 9/1,000 sf INDUSTRIAL: Industrial (with retail) 16/1,000 sf Industrial (without retail) 8/1,000 sf 'Sources of information for Trip Generation Rates: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAL). These trip generation rates are based on averages. Most retail uses are given a 35% pass-by reduction. Land uses that are shaded will always pay at the individual trip rate as these uses tend to generate destination trips. Commercial/retail and certain recreation uses will pay at the individual trip rate if the site is a stand-alone land use; if the land use is part of a larger shopping center, the appropriate shopping center trip rate will apply. Page 1 of 2 ~o~ pia 2/26/2010 g:IEDTIF UPDATEIExhibit C -Fee Rates_2009 Transit Center Fee Retluction Update DRAFT Exhibit C EASTERN DUBLIN TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE Effective May 17, 2010 ESTIMATED WEEKDAY VEHICLE LAND USE TRIP GENERATION RATE (Non-Residential) (WITH PASS-BYl RESTAURANT: Located Within a Shopping Center (may be separate legal pedestrian connections to adjacent commercial parcels): Quality (leisure) Sit-down, high turnover (usually chain other than fast food) Bar/Tavern Fast Food (w/o drive through/ Fast Food (with drive through} parcels but with shared parking and internal vehicle/ See appropriate Shopping Center Rate See appropriate Shopping Center Rate See appropriate Shopping Center Rate See appropriate Shopping Center Rate 306/1.000 sf Located On A Separate Parcel (w/o shared parking and intemal vehicle) pedestrian connections to adjacent commercial parcels}: Quality (leisure} 561 1,000 sf Sit-down, high tumover (usually chain ather than fast food) 791 1,000 sf BarlTavem 98/ 1,000 sf Fast Food 30611,000 sf Restaurant uses shall be as defined in the Thp Generation Manual, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 8th Ed Final determination shall be made by the Public Works Director. AUTOMOTIVE: Car Wash:. Automatic SelfServe Gas Station with or without food mart Tire Store/Oil Change Store Auto Sales/Parts Store Auto Repair Center Truck Terminal 585/s lte TO/wash stall 97tpump , 28/seroice bay (no pass-bys) 48/1,000 sf (no pass-bys) 2011,000 sf (no pass-bys) 80/acre FINANCIAL: Located Within a Shopping Center (may be separate legal parcels but with shared parking and internal vehicle/ pedestrian connections to adjacent commercial parcels): Bank/Savings and Loan See appropriate Shopping Center Rate Located On A Separate Parcel (w/o shared parking and intemal vehicle/ pedestrian connections to adjacent commercial parcels Bank/Savings and Loan 85/1,000 sf COMMERCIAL/RETAIL: Super Regional Shopping Center 22/1,000 sf (More than 600,000 SF; usually more than 60 acres; with usually 3+ major stores) and not biscted by a public arterial street Regional Shopping Center 33/1,000 sf (300,000 - 600,000 SF; usually 30-60 acres; w/usually 2+ major stores) and not bisected by a public arterial street Community or Neighborhood Shopping Center 46/1,000 sf (Less than 300,000 sf; less than 30 acres; w/ usually 1 major store or grocery store and detached restaurant and detached restaurant and/or drug store) and not bisected by a public arterial street Commercial Shops: Retail/Strip Commercial (no major store) 26/1,000 sf Supermarket (Stand Alone/ gg/1.000 sf Convenience Market 32511,000 sf Discount Store 46/1,000 sf Page 2 of 2 9iy iia 2/26/2010 g:IEDTIF UPDATEIExhibit C -Fee Rates_2009 Transit Center Fee Reduction Update DRAFT ~!° ~ ~~ ~t.....tttt.....tt.t......t.t..... ...t- - R,' " ~ ~ ti......tt.......tt..- - ~ ,~+q! - T : f*`1 ryr t~~ '7 _ ..... . _ _.. .... .... 1 4i - - ~' I _ ~ ~ ~ i-- I -ttt.tt/t.t.tt/ttt.r ~ T~ k~"-~ ~- \~ / W x ~~~- ` ` j I = ~ c~ ~~~ ~ fir„ ~-~~~ `` ~ ~ ` ~~' ~ I ~' ~ a--' -.t.t..... ~.~ ~, ~.~,r, 4~ ttt......t.t......tt.t....r - ~ €~~ ~'''`~ I i!' = C ~ ~ i ~ ~ x~~ ,~ ~r~. ~ ~, ~ ~~ ~- ri ~ - ra ~ \ ~ .. ,.., LL : I r , , ,,r `~~ ~~, ,,~ ~ ~._ ~~ . - ~ ~ tt. F <" n i ~ Y y ~ ~ " LJ'Z 11~~ ~ ~" ~ ' ~ L ~ ,. b f ~~ 3y . tai i +~ k('h .. 4 ~„^ '~ i ~ . ~ v~ ~ __~, ~ ~ I ~ ~I ~ ~ ~ ! z ~---- = .~ ~ ~ ~, ~~tt~~tt~~ ~ I ~~ ~ m _ ~ y ~ .fl Q ~ ~ ~ ~~ a n~ ~ ~ r ' 1 ..-~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ AtttttJl~t~ i~ ~ . I „ ~ ~ tt~tAtj -~- ~ ~_~ ~ ~ ~ - ~/ /~ W ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ 'i ~ ` ka t ~ ~ ~ ~i • >. -~. - ~ Yu,,,','7 w'X. ., I.. ~ y .. ~ ~ \ ~ ~~ ~ ~ g ~ r ~ ~- u. _ 7 ~ ~ ._. _ . 4 I 1 . ~ - W X ~ ~ - _... 1 ^ ^ ~~ ^ I ~ ~ `i ~ ~1 ~ / ~~ ~ ~,, ~ ~. ~ - ^ Z ,, '' ~ \ ~~ ~~ .... {. ~, T ._-4 v ~~ a ~ `~ __. ~ ~ \ k _L ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ V ~-- ~ r z ~~ '~ r , - ~ ~ L y 1 .'~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ : ~ _ ~ ~ ~." ~ ~ y.ll.y r! ... ` _~ J // ~ ~. r+ ? .rte I. ~~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ o Exhibit E AREA OF BENEFIT MAJOR THOROUGHFARES AND BRIDGES WITHIN EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN AREA Dublin Boulevard Hacienda Drive Central Parkway Gleason Drive Tassajara Road Fallon Road Street Alignment Study Extend and widen to 6 lanes from the Southern Pacific Right-of-Way to Airway Boulevard (from the EIR future road improvement assumptions on pages 1 and 2 of the DKS revised report form December 15, 1992 and mitigation measure 3.3/10). Widen and extend as 4 lanes from Dublin Boulevard to Gleason Drive and to 6 lanes from I-580 to Dublin Boulevard (from the EIR future road improvement assumptions on page 1 of the DKS revised report). Construct four-lane road from Dublin Boulevard west of Hacienda Drive to Fallon Road (from the EIR future road improvement assumptions on page 1 of the DKS revised report). Construct new 4-lane road from west of Hacienda Drive to Fallon road (from the EIR future road improvement assumptions on page 1 of the DKS revised report). (The project does not require extension of Gleason Drive to Doolan Road due to no development proposed in the future study area.) Widen to 4 lanes over a 6-lane right-of-way from Dublin Boulevard to the Contra Costa County Line, and to 6 lanes over an 8-lane right-of-way from Dublin Boulevard to I-580 from the EIR future road improvement assumptions on page 1 of the DKS revised report and mitigation measure 3.3/14.0 Extend to Tassajara Road, widen to 4 lanes over a 6- lane right-of-way from I-580 to Tassajara road (from the EIR future road improvement assumptions on page 1 of the DKS revised report). A study is required to specify the exact street alignments in the Eastern Dublin area. 93 ~~~a ''Cost of Roadway "Cost of Bridge Improvements Improvements $ 27,780,432.39 $ 5,070,000.00 $ 942,195.00 $ $ 4,453,310.63 $ 1,040,000.00 $ 292,110.00 $ $ 33,065,738.01 $ 5,293,600.00 $ 9,247,554.20 Right-of-Way Contingency Funds are required to acquire land in the event that right- of-way must be obtained through condemnation and $ value of land is greater than the appraised value. Total $ 75,781,340.23 $ 11,403,600.00 The Area of Benefit Fee for roadway improvements based on 63,213 related trips for residential and 231,976 trips for non- residential is $2,570/unit for Low Density (1-6 units per acre) and Medium Density Residential (7-14 units per acre), $1,799 for Medium/High Density Residential (15-25 units per acre), and $1,542 for High Density Residential (more than 25 units per acre); and $1,157 for High Density Residential (more than 25 units per acre) within the Transit Center; and $257/trip for non- residential. The Area of Benefit Fee for bridge improvements for Low and Medium Density Residential is $390/unit, for Medium/High Density Residential is $273/unit, and for High Density Residential is $234/unit, and for High Density Residential (within the Transit Center) is $176/ unit; and non-residential is $39/trip. The eastern Dublin Specific Plan area has 3,916 Low Density units; 4,863 Medium Density units; 2,680 Medium/High Density units;and 3,952 High Density units. * These cost estimates do not include credits due for construction of portions of these major thoroughfares and bridges. In the event that the Area of Benefit Fee becomes effective, the appropriate credit amounts will be calculated and the Area of Benefit Fee will be adjusted accordingly. ~~~ ~r NARRATIVE RECORD OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE EASTERN DUBLIN TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE INCLUDING THE BASIS FOR THE STUDY AND STUDY UPDATES AND ADJUSTMENTS (1994 - 2009) Description of Area Covered The Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment (GPA) and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (SP) were adopted by the City in 1994. The GPA outlines future land use plans for the 4,176-acre Eastern Dublin sphere of influence. Based on the 1994 GPA, approximately 13,906 dwelling units and 9.737 million square feet of commercial/office/industrial development are anticipated in the GPA area, in addition to parks, open space, and institutional uses. The SP provides more specific detailed goals, policies, and action programs for the portion of the City abutting the easterly City limits. Environmental Studies An Items Identified In The Eastern Dublin Specific Plan A Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the GPA and SP (SCH No. 91103064) and was certified by the City Council on May 10, 1993 (Resolution No. 51-93). Two subsequent addenda, dated May 4, 1993., and August 22, 1994, were approved. Chapter 5.0 of the SP addresses Traffic and Circulation. At the time the SP was adopted, the existing roads were generally rural in character and adequately served existing rural residential development in the area (EIR, pp. 2-3). Portions of the SP area have since been developed and new roads constructed. The transportation and circulation systems for the SP are designed to provide convenient access to, and mobility within, the SP area. The Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area road system is characterized by three major north- south streets (Hacienda Drive, Tassajara Road, and Fallon Road) and three major east-west ~, streets (Dublin Boulevard, Central Parkway, and Gleason Drive) to accommodate traffic in the SP area (SP 5.2.1). These streets are all planned or built as major four- or six-lane streets. Other streets necessary for development of the SP are local roads that will be constructed by developers to provide access to respective properties as development occurs. No fees are necessary to provide for such roads. The SP also identifies certain freeway improvements and interchange improvements necessary to accommodate traffic to and from the SP area (SP 5.2.12). The SP includes a policy (Policy 5 -10) that transit service should be provided within one-quarter mile of 95 percent of the SP population and also establishes park-and-ride lots adjacent to freeway interchanges on the three north-south streets (SP 5.7.2). Finally, to encourage non- motorized forms of transportation, the SP provides for a network of pedestrian trails (Policy 5- 15) and bike paths (Policy 5-17 and Figure 5.3). In analyzing the traffic impacts of the project, the EIR assumed that certain improvements would be constructed and that development within the SP/GPA areas would pay its proportionate share of the cost of such improvements (EIR, pp 3.3-16 to 3.3-18). The EIR also included a number of mitigation measures to mitigate the transportation-related impacts of the development (EIR, p.3.3-19 to 3.3-29). These mitigation measures were adopted by the City Council as part of the Mitigation Monitoring Program (Resolution No. 53-93). 9 °' ATTACHMENT ~ ~'~~ ~/~ NARRATIVE RECORD OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE EASTERN DUBLIN TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE INCLUDING THE BASIS FOR THE STUDY AND STUDY UPDATES AND ADJUSTMENTS (1994 - 2009) In December 2002, the SP was amended to add the area known as the Transit Center. The EIR for this project also assumed that certain improvements would be constructed and that development in the Transit Center would pay its proportionate share of the cost for the improvements. The General Plan contains a policy that requires new development to pay for infrastructure necessary to accommodate the development (2.1.4, Implementing Policy C). The SP contains a similar goal and policy (Policy 10-1). 1994 / 1995 Adoption of Impact Fee The City Council adopted a Transportation Impact Fee ordinance on December 12, 1994 (Ordinance No. 14-94), which provided the authority for the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee ("TIF"), which was then adopted by the City Council on January 9, 1995 (Resolution 1-95). The TIF was based on two reports: study prepared by Barton-Aschman Associates ("Study"), and a report prepared by Santina & Thompson ("Cost Estimate Report"). 1996 Revision The City Council adopted a revised Traffic Impact Fee at its meeting of April 9, 1996, under Resolution No. 41-96. The revised Fee was based on two reports: a study prepared by TJKM Transportation Consultants ("1996 Study Update"), and a revised cost estimate by Santina and Thompson ("1996 Cost Estimate"). 1999 Revision A revised Traffic Impact Fee was subsequently adopted by the City Council on December 7, 1999, under Resolution No. 225-99. The revised Fee was based on the 1999 Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Update prepared by the Public Works Department, dated November 8, 1999 ("1999 Study Update"). 2004 Revision A revised Traffic Impact Fee was subsequently adopted by the City Council on June 15, 2004, under Resolution No. 111-04. The revised Fee was based on the 2004 Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Update prepared by the Public Works Department, dated May 27, 2004 ("2004 Study Update"). 2009 Revision A revised Traffic Impact Fee was subsequently adopted by the City Council on April 7, 2009, under Resolution No. 41-09. The revised Fee was based on the 2009 Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Update prepared by the Public Works Department, dated January 12, 2009 ("2009 Study Update"). Page 2 of 2 ATTACHMENT 2 ~6 G !/mil Attachment 3, Staff Report 2008 Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Update Allocation Between Land Acquisition and Construction Costs Se ment Descri lion Ri ht-Of-Wa Land Including Overhead Total Pro ect Cost 1 Dou he Road - Ci Limits to Amador Valle Widenin $ $ $ 6,897,917.15 2 Dou he Road -Amador Valle boulevard to Houston Place $ 272,000.00 $ 353,600.00 $ 6,090,065.47 3 Dou hert Road -Houston Place to Dublin Boulevard $ $ 4 Dou hert Road -Dublin Boulevard to North of I-580 Off Ram $ $ $ 1,678,050.00 5 Dublin Boulevard -East of Villa a Parkwa to Sierra Court Widenin $ $ $ 6 Dublin Boulevard -Sierra Court to Dou hert Road Widenin $ 556,511.00 $ 723,464.30 $ 2,145,747.71 7 Dublin Boulevard -Dou he to Southern Pacific Ri ht-of-Wa $ $ $ 8 Dublin Boulevard Extension - Southern Pacific R/W to East BART Access $ $ $ 8A Dublin Boulevard Extension -East BART Access to Hacienda Drive $ $ $ 659,401.20 9 Dublin Boulevard -Hacienda to Tassa'ara Road $ $ $ 289,250.00 10 Dublin Boulevard - Tassa'ara Road to Fallon Road $ $ $ 526,734.00 11 Dublin Boulevard Extension -Fallon Road to Airwa $ 9,099,040.00 $ 11,828,752.00 $ 26,305,047.19 Prior Grant/ Loan Revenue for Dublin Boulevard $ 12 Freewa Interchan a -Dublin Boulevard Extension with I-580 Airwa Blvd $ $ $ 13 Hacienda - I-580 to Dublin Boulevard Extension $ $ $ 14 Hacienda -Dublin Boulevard Extension to Gleason Drive $ $ $ 942,195.00 15 Freewa Interchan a -Hacienda Road with I-580 $ $ $ 9,430,212.12 16 Arnold Drive -Dublin Boulevard Extension to Gleason $ $ $ 5,049,156.52 16A Central Parkwa - Arnold to Hacienda $ $ $ 687,273.81 17 Central Parkwa - Hacienda to Tassa'ara $ $ $ 3,328,902.49 18 Central Parkwa - Tassa'ara to Kee an Street, Western 3, 640 feet $ $ $ 264,810.00 18A Central Parkwa -Kee an Street to Fallon, 2,230 feet $ $ $ 172,120.00 19 Gleason - Arnold Road to Hacienda $ $ $ 97,500.00 19A Gleason - Hacienda to Tassa'ara $ $ $ 20 Gleason - Tassa'ara to Fallon $ $ $ 194,610.00 21 Scarlet Drive -Dou hert Road to Dublin Boulevard Extension $ 4,916,220.00 $ 6,391,086.00 $ 13,894,752.18 22 Tassa ara Road - 5,000 feet north of Gleason to Contra Costa Count Line $ 4,531,128.00 $ 5,890,466.40 $ 23,817,330.91 22A Tassa'ara Road -Gleason Road to 5,000 feet north of Gleason Road $ 868,611.00 $ 1,129,194.30 $ 7,730,214.17 23 Tassa'ara Road -Dublin Boulevard Extension to Gleason Road $ $ $ 1,264,058.41 24 Tassa'ara Road -Dublin Boulevard Extension to I-580 $ $ $ 254,134.52 25 Tassa'ara Road -Freewa Interchan e $ $ $ 2,812,216.94 26 Fallon Road - Tassa'ara to Gleason $ $ $ 1,276,566.94 26A Fallon Road -Gleason to Dublin Boulevard Extension $ 2,500.00 $ 3,250.00 $ 6,524,455.57 27 Fallon Road -Dublin Boulevard Extension to North of I-580 $ $ $ 1,446,531.69 28 Fallon and I-580 Freewa Interchan a with Si nals $ 2,811,455.49 29 Tassa'ara Creek Bike Path - Greenbriar Pro a Line to Contra Costa Count Line $ $ $ 921,600.00 30 Park and Ride $ 26,000.00 Transit Center BART Parkin Structure $ $ $ 4,827,906.00 TIF U date $ $ $ 40,000.00 Other Costs Section I $ $ $ 300,000.00 Other Costs $ $ $ 500,000.00 TOTAL $ 20,246,010.00 $ 26,319,813.00 $ 133,206,215.48 Ri ht-of-Wa 20 Im rovements 80 ATTACHMENT 3. q9~F irk RESOLUTION NO. 20 - 07 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN REVISING ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDELINES RELATED TO THE EASTERN DUBLIN TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE WHEREAS, the City Council has established a Traffic Impact Fee (TIF} applicable to development occurring within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Area; and WHEREAS, the current TIF was adopted on June 18, 2004, via Resolution 111-04; and WHEREAS, the City Council previously adopted Resalution 221-04 on November 16, 2004, Adopting Revisions to the Eastern Dublin TIF Administrative Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the intent of the Guidelines is to provide procedures for reimbursement, credit, or other administrative aspects of the TIF Program; and WHEREAS, the adoption of Resolution 111-04 established a TIF category for Section II entitled "Residential BART Garage Fee" that will be collected by the City and paid to Alameda County Surplus Property Authority; and WHEREAS, revisions to the Administrative Guidelines are necessary to address the disbursement of BART Garage Fees and to incorporate other minor updated wording in order to maintain conformance with the TIF Program; and WHEREAS, the revised Guidelines, as prepared, are consistent with the requirements of Resolution 111-04 and existing laws and regulations; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin does hereby adopt the revised Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Administrative Guidelines, attached hereto as Exhibit "A," and by reference made a part hereof to supersede all prior versions of the Guidelines. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of February, 2007, by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers Hildenbrand, Oravetz, Sbranti and Scholz, and Mayor Lockhart NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ATTEST: ~ , ~.. City Clerk Reso No. 20-07, Adopted 2/20/07, Item 8.4 Mayor ATTACHMENT N. Page 1 of 1 ~8'~ pia EXHIBIT A CITY OF DUBLIN EASTERN DUBLIN TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDELINES Revision Adopted Resolution # 20 - 07 (2/20/2007) I. Introduction/Overview These guidelines apply to the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fees (hereafter known as the `Fee' or `Fees') adopted by the City of Dublin through Resolution 111-04 and any subsequent replacement resolution. The Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee includes three categories of improvements and facilities. • Section I improvements and facilities are those located exclusively in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area. • Section II improvements and facilities are those projects to which Eastern Dublin developers contribute a proportionate share, including projects located in other areas of the City. • Section II Residential BART Garage improvements include 500 spaces in Phase I of the Eastern Dublin BART garage ,necessitated by residential development outside the Transit Center. • Section III improvements and facilities are those of a regional nature. (NOTE: Section III Fee suspended effective September 12, 1998, as long as Tri-Valley Transportation Development Fee remains in place.) The administrative guidelines provide procedures for calculation of the Fee, calculation and use of credits and reimbursements, and other administrative aspects of the Fee. In addition, the guidelines include procedures for construction of designated facilities by developers. The administrative guidelines establish the authority for providing credits and/or reimbursements to developers who construct and/or dedicate any of the improvements and facilities for which the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee is imposed (TIF facilities). When such public improvements and facilities are constructed and/or dedicated by a developer, the developer shall be given a credit to be applied against the Fees due for the development project. The amount of the credit shall be determined pursuant to Section VI of these guidelines. If the amount of the credit is greater than the Fees due for the development project, the developer may use the credit toward the Fees for another development project or transfer the credit to another eligible developer in Eastern Dublin in accordance with these guidelines. If the developer cannot use or transfer the credit within ten years, then the credit will convert to a reimbursement right. At the end of the ten-year period, the developer may elect to extend the credit for an additional five years. The combination of credit and reimbursement rights will terminate twenty-five years after the effective date of the agreement creating such rights. The administrative guidelines also establish the authority for the distribution of monies collected under "Section II Residential BART Garage". EXHIBIT A To the Resolution ~9~ ~~a Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Admuustrative Guidelines Reso #20 - 07 (2/20/2007) Exhibit A (2/20/2007) Page 2of 13 The application of these guidelines will at times refer to various reference documents adopted by the City of Dublin. These documents include the City's General Plan, the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, the most recent Traffic Impact Fee Study, and various other fee studies and updates. Such reference documents are subject to change and may affect the application of these guidelines. II. Authority of City Manager To Interpret Situations Not Covered Should situations arise not covered by these guidelines, the City Manager will have the authority to determine how the resolutions, ordinances, guidelines and agreements will be administered. Such interpretations by the City Manager will be in writing. III. Fee Calculation A. Imposition of Fees Except as exempted under subsection D. of this section, Fees are imposed on all development in Eastern Dublin as described below: 1. All new development, including new construction of any building or structure (residential or non-residential);. 2. Additions to non-residential buildings or structures which result in an increase of 500 square feet or more; 3. Additions to residential buildings or structures which increase the number of units (i.e. construction of a "granny unit"). The Administrative Services Department serves as the lead department to gather and coordinate the information necessary to calculate the Fee. The Community Development Department is responsible for determining the intended land use. The Public Works Department is responsible for determining the number of vehicle trips assigned to the project. Unless otherwise provided, the Fee will be collected with the payment for the building permit for the development project. B. Effective Fees The Fees owed by a development project will be those in effect when the building permit is obtained. This section shall be applicable whether the fees are paid in cash or a credit is used. C. Basis for Calculating Fees The Fees for residential development projects will be calculated based upon the per unit fee for each of the categories noted in Resolution 111-04 (i.e. Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, Medium/High Density Residential, High Density Residential) and/or any subsequent replacement resolution. The Fees for non-residential development are calculated on a per average weekday vehicle trip basis. The number of average weekday vehicle trips for each type of 1 ~~ i~~ Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Administrative Guidelines Reso #20 - 07 (2/20/2007) Exhibit A (2/20/2007) Page 3of 13 development is determined by the land use categories specified in "Exhibit C" of Resolution 111-04. However, if the Public Works Director determines that the Iand use of the development project is not appropriately reflected on "Exhibit C" of Resolution 111-04, then the Public Works Department will undertake a specific traffic study, to be paid for by the applicant, for the purpose of determining the estimated trip generation of the proposed development project. Fees for non-residential development will be charged for any addition to an existing building or structure if the addition exceeds 500 square feet. For mixed-use non-residential development projects, the Community Development Director, upon consultation with the Public Works Duector, will determine the projected percentage of each use at the time the Final Map or other appropriate entitlement is approved. The Fee will be calculated on a pro-rata basis among the various rates stated for each different use (For example, a large single building could be divided between commercial office space and industrial warehouse space). If the .uses are unknown at the time of obtaining a building permit and the building permit does not include adequate interior details to determine the intended use, the use for the initial Fee calculation purposes will be assumed as "Industrial without Retail". Any additional Fees owed as a result of a different final use of the property will be calculated and collected at the time that a building permit is issued for interior tenant improvements. This fee calculation shall be at the rate in effect at the time the building permit for tenant improvements is issued. No refund of Fees will be given if the resulting uses are different from the projected land use. The average weekday trip generation rate for quasi-public uses, which is not appropriately reflected on the "Estimated Weekday Vehicle Trip Generation Rate" schedule that was adopted as part of the Traffic Impact Fee Resolution (Exhibit C to Resolution 111-04), as determined by the Public Works Director, will be established by a project specific traffic study. This study will be conducted by the City (Public Works Department) and paid for by the project applicant. Affordable housing projects developed by government agencies and non-profit entities will be subject to the same Fees that are assessed on private residential development. D. Exemptions 1. Total Exemption. The following types of development will be exempt from the collection of Traffic Impact Fees: a) Any alteration or addition to a residential structure, except to the extent that a residential unit is added to asingle-family unit, or another unit is added to an existing multi-family building. b) 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 50% or more. ~a~ u.2 Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Administrative Guidelines Reso #20 - 07 (2/20/2007) Exhibit A (2/20/2007) Page 4of 13 c) Any replacement or reconstruction of an existing non-residential structure that has been destroyed or demolished provided that the building permit for new reconstruction is obtained within one year after the building was destroyed or demolished and the reconstructed building would not increase the destroyed or demolished building's trips based on the "Estimated Weekday Vehicle Trip Generation Rate" as applied to the original building. 2. Partial Exemption. A partial exemption may be granted based on prior Fees paid in the situation of a change in the type of use as described below: If within 10 years of paying Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fees for a specific development project, the project is demolished and replaced by a new type of development, an exemption may be given for up to the amount which was paid by the prior development project: Proof of payment shall be obligation of the individual/entity requesting the exemption. The new development shall not accrue any unused credit or reimbursement rights, in the event that the replacement project would result in a lower Fee. Any change in use outside of the 10 year period stated shall be obligated to pay the entire Fee. IV. Fee Collection A. Payment of Traffic Impact Fees for Non-Residential Development T'he Traffic Impact Fee for non-residential development will be due and payable at the issuance of a building permit and will be collected by the Building & Safety Division. The number of estimated average weekday vehicle trips, determined as described in Section IILC., above, multiplied by the non-residential fee per trip, will be the basis for the collected Fee. The square footage or other appropriate measure as identified on the building permit will be the basis for determining the number of trips on "Exhibit C" of Resolution 111-04. Following is an example: Non-Residential Fee Example: Assume that the development project is a 15,540 square foot standard commercial office building. The estimated weekday vehicle trip generation rate for this type of development is 20 trips per 1,000 square feet, and the Fee is $360 per trip for non-residential development. FEE CALCULATION: 15,540 square feet/1,000 square feet = 15.54 x 20 trips = 310.8 trips x $360 per trip = $111,888 Traffic Impact Fee. Amendments to anon-residential building permit which result in 500 additional square feet or more shall result in additional fees owed based on the added area. B. Payment of Traffic Impact Fees for Residential Development If the City incorporates the facilities described in Resolution 111-04 into its annually adopted long-term Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), then the Traffic Impact Fees for residential development will be due and payable. at the issuance of a building permit. Prior to the incorporation of these facilities into the CIP, the Fee will not be due until the loa ~' iia Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Administrative Guidelines Reso #20 - 07 (2/20/2007) Exhibit A (2/20/2007) Page Sof 13 dwelling is issued a certificate of occupancy. The developer may voluntarily pay the full fee when the building permit is issued or as otherwise appropriate under applicable law. C. Payment of Fees in Ezcess of $50,000 When the amount of payment for Traffic Impact Fees exceeds $50,000 on any given day, payment shall be made in one of the following ways: 1) paid by check drawn on a bank within the State of California, 2) paid by cashier's check, or 3) if paid in same day funds by a wire transfer, the wire transfer must be pre-arranged with the City's Finance Division. D. Payment of Fees in Conjunction with Development Agreements The Traffic Impact Fees can be collected at an earlier point of time than what is noted in this section if agreed to by a developer within the terms of a Development Agreement. E. Payment Records The Administrative Services Department will record the payment of the Traffic Impact Fees. Records will be maintained to comply with refunding requirements as prescribed by State Law. The Administrative Services Department will obtain a mailing address from each payee, as well as the applicable Assessor's Parcel Number, and will note the payee as the entity or person whose name appears as the applicant for the building permit. The Finance Division will maintain the records for a period of ten years from their collection, unless a legal mandate exists for a longer retention. V. Allotment of Developer Fee Credits The City understands the practicality of having developers construct and/or contribute some of the TIF facilities described in Resolution 111-04 and any subsequent replacement resolution. For this reason, the City will allot fee credits against the collection of Fees for constructing or contributing TIF facilities. A. Fee Credit /Reimbursement Agreement Required The allotment of fee credits and/or provision for a reimbursement will only occur in accordance with a written credit/reimbursement agreement between the City and the developer responsible for the construction of the TIF facilities or dedication of TIF right of way. All fee credits will be granted by use of a standard agreement approved by the City Attorney. 2. This credit/reimbursement agreement will be entered into at the time the improvements are secured and/or the right-of--way is accepted for dedication. The terms of this agreement may, at the City's discretion, be included in the agreement entered into with the City to secure certain public improvements as contained on a Final Parcel Map or Final Subdivision Map. 3. The developer will pay an administrative fee, due on the effective date of the creditlreimbursement agreement, to be established in the City's Master Fee Schedule. The purpose of this administrative fee is to cover the administrative X03 0~ ~~a Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Administrative Guidelines Reso #20 - 07 (2/20/2007) Exhibit A (2/20/2007) Page 5of 13 costs associated with establishing and monitoring the creditlreimbursement agreement. 4. Any credits, which are unused tan years following their creation, shall convert to a right to reimbursement. The right to reimbursement terminates fifteen years after it is created. Alternatively, credit holders may elect by providing written notice to the City Manager to extend the term of the credit for an additional five years. Notices of the election to extend the term must be received no sooner than one year prior to and no later than six months prior to the conversion of the credits to a right to reimbursement. If the credit holder elects to extend the term of the credit for five years, then any credits remaining at the end of the five-year extension shall convert to a right of reimbursement. The right to reimbursement terminates ten years after it is created. All rights to reimbursement shall terminate twenty-five years after the effective date of the agreement creating such rights. 5. Neither a credit nor the right to reimbursement shall be increased for inflation or accrue interest. 6. Credits are transferable, with the written approval of the City Manager, provided the credit is transferred to a person/firm having a legal interest in real property withinthe area subject to the Fee and provided that the administrative transfer fee is paid, as specified in Section IX.A. of these guidelines. 7. The developer will sign a certificate attached to the fee credit/reimbursement agreement attesting that it obtained a copy of these admuustrative guidelines and they were read and understood. 8. No fee credits shall be established for "Section II Residential BART Garage component of the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee. Payments from those monies shall be made in accordance with a separate section of these guidelines. B. Applicability of Administrative Guidelines to Pre-Existing Credits Allotted to the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority These guidelines do not apply to existing fee credits to which the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority is entitled under the terms of the Agreement between the City of Dublin, the City of Pleasanton, the County of Alameda and the Surplus Property Authority regarding coordination of certain Freeway Improvements dated March 12, 1991. These guidelines do apply to existing fee credits to which the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority is entitled under development agreements entered into between January 1, 1995 and the effective date of these guidelines, to the extent provided for in a /~`/'d Ala Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Administrative Guidelines Reso #20 - 07 (2/2012007) Exhibit A (2/20/2007) Page 7of 13 specific fee credit/reimbursement agreement to be entered into between the City and the Alameda County Surplus Property authority. VI. Calculating the Fee Credits For calculation purposes, the fee credits will be segregated into the following categories: Section L Eastern Dublin Traffic Improvements Section II (Excludes Secrion II Residenrial Bart Garage): Citywide Traffic Improvements Section III: Regional Transportation (Note: Section III Fee suspended effective September 12, 1998, as long as Tri-Valley Transportation Development Fee remains in place.) A. General The fee credit/reimbursement agreement will identify the total credit by category for TIF facilities constructed or right of way dedicated for a particular development project. The contributed land or improvements must be the facilities described in Resolution 111-04 and/or any subsequent replacement resolution. There must be a minimum value of $50,000 in improvements and/or right of way dedicated before credits will be allotted to a developer. B. Determination of Value The Public Works Director will determine the value of the contributed facilities based upon improvement plans submitted by the developer and approved by the City, which plans shall quantify the size of the TIF facilities to be constructed or dedicated. It is recognized that in some cases the scope of construction or dedication will not exactly match segments shown in the TIF Report. The credits will be the lesser of the following: a) the estimated cost of the improvements as noted in Resolution 111-04 and/or any subsequent replacement resolution; or b) the pro-rated value of the improvement using the standard cost measurements in Resolution 111-04 and/or any subsequent replacement resolution. The fee credits cannot exceed the cost estimates of the improvements in the most recent fee study and resolution. In no case shall the fee credits include facility financing costs. Illustrative Example 1: Assume that a developer dedicates land for the partial widening of a major street to offset the Traffic Impact Fees due from a development project. To qualify for a credit, this roadway widening project must be included in the TIF. The land dedication to be applied for a fee credit shall not include improvements immediately adjacent to the development project, as these improvements are entirely the responsibility of the developer and are not to be funded by the Traffic Impact Fee. Resolution 111-04 used a standard cost measurement of $7 per square foot for right-of--way dedication in calculating the Traffic Impact Fees. The fee credits due to the developer can be calculated by Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Administrative Guidelines Reso #20 - 07 (2/20/2407) Exhibit A (2/20/2007) Page 8of 13 determining the square footage of the land to be dedicated multiplied by this per square foot cost measurement. Illustrative Example 2: A developer constructing single family homes contributes traffic signal improvements (Category 1 improvement) valued at $200,000. Assume that the Traffic Impact Fee totals $6,950 per home, which is comprised of the Category 1 portion of $4,700 and the Category 2 portion of $2,250. The credit of $200,000 can only be used against the developer's Category 1 Fee of $4,700 per home, which will cover approximately 42.55 homes. When the building permit is issued for the a3Ta home, the developer will have used up the credit and will have to begin paying the Category 1 Fee. The Category 2 portion of the Fee must be paid at the issuance of each building permit for all homes included in the development, as the Category 1 credit cannot be used to offset these portions of the Fee. VII. Use of Fee Credits A. Credits expire when used or ten years from the date of the credit/reimbursement agreement (unless extended an additional five years at the request of the credit holder), whichever occurs first. B. In the event the fee credits are unused following ten years from the date of the creditJreimbursement agreement (or fifteen years if extended at the request of the credit holder}, the fee credit shall convert to a reimbursement right as provided for under Section X and XI of these guidelines. C. The value of the credits in each category will be listed in the agreement and tracked by fee category as they are used by the developer. The City's Finance Division will keep record of the unused credits and provide this information to the Building Safety Division at the time fee credits are used. D. Credits earned by constructing or dedicating a certain category of improvements can only be used to offset fees for that category. The balance of the Traffic Impact Fee, which is to be used for other categories of improvements, will be paid by the developer as specified in Section IV of these guidelines. Fee credits will not be mixed between the fee categories. For example, unused credits from Category 1 portion of the Traffic Impact Fees cannot be used to offset amounts due for Category 2 and Category 3. E. Only the developer who builds or dedicates the TIF facilities will be entitled to the original or initial credits, until such time as they may be transferred "in accordance with these guidelines. VIII. Use of Fee Credits requires Completion of Facility or Performance Bonds Fee credits cannot be used by the developer until the developer has either: iD6~~ pia Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Administrative Guidelines Reso #20 - 07 (2/20/2007) Exhibit A (2/20/2007) Page 9of 13 1. Dedicated the land or improvements representing the credits to the City; or 2. Provided the City with a performance bond and labor and materials bonds or other adequate security to insure that the improvements will be constructed prior to the first Certificate of Occupancy for any building that is a part of the project. The performance bond or other security shall be in an amount equal to 100% of the engineer's estimated cost to construct the improvements and the labor and materials bond shall be in an amount equal to 50% of the engineer's estimate. The bonds shall be written by a surety licensed to conduct business in the State of California and approved by the City's City Manager. Illustrative Example: Assume a developer is in the midst of completing certain street improvements, which will be dedicated to the City to offset a portion of the Traffic Impact Fee. The developer supplies the City with aright-of--way conveyance, a performance bond and a labor and materials bond for the completion of the street improvements.. Fee credits can be used in advance of completing the improvements, since the City is assured that the land will be dedicated and the improvements will be completed. IX. Transferring of Credits A. The original holder of credits can request a transfer of credits to a person owning an interest in property that is subject to the same category of Traffic Impact Fee. Such transactions shall be subject to an administrative transfer fee, which shall cover the City's administrative costs associated with the credit transfer. The administrative transfer fee shall be established in the City's Master Fee Schedule. B. There is no limit on the number of times that credits can be transferred between developments. X. Reimbursement Rights (Sections I & II -Excluding Section II Residential BART Garage) Reimbursement rights are created from the conversion of fee credits, which occurs ten years after the initial date of the credit/reimbursement agreement creating the fee credit (unless the credits have been extended an additional five years at the request of the credit holder). Reimbursement rights are subject to the following specific guidelines: A. The reimbursement rights shall expire twenty-five years after the initial date of the credit) reimbursement agreement creating the fee credit. B Reimbursement will be only from funds collected as Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fees or from fees collected by Contra Costa County and paid to Dublin for any improvements Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Administrative Guidelines Reso #20 - 07 (2/20/2007) Exhibit A (2/20/2007) Page l0of 13 also included in the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee, and will not come from the City's General Fund. C. The City will determine the amount of funds available for reimbursement in each of the categories on an annual basis. D. The procedure for prioritizing reimbursements is described in Section XI of these guidelines. XI. Process for Reimbursement of Reimbursement Rights A. Determination of Funds Available for Reimbursement Within 180 days of the end of each fiscal year, the Admuustrative Services Department will make an accounting of all Traffic Impact Fees collected for the fiscal year that just ended. The Administrative Services Department will also determine the amount of Traffic Impact Fee funds that are unspent and unencumbered as of the close of the fiscal year. For funds that are unspent and unencumbered in each fee category, the City will allocate the necessary amount to be used to finance needed TIF facilities for the upcoming fiscal year and/or to repay amounts due on outstanding loans for previously constructed TIF facilities. The remaining funds (the reimbursement set-aside) will be used to reimburse holders of reimbursement rights for facilities already contributed, if any such reimbursement rights exist. B. Allocating the Reimbursement Set-Aside to Outstanding Rembursement Rights In the event that the City designates that a reimbursement set-aside is available, fifty percent will be used to pay the oldest reimbursement right outstanding. If the oldest right is paid off before this portion of funds is entirely consumed, then the balance of the 50% will go toward the next oldest right. This portion of reimbursement set-aside funds will be allocated according to this method until it is exhausted. The other half of the reimbursement set aside will be allocated to all reimbursement rights on a pro-rata basis according to their amounts outstanding, including the remaining unreimbursed portion of the oldest agreement. Unused reimbursement set-aside funds will not be carved over to another fiscal year. The following example illustrates this allocation: Illustrative Example: During one fiscal year, the City collects $88,000 in Fees for a certain category of improvements. The total outstanding reimbursements owed are $100,000 to the following developers: Developer A (the oldest agreement): $50,000 Developer B: $20,000 Developer C: $30,000 For the upcoming fiscal year, the City retains $44,000 for improvements not built by developers and allocates $44,000 as the reimbursement set-aside to reduce current reimbursement obligations. $22,000 (50% of the $44,000) of the reimbursement set-aside is used to pay Developer A, who holds the oldest agreement. Developer A now has $28,000 of outstanding reimbursements (Beginning balance of $50,000 less the $22,000 payment). The other half of the reimbursement set-aside ($22,000) is allocated proportionally to all three parties who currently hold reimbursement rights as follows: io~~ ~~a Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Administrative Guidelines Reso #20 - 07 (2/20/2007) Exhibit A (2/20/2007) Page 11 of 13 Holder of Current Value of Percent of Total Amt. of $22,000. Reimbursement Reimbursement Reimbursement Reimbursements Reimbursement Balance Owed Outstandine Distributed Remaining Developer A $28,000 35.90% $7,898.00 $20,102:00 Developer B $20,000 25.64% $5,640.80 $14,359.20 Developer C $30,000 38.46% $8,461.20 21 538.80 TOTAL $78,000 $22,000.00 $56,000.00 XII. Payment to Alameda County Surplus Property Authority (ACSPA) For $6 million of BART Garage Costs (Section II Residential BART Garage) Payment of Section II Residential BART Garage Fees can occur upon completion of phase I of the parking garage and surface parking immediately adjacent to the new garage at the eastern Dublin / Pleasanton BART Station, consisting of approximately 1,706 parking spaces, and the availability of the BART Garage for public use. Payment shall be made to the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority (ACSPA), which is responsible for the parking garage construction and will dedicate the improvement to the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) District for public use upon its completion. Except for interest earned on Section II Residential BART Garage fees prior to distribution, the maximum amount to be paid to ACSPA shall not exceed $6,000,000 (six million dollars). Payment to Alameda County Surplus Property Authority is subject to the following specific guidelines: A. The maximum to be disbursed from fees collected, as described in XII subsection B, shall be six million dollars ($6,000,000) and this amount shall not be increased for any reason including inflation. In addition, any accrued interest pending disbursement shall be disbursed to ACSPA. B. Disbursement will be only from the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fees Section II Residential BART Garage fee, and will not come from any other source including the City's General Fund. C. Once the BART Garage is completed, the amount disbursed will depend on the payment of fees by development subject to the fee. There is no guarantee that ACSPA will receive a total of $6,000,000. D. The City will determine and report on an annual basis to ACSPA, the amount of funds collected from the Section II Residential BART Garage fee and the amount available for disbursement, including interest accrued prior to disbursement, if any. E. The procedure for distributing the disbursements to ACSPA is described in Section XIII of these guidelines. XIII. Process for Payment to ACSPA -Section II Residential BART Garage Fee Funds A. Initial Distribution of Section II Residential BART Garage Fee Funds i. Once the BART Garage has been accepted by BART and made available for public use, the ACSPA shall provide to the City a written certification of the completion of the BART Garage. laq~'/l~ Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Administrative Guidelines Reso #20 - 07 (2/20/2007} Exhibit A (2/20/2007) Page 12of 13 ii. Within 45 days of receipt of the certification described in Section XIII(A)(i) City shall calculate the balance of funds available in Section II Residential BART Garage fee, as of the first day of the month preceding the date of the notice. City shall also calculate and account for accrued interest based on the quarterly balance of Section II BART Garage Fees and the earning rate applied to pooled funds managed by the City. City shall remit to ACSPA the funds as calculated along with a report showing the maximum remaining fees that may be paid to ACSPA. iii. Thereafter, funds shall be distributed on an annual basis as described in subsection B below. B. Annual Determination of Section II Residential BART Garage Fee Funds Available for Payment i. Within 180 days of the end of each fiscal year, the Administrative Services Department will make an accounting of all Section II Residential BART Garage fees collected, and not previously disbursed, for the fiscal year that just ended. This shall include accrued interest. ii. The City shall distribute to ACSPA, Section II Residential BART Garage fees available, to the extent that the total distribution including previous payments, excluding any amounts paid as interest, does not exceed the maximum amount described in Section XII. iii. The Administrative Services Department shall annually report to the ACSPA the current balance remaining Section II Residential BART Garage fees that maybe paid. XIV. Other Miscellaneous Administrative Guidelines A. Procedures for Construction of Designated Facilities by Developers The improvements to be constructed or dedicated must be submitted for approval in writing to the Public Works Director no later than thirty calendar days prior to the approval of the Final Map on the development project. The submittal of the improvement plans and/or description of area to be dedicated shall be in sufficient detail as determined by the Public Works Director. The Pubic Works Director will attempt to respond to the request within twenty business days. The developer constructing or dedicating improvements in lieu of paying a portion of the traffic fee must post a performance bond before the issuance of any grading and/or building permits for the construction of the improvements. B. Refunds Refunds of withdrawn applications will be done in accordance with existing procedures for paid building permits. • Payable to entity making payment or property owner of record. • Payable in accordance with State Law. • Not applicable to Letters of credit, surety bonds or other instruments taken to secure payment. ~~o ~~ ~i~ Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Administrative Guidelines Reso #20 - 07 (2/20/2007} Exhibit A (2/20/2007) Page 13of 13 C. Annual Review of Fee Collection The City has existing procedures for complying with State Law in regards to accounting for developer fees. The Administrative Services Department will maintain records to provide the following items: • A brief description of the Traffic Impact Fee; • An identification of the improvements and the percentage of cost of the improvements which the Traffic Impact Fee will be expended upon; and • For improvements which are funded and yet to be completed, an identification of an expected date by which construction of the facilities will commence. D. Funds and Accounting The City will incorporate the following, items into its accounting procedures, which are the responsibility of the Administrative Services Department: • The City will maintain separate fiends for the collection and expenditure of Traffic Impact Fees as follows: Section I: Easternn Dublin Traffic Improvements Section II: City-Wide Traffic Improvements Section II Residential BART Garage • The City will allocate interest to fees collected in the funds based upon cash balances at the end of each quarter. • The City will identify in accordance with State Law the beginning and ending balance of the funds held fob the Traffic Impact Fee as of fiscal year end. • The City will identify the amount of fees collected and interest earned in each fiscal year for Traffic Impact Fees. • The City will provide a description and accounting of any interfimd transfers made by the Traffic Impact Fee Funds. Although it may be authorized by State Law, it shall not be City policy to loan TIF monies for another public purpose. • The City will calculate reimbursements annually within 180 days of each fiscal year end. • The City will file an annual accounting of all development impact fees, including the Traffic Impact Fee, with the City Council and for public inspection within 180 days of each fiscal year end. (// ~ //d ALAMEDA COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY SURPLUS PROPERTY AUTHORITY Chris Bazar Agency Director February 24, 2010 Patrick Cashman SPA Director Mark Lander City Engineer zz4 West Winton Avenue Cit of Dublin y Room 110 100 Civic Plaza Dublin CA 94568 Hayward j California 94s44-lzls Subject: Revisions to the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee/ Transit Center Residential phone 510.670.5333 Dear Mark, fax 510.670.6374 Thank you for providing me the information regarding the proposed revisions to www.acgov.org/cda the EDTIF. i One year ago, the City committed to consider revising the EDTIF to provide for a j reduction of the TIF for Transit Center residential. True to its commitment, the City commissioned a study looking into the issue. I am very pleased that the end result is a recommendation to recognize that transit-oriented residential generates ~ less traffic and warrants a reduction. The Alameda County Surplus Property Authority fully supports the proposed revision reducing the trip generation for residential in the Transit Center from 6 per j unit to 4.5 per unit. Sinc , . ~ i / / ~~lS~~~i'! ~~,. atr>ck Cashman Director M Cc: Stuart Cook, ACSPA Jeff White, AvalonBay Communities ~ Eric Kenny, The Hanover Company Dean Mills, DR Horton ATTACHMENT 5, l~a,< pia AvalonBay 400 Race Street, Suite 200 w San Jose, CA 95126 ~ Tel (408) 983-1500 w ral (408) 287-91 C7 COiV1VIUNITIES,t~c. March 5, 2010 Mark Lander City Engineer City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 Re: Proposed Revision to Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Dear Mark, We appreciate the response to the request from property owners in the Dublin Transit Center to evaluate a lower impact fee for transit oriented properties. AvalonBay Communities, Inc. supports the proposed revision reducing the trip generation rate for residential uses in the Transit Centel• from 6.0 to 4.5. Sinc }ely, ~~ Je• l ~ to r e~elopment Director ATTACHMENT 6