PUBLIC HEARING: Development (Impact) Fees - Land Use Assumptions & Infrastructure Improvement Plan Reports June 30, 2014.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Sacramento Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED SMUD SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AND ANNEXATION Presented by Chris Tooker Friday, October.
Advertisements

PROPOSITION 218 IMPACTS ON UTILITY USER FEES Case Study City of Dixon Sewer Rate Repeal of 2007.
GFOAz May 11, 2007 The ABC’s of Municipal Financing.
ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES ORDINANCE. What the discussion should include: 4 Adequate Public Facilities Ordinances (APFO) allow local governments to deny.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________.
Board of Supervisors Public Facilities Impact Fees Sanger / Del Rey Cemetery District County of Fresno September 9, 2008 Bryan Miller (800)
General Fee Schedule Annual Update Fiscal Year 2014 Finance Committee/City Council June 3, 2013.
January 20, 2015 City Council Meeting. Purpose Council direction on moving forward with: Housing linkage fee in short term based on 2009 Study and existing.
Development (Impact) Fee Program Changes to Comply with State Law Mayor and Council Study Session June 3, 2014.
Reduction and Deferral of Impact Fees Board of County Commissioners Discussion Item March 29, 2011.
2014 Budget Department Presentations Infrastructure Funding Options.
City of Houston Long Range Financial Management Task Force City Financial Overview Part I August 29,
Preliminary Budget Follow-up Council Briefing November 3,
Law Enforcement Impact Fee Study Update Board of County Commissioners Public Hearing January 15, 2013.
1 Impact Fees in Virginia Virginia Municipal League Annual Conference October 15, 2007 Jeffrey S. Gore Hefty & Wiley, P.C.
Ordinance Temporarily Reducing Impact Fees Board of County Commissioners Public Hearing May 10, 2011.
Impact Fee Analysis: Maintaining the Public’s Trust.
Capital Improvement Program. During the Annual Strategic Action Plan (SAP) evaluation, long-term needs and priorities are identified by City Council Capital.
Economic Incentive Plan and Impact Fee Update Board of County Commissioners Work Session February 7, 2012.
Elk Grove Water District Water Rate Update and Connection Fees Habib Isaac – Principal April 10, 2013.
City of Hallandale Beach Fire Assessment Program Update June 2015.
April 9, 2011 Mike Wieszchowski, P.E., PTOE Professional Traffic Operations Engineer Road Use Planning Guidelines to Protect Your Roadways.
Impact Fee Updates Board of County Commissioners Public Hearings October 30, 2012.
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP DECEMBER 14, Sec Review requirements. (a) The City Manager shall each fiscal year prepare a preliminary capital improvement.
Implementing SB 1525: An Update Cheyenne Walsh Squire Sanders (US) LLP Government Finance Officers Association of Arizona Winter Conference Prescott, Arizona.
Road Impact Fee Update Orange County Board of County Commissioners June 9, 2009.
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP DECEMBER 21, Sec Review requirements. (a) The City Manager shall each fiscal year prepare a preliminary capital improvement.
Department of Sustainable Development and Construction Proposed Revision to the Historic Preservation Tax Exemptions and Economic Development Incentives.
Road Impact Fee Update Discussion Item June 21, 2011 Transportation Impact Fee Update Discussion Item June 21, 2011.
Department of Public Works Recommended Residential Impact Fee Distribution Methodology Change October 26, 2015.
July 29, 2013 TOWN OF FLORENCE MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION PROPOSED MAGIC RANCH ANNEXATION PROPOSED ARIZONA FARMS ANNEXATION
SUMMARY OF FY2016 PROPOSED BUDGET July 21,
1. FY Proposed Budget Jamie Justice, Town Manager & Piet Swart, Finance Director April 26, 2016 Fiscal Year Proposed Budget 2.
Planning Commission Study Session: Preferred Plan July 23, 2015.
Christopher M. Quinn, MACC, CPA, CFE, CGFO, CGMA Finance Director Tuesday, May 3 rd, 2016.
City of Ottawa 2014 Development Charges Background Study Affordable Housing July 8, 2014.
Affordable Housing Impact Fees City Council Hearing, Redwood City October 26, 2015.
Village of Tarrytown Tentative Budget Fiscal Year 2012 – 2013 June 1, 2012 through May 31, 2013.
ITEM 6.a AT GREEN BUILDING ORDINANCE City Council – August 25, 2009.
HALA & S EATTLE 2035 P RESENTATION TO THE M APLE L EAF C OMMUNITY C OUNCIL Geri Morris & Amy Gore Office of Rob Johnson Seattle City Council District 4.
4701 Sangamore Road S240 | Bethesda, MD | (800) Ext
2013 Budget Review and Approval Police Services Board 26 November 2012.
1 Transportation Impact Fees and Street Maintenance Fees Presented to the City Council by the Planning and Development Department January 21, 2010.
CITY OF STOCKTON CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM: DATE: PROJECT: APPLICANT: PRESENTOR: AGENDA ITEM: DATE: PROJECT: APPLICANT: PRESENTOR: a) FEIR/IS Final Environmental.
Meadowbrook Property Fiscal Impact Analysis October 6, 2009.
Orange County Government Adoption Public Hearing May 10, 2016 Board of County Commissioners School Impact Fee Update.
1 Budget Presentation Fiscal Year 2011 May 10, 2010.
Residential Impact Fee - Nexus Study Update City of Pasadena Conclusions & Findings Prepared by Brion & Associates In association with Nilsson Consulting.
BUDGET PROCESS & REVENUE & EXPENSE INFORMATION For FISCAL YEAR 2011.
2018 Preliminary Tax Levy Preliminary tax levy must be certified to the County by end of September for property tax statements mailed in late November.
Water & Wastewater Capacity Charge Work Shop
Planning Commission Impact fees Planning Commission
City of Tucson: Financial Sustainability Plan
Christopher M. Quinn, MACC, CPA, CFE, CGFO, CGMA
Development Charge Public Meeting October 23, 2017
Impact Fee Advisory Committee November 10, 2016
City of Richmond, California FY Draft Budget
Joshua Basin Water District Draft Findings & Rate Scenarios
Updates to the Traffic Reduction and Transportation Improvements Fee (TR/TIF) City Council July 24, 2017.
System Development Fees
Fire Protection Impact Fee
Margarita Area Specific plan
Proposed 2018 Budget Truth In Taxation Hearing December 5, 2017
STP Shared Local Fund: Project Evaluation Criteria
BUDGET WORKSHOP February 15, 2017.
Work Session Follow UP Aug. 23, 2018.
Transportation Impact Fees and Funding
Presentation and Discussion of the Draft Transportation Land Use Assumptions and Infrastructure Improvement Plan Report (Impact Fee Report) Town Council.
Funding the Town’s Transportation Infrastructure Improvement Plan (IIP) – An Initial Discussion of Impact Fees Town Council Meeting March 1, 2017.
Updating the Transportation Impact Fee – The Proposed Calendar and Public Input Process Town Council Meeting March 15, 2017.
Presentation transcript:

PUBLIC HEARING: Development (Impact) Fees - Land Use Assumptions & Infrastructure Improvement Plan Reports June 30, 2014

SB 1525, initiated by Central Arizona Homebuilders, was signed into law April 26, 2011 by Governor Brewer requiring Arizona cities and towns to update their impact fee programs. Background

Impact fees are a funding mechanism to help cover the cost of facilities and infrastructure needed to serve new development City of Tucson established impact fees for streets and parks in 2004; for police, fire and public facilities in 2007 A total of $57.8 million has been collected in impact fee revenue to date In January 2012, the public facilities fee was eliminated and police and fire fees were reduced due to SB 1525 The City began the process of re-doing it’s fee program to meet SB 1525 requirements in September 2013

Timeline for Adoption of New Fees May 1 Required studies (LUA & IIPs) were posted (wait 60 days until public hearing) June 30 Public Hearing on LUA & IIPs (wait days prior to adoption) Aug 5 Mayor and Council adopt LUA & IIPs Aug 10 Post Notice of Intent to Assess Fees and Draft Ordinance (wait 30 days until public hearing) Sept 9 Public Hearing on Proposed Fees and Ordinance (wait days until adoption) Oct 9 Adopt Fees and Ordinance (wait 75 days until fees are effective) Dec 23 Fee effective date

Stakeholder Discussions Meetings held with representatives of Southern Arizona Homebuilders Assoc, Metropolitan Pima Alliance and AZ Multihousing Association Examples of concerns include: –Potential fee increases during economically challenging times –Methodology to establish existing levels of service –Questions/concerns about specific projects being proposed –Need for transparency in how funds are being expended Additional meetings can be held over next 3 weeks to further discuss potential changes

Land Use Assumptions Report Provides growth, land use and employment projections within each of the 5 benefit districts over a 10 year period -73,000 new residents -31,000 new housing units -48,000 new jobs

Infrastructure Improvement Plans (IIP) State requirements: Establish current levels of service Calculate cost per new unit of development (this establishes upper limit for what the City can charge for the impact fees) Project revenues based on projected growth (LUA report) Develop 10-year project list (“necessary public facilities needed to serve new development”)

IIP for Streets Demand for New Arterial Capacity –Number of new trips x trip length = new capacity needed –Trip generation rates based on Institute of Transportation Engineer’s Trip Generation Data –Trip length based on US Census and PAG data and evaluated for land use categories Cost of New Capacity –Based on recent construction projects for road widening and new construction Estimate Revenue by Benefit District –Based on development forecasts from PAG data and Plan Tucson Develop 10-Year Project Plan –Based on new capacity projects in CIP –Includes RTA projects requiring local funding (a premise of RTA plan) –Includes non-widening capacity such as bus pullouts and sidewalks in developed area

IIP for Parks Net facilities value for existing parks facilities, land, and improvements based on current replacement costs Current level of service by dividing net facility value by existing City population to establish a per capita unit value, which is then converted to a per dwelling unit value Fees only charged to residential because of limited nexus between parks and non-residential 10-year project plan - facilities needed to serve new development; total project cost must roughly match projected revenues

5 Benefit Districts for Streets and Parks Fees Helps ensure funds are spent in reasonable proximity to development

IIPs for Police & Fire Net facilities value for existing police and fire facilities, land, vehicles and equipment based on current replacement costs Current level of service - divide net facility value by existing population to establish per capita value with is then converted to value per dwelling unit City-wide benefit district for collection and expenditure of fees (integrated service delivery systems) Impact fees charged to residential and non-residential development (split determined based on call generation data) 10-year project plan - facilities needed to serve new development; total project cost must roughly match projected revenues

Recommended Modifications to IIPs Include Certificates of Participation (COPs) in calculating net asset valuation (applies to parks, police and fire) Include full value of new Fire Central facility in fire asset valuation Change existing non-residential square footage from 217 million to 149 million based upon further consultation with Assessor’s office Police – remove replacement vehicles

Updated Development (Impact) Fee Table Historic, Current, Proposed, Revised Proposed FACILITY RESIDENTIAL USES (per unit) NON-RESIDENTIAL USES, (per 1000 square feet) Single- Family Residence Condo/ Townhome Multi-Family Residence/ Apartment RetailOfficeIndustrial Streets $6,017 $4,838 $4,215 $3,978 $3,610 $2,580 $6,647 $4,282 $3,988 $5,087 $997 $2,196 Parks $3,039 $3,078 $1,935 $2,066 $2,093 $1,591 $1,854 $1,878 $1,032 $0 Police $597 $750 $543 $643 $405 $509 $543 $643 $362 $455 $402 $476 $505 $437 $563 $699 $505 $437 $563 $699 $505 $437 $563 $699 Fire $366 $483 $357 $469 $248 $327 $357 $469 $222 $293 $263 $346 $172 $156 $196 $269 $172 $156 $196 $269 $172 $156 $196 $269 TOTAL $10,019 $10,328 $7,363 $7,885 $6,934 $7,144 $6,469 $6,681 $6,048 $6,236 $4,277 $4,434 $7,324 $7,240 $5,041 $5,250 $4,665 $4,581 $5,846 $6,055 $1,674 $1,590 $2,955 $3,164

How do we compare? Single Family Residential Fees TUCSONMARANAORO VALLEY PIMA COUNTY STREETS$6,017$5,599$1,990$5,478 PARKS$3,039$2,461$856$1500 POLICE $597$0$310$0 FIRE $366$0 CST$0$3,250$3,900N/A TOTAL$10,019$11,310$7,056$6,978

10-Year Projected Revenue STREETS$ M PARKS$80.2 M POLICE$ 36.1 M FIRE$ 16.1 M TOTAL$ M

Proposed projects in draft IIPs were selected from current Impact Fee Project Plans, the CIP, and unmet needs list City must update LUAs and IIPs at least every five years; can do so more frequently Mayor and Council can adopt changes to the IIP at any time without a public hearing if it does not cause a fee increase of more than 5% IIP will continue to be incorporated into City CIP Process to Update IIPs

Staff Recommendation Incorporate the following needed modifications into the Final IIPs: –Include Certificates of Participation (COPs) in calculating net asset valuation (applies to parks, police and fire) –Include full value of new Fire Central facility in fire asset valuation –Change existing non-residential square footage from 217 million to 149 million based upon further consultation with Assessor’s office –Police, remove replacement vehicles Over the next 3 weeks, consider additional modifications through review and consultation with stakeholders and Mayor and Council offices to develop final LUA & IIPs for adoption August 5th