HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 6.1 L&L MAD 86-1PrelEngrCITY CLERK FILE # 360-20
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 17, 2001
SUBJECT:
Public Hearing: Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment
District 86-1 (Dougherty Road)
Report Prepared by: Lee Thompson, Public Works Director
ATTACHMENTS:
Preliminary Engineer's Report
RECOMMENDATION: 1)
~ 2)
3)
Open public hearing
Receive Staff:presentation and public comment
Continue to August 7, 2001, City Council meeting
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
2001-2002 Sources and Use of Landscape Maintenance District Funds
Revenues:
Total Proposed Assessments Levied:
Estimated Interest on Reserves:
Estimated Prior Year Collections and Penalties
Less Estimated Collection Cost and Delinquency
Net Total Revenues:
$85,11L96
$ 2,086.00
$ 329.00
$(2,298.00)
$85,228.96
Expenditures:
Contract Landscape Maintenance:
Utilities:
Administration and Engineering Reports:
Total Operating Expenses:
$52,13L00
$29,910.00
$ 3~279.00
$85,320.00
As shown above, $85,11L96 is proposed to be assessed to property owners for the 2001-02 street
landscaping maintenance costs. The amount proposed to be assessed to property, owners {$130.64 per
single family home and $65.32 per multi-family dwelling) represents a 54% increase from the
assessment amount levied during 2000-01.
COPIES TO:
ITEM NO. ~
g:\assessdist\86-1\agstpre
DESCRIPTION: This maintenance assessment district was formed in 1986 as part of the review and
approval of the Villages at Willow Creek development. This assessment district funds the maintenance of
landscaping, including fencing and soundwalls, along the west side of Dougherty Road from Amador
Valley Boulevard to the northerly City Limit, along Amador Valley Boulevard from Dougherty Road to
Wildwood Road, along Wildwood Road and Fall Creek Road, and certain landscaped areas within the
Ridgecreek single-family home development. Landscaping within the condominium and apartment
developments is the responsibility of the property owner or homeowners' association for those individual
developments. The landscaping along and within the Alamo Creek channel area is not included in the
assessment district as it is the responsibility of Alameda County Flood Control, Zone 7.
At the City Council meeting of June 19, 2001, the City Council approved the Preliminary Engineer's
Report (Attachment) for Fiscal Year 2001-02, which includes a proposed rate increase. The proposed rate
is $130.64 per single-family home and $65.32 per multi-family dwelling unit. This is an increase of 54%
over the prior year's assessment.
The Engineer's Report also includes an escalation clause that would allow increases in future years based
on the Consumer Price Index rate of increase and actual increases in utility costs. Similar clauses were
included in two of the newer Districts, the Santa Rim Landscape Maintenance District and the Dublin
Ranch Street Light Maintenance District.
When this assessment district was Originally formed in 1986, the assessment was set at $120 per single
family lot and $60 per multi-family lot based on an engineering estimate of maintenance cost for planned
landscaping improvements. A substantial reserve built up over the next several years, as some of the
anticipated improvements were not accepted for maintenance. Under the Landscaping and Lighting Act of
1972, the allowable reserve for an assessment district is about half the annual maintenance cost, and in
1991-92, the assessment was reduced to $78.48 per single family lot and $39.24 per multi-family lot in
order to utilize some of the reserve. Slight increases occurred in 1992-93 and 1993-94, but the assessment
has not been increased above $84.72 per single family lot and $42.36 per multi-family lot since that time.
The total assessment amount since 1993-94 has been $55,195. The estimated cost of maintenance for
1993-94 was $69,620 and has increased about 19% over seven years to the 2001-02 estimate of $82,820.
Without an increase in assessment, the cash balance for this District would be expected to drop to about
$13,000 by the end of 2001-02. In the past, reserves have been used to defray the cost of unexpected
expenses such as major irrigation repairs or plant replacements following a drought or freeze. Staff is
concerned that, should such an event occur, there would be insufficient fimds to effect a repair. If the
assessment is not raised at this time, the Assessment District will experience a significant deficit in Fiscal
Year 2002-2003, which will increase in subsequent years. This will result in a significant reduction in the
levels of maintenance in Fiscal Year 2002-03 and beyond.
To comply with Proposition 218, notices and ballots were mailed to property owners on June 22, 2001,
which is 46 days prior to the scheduled public hearing on August 7th. Along with the required notice,
Staff also included a newsletter which explained the history of the District and the need for an increase in
more detail. Property owners were also invited to an informational meeting which was scheduled for July
9th; however, no one attended the meeting.
Page 2
Proposition 218 requires that two public meetings be held. The currem meeting is the first of the two
meetings. As indicated in the Recommendation, the City coUncil should receive testimony from the public,
but no action is to be taken at this time. At the August 7th meeting, the mailed ballots will be tabulated,
and the City CoUncil will be requested to adopt a resolution which reflects the result of the vote.
Should the vote be negative with regard to the proposed increase, the assessment would remain the same
as in prior years, with the consequence as noted above that the level of service would need to be reduced.
Staff recommends that the City Council conduct a public hearing and continue the item to the meeting of
August 7, 2001.
Page 3
CITY OF DUBLIN
LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING DISTRICT NO.
(TRACT 5511)
FISCAL YEAR 2001-2002
ENGINEER'S .REPORT
CONTENTS
Assessment: Including Scope of Work, Estimate of Costs, Assessment Roll, and
Method of Apportioning.
Assessment Diagram
ASSESSMENT
WHEREAS, on March 20, 2001, the City Council of the City of Dublin, California,
pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, adopted its Resolution Directing
Preparation of Annual Report for Maintenance Assessment District 1986-1 for the maintenance of
improvements more particularly therein described; and
WHEREAS, said Resolution directed the undersigned to prepare and file a report
pursuant to Section 22565, et. seq., of said Act;
NOW, THEREFORE, the undersigned, by virtue of the power vested in me under said
Act and the order of the Council of said City, hereby make the following assessment to cover the portion
of the estimated cost of the maintenance of said improvements and the cost and expenses incidental
thereto, to be paid by said District.
ESTIMATE OF COSTS
(1) (2) (3)
As Preliminarily As Finally
As Filed Approved Approved
Cost of Maintenance $82,041. O0 $82,041. O0
Capital Improvement Project $0.00 $0.00
Incidental Expenses $46,692.96 $46,692.96
TOTAL COST $128,733.96 $128,733.96
Estimated 2001-02 Interest Income Applied
to 2001-02 Operating Costs ($2, 086. 00) ($2, 086. 00)
Prior Year Collections & Penalties ($329. 00) ($329. 00)
Estimated Surplus fi:om 2000-01 Fiscal Year ($41,207.00) ($41,207.00)
NET TO BE ASSESSED FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2001-2002 $85,11L 96 $85,11L96
As required by said Act, a diagram is hereto attached showing the exterior boundaries of
said landscaping maintenance assessment district and also the lines and dimensions of each lot or parcel of
land within said landscaping maintenance assessment district as the same existed at the time of the
passage of said resolution, each of which lots or parcels having been given a separate number upon said
diagram.
I do hereby assess the net amount to be assessed upon all assessable lots or parcels of land
within said landscaping maintenance assessment district by apportioning that amount among the several
lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from the
maintenance of said improvements, and more particularly set forth in the list hereto attached and by
reference made a part hereof.
Said assessment is made upon the several lots or parcels of land within said landscaping
maintenance assessment district in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by said lots or
parcels respectively from the maintenance of said improvements. The diagram and assessment numbers
appearing herein are the diagram numbers appearing on said diagram, to which reference is hereby made
for a more particular description of said property.
Each lot or parcel of land assessed is described in the assessment list by reference to its
parcel number as shown on the Assessor's Maps of the County ofAlameda for the Fiscal Year 2001/02
and includes all of such parcels excepting those portions thereof within existing public roads or rights of
way to be acquired in these proceedings for public road purposes. For a more particular description of
said property, reference is hereby made to the deeds and maps on file and of record in the office of the
County Recorder of said County.
Dated: July 10, 2001
SCOPE OF WORK
The following areas are to'be maintained by this Maintenance Assessment District:
1)
The median and roadside landscaping along the north side of the street for the entire length of
Willow Creek Drive..
2)
Roadside landscaping along Shady Creek Drive within Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 15, 16, 37, 38, and
south of Lot 145, all within Tract 5511.
3)
Roadside landscaping, wall, fence, and pathway improvements along the west side of Dougherty
Road between Amador Valley Boulevard and the northerly City Limit line, and along the north
side of Amador Valley Boulevard between Dougherty Road and Wildwood Road.
4) Roadside landscaping, fence, and pathway improvements along the west side of Wildwood Road.
5)
Roadside landscaping, fence, wall, and pathway improvements along the west side of Dougherty
Road and the south side of Amador Valley Boulevard adjacent to Lot 150.
6)
Roadside landscaping, fence, and pathway improvemems along the west and north sides of Fall
Creek Road.
7)
Roadside landscaping and emergency access surfacing at the north end of Crossridge Road within
the street right-of-way.
4
ENGINEER'S COST ESTIMATE
FISCAL YEAR 2001-2002
The estimated cost for the maintenance of improvements described in this Report for Fiscal Year 2001-02
is as follows:
Maintenance
(1) Weeding, fertilizing, pruning, plant
replacement, irrigation system:
(2) Utilities:
$52,131. O0
$29,910.00
Incidentals
(1) Administration
(2) Engineer's Report and Proceedings
(3) Cost of County Collection (1.7%)
(4) Delinquencies (1%)
(5) Contingencies/Reserve
$134.00
$3,145.00
$1,446.90
$851.12
$41,115.94
SS2,04LO0
$46,692.96
TOTAL:
$128,733.96
ASSESSMENT ROLL
Amount of Assessment for
Assessment and Lot Number Property Owners Lots/Units 2001-2002 Tax Year
Per Unit Total
Lots 1 - 145 (Village VI) Individual Owners 145 lots $130.64 $18,942.80
Lot 150 (Village I) Unknown 56 units $65.32 $3,657.92
Lot 151 (Commercial Comer). Unknown 4 units $130.64 $522.56
Lot 149 (Village II) Individual Owners 248 units $65.32 $16,199.36
Lot 148 (Village III) Individual Owners 224 units $65.32 $14,631.68
Lot 146A (Village IV) Individual Owners 135 units $65.32 $8,818.20
Lot 146B (Village V) Unknown 204 units $65.32 $13,325.28
Lots 152-177 (Village VII) Individual Owners 138 units $65.32 $9,014.16
$85,111.96
The annual maintenance cost shall be increased annually beginning July 1, 2002, by the percentage increase in the
Bay Area Urban Wage Earner Consumer Price Index ("Index") (applies to all costs except utilities), plus any actual
increase in the cost of utilities (power and water). If the Bay Area Urban Wage Earner Consumer Price Index is
unavailable or deemed by the City Council to be inappropriate, a comparable consumer price index, as approved by
the City Council, shall be used to replace the Bay Area Urban Wage Earner Price Index. SAMPLE
CALCULATION: ,
Assume an increase in the index of 1% and a utility increase of 5%.
MAINTENANCE COST
LESS UTILITY COST (SUBJECT TO RATE INCREASE ONLY)
$85,320
$(29,910)
ASSESSMENT SUBJECT TO INDEX INCREASE
$55,410
INDEX INCREASE (ASSUMED 1%) 55,4~0 x .01 = 554
$554
ENERGY COST
5% UTILITY RATE INCREASE 29,910X.05 = 1,495
$29,910
$1,495
NEW TOTAL MAINTENANCE COST
$87,369
6
METHOD OF APPORTIONING
Each single family lot shall be assigned a benefit unit of one (1), each multifamily unit assigned a benefit
unit of one-half (1/2), the commercial lot shall have a benefit unit of four (4), and the open space lots
shall have a benefit unit of zero. This gives the following benefit units and apportionments for each
Village for this Fiscal Year:
NUmber of Benefit % of Total
Living Units Units Assessment
Lot 150 Village I 56 28 4.30
Lot 149 Village II 248 124 19.03
Lot 148 Village III 224 112 17.19
Lot 146A Village IV 135 67.5 10.36
Lot 146B Village V 204 102 15.66
Lot 1-145 Village VI 145 145 22.26
Lots 152-177 Village VII 138 69 10.59
Lot 151 Commercial 0 4 0.61
Lots A - D Open Space 0 0 0.00
Total: 1,150 651.5 100.00
7
CITY OF DUBLIN
LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 86-1
CERTIFICATIONS
HSCAL YEAR 2001-2002
I, the City Clerk of the City of Dublin, California, hereby certify that the foregoing Engineer's Report,
including Assessment, in the amounts set forth in Column (1), with the diagram thereto attached, was
filed with me on June 19, 2001.x,,._~)~ ~ (~~ /t/~~ C_~h~
I, the City Clerk of the City of Dublin, California, hereby cert the foregoing Assessment, with the
diagram thereto attached, was preliminarily approved and confirmed by the City Council of said City by
its Resolution No. 99-01 duly adopted by said Council on, l_9, 20/~
I, the City Clerk of the City of Dublin, California, hereby certify ~at the f°regoing Assessment, with the
diagram thereto attached, was finally approved and confirmed by the City Council of said City by its
Resolution No. __-01, duly adopted by said Council on August 7, 2001.
I, the City Clerk of the City of Dublin, California, hereby certify that a certified copy of the Assessment
and diagram was filed in the office of the County Auditor of the County of Alameda, California, on
August 10, 2001.
8
146 B
VIC/HIT)'
, DOo~HERTY RoAD
'F'
· SEE DETAIL A
· SHEET. 2 0F~i3:
LOT
LOT ~'
B~S'B O~ BF, L,~RZN~8
~ISSEISISMENT DIAGRAM
.Street .Ughting Maintenance
Assessment Distr~t 81S-1
i~ CITY OF DUBLIN
ALAMEDA couNTYi CALIFORNIA
?
- '~~~- . .........~
............ : k I I ~~ '0: ' · . · ~'
~?,~¥,...._~ ..... ~. , -: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~:~;.. ::' ' ""'~~ "': L. ~ ..~ ·
~.~ ...... :...... .... ?:...'...' .......... ....~ ~ :.~ .~.~ -
DETAIL; B
SHE?ET 2 01~ ~'.
27~1
/
/
/