Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - July 12, 2011 SSLODI CITY COUNCIL SHIRTSLEEVE SESSION CARNEGIE FORUM, 305 WEST PINE STREET TUESDAY, JULY 12, 2011 A. Roll Call by City Clerk An Informal Informational Meeting ("Shirtsleeve" Session) of the Lodi City Council was held Tuesday, July 12, 2011, commencing at 7:00 a.m. Present: Council Member Hansen, Council Member Katzakian, Council Member Nakanishi, Mayor Pro Tempore Mounce, and Mayor Johnson Absent: None Also Present: City Manager Bartlam, City Attorney Schwabauer, and City Clerk Johl B. Topic(s) B-1 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Program Update (PAW City Manager Bartlam provided a brief introduction to the subject matter of the impact mitigation fee update. Public Works Director Wally Sandelin provided a PowerPoint presentation regarding the impact mitigation fee update. Specific topics of discussion included terms and abbreviations, growth forecast, growth forecast for non-residential, project progress and time line, water demand, water fee assumptions, water fee concept, water impact fee, meter size comparisons for water and wastewater, wastewater generation, wastewater fee assumptions, wastewater fee concept, wastewater impact fee, storm drainage fee concept, police impact fee, police fee assumptions, fire impact fee, and fire fee assumptions. In response to Council Member Hansen, Mr. Sandelin stated the program is not showing high density because the building industry does not feel there will be a market for high density in Lodi over the next 20 years. In response to Council Member Hansen, Mr. Sandelin stated the impact fee program does not take into account and is not related to specific types of high-density units, including rental units. In response to Council Member Nakanishi, Mr. Sandelin stated low-income housing is considered in the housing element of the General Plan and not separately under the impact fee program. Mr. Bartlam provided a brief overview of affordable housing, senior housing, the Eden project, and how the housing is calculated. In response to Mayor Johnson, Mr. Sandelin stated the 10% difference with conservation and metering for water demand is due to getting the water from the wells and the differential is fairly moderate in comparison to other similar models. In response to Council Member Hansen, Mr. Sandelin stated the cost for the transmission line was approximately $8 million. In response to Mayor Pro Tempore Mounce, Mr. Sandelin stated the map represents the area where the water connection fee could apply eventually, although it is not necessarily so currently. He stated the City Council under its discretion could consider specific connection requests. In response to Mayor Johnson, Mr. Sandelin stated the calculations are based on the overall Continued July 12, 2011 capacity of the surface water treatment plant to serve development. In response to Mayor Pro Tempore Mounce, Mr. Sandelin stated the City Council has not decided how the financing for the new treatment plant will be assessed to new development and the impact fee program partly addresses that financing. John Beckman, representing the Building Industry Association (BIA), spoke in regard to the letter submitted by the BIA for the meeting and stated that the aquifer concept for total depletion has yet to be incorporated in the water surface treatment plant discussion. Discussion ensued among Mr. Beckman, Mr. Sandelin, Mr. Bartlam, and Mayor Johnson regarding the analysis required for total depletion calculations, the methodology to be used, and the sufficiency of the existing safe yield formula. In response to Council Member Hansen, Mr. Beckman stated new development should pay its fair share, the BIA does dispute the 2/3 to 1/3 formula, and the City could demonstrate adequate water supply without the surface water treatment plant being built as the groundwater is not sufficiently drawn. A brief discussion ensued between Mr. Beckman and Council Member Nakanishi regarding the reasoning for the construction of the new treatment plant and its relation to new development. In response to Council Member Hansen, Mr. Sandelin stated the 8.5 mgd for wastewater would take the City well beyond 2035 and into the next General Plan. In response to Mayor Johnson, Mr. Sandelin stated some of the hard costs associated with new regulations are set and accounted for in the program while others will come back to Council for consideration in the future. In response to Mayor Pro Tempore Mounce, Mr. Sandelin stated the existing trunk line as shown on the map was only partially lined. In response to Council Member Hansen, Mr. Sandelin stated that, if the fees in the program go down at some point in the future, staff will need to return to Council for consideration. In response to Council Member Nakanishi, Mr. Bartlam stated regardless of what the existing fee is the proposed methodology is the appropriate apportioned fee to ensure new development is paying for its share. In response to Council Member Katzakian, Mr. Bartlam stated a larger meter and pipe will be needed for a structure that serves multiple units. In response to Myrna Wetzel, Mr. Sandelin stated the standard size pipe for residential is a 3/4 inch. In response to Council Member Nakanishi, Mr. Sandelin stated other communities are using the same methodology proposed for police and fire impact fees. In response to Mayor Pro Tempore Mounce, Mr. Bartlam stated that, while the original Fire Station No. 5 is planned for Reynolds Ranch and incorporated in the development agreement, the development agreement may be amended in the future if there is a need for the station elsewhere depending upon development. In response to Mayor Johnson, Mr. Sandelin stated staff will be bringing back to Council comparisons from five to seven other cities that show the police and fire impact fees and the methodology for the same. In response to Mayor Johnson and Mayor Pro Tempore Mounce, Mr. Bartlam stated what police N Continued July 12, 2011 and fire facilities will be necessary in the future is a separate question from how to pay for them and the old method of delivering services may need to be reconsidered in the future. John Beckman spoke in regard to considering calls for service and traffic calculations when analyzing police and fire impact fees. C. Comments by Public on Non -Agenda Items None. D. Adjournment No action was taken by the City Council. The meeting was adjourned at 8:07 a.m. ATTEST: Randi Johl City Clerk AGENDA ITEM CITY OF LODI COUNCIL COMMUNICATION • TM AGENDA TITLE: Development Impact Mitigation Fee Program Update MEETING DATE: July 12, 2011 (Shirtsleeve Session) PREPARED BY: Public Works Director RECOMMENDED ACTION: Development Impact Mitigation Fee Program Update. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: On March 16, 2011, City Council approved the professional services agreement with Harris and Associates for the Development Impact Fee Program Update. Members of the project team will make a presentation to the City Council regarding a number of topics including, but not limited to, the following: 1. Water Connection Fee 2. Wastewater Connection Fee 3. Police Impact Fee 4. Fire Impact Fee 5. Storm Drainage Fee Zones A total of three additional Shirtsleeve Sessions are scheduled with the City Council over the next four months, leading to adoption of the Program on December 7, 2011. FISCAL IMPACT: FUNDING AVAILABLE FWS/pmf Not applicable. Not applicable. F. Wally ndelin Public Works Director m, City Manager K:\WP\IMFees\2011 IMF Update\Council Communications\CIMFUpdate_Shirtsleeve2.doc 7/6/2011 OFFICERS Randy Bling Florsheim Homes Ramon Batista River Islands @ Lathrop Bill Bromann 1t.D. Arnaiz'Corporation Jeremy White The Grupe Company BOARD OF DIRECTORS Rod Attebery Neumiller & Beardslee Rod Bovee Bennett Development Gina Carruesco Caresco Homes Rey Chavez Kelly -Moore Paint Company Ryan Gerding Pulte Homes Cathy Chan Oak Valley Community Bank Steve Herum Herum Crabtree Brown Dudley McGee Wells Fargo Terry Miles Teichert Constitution David Nelson A.G. Spanos Companies Carol Ornelas Visionary Home Builders, Inc. Denise Tschirky Legacy Homes LIFETIME DIRECTORS Matt Arnaiz H.D. Amaiz Corporation Dennis Bennett Bennett Development Bill Filios AKF Development, LLC Mike Hakeem Hakeem, Ellis & Marengo Jeffrey Kirst Tokay Development Wayne LeBaron LeBaron Ranches John Looper Top Grade Construction Steve Moore Westervelt Ecological Toni Raymus Raymus Homes, Inc. Tony Souza Souza Realty & Development BUILDING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION OF THE DELTA 315 N. SAN JOAQUIN ST., SUITE 202 STOCKTON, CA 95202 209-235-7831 •209-235-7837 fax July 11, 2011 Mayor Bob Johnson City of Lodi 221 W. Pine St. Lodi, CA 95240 Mayor Johnson, I would like to commend city staff and your consultants working on the Impact Mitigation Fee Program update. We are pleased with the process of the update and so far we only have two issues of concern we'd like to raise. The Police and Fire estimates for facilities needed, cost estimates, and total fees to be collected seem appropriate. However, the cost allocation between residential and non-residential represents a 180 degree tum from the well accepted methodology used by most other cities and it is a reversal from Lodi's current methodology. The City of Manteca for instance, is currently updating their Fire facility fees and will continue to use the "Calls For Service" method of analyzing the nexus for needed facilities. Due to the extraordinary call volume at retirement homes this building type will have a separate category of its own and will pay for its pro -rata share of fire facilities. Likewise other building types will pay their fair share based on the call volumes to those building types. The BIA strongly believes actual calls for service, or a proxy for this data, to be the strongest nexus for determining cost allocation. Also, the nexus for the Water Treatment Plan has correctly identified that an "existing deficiency" exists within the City's current water delivery system and it correctly identifies the prohibition of making new development pay for "existing deficiencies". However, the nexus used to allocate the costs between existing users and new development is not consistent with the record The proposed methodology does not reconcile the historic groundwater depletion with the projected benefits to groundwater levels of the Water Treatment Plant. We have raised this issue with city staff and are still waiting for a response. It is the position of the BIA to support fees which allow new development to pay its fair share of facility burdens on existing residents and we look forward to supporting the entirety of the Impact Mitigation Fee Program at its conclusion. Si rely, ohn R. Beckman Chief Executive Officer Engineering fi� Impact Mitigation Fee Update Shirtsleeve Session July 12, 2011 Terms and Abbreviations • Ac Ft =acre feet or 326,000 gallons • DUE =dwelling unit equivalent • MGD =million gallons per day • CCF one hundred cubic feet (748 gallons) • SF =square feet • Fees are Per Unit and Per 1,000 sq ft (mostly) • COP =Certificate of Participation (Bonds) Growth Forecast Total 0 720 0 10 Low Medium High Density Density Density Year (LDR) (MDR) (HDR) Total 2015 100 - - 100 2016 125 - - 125 2017 175 - - 175 2018 200 40 - 240 2019 200 40 - 240 2020 200 40 - 240 2021 200 40 - 240 2022 200 40 - 240 2023 200 40 - 240 2024 200 40 - 240 2025 200 40 - 240 2026 200 40 - 240 2027 200 40 - 240 2028 200 40 - 240 2029 200 40 - 240 2030 200 40 - 240 2031 200 40 - 240 2032 200 40 - 240 2033 200 40 - 240 2034 200 40 - 240 2035 200 40 - 240 Total 0 720 0 10 Growth Forecast — Non Residential Non -Residential Growth Forecast Units of 1,000 Square Feet 2015-19 2020-24 2025-29 2030-35 Industrial Reynolds Ranch Lodi Shopping Center South Hutchins Northeast 896 792 800 Southeast Major Retail Reynolds Ranch 134 Lodi Shopping Center 217 South Hutchins Multi -use Corridor 100 Downtown Multi -use Minor Retail Reynolds Ranch 466 Lodi Shopping Center 26.5 26.5 South Hutchins 109 Multi -use Corridor Downtown Multi -use Office Reynolds Ranch Lodi Shopping Center South Hutchins 90 90 Multi -use Corridor 180+70 Southeast 100 Medical Reynolds Ranch Lodi Shopping Center South Hutchins 68 Multi -use Corridor Downtown Multi -use Overview • Finance public improvements required to implement the General Plan • Maintain level of service • Fund 5 -year updates • Charged by unit for residential and per 1,000 SF for non-residential • Water and wastewater connection charges based upon water meter size • Fees collected at building permit Project Progress • Growth Forecast • Vacant Land Inventory April 19 Fee Incentive Areas • Location of Development Ongoing 0 Facilities Master Plans • Water Connection Fee Today Wastewater Connection Fee • Storm Drainage Fee Concept • Police Fee • Fire Fee Project Progress • Streets, Interchange and Grade August 23 Separation Fee Shirtsleeve • Parks and Recreation Fee • Storm Drainage Fee • Electric Utility Fee September 27 • General City Facilities Fee Shirtsleeve • Art in Public Places Fee October 25 0 Draft Impact Fee Program December 7 9Adopt Impact Fee Program Water Demand Per DUE • 22 CCF per Month per DUE • 20 CCF with conservation and metering (10%) • Equates to 0.56 Ac Ft per Year per DUE • Production requirement is 0.62 Ac Ft per Year per DUE Water Fee Assumptions • Current overdraft 2,000 ac ft per year • Firm supply 6,000 Ac Ft per year • Costs assigned 1/3 to existing customers and 2/3 to future customers • Water plant treatment capacity 7,200 Ac Ft per year • Service capacity of plant 11,569 DUEs • Service capacity for future customers 7,713 DUEs ollIK:16 -OKELUFANE RIVER LAS SURFACE WATER TIJRNER RD T T T MENT RF -AT PLANT P=TD Z lUXKE ORD ST K&Y. 12 ELM Srr FINE Si =A y LoDJ AVE L JAI TIMAY 8T Jr -z VINE 8T In =L Li ILLU �n Z 71 a3 LU HWY. 1 PROPOSED i.shkG OTMERM LN STORAGE TANK CENTURY RL -Vo HARNEV �N PROPOSED PROPOSED WELL #2 WELL #1 Planning and $3,869,800 Design Water Plant * $67795,400 System $57000)000 Improvements Total Costs $76,6657200 Contract Supply 6,000 ac ft Supply w/Banked 7,200 ac ft Unit Demand 0.62 ac ft/DUE Service Capacity 11,569 DUE $1,289,933 $22,598,467 $0 $23,8887400 2,000 ac ft 2,400 ac ft 0.62 ac ft/DUE 3,856 DUE $2,579,867 $45,196,933 $570007000 $527767800 4,000 ac ft 4,800 ac ft 0.62 ac ft/DUE 7,713 DUE Water Impact Fee $63843/DUE * Principal and interest on debt service to finance $36.5 million construction. 0 16 5/8 Inch 0.67 $4)585 3/4 Inch * 1.00 $6,843 1 Inch 1.67 $11,428 1 '/2 Inch 3.33 $221787 2 Inch 5.33 $36,473 3 Inch 10.00 $68,430 * Current Fee= $1,120 Wastewater Generation Per Due • 200 gallons per day per DUE Wastewater Fee Assumptions • Treatment Capacity 8.5 MGD • Service Capacity to Serve Future Customers 2.3 MGD • $128 Million (`91,'03,'04,&'07 COPs) • $49.4 Million for Future Customers (38.6%) • Service capacity of plant 42,500 DUEs • Service capacity for future customers 11,500 DU Es 0 � c m .# m § J& fJ3 ,.KE �mmm } � � , n , e m■r . LOU!� UCT � y , # ] § ; � KE_"a as # Z � » @_rELW a. _!, [ � ��w��`,►�,I �IIPAIN �����i�`�i►`���I �v� II/ILII► ����I %I.� ► ��I�� Total Costs Plant Capacity Unit Demand Service Capacity $128,027,080 8.5 mgd 200 gal/DUE 42,500 DUE n $78,615,561 6.2 mgd 200 gal/DUE 31,000 DUE $49,411,519 2.3 mgd 200 gal/DUE 11,500 DUE Wastewater Impact Fee $4,297/DUE 0 16 5/8 Inch 0.67 $27879 3/4 Inch * 1.00 $4,297 1 Inch 1.67 $77175 1 '/2 Inch 3.33 $147308 2 Inch 5.33 $22,901 3 Inch 10.00 $42,957 * Current Fee = $5,938 Storm Drainage Fee Concept • Area Within City Limits -conventional fee type (except Reynolds Ranch) — Fees Pay for Over Sizing Pipes (> 18 inches) — Fees Credited for Basin/Park Construction — Fees Pay for Pixley Park & Cluff Ave. Storm Drain Pump Station Improvements • Area Outside City Limits — no fee — Development Constructs All Pipe — Development Constructs Open Space Basins — Development Acquires All Land C O 0_ O N C N C..)' V N 7 Z U O M 0 0 .o 0 O 3 0- E E 0 0 U X ry o' U 0 x X row U E 0 z 0 J E J U ry v) E z ry Ld w ryX oo 0 0 0 x X w or c c L� 0 Cr) 0 O J / N C N E 7 0 O D N C O / U NO MEN �1.■II-`''' I=mo■■■ , �'' � R ' .1 INS 1■ ■�■■ � ��: .fin � �J i ■ iii � � �� �__�_■ __ � �1. MEN � ,..._. _ �_7 ■ X11 :■ �� —y�— X1111111■:---■���::_====i����_ '' ■mil 11 so mom _ �..■III EEE - MEN ■ - erg■ _� .. ��;;_ ■1111:x!11 ■■ _■rlE�l• ■L_� III �Cii� IM NE 111•d.w._ L \C� ", ■ - Ali`■I ONE �� _■1111 �� �� _ _ ���I ■ Son oil � � 11■111. r'■■I�■■mft ������' Ii1111 Wo, - VIII _. �.,:�� ��� I � � ■ �������� ' :�.=� 1� 11111111 j �1■■ • . �� _. .....� ' ■1111 FEE PROGRAM DEVELOPER CONSTRUCTED F1 FUTURE ANALYSIS 111111 Harris & Associates STORM DRAIN THROUGH 2035 LEGEND PARK NO PARK BASIN - OPEN SPACE TEMPORARY BASIN City of Lodi PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT O 1/8 1/4 3/8 1/2 MILE O 1000 2000 3000 FEET arm Dra-inac v� UAKF w H E c_ j'F.')Rn fBL EL L{£T L}C.;r M -1 y r..r 1�_Ual AVE B-1 F +ry+ry��rr TCKa,�- ME $T Y M- r _ A-1 4 1 Le 1 1 2 W J V-1 kErTIEM1Uin_n ti I DEBENEDETTI PARK PUMP STATION A-� C Sh T. IH- 6LVE: N-2 - L-2 L-1 K_3 � f n � 3 F • TJRK=R RG H F{5'fY. li 11NE :'T CLUFF AVE �. MP STATION c w Y�hESi � L PILEY PARK PUMP STATION u 0 Police Impact Fee • Per Capita Methodology • 1991 Methodology "Call -Based" • 2 Employees Equals 1 Resident • 5.7 Employees Equals 1 DUE • 77% Residential / 23% Non -Residential Police Fee Assumptions • Current Sworn &Non -Sworn — 1.70 per 1,000 • 15 Sworn Officers Added by 2035 • 15% of Police Building Assigned to New Development - $3,952,697 • 18% of Police Building Serves Beyond 2035 • New Vehicle Costs - $434,147 Residential Low Density Medium Density High Density Current Per Dwelling Unit $366 $259 $414 Recommended (1 : 0.50) $747 $629 $525 Non -Residential Per 1,000 Building Square Feet Retail $830 $328 Office/Medical $625 $525 Industrial $31 $175 Alternative (1 : 0.24) $833 $702 $585 $174 $278 $93 Fire Impact Fee • Per Capita Methodology • 1991 Methodology "Call -Based" • 2 Employees Equals 1 Resident • 77% Residential / 23% Non -Residential Fire Fee Assumptions • Outstanding Fire Station 4 Loan = $1,225,173 • Fire Station 2 Expansion ➢ 3,300 SF of total 10,500 SF ➢ No Apparatus ➢ Debt Finance Cost = $1,600,000 • Fire Station 5 Acknowledged but Not Included Residential Low Density Medium Density High Density Current Recommended Alternative (1 : 0.50) (1 : 0.24) Per Dwelling Unit $358 $280 $371 $470 $396 $330 Non -Residential Per 1,000 Building Square Feet Retail $530 $206 Office/Medical $404 $330 Industrial $77 $110 $536 $451 $376 $112 $179 $60 MaaNaaa Dilps'st-le