Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.4 TranspImpactFeeOrd ..' '~.,;;::-::,:> '~!! ". ... ,,"~"'. ""-'-~~"T' ",'~"'""'~'-"-"-' -".~... .~",.,-_.. -,.."- '<'.....' .. ". . ... .... . . '" f,. . . CITY OF DUBLIN MBtfDA STATEMENT euy Cllu.-crL MEETING DATE: December 12, 1994 SUBJ:BCI';: Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance (prepared by: city Attorney Elizabeth H. silver) 1. ~Draft Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance 2. ~Eastern Dublin specific Plan, pages 149, 151-153 and 165 3. /Government Code section 65913.2 EXBDlt'DB A'TTILCHED: REOdRKENDATIONV. 1. 2. 3. 4. open Public Hearing Receive staff Report and Public comment Close public hearing and deliberate waive reading and ADOPT Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance FIBANCIAL STATEMENT: The cost of preparing the Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance can be recovered from property owners applying for approval of development. DESCRIPTION: The council introduced a Transportation Impact Fee ordinance at its November 28, 1994, meeting. Since that time, staff has revised the ordinance to be an urgency ordinance which would become effective immediately pursuant to Government Code section 36937, subdivision (b). section 7.82.020 A has also been revised to delete reference to the time for payment of the fees inasmuch as 7.82.020B provides that the resolution shall set forth the time for payment. The Eastern Dublin specific Plan was adopted in 1993. The Plan includes financing goals including a goal that new development in the specific Plan area should pay the full cost of infrastructure needed to serve the area. The Plan anticipates that the cost of new infrastructure will be paid for in a variety of ways. These include: . Hello-Roos Community Facilities Districts which authorize a special tax to finance public facilities ( and some public services) . special Assessment Districts which authorize an assessment against the property; bonds are typically issued secured by the lien of the assessment and annual assessments are paid along with property taxes for the term of the bonds . Harks-Roos Bonds which are a bond pool made up 'of other bonds that the Ci ty has issued or plans to issue for the purpose of reducing the costs of issuance of the bonds . Infrastructure Financing Districts which allow the formation of a diistrict which then receives "tax increment" property tax monies to fliiDam::eldesignated pUblic facilities . In.._iIlap..: Imvact Fees which are established pursuant to Government JC~! me&1:lltiom 64000 et seq. (IIAB 1600") for infrastructure such as -l'~f ~arJm. amd community buildings . Fi:re Impact I'ees wi-,ell are established by the Dougherty Regional Fire Autlliority to. fund tile cost.nf new fire stations . school Impact Fees which are established by the school districts ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ITEM NO. _6.4 COPIES TO: CITY CLERK FILE~ \ ;<" "''''\ r ~. . . . Sewer and Water Connection Fees which are established and charged by the Dubliu Ban Ramon services District and Zone 7 The specific PlaD (page 152) recoqnizes that the entire cost of new illfrastracture cannot be financed over time through an assessment district or a HeI,1o-Roos special tax because to do so would impose an excessi ve b'nn_ 0111 future property owners. The specific Plan contemplates, th.refore, that part of the cost of infrastructure will be financed through "developer impact fees" to be adopted by the council pursuant to AB 1600 (GOvernment Code sections 66000 et seq.) AB 1600 was enacted by the state LegiSlature in 1989 and is contained in Sections 66000 et seq. of the Government Code. These prov1s10ns contemplate a two-step process prior to the imposition of impact fees on new development. The first step is adoption of an "implementing ordinance." The second step is adoption of a resolution setting the amount of the fee, the type of improvements to be funded by the fee or fees, and the properties SUbject to the fee or fees The draft ordinance is the first step. It is an implementinq ordinance which, if adopted, will establish the mechanism for imposing a fee or fees. No fees will be imcosed bv the ordinance. The second step - adoption of a resolution setting the fees - requires a pUblic hearing. It also requires that information regarding the amount of the proposed fee be available to the public at least ten days in advance. This informa tion would be in the form of a study which would show the relationship between development projects and the public improvements for which the fee is proposed to be oharqed. Fees to pay for transportation improvements necessary to implement the Eastern DUblin Specific Plan could be adopted by resolution once the implementing ordinance is in place. These would include not only roadway improvements but buses and mass transit. The adoption of a Transportation Impact Fee which is applicable to properties within the Eastern Dublin specific Plan area will not preclude developers from picking and choosinq from the various financing options available to them. Developers are required to prepare Financing Plans which are to be part of the Development Agreement. The Financing Plan is the vehicle for a developer to propose the "mix" of financing options available to him so that the property is not overburdened with assessments and/or special taxes. In addition to a fee to finance improvements to implement the Eastern Dublin specific Plan, fees to pay for traffic improvements to implement the General Plan and Downtown specific Plan could also be adopted by resolution once the ordinance is in place. On October 25, 1993, the Council authorized a traffic study to establish a uniform traffic impact fee. When this study is completed, staff will recommend a traffic impact fee. Adoption of that fee would be authorized by this ordinance and would actually be levied by resolution. Government Code Section 65913.2 requires the Council to consider the effect 04 an ordinance such as this with respect to the housing needs of the r.qian in which the city is located. The Government Code requires the city tll' rMlfr.ain from imposing regUlations which would make housing infeasible fan ~~. sagment of the community. This ordinance would not make housing il!lf'8asJDlle far any segment of the community because it is necessary to a~low ~lo~ent t~ occur. This ordinance is one step in the implBmeattatiolll Qf: 1tU :bstern Dublin speoific Plan which contemplates close to- 1.4, oel _eJl.lii.q \1l1d.t;s at. huildout, and which will have a beneficial effect on ~ h~~ Beeds of the region. It will help the city to meet the HAG projected howd,Dq Deed in Dublin. . .__" .L.......'.~~',;;.~~~.:~-'-- 'CJ--~-'-'--- - ...."'_....tfiE'r"-....~...~~ '. . ~option of'the draft ordinance is consistent with and will implement the Eas~ern DUbAiB specific Plan and the Downtown specific Plan. The adoption of the draft ordinance is not subject to CEQA (Public Resources Code section 21080(b) (8).) staff recommends that the council find that the ordinance is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public health and the economic health of the City, in particular, and should be effective immediately for the following reasons: The City has received an application from Homart Development Co. ("applicant") tor development within the specific Plan area of a 75-acre retail shopping center ("center"). The center is considered pivotal to implementation of the specific Plan because of its size, location and type of development. In order for the applicant to meet its schedule tor development at the center, it must know the amount of any traffic or transportation impact fees before entering into a development agreement with the city, as required by the specific Plan. To meet the applicant's schedule, the council's meeting schedule and procedural requirements related to the adoption of fees, approval of development agreements and other actions required for approval of the center, the implementing ordinance must be in effect prior to the council's next regular meeting. The adoption of the ordinance as an urgency measure requires a four-fifths vote. staff recommends that the city council conduct a pUblic hearing, deliberate, waive the reading and ADOPT the ordinance. a: 1128tren.agenda#16 · DEC-07-34 WED 12: 06 P. 02/05 . . ORDINANCE NO. 94-___ AN ORPXNANCB OF TRm aXTY OF DUBLIN ADDING CHAPTER 7.82 TO ~HE DUBLXH.KVNICIPAL CODE ESTABLISHING A TRANSPORTATION IKPAC~ PRR POR pumUR2 DEV3~OPHBNTS WITHIN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND CBCLARING THIS ORDlKAHCB TO BE AN URGENCY KEASURB TO TAXE EFFECT IMKEDIATELY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chaptor 7.82 is added ~o ~he Municipal Code of the City of Dublin to read 'as follows: "Section 7.82.010 PUrDOSQ In order to implement the goals and objectives of the Ci-r.y of Dublin's ("city") General Plan and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, the Downtown Specific Plan and the san Ramon Road specific Plan and to mitigate the impacts caused by future development in the city, oertain transportation facilities must be constructed. The city Council has determined that a transportation impact fee is needed in order to finance these transportation facilities and to pay for each deveiopmen~'s fair share of the con$truction and acquisition costs or the necessary transportation improvements. In establishing the fee described in the followinq sections, the city council has found the fee to be consistent with its General Plan and the above Specific Plans, and pursuant to Government Code S 65913.2, has considered ~hQ effeo~s of the fee with respeot to the city's housing needs as establisbed in the Housing Element of the General Plan." USection 7.82.020 'l"ranaport:ation 11Ilp.Q~t ~ee Established A. A Transportation Impact Fee (UFee") is hereby established to pay for transportat.ion facilities. B. The City Council shall, in a council resolution or resolutions adopted after a duly noticed pUblic hear1nq, set forth the amount of the Fee, describe the benefit and impact area on which the Fee is imposed, list the transportation facilities to be financed, descriDe the estimated cost of these facilities, and describe the reasonable relationship between the Fee / DEC-07-34 WED 12:07 P. 03/05 . . and the various types of future developments and SQt forth time for payment." "Section 7.82.Q30 Use of Fee Revenues A. The revenues raised by payment of the Transportation Impact Fee shall be accounted for in the City's capital Project Fund ("Fund"). Separat:.e and special accounts within the fund shall be used to account for revenues, along with any interest earnings on SUCh account. These monies shall be used for the following purposes: (i) TO pay tor design, engineering, right-of-way acquisition and construction of tho transportation facilities designatod in the Oouncil resolution and reasonable costs of outside consultant s~ud1es related thereto; (ii) To reimburse the City for Qesiqnated transportation facilities constructed by the city with funds (other than gifts or grants) from othQr souroes together with accruQd intQrsst; (iii) To reimburse developers who have designed and construc~ed d.si~nated transportation faoili~ies which are oversized with supplemental size, length, or capaci~y; ana/or (iv) To pay for and/or ~eimburse costs of program development and onqoing administration Of the Traffic Impact Fee Program." "Section 7.82.040 Developer construction of Facilities If a developer is required, as a oondition of approval of a permit, to conatruct.a transportation facility that has been designated to be finanoed with Transportation Impact Fees and if the facility has supplemental size, length, or capacity ovor that needed for the impacts of the development, a reimbursement agreement with the developer and a credit aqainst the ree otherwise levied by this ordinance on the development project shall be offered by the city. The reimbursement amount shall not includQ the portion of the improvement needed to mi~i9ate ~he burdens oroatod by the development." "Secti~m. 1......a.a.._QM ,Administration Guidelines The city Council ~ay, by resolution, adopt Administrative Guidelines to provide procedures for the oalculation; reimbursement, credit or deferred payment and other administrative aspects ot the Traffic Impact Fee." ,~ ~~:"'f_,;...,.., ,.....,.:,. J, ..._ ';."'" ...... ~...~..,' ._..oii.~~.;~ ,', . .,;.., . .J.~ " ,... ::. ~ .of'I" '"." ~',. . .l.l, .', DEC-q7-34 WED 12:07 P. 04/05 . . Sec:;tion 2. This ordinanoe was adopted at a noticQd public hearing, for which notice was given pursuant to Government Code S 6062a. section 3. This ordinance pursuant to Cal. Gov. Code S 36937, subd. (b), shall become effective immediately. The facts constituting the urgency are as follows: The eastern Dublin specific Plan is considered critical to the 10n9- term economic health of the city. The specific Plan requires that new development pay for the infrastructure necessary to serve ehe new development and provides that developer impact fees should be analyzed as a mean6 of paying for road improvements. The Council has determined that impaot fee for transportation improvements should be authorized by this ordinance. The City has received an application from Homart Development company (the lIA,pplic8i'ltll) for development within the specific Plan area for a 75-aore retail shopping' center (the "Centerll). In order for the Applicant to meet its schedule for development of the Center, it must know the amount of any traffic or transportation impact fees before entering into a development agreement within the city a5 required by the specific Plan. TO meet the ~pplicant's sChedule, the Council's meeting schedule and procedural requirements related to adoption of fees,' approval of development agreements and other actions required for approval of the Center, this implementing ordinance must be in effect prior to the Council's nQxt regular meeting. The council therefore finds, based on the foregoing facts, that this ordinance is an urgenoy ordinance necessary for the immediate preservation of the public health and, in particular, the economic health of the city of Dublin, and shall become effective immediately. Sec'tiOD 4. ~he City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause this ordinanoe to be publishad or to be posted in at least three (3) public places in city in accordance with seotion 36933 of the Government code ot the state ot California. ;DEC-0,7-34 WED 12:08 p, 05/05 . . PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the city Council of the city of Dublin on this ____ day of , 1994, by vote as follows: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK 114\ord\traffie.3 . .. I .. tI I I ) I I I I It I I I I I ] I I " . be heard regarding the extent of the benefit. The assessment district is ordinarily initiated by petition of 60 percent of the property owners in the area. The types of Infra- structure and support structures that can be financed in this way include grading, slope stabilization and slide repair, street paving, sidewalks, street lighting, curbs and gutters, sanitary and storm sewers, and water supply facilities (onsite or offsite), among other items. The amount of the bond issue may also cover architectural and engineering fees as well as the cost of the bond issue. The public agency that institutes the district raises money by levying special assessments against the benefiting property owners. The assessment formula must be based on the degree to which each property benefits, and in this regard public agencies have traditionally considered such factors as acreage, building size, number of units, front footage, units of water or sewer usage, and land value. Assessments are due either upon application for building permit or, if bonds have been issued to finance infrastructure,annual assessments are due along with ad valorem property taxes. In addition to the general-purpose assessment districts autho- rized by the 1911 and 1913 ActS, several other types of assessment districts exist. These districts include the following: Vehicle Parking Districts (1943 and 1951), Pedestrian Mall Districts (1960), and Landscaping and Lighting Districts (1972). SB-308 INFRASJRUCIVRE FiNANCING DISJ'RJCJS (SEYMOUR BIlL) Recent legislation introduced by Senator Seymour and passed by the Legislature on September 1990 authorizes counties and cities to form infrastructure financing districts to fund public capital facilities using a method called "tax increment" financing. Prior to this legislation, redevelopment agencies were the only entities authorized to incur debt and fund capital projects from this method of financing. Under redevelopment law (Section 16, Article XVI, of the California Constitution), property tax base is frozen when a redevelopment project area is established. The tax yields on increments in the value of taxable property is then set aside for repayment of debt incurred to finance redevelopment projects. SB 308 authorizes cities and counties to use a similar method of tax increment financing to fund infrastructure development. FINANCING However, it exempts school districts from participating and requires the cooperation of all other special districts affe:ted by the diversion of property tax. The amount of annual fiscal surplus accruing to affected districts as a result of the develop~ ment is a key factor in the negotiation process. Tax increments are redistributed back to affected districts once infrastructure projects are paid. The constitutionality of S8-308 is currently being challenged. DUBIlN DEVELOPER IMPACI' FEES All cities estimate and program for the potential future demand for capital improvements that serve the entire city; these items may include wider roads, new freeway interchanges, new community buildings, and new parks. ThESe items are com~ manly described and scheduled in a capital improvements program. In many growing cities, the portion of costs that can be allocated equitably to new development is then fund~ through a system of impact fees, whereby new development, at the time of issuance of building pennits, is charged a set amount to provide for its pro- rata sh3Ie of the nw infrastnlcrure. I t is important to stress that the coordination of infrastrucrure development of the scale required in eastern Dublin \11111 probably require the establishment of such a system of developer impact fees. OtheIWise, for most publJc infrastructure, Dublin currently does not have an impact fee program in place and therefore must fund capital improvements within the existing city boundaries out of other revenues. The exception is that Dublin does require residential subdividers to dedicate park land and/or pay an in- lieu fee for acquiring park land. In the case of eastern Dublin, the Specific Plan calls for 241.5 acres of public parks. If the City finds the land allocated for park dedication acceptable, no in- lieu fee would be required. If no~ some or all of the estimated $12 million in p3Ik in-lieu fees would be payable at the time of Final Map approval for mdividual subdivisions. DRFA FIRE IMPACT FEES In addition to these CIty of Dublin impact fees, the Dougherty Regional Fire Authority (DRF A) currently assesses a fire impact fee for new development projects. With a current fire impact fee set at $600 per residential development unit and $600 per 2,000 squareieet for other types of occupancies, the eastern Dublin and Santa Rita fire impact fees would total more than n 1 million. Based on 1992 costs, the cost estimate for the fire stations 149 ::;~~ "0;: ~,~: {::] '-:~ J.....l '4" . .' L ;.. ~.. . : . . . ,. \. . ., I " ~:~'_"':.'.1.- _ _ ,0',.',. '\ I' I I I . II I I tl I ~'fl . biI. ~ [I I' . ~. I . I I I ;t II It a~ I ;I 10.4 FINANCING GOAlSAND POliCIES The following goals and policies, apply to the Eastern Dublin specific plan area. Goal: New development in the Specific Plan area should pay the full cost of infrastructure needed to serve tbe area, and should fund the costs of mitigating adverse project impacts on the City's existing infra- strtlcture and services. Goal: The financing plan should provide for reimbursements from any other benefiting areas for costs that Specific Plan area owners are required to advance, and should provide a fair allocation of costs among land uses. Policy 10-1: Fund the full costs oftbe on-site and off- site public infrastructure and public sernces required to support development in the Specific Plan area from revenues generated by development Vrithin that Specific Plan area. These revenues may include City, County, State, or Federal revenues generated by development within that Specific Plan Area. Policy 10.2: Allocate the backbone infrastructure costs to property within the Specific Plan area based on the general principles of benefit received. "Backbone infrastructure" means public infrastructure outside of building tracts. Policy 10-3: Adopt an Area of Benefit Ordinance and form an Area of Benefit for the Specific Plan area that establishes a fair share cost allocation fOJ: public improvements required to serve development of the Specific Plan area. FINANCING Policy 10-4: Use pay-as-you-go financing to the extent possible. Use debt financing only wh.en essential to provide facilities necessary to permit development or to Illilintain service standards. Policy 10-5: Require development projects in the Specific Plan area to fund the oversizing of facilities if required by the City, subject to reimbursement from future developments benefiting from the oversizing. Policy 10-6: Require developers who proceed ahead of the infrastructure sequencing plan to pgy the costs of extending the backbone infrastructure to their project subject to future reimburSement Policy 10-7: Require dedication ofland for road improvements, park and other public facilities, and construction of such improvements consistent Vrith City-wide policies. Policy 10-8: Provide for reimbursements from any other benefiting areas for costs that specific Plan area owners are required to produce. Policy 10-9: Issue Bonds (such as :tie1Ier Roos andlor Assessment District bonds) only so long as the security for those bonds equals 300 percent (or more) of the bond ralue. Developers sball be required to finance privately any infrastructure costs that would cause bond issues to fail to meet the above-stated criteria. Policy 10-10: Issue Bonds (such as Mello~ Roos and! or Assessment District bonds), only so long as the annual special assessment or special tn: and 1.0 percent regulM property tax and existing bonded indebtedness does not exceed 2.0 percent of property value. 10.5 CAPITALFlNANCING SOURCES AND BURDEN ON . lAND USES This section Illustrates how development in eastern Dublin could be financed in accordance with the above-described goals and policiES. Table 10.1 (at the end of the chapter) estimates sources . of funding for each of the infrastructure costs. In general, the developers will be required to pay for streets and utilities within their traCts. Note that the costs of in-tract improvements are not r included in Table 10.1. In addition, developer impact fees 151 FINANCING , . ...J L already in place or established In the future by the City or special districts will serve as a major source of financing. For e.xample, some school costs may be covered by AB 2926 fees, which the builders are responsible for paying at the time building pem1its are issued. Similarly, in-lieu fees for park dedications are payable by the developer at the time of Final Map approval. Developers are also currently required by the Dublin San Ramon Services District to pay for a large amount of the water treatment and water service infrastructure costs through fees. Ye~ these existing fees are not sufficient to cover all the infrastructure costs. The City will have to consider creating a system of developer and builder impact fees to fund remaining costs, particularly those costs which Gould not be funded by one or more Area of Benefit assessments (via either a Mello-Roos ern or Special Assessment District) due to the e.'(cessive burden the costs would impose on future homeowners. k5 a general guideline, "excessive" refers to yearly assessments (including property tax) of more than 2.0 percent of the assessed value of the home. In Table 10.1, it has been estimated that roughly 75 percent of the costs of streets and mass grading would have to funded by a system of impact fees or in-kind contributions by developers in order to keep the Mello- Roos debt service load bearable on future property owners. Table 10.2 presents total infrastructure costs and development phased over a 17 -Yf:2J period. The start of construction occurs in 1994 with nf:2J 100 percent completion during 2010. This phasing schedule reflects WRT team discussion regarding the sequence of development that is likely to take place in eastern Dublin. DKS Associates (transportation consultants) and Kennedyl]enks (water and sewer engineering consultants) provided estimates of infrastructure costs for three phases of development ERA then used these cost estimates to create this annual phasing schedule. Table 10.3 presents an analysis of the project's capacity to support bonds issued for infrastructure finanCing. The first section of the table outlines the infrastructure expenditures over time and adds in financing costs to arrive at estimates of annual and cumulative bond issues. The second section compares annual average residential debt service (the annual special assessment or Mello-Roos special ta>:) to the cumulative value of homes sold and finished and unfinished lots. Once all the bonds have been issued, the annual infrastructure debt service, on average, would equal 0.8 percent of the value of the homes and residential lots. During the entire period of development, the annual infrastructure debt service is equal or less than 1 percent, except during 1996. The general guideline is that total annual assessments, which include regular property taxes as well as special ta.xes or assessments, should not exceed 2.0 percent of the value of the home. Because 1.0 percent is already: accounted for in regular property taxes, only 1.0 percent remains available for Special taxes or special assessments, and this project's capital . infrastructure requirements would place these homes within that limit. The third part of the table compares the infrastructure bonds issued year-by-year to the value of the entire property that would be security for the those bonds. The bonds are easiest to sell when the property is worth at least three times the bond issue. k, the last line of the table shows, this deVElopment would meet that cri ten a. Table 10.4 allocates the costs borne by the Area of Benefit (Mello- Roos ern or Special Assessment) among the land uses proposed in the deVElopment. Costs are apportioned according to various factors; for instance, road costs are allocated on the basis of trips generated by each land use, and school development costs are allocated on the basis of average number of children per unit. Several lines in the middle of the table indicate the total capital cost per housing unit (or per 1,000 square feet of non-residential development), the proportion of total value this amount represents, the estimated yearly assessment each unit would have to pay to retire bonds sold, and the proportion of the unit's market value represented by that yearly assessment. The generally accepted standard is that total annual assessments (ad-valorem property taxes plus Mello-Roos or other assess- ments) should be less than two percent of property value. Since one percent is already accounted for in the ad-valorem property tax, the assessments should not exceed one percent. Note that in Table 10.4 all of the residential and commercial units would have annual assessments equal or below one percent. In short, this financing plan would spread the debt burden amongst the various land uses Without placing any undue burden on anyone land use. I I I I I I I I I AC110N PROGRAM: FINANCING The City of Dublin should take the foll<ming actions to carry out the finan~ing policie; of the Specific Plan. DeveloJmwnt Agreement. For each property in the Planning Area, prepare and adopt a development agreement that spells out the precise financial responsihilities of tbe der:elnper. 152 .. . . Ifj . IIIJ] ~ . . '. , ,,' , Area of Benefit Ordinance. Adopt an Area of Benefit Ordinance and form an Area of Benefit for tbose properties benefitingfram construetion of public improvem<mts described in tbe specifIC Plan. . Special AsSessment District or Mello.Roos CFD. Create one or more Mello.Roos epn or specialAsSessment Distrkls tofinance construction oftbe infrastructure (outlined in Table 10.1) to serve tbe Area of Benefit. Some of tbe special /a:tes or special assessments may be dus upon applicationfor building permits, . and the remainder may be financed witb tbe appropriate bond mecbanisms. . Marks.Roos Bond pooling. Have bond counsel evaluate whether tbe City would save mOlley and refrain from incurring undue risk by pooling bonds issued for eastern and western Dublin, or for eastern Dublin alnne, under the Marks.RODS Bond Pooling Act. I . City-wide Develnper and Builder impact Pee systems. Analyze city.Wide infrastructure needs to assess the usefulness of implementing an impact fee program, in compliance with AB 1600, that could draw some funding from new delielopmtn t whmfinal map or building permits are issued. TJJefees cou.!d pay for infrastrudure of city-wide importance, s~h as downtown infrastructure or new arterial streeIJ tbrvugh eastern Dublin. Actions needffi by other agenciei include: School impact Fees.. The City and the School nist",t should coordinate efforts tofund necessary scboolfadiities and collect payable fees. Highway Intercbange Funding. The City and CalTrans should coordinate efforts to fimd necessary freeway imprcn:ements and collect det'elopers' share of costs. Utilities Impact Pees. The City, Dublin San Ramon Services IJistrict and Zone 7 should roordinate efforts to fund utilities services and collect dll1:elnj>eTS' share of costs. Bonding capadty. The City of Dublin and its oond OJunsel will coordinate with all affected agencies to develop a TTU!thod of financing infrastrzuture tbat wiUjairly apportion the assess. ment burden among the agencies expected to ptrJ!.ide serviaS, and not allow tbe lxmding Cl1padty to be maximized by any one agency or infrastructure need. " 153 /0. I I ~ I I ] I I I . II II . ~ . . d . II 11.3.2 AREA OF BENEFIT ORDINANCE The City shall adopt an Area of Benefit Ordinance and form an Area of Benefit for those properties benefiting from construction of public improvements described in the SpecifiC plan. Area of Benefit fees may be enacted by the City of Dublin through adoption o.f an ordinance, without voter approval. The fee must be directly related to the benefit received. It does not create a lien against property, but must be paid in full as a condition of approval. Benefiting properties may be given the option to finance the fees by entering into an assessment district 0913- 1911 Act) or Mello-Roos CFD. 11.3.3 ANALYSIS OF FINANCING TECHNIQUES Further analysis of various publiC financing techniques is required to identify and develop the most flexible and lowest cost financing program for necessary public infrastructure and facilities in the project area. Each technique or combination of techniques should be evaluated for its suitability of funding public infrastructure and facilities costs and its capacity to insUre both adequate and timely provision of infrastructure and facilities, and lowest possible burden to new residents. In addition, the financing program developed should be consistent with financing policies set ou't i!1 the Specific Plan. Public financing mechanism's that the City should consider as part of this analysis may include: . . Special Assessment District or Mello-RooS r;FD. The City shall analyze the use of a Mello- Roos CFD, Special Assessment District, or a combination of these and other financing mechanisms to finance construction of the required public improvements (outlined in Tables 10-1 and 10-4 in Chapter 10) to serve the Area of Benefit. Some of the special taXes orsp.ecial assessments may be due upon application for building pennits, and the remainder may be financed with the appropriate bond meChanisms. . Landscaping and Li~ting District. The City shall analyze the use of a district to fund certain ongoing costs such as maintenance of street lights and landscaping. . Geologic Hazards Abatement District (GRAD). The City shall analyze use of a GHAD to periodically inspect and maintain unstable slopes in the eastern Dublin area. A GHAD would provide for the assessment of a special fee on property owners in the area to pay for inspections an~ IMPLEMENTATION maintenance as well as create a reserve fund from which to make any necessary repairs. 11.3.4 MARKS-ROOS BOND POOLING The City should have impartial bond counsel evaluate whether the City would save money and refrain from incurring undue risk by pooling bonds Issued for western and eastern Dublin, or for eastern Dublin alone, under the Marks-Roos Bond pooling Act. 11:3.5 CITIWIDE BUILDER IMPACT FEE SYSTEM CityWide infrastructure needs should be analyzed to assess the usefulness of implementing an impact fee program, in compli- ance with AB 1600, that could draw some fundincr from new o developme.f1t when building pennits are issued. The fees could pay for infrastructure of citywide importance, such as a eomrm nity park or freeway interchange. 11.3.6 RESPONSIBIIlTIES FOR OTHER IMPLEMENTING ACTIONS Table 11-3 RESPONSffiIilTIES FOR OTHER IMPLEMENTING ACTIONS Re5f<lIlSibility for Document Other lmplementin~ Actions prepara tiQn Maptian Ry Development Agreements . M15ter Development Agreement City not applicable . Individual Development Agreements Developers City Area of Benefit ordinance Developers City Special Assessment District or Mello-Roes eFD Developers City Landscaping and Lighting District Developen City Geologic Hawds Abatement District DeYelopen City Marks- Roos Bond Pooling City City Cityv.'ide Builder Impact Fee System City City SOURCE: wallace Robern & Todd, March 1992 165 ('- .:. - .. ." .' __....~..........040._~~.;. ...... IE S 65913.2 GOVERNMENT CODE ng CHAPTER 4.2 HOUSING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS on nd w- It.- 19 J.) }S. Section 65913.4. Repealed. 65913.5. Density bonus for developer of housing within one-half mile of mass transit guideway station. Section 65913.8. Public capital facility improvement relat- ed to development project; prohibition . of fee or other payment including . amount for maintenance and operation 115 condition for approval; exceptions. ~ 65913. Legislative findings and declarations ;e :h enough for production of o ,9 " 11 e d d 'L '. Law Review Commentaries Growth control by the ballot box; Calliornia'B experi. cncc. Daniel J. Curtin, Jr. Ilnd M. Thomas JacobBon, 24 Loy.L.A. L.Rev. 1073 (1991). ~ 65913.2. Limitations on local government regulation of subdivisions by underline; deletions by asterl~ks · · · 31. , ~.... ,...-r"'''T':,''~1 _...,.., .. . . I ., f: t, "j jfj .,j, ~,.i\itl M~:~ :;1 \1 ....-.-.0:--..---"""'--- ..._.............____n____..~r~____~..., _.....un.... ~..-- - . ....-1 3