1 NOVEMBER 15, 2022
CITY OF COSTA MESA
77 FAIR DRIVE
COSTA MESA, CA 92626
City of Costa
Mesa
FY2021-22
Development
Impact Fee
Report
Attachment 1
2 Table of Contents
City Council Directory ................................................................................................... 3
City Officials Directory .................................................................................................. 4
Introduction
Legal Requirements for Development Impact Fee Reporting ...................................... 5 Description of Development Impact Fees with corresponding Fee Schedules ............. 7
Development Impact Fee Report
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance Summary ....... 9
Financial Summary Report and Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) Park Development Fees ............................................................................................. 10 Drainage Fees ........................................................................................................... 12 Traffic Impact Fees .................................................................................................... 13 Fire System Development Fees ................................................................................. 14
Development Impact Project Identification
Park Development Projects ........................................................................................ 16 Drainage Projects ...................................................................................................... 17 Traffic Impact Projects ............................................................................................... 17 Fire System Development Projects ............................................................................ 17
City Council Action and Studies
Review of the Citywide Traffic Impact Fee Program .................................................. 19 Update to the Park Impact Fees ................................................................................ 35
3 City Leadership
4 City Official Directory
City Manager’s Office
City Manager .............................................................. Lori Ann Farrell Harrison
Department Directors
City Attorney’s Office ............................................................... Kimberly Barlow Community Development Services .................................................. Jennifer Le Finance .......................................................................................... Carol Molina Information Technology ...................................................................... Steve Ely Parks and Community Services .................................................... Jason Minter Public Services ...................................................................... Raja Sethuraman
Public Safety
Fire and Rescue ................................................................. Dan Stefano Police ............................................................................... Ron Lawrence
5 Legal Requirements for Development Impact Fee Reporting
Legal Requirements for Development Impact Fee Reporting
California Government Code Section 66006 (b)
California Government Code Section 66006 (b) defines the specific reporting requirements for local agencies that impose AB 1600 DIFs on new development. Annually, for each separate fund established for the collection and expenditure of DIFs, the local agency shall, within 180 days of the close of the fiscal year, make available to the public the information shown below for the most recent fiscal year.
a) A brief description of the type of fee in the account or fund. b) The amount of the fee.
c) The beginning and ending balance of the account or fund. d) The amount of the fees collected and interest earned. e) An identification of each public improvement on which fees were expended and the amount of the expenditures on each improvement, including the total percentage of the cost of the public improvement that was funded with fees. f) An identification of an approximate date by which the construction of the public improvement will commence if the local agency determines that sufficient funds have been collected to complete financing on an incomplete public improvement, as identified in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 66001, and the public improvement remains incomplete.
g) A description of each inter -fund transfer or loan made from the account or fund, including the public improvement on which the transferred or loaned fees will be expended, and, in the case of an inter-fund loan, the date on which the loan will be repaid, and the rate of interest that the account or fund will receive on the loan. h) The amount of refunds made pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 66001 and any allocations pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 66001.
California Government Code Section 66001
For all funds established for the collection and expenditure of DIFs, California Government Code Section 66001 (d) has additional requirements. For the fifth fiscal year following the first deposit into the fund and every five years thereafter, the local agency shall make all of the following findings with respect to that portion of the fund remaining unexpended, whether committed or uncommitted:
a) Identify the purpose to which the fee is to be put.
b) Demonstrate a reasonable relationship between the fee and purpose for which it is charged.
c) Identify all sources and amounts of funding anticipated to complete financing in incomplete improvements identified in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a). d) Designate the approximate dates on which the funding referred to in subparagraph (c) is expected to be deposited into the appropriate account or fund.
6 California Government Code Section 66002
The State of California Government Code Section 66002 states that:
a) Any local agency, which levies a fee subject to Section 66001, may adopt a capital improvement plan, which shall indicate the approximate location, size, time of availability, and estimates of cost for all facilities or improvements to be financed with the fees.
b) The capital improvement plan shall be adopted by, and shall be annually updated by, a resolution of the governing body of the local agency adopted at a noticed public hearing.
Notice of the hearing shall be given pursuant to Section 65090. In addition, mailed notice shall be given to any city or county, which may be significantly affected by the capital improvement plan. This notice shall be given no later than the date the local agency notices the public hearing pursuant to Section 65090. The information in the notice shall be not less than the information contained in the notice of public hearing and shall be given by first-class mail or personal delivery.
c) "Facility" or "improvement," as used in this section, means any of the following:
1. Public buildings, including schools and related facilities; provided that school facilities shall not be included if Senate Bill 97 of the 1987- 88 Regular Session is enacted and becomes effective on or before January 1, 1988.
2. Facilities for the storage, treatment, and distribution of nonagricultural water.
3. Facilities for the collection, treatment, reclamation, and disposal of sewage.
4. Facilities for the collection and disposal of storm waters and for flood control purposes.
5. Facilities for the generation of electricity and the distribution of gas and electricity.
6. Transportation and transit facilities, including but not limited to streets and supporting improvements, roads, overpasses, bridges, harbors, ports, airports, and related facilities.
7. Parks and recreation facilities.
8. Any other capital project identified in the capital facilities plan adopted.
7 Description of Development Impact Fees with Corresponding Fee Schedule
Park Development Impact Fees (Quimby Act Fees)
Fee Description: This fee provides funding for additional or improved park and/or recreation facility improvements for which the need is generated by new development within the City.
Fee Schedule: The table below indicates the applicable park development fee per unit that will be applied to new residential projects based on the net increase in residential units.
Development Fee per Unit
Single-family Dwelling Unit $13,572.00
Multi-family Dwelling Unit $13,829.00
Apartment Dwelling Unit $5,000.00
Drainage Impact Fees
Fee Description: This fee provides funding for additional construction and maintenance of the City's drainage system for which the need is generated by new development or redevelopment within the City.
Fee Schedule: The table below indicates the applicable drainage impact fee per acre that will be applied to new or redeveloped projects.
Development Type Fee per Acre
Low Density Residential Use $6,283.00
Medium Density Residential Use $7,539.00
High Density Residential Use $10,052.00
Commercial / Industrial Density Residential Use $11,309.00
Traffic Impact Fees
Fee Description: This fee provides funding for additional or improved traffic signal, operation, and infrastructure improvements for which the need is generated by new or expanding development within the City.
Fee Schedule: The citywide Traffic Impact Fee is assessed on the increased number of average daily trips generated by the proposed project. The City Council adopted a fee of $235 per daily trip on November 13, 2018. On December 17, 2020, the City Council voted to continue the Traffic Impact fees at $235 per daily trip.
8 Fire System Development Fees
Fee Description: This fee provides funding for additional fire protection facilities, equipment, and paramedic support for which the need is generated by future development within the North Costa Mesa area. This fee is only levied against five identified developments: Home Ranch, South Coast Plaza Town Center, South Coast Metro Center, and Sakioka Farms' Lots 1 and 2.
Fee Schedule: The fee is $0.285 per square foot of new commercial, industrial or residential development.
9 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance
A summary of activities in each type of development impact fee for fiscal year ended June 30, 2022 is shown below:
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2022*
Development Impact Fees
Description
Park
Development
Fees
Drainage
Fees
Traffic Impact
Fees
Fire System
Development
Fees
Revenue
Fees 1,278,941 348,736 437,943
Investment Earnings (100,792) (57,057) (143,170) (15,857) Other
Revenue Total 1,178,149 291,679 294,773 15,857
Expense
Expenditures 2,214,169 145,850 127,222
Other
Transfers Out
Expense Total 2,214,169 145,850 127,222 0
Rev Over(Under) Exp (1,036,020) 145,829 167,552 (15,857) Begin Fund Balance 4,651,456 2,096,392 5,490,214 651,541 End Fund Balance 3,615,436 2,242,221 5,657,766 635,685
*Unaudited actuals
10 Financial Summary Reporting and CIP
State law requires an identification of each public improvement on which fees were expended and the amount of expenditures on each improvement, including the total percentage of the costs of the public improvement that was funded with fees. A summary of improvements for each Development Impact Fee is provided.
PARK DEVELOPMENT FEES (QUIMBY ACT FEES)
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Last Five Years:
For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30
Description 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022*
Revenue
Fees 1,541,038 4,657,896 2,299,373 1,049,018 766,372 1,278,941 Investment Earnings 47,040 (8,310) 254,347 223,901 8,022 (100,792) Other 106,966
Revenue Total 1,588,078 4,649,586 2,553,720 1,272,919 881,359 1,178,149 Expense
Expenditures 13,612 2,558,466 1,899,528 1,589,954 1,753,155 2,214,169 Other 11,879 10,810 9,735
Transfers Out 3,842
Expense Total 25,491 2,569,276 1,913,105 1,589,954 1,753,155 2,214,169
Rev Over(Under) Exp 1,562,587 2,080,310 640,615 (317,035) (871,796) (1,036,020) Begin Fund Balance 1,556,775 3,119,361 5,199,672 5,840,286 5,523,251 4,651,456 End Fund Balance 3,119,361 5,199,672 5,840,286 5,523,251 4,651,456 3,615,436 *Unaudited actuals
Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) for the Last Five Years:
For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30
Capital Project 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
208 - Park Development Fees
Tenagr Pk Plygrd Equip Repl 96,786
Wilson TeWinkle Prk Bridg 18,630
Fairview Park Improvements 13,456 3,455 198,810
Pk Security Lighting Repl 156 11 86,983
Jack Hammett Field Upgrade 55,000 63,634 3,300 8,796 1,532,681 Fairview Pk Mstr Plan 54,854
Fairview Park Bluffs 151,406
Fairview Pk Fence Sign Trail 5,136
Jordan Pk Playgrnd Equip 96,384
TeWinkle Park Lakes Repairs 31,830
NCC - Library Development 2,500,000 1,430,824 1,282,483 1,427,452 225,904 208 - Park Development Fees
Fund Total 13,612 2,558,466 1,899,528 1,285,783 1,523,232 2,007,351
11 Funds held past the fifth year and first deposit
Not applicable at this time. All funds were expended within the five-year timeframe to fund park improvements and/or recreation facility improvements.
Construction Commencement Date for Incomplete Improvements Not applicable at this time.
Inter-fund Transfers and Loans
No loans were disbursed during this period.
Amount of Refunds
No refunds of any of these funds were made or required in during this period.
12 DRAINAGE FEES
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Last Five Years:
For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30
Description 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022*
Revenue
Fees 549,871 113,610 268,800 898,498 433,328 348,736
Investment Earnings 18,965 9,519 57,202 78,484 2,100 (57,057) Other 117,373
Revenue Total 686,210 123,130 326,002 976,982 435,428 291,679 Expense
Expenditures 66,950 1,101,378 56,980 194,127 593,405 145,850 Expense Total 66,950 1,101,378 56,980 194,127 593,405 145,850
Rev Over(Under) Exp 619,259 (978,248) 269,022 782,855 (157,977) 145,829 Begin Fund Balance 1,561,480 2,180,739 1,202,491 1,471,513 2,254,368 2,096,392 End Fund Balance 2,180,739 1,202,491 1,471,513 2,254,368 2,096,392 2,242,221 *Unaudited actuals
Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) for the Last Five Years:
For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30
Capital Project 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
209 - Drainage Fees Fund
Catch Basin Inserts-Various 10,886 9,966 169,750 26,727 Citywide Storm Drain Impr 66,950 740,492 56,980 184,161 332,976 108,752 Westside Storm Drain Impr 10,370
NCC - Library Development 350,000 90,679
209 - Drainage Fees Fund Total 66,950 1,101,378 56,980 194,127 593,405 145,850
Funds held past the fifth year and first deposit
Not applicable at this time. All funds were expended within the five-year timeframe to fund storm drain improvements.
Construction Commencement Date for Incomplete Improvements Not applicable at this time.
Inter-fund Transfers and Loans
No loans were disbursed during this period.
Amount of Refunds
No refunds of any of these funds were made or required in during this period.
13 TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Last Five Years:
For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30
Description 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022*
Revenue
Fees 99,419 878,865 182,166 259,298 1,212,500 437,943
Investment Earnings 30,967 4,203 177,173 174,806 (9,496) (143,170) Other 1,855
Revenue Total 130,383 883,068 359,339 434,104 1,204,859 294,773 Expense
Expenditures 62,148 1,227 67,090 220,544 404,704 127,222 Other 75,000
Expense Total 52,148 1,227 67,090 295,544 404,704 127,222
Rev Over(Under) Exp 68,236 881,841 292,249 138,560 800,155 167,552 Begin Fund Balance 3,309,173 3,377,409 4,259,250 4,551,499 4,690,059 5,490,214 End Fund Balance 3,377,409 4,259,250 4,551,499 4,690,059 5,490,214 5,657,766 *Unaudited actuals
Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) for the Last Five Years:
For the Fiscal Year Ended
Capital Projects 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
214 - Traffic Impact Fees Fund
Fairview Road/Wilson St Impr 2,726
Bicycle Racks Citywide 35,032 8,299
Hyland/MacArthur Intersct Impr 58,148 23,224
Adams at Pinecreek Imp 3,831
East 17th St. Landscape Enhanc 52,211 (2,611)
Fairview Traffic Signal Sync 10,457 174,575
Baker/Placntia/19th/Victr TSSP 15,373
Sunflower Traff Signal Sync 93,407
W 17th Design Newport Westside 7,211 1,227 5,842 48,992 Newport Blvd Wide 19th to 17th 3,100 43,751 5,731 31,491 Class II and III Bicycle Proj 712 1,805 12,052
Merrimac Way Bicycle Facility 181,847 16,837
Adams Av Bicycle Facility Proj 5,715 6,832
Randolph Prkg & Pedestrin Impr 25,792
West 18th & Wilson Crosswalks 9,325
214 - Traffic Impact Fees Fund
Total 62,148 1,227 67,090 220,544 404,704 127,222
14 Funds held past the fifth year and first deposit
Traffic Impact Fee funds are being held passed the fifth year and first deposit. These funds are intended to fund additional or improved traffic signal, operation, and infrastructure improvements for which the need is generated by new or expanding development within the City.
Construction Commencement Date for Incomplete Improvements Not applicable at this time.
Inter-fund Transfers and Loans
No loans were disbursed during this period.
Amount of Refunds
No refunds of any of these funds were made or required in during this period.
15 FIRE SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT FEES
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Last Five Years:
For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30
Description 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022*
Revenue
Fees 469,332
Investment Earnings 3,309 1,061 5,865 25,319 45 (15,857) Other
Revenue Total 3,309 1,061 5,865 494,651 45 (15,857)
Expense
Expenditures 82,735
Transfers Out 125,000
Expense Total 207,735
Rev Over(Under) Exp 3,309 (206,674) 5,865 494,651 45 (15,857) Begin Fund Balance 354,347 357,655 150,981 156,846 651,497 651,541 End Fund Balance 357,365 150,981 156,846 651,497 651,541 635,685 *Unaudited actuals
Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) for the Last Five Years:
For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30
Capital Projects 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
218 - Fire System Dev. Fees
Corp Yard Exhaust System 82,735
218 - Fire System Dev. Fees
Fund Total 82,735
Funds held past the fifth year and first deposit
Fire System Development Fee funds are being held past the fifth year and first deposit. These funds are intended to fund additional fire protection facilities, equipment, and paramedic support for which the need is generated by future development within Costa Mesa.
Construction Commencement Date for Incomplete Improvements Not applicable at this time.
Inter-fund Transfers and Loans
No loans were disbursed during this period.
Amount of Refunds
No refunds of any of these funds were made or required in during this period.
16 Development Impact Fee Project Identification
The City's current, Adopted Budget 2022-2023, which includes the Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) 2022/23 — 2026/27 can be found on the City's website at:
https://www.costamesaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/51218/637877023662070000
Funding of Infrastructure
The FY 2022/23 — FY 2026/27 CIP identifies all funding sources and amounts for individual projects through FY 2026/27. The CIP is updated annually to reflect the current City's infrastructure needs. As a CIP is identified, the project is evaluated to determine the portion of the project that will service existing residents and businesses versus new development.
Once the determination of use is made, the percentage of use attributed to new development is then funded by the appropriate development fee based on the type of project. The percentage of use associated with existing residents or businesses are funded from other appropriate sources. Estimated construction start dates for projects are adjusted, as needed, to reflect the needs of the community.
ONGOING/NEW CAPTIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
Park Development Fees
Projects by Fund FY2022/23 - FY2026-27
208 - Park Development Fees Fund
700016 - Tenager Park Playground Equipment Replacement 51,739 700021 - Wilson TeWinkle Park Bridge Repairs 181,371 700027 - TeWinkle Skate Park Expansion 100,000 700029 - Fairview Park Improvements
700054 - Westside Park Development 250,000 700080 - Park Security Lighting/Replacement 164,500 700110 - Open Space Master Plan Update 75,000 700115 - Jack Hammett Sports Complex ADA Improvements 513,843 700125 - Fairview Park Master Plan Habitat Restoration Project 700129 - Shalimar Park Improvements 250,000 700131 - Fairview Park Bluffs
700133 - Canyon Park Inventory Mgmt Restoration 60,000 700134 - Fairview Park Fence Sign Trail 144,865 700135 - Fairview Park Master Plan Update 250,000 700136 - Jordan Park Playground Equipment Replacement 78,616 700137 - TeWinkle Park Lakes Repairs 100,645 700139 - Ketchum-Libolt Park Expansion 50,000 800015 - NCC - Library Development and Lions Park Projects 208 - Park Development Fees Fund Total 2,270,579
17 Drainage Fees
Projects by Fund FY2022/23 - FY2026/27
209 - Drainage Fees Fund
550008 - Citywide Catch Basin Inserts and Water Quality Improvement 55,883 550011 - Citywide Storm Drain Improvements 761,439
550022 - Westside Storm Drain Improvements 1,589,630
800015 - NCC - Library Development and Lions Park Projects 209 - Drainage Fees Fund Total 2,406,952
Traffic Impact Fees
Projects by Fund FY2022/23 - FY2026-27
214 - Traffic Impact Fees Fund
300129 - Harbor/Adams Intersection Improvements
300146 - Fairview Road/Wilson Street Improvements
300148 - Citywide Bicycle Rack Improvements 206,669 300160 - Hyland/MacArthur Intersection Improvements
300174 - Adams at Pinecreek Improvements 83,622 300181 - Fairview Road Improvement Project 250,000 350018 - East 17th Street Landscape Enhancements
370010 - Mesa del Mar Multi-Model Access 100,000 370034 - Fairview Traffic Signal Synchronization 5,377 370039 - Baker/Placentia/19th/Victoria Traffic Signal Synchronization 237,745 370047 - Sunflower Traffic Signal Synchronization
370050 - West 17th Design Newport Westside
370052 - Newport Blvd Improvements from 19th Street to 17th Street 290,927 370056 - Bear Street Traffic Signal Sync 31,000 450010 - Class II, III, and IV Bicycle Projects 985,433 450011 - Merrimac Way Bicycle Facility
450014 - Adams Avenue Bicycle Facility Project
450015 - Bicycle/Pedestrian Infrastructure Improvements 350,000 450016 - Mesa/Santa Ana Bicycle Facility Improvements 100,000 450017 - MV/Peterson Place Class II Bicycle 100,000 470001 - Randolph Parking and Pedestrian Improvements
470002 - West 18th Street and Wilson Street Pedestrian Crossings 124,209 NEW - Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure Improvements 390,675 214 - Traffic Impact Fees Fund Total 3,255,657
Fire System Development Fees
No current projects to report.
18 City Council Action and Studies
The following attachments are Development Impact Fees related recent and prior Council Reviews (Traffic Impact Fees and Park Development Fees).
City of Costa Mesa
Agenda Report
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
File #: 21-482 Meeting Date: 12/7/2021
TITLE:
ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE CITYWIDE TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE PROGRAM DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT /TRANSPORTATION
SERVICES DIVISION
PRESENTED BY: RAJA SETHURAMAN, PUBLIC SERVICES DIRECTOR CONTACT INFORMATION: JENNIFER ROSALES, TRANSPORTATION SERVICES MANAGER (714) 754-5343
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council adopt the proposed resolution, continuing the citywide traffic impact fee for new development in the City of Costa Mesa and conducting the related annual review of the citywide traffic impact fee program and capital improvement plan for transportation improvements (Attachment 1). The resolution incorporates the recommendations from the Traffic Impact Fee Ad Hoc Committee and staff, which include:
1. Continue a traffic impact fee of $235 per Average Daily Trip (ADT) based on the Capital Improvement Projects in Attachment 2 and Active Transportation projects in the adopted Active Transportation Plan (ATP);
2. Approve allocation of up to ten percent (10%) of traffic impact fees towards traffic signal synchronization projects;
3. Approve a five percent (5%) reduction in automobile trips as a result of ATP implementation and an additional five percent (5%) reduction in automobile trips for developments proposing to implement active transportation improvements beyond typical development requirements; and
4. Approve the annual accounting of the Citywide Traffic Impact Fee Program.
BACKGROUND:
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 66000, et seq. and the Costa Mesa Municipal Code, a traffic impact fee study is required by the City to establish a basis for the imposition of Citywide traffic impact fees on new and expanding developments within the City. The purpose of the fee is to fund the necessary transportation/circulation improvements, which are related directly to the incremental traffic impacts imposed on the City’s transportation system by the development of new
19 File #: 21-482 Meeting Date: 12/7/2021
incremental traffic impacts imposed on the City’s transportation system by the development of new and/or changing commercial, industrial, and residential uses as permitted by the General Plan. The fee also maintains compliance with the eligibility requirements of the Orange County Transportation Authority’s (OCTA) Renewed Measure “M2” Program (Measure “M2”).
The City Council has reviewed the Citywide Traffic Impact Fee Program each year since the fee program was first adopted in 1993. The City Council, in July 1993, also approved the formation of an Ad Hoc Committee consisting of representatives from various stakeholder groups to work with staff on all aspects related to the revision and updating of traffic impact fees.
The City Council subsequently appointed an Ad Hoc Committee consisting of members representing large and small developers, the Chamber of Commerce, citizens-at-large, as well as members representing the City Council and the Planning Commission, to assist staff in the development and review of the traffic impact fee.
The current Ad Hoc Committee members and their representation are as follows:
Jason Kensey (Chair) At Large Representative
George Sakioka (Vice Chair) Major Developers’ Representative Steve Brahs Small Developers’ Representative
Matt Eimers At Large Representative
Carla Valenzuela Chamber of Commerce
City Council Liaisons:
Council Member Don Harper
Council Member Arlis Reynolds
Planning Commission Liaison:
Commissioner Jonathan Zich
The City Council, in June 2012, authorized a comprehensive review of the City’s General Plan, including the Land Use and Circulation Elements. The General Plan was completed and finalized in 2016.
The last major update of the Traffic Impact Fee Study was completed in November 2018. The update took into account the most recent land use and circulation information contained in the 2016 General Plan update. The proposed General Plan circulation improvements identified in the new transportation model form the basis for the traffic impact fee update. A revised traffic impact fee calculation was conducted taking into account the 2016 General Plan and updated traffic analysis model. The estimated costs for various improvements were reviewed and updated using the most recent construction cost data. The Ad Hoc Committee, together with staff, reviewed all conditions and analyzed different trip fee scenarios. Several variations of improvement options were considered, and it was determined that trip fees in the range of $176 per ADT through $476 per ADT could be justified.
On November 17, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 20-60, approving a traffic impact fee of $235 per Average Daily Trip (ADT) to be continued with the inclusion of Active Transportation
20 File #: 21-482 Meeting Date: 12/7/2021
fee of $235 per Average Daily Trip (ADT) to be continued with the inclusion of Active Transportation projects, selecting a fee from the calculated range of between $176 and $476 per ADT. The City Council also approved up to ten percent (10%) of traffic impact fees being allocated toward traffic signal synchronization projects. In addition, City Council approved a five percent (5%) reduction in automobile trips as a result of ATP implementation and an additional five percent (5%) reduction in automobile trips for developments proposing to implement active transportation improvements beyond typical development requirements. A chronology of actions taken by the City Council on the Citywide Traffic Impact Fee Program between the years of 1993 and 2020 is included in Attachment
3. ANALYSIS:
The Traffic Impact Fee Ad Hoc Committee and staff met on October 27, 2021 to review the traffic impact fee program and calculation. Recently completed projects, consideration of active transportation projects, and the available traffic impact fee fund balance were accounted for in this review.
Attachment 2 provides the calculation of the traffic impact fee of $221 per ADT based on a revised list of capital improvement projects and the inclusion of Active Transportation projects. Following a review of the fee analysis and staff input, the Ad Hoc Committee recommended to continue the current traffic impact fee of $235 per Average Daily Trip (ADT) with the inclusion of Active Transportation projects in the Traffic Impact Fee program. In addition, the Ad Hoc Committee recommended to continue the allocation of up to ten percent (10%) of traffic impact fees towards traffic signal synchronization projects.
The Ad Hoc Committee also recommended to continue to provide a five percent (5%) reduction in automobile trips for development projects due to the implementation of the Active Transportation Plan (ATP) and an additional five (5) percent reduction in ADT if a development proposes to implement active transportation improvements beyond typical code requirements. The improvements have to be substantial such as addition of a multipurpose trail, conversion of lower-class active bicycle facility to a higher-class bicycle facility, or enhanced pedestrian improvements in the vicinity of the project.
Annual Accounting of the Traffic Impact Fee
:
California Government Code Section 66006(b) requires an annual review and accounting of the Citywide Traffic Impact Fee Program. Section 66001(d) requires that the City make specified findings every five years relating to any portion of the traffic impact fees collected that remain unexpended in its account. The City has elected to conduct the review of traffic impact fees required by California Government Code Section 66001(d) on an annual basis in conjunction with its review of the capital improvement plan required by California Government Code Section 66002(b) and the annual accounting required by California Government Code Section 66006(b). Attachment 4 depicts the opening balance, the ending balance on June 30, 2021, interest earned, revenues, expenditures, and unexpended funds from the Citywide Traffic Impact Fee Account. This attachment also shows that there are no funds unexpended or uncommitted in the account five (5) or more years after deposit and that no administrative costs have been charged to the fee account. The accounting was presented to the Committee at their meeting on October 27, 2021, and was approved.
As required by the Government Code, the updated Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is contained in
21 File #: 21-482 Meeting Date: 12/7/2021
As required by the Government Code, the updated Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is contained in the Fiscal Year 2021-22 adopted budget and remains valid for the current traffic impact fee review.
The traffic impact fee account information, including the interest earned, shown in Attachment 4, is available for public review.
ALTERNATIVES:
The City Council has the option to choose a traffic impact fee rate anywhere in the range of $176 per ADT to $476 per ADT, based on the most recent update of the traffic impact fee analysis. An additional alternative is to not have a Citywide Traffic Impact Fee Program at all. This alternative, however, would make the City ineligible to receive funds from any of the competitive grant programs processed through the Orange County Transportation Authority’s Combined Transportation Funding Programs. The City Council could also increase or decrease the percent of traffic impact fees for traffic signal synchronization. The City Council could also not approve the addition of active transportation projects to the traffic impact fee program.
FISCAL REVIEW:
Traffic impact fees fiscally support required capital transportation improvements outlined in the City’s General Plan Circulation Element.
LEGAL REVIEW:
The City Attorney’s Office has reviewed the agenda report and resolution and approves them both as to form.
CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND PRIORITIES:
This item supports the following City Council Goals:
· Achieve long-term fiscal sustainability.
· Strengthen the public’s safety and improve the quality of life.
CONCLUSION:
The Citywide Traffic Impact Fee Program had the last major update in 2018 and the Traffic Impact Fee Ad Hoc Committee reviewed the Traffic Impact Fee Program in October 2021 as part of the annual review. The Traffic Impact Fee Ad Hoc Committee recommended that the current traffic impact fee of $235 per ADT be continued with the inclusion of Active Transportation projects. In addition, the Ad Hoc Committee recommended continuing allocation of up to ten percent (10%) of traffic impact fees toward traffic signal synchronization projects. The Ad Hoc Committee also recommended that the automobile trip generation for development projects continue to be reduced by five percent (5%) due to the inclusion of Active Transportation projects in the City’s General Plan and a further five percent (5%) reduction in ADT for developments that incorporate substantial Active Transportation improvements beyond those required by code.
Staff requests that the City Council adopt the proposed resolution, continuing the citywide traffic impact fee for new development in the City of Costa Mesa and conducting the related annual review
22 File #: 21-482 Meeting Date: 12/7/2021
impact fee for new development in the City of Costa Mesa and conducting the related annual review of the citywide traffic impact fee program and capital improvement plan for transportation improvements. The resolution incorporates the recommendations from the Traffic Impact Fee Ad Hoc Committee and staff.
23 1
RESOLUTION NO. 2021-xx
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA,
CALIFORNIA, CONTINUING THE CITYWIDE TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE FOR NEW
DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY OF COSTA MESA AND CONDUCTING THE RELATED
ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE CITYWIDE TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE PROGRAM AND
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, California Government Code section 66000 et seq. enables cities to charge fees for transportation facilities; and
WHEREAS, Section 13-274 of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code authorizes the City Council to, by resolution, establish a development impact fee program based on the capital improvement program; and
WHEREAS, in 1993, by Resolution No. 93-43, the City Council established a traffic impact fee program and the rate of the traffic impact fee based upon a Traffic Impact Fee Study; and
WHEREAS, each year since 1993, the City has continued the traffic impact fee program; and
WHEREAS, on November 17, 2020, the City Council established a traffic impact fee of Two Hundred Thirty-Five Dollars ($235.00) per Average Daily Trip (ADT) based upon a Traffic Impact Fee Study completed in 2018; and
WHEREAS, California Government Code section 66001(d) requires the City to make specified findings every five years with respect to any portion of the traffic impact fees collected that remain unexpended in its account, including (1) identifying the purpose to which the fee is to be put; (2) demonstrating a reasonable relationship between the fee and the purpose for which it is charged; (3) identifying all sources and amounts of funding anticipated to complete financing of incomplete improvements; and (4) designating approximate dates on which the anticipated funding is expected to be deposited into the appropriate account; and
WHEREAS, California Government Code section 66002(b) further requires a separate annual review and update of the City’s capital improvement plan for improvements to be paid for by traffic impact fees; and 24 2
WHEREAS, California Government Code section 66006(b) requires the City to make available to the public within 180 days of the last day of the fiscal year certain information, including but not limited to, a description of the type of fee, the amount of the fee, the amount of fees collected and the interest earned thereon, identification of each public improvement on which fees were expended and the amount of the expenditures on each improvement, identification of an approximate date by which the construction of the public improvement will commence if the City determines that sufficient funds have been collected to complete financing of an incomplete public improvement, and the beginning and ending balance of the traffic impact fee account or fund for the previous fiscal year; and
WHEREAS, the 2016 General Plan requires the City to maintain a traffic impact fee for improvements to the Master Plan of Streets and Highways and that the City review and update the fees on a regular basis; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the 2016 General Plan and the Costa Mesa Municipal Code, the City has elected to conduct the review of traffic impact fees required by California Government Code section 66001(d) on an annual basis in conjunction with its review of the capital improvement plan required by California Government Code section 66002(b) and the annual accounting required by California Government Code section 66006(b)(1); and
WHEREAS, the City reviewed and updated the capital improvement plan on June 15, 2021 in connection with its Measure M2 reporting; and WHEREAS, a primary purpose of this resolution is to continue the traffic impact fee based on the 2018 Traffic Impact Fee Study and to enable the City to continue the traffic impact fee; and
WHEREAS, the traffic impact fee is necessary because new development increases the need for transportation/circulation facilities in the City of Costa Mesa not only during peak periods, but throughout the day, and the City transportation/circulation system will be burdened by the demands of carrying vehicles of a larger number of persons and cargo due to new commercial, industrial, and residential uses; and WHEREAS, the 2015-2035 General Plan as well as Environmental Impact Report No. 1049 indicate that development of new commercial, industrial and residential uses is 25 3
expected to exceed current commercial, industrial and residential uses and, accordingly, the City transportation/circulation systems will need to be increased in capacity to carry the increase in the number of vehicles due to new commercial, industrial and residential uses; and
WHEREAS, the Public Services Department has conducted an audit of the accounts for the traffic impact fee program for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021, which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein; and WHEREAS, pursuant to California Government Code section 66006, the audit was available for public inspection and review at least fifteen (15) days prior to the City Council review of the audit on December 7, 2021 and notice was mailed to all interested parties on record at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing held on December 7, 2021; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on December 7, 2021, received testimony and evidence from interested parties in the City of Costa Mesa, and has evaluated justification for renewal of the traffic impact fee given economic and social factors, as well as average fees charged by surrounding cities.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA HEREBY FINDS, DETERMINES, AND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council hereby finds that:
a. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference.
b. The purpose of the traffic impact fee is to fund transportation/circulation improvements including active transportation improvements within the City of Costa Mesa which are directly related to the incremental traffic/vehicle burden imposed upon the City transportation/circulation system by the development of new commercial, industrial and residential uses. c. The fee will be used to fund transportation and circulation improvements within the City of Costa Mesa.
d. There is a reasonable relationship between the traffic impact fee’s use and the development projects on which the fee is imposed because the transportation/circulation facilities funded by the fee are needed to 26 4
accommodate the incremental new traffic/vehicle burdens generated by the development of new commercial, industrial and residential uses upon which the fee is imposed.
e. There is a reasonable relationship between the need for the transportation/circulation facilities and the development of new commercial, industrial and residential projects upon which the fee is imposed because the new development projects paying the fee will receive a direct benefit from the transportation/circulation facilities funded by the fee; the transportation/circulation facilities funded by the fee will increase traffic/vehicle circulation capacity on streets and highways directly burdened by the increase in traffic/vehicles generated by new development projects upon which the fee is charged; the cost of transportation/circulation facilities attributed to existing deficiencies, existing land uses and population, excess and reserve capacity, and regional transportation needs have been excluded from the fee calculation, and such costs are not included in the fee to be paid by the development.
f. There is no portion of the fees deposited into the traffic impact fee fund that remains unexpended.
g. The capital improvement plan is adequate to provide the facilities for which the traffic impact fee is charged and does not need to be amended. h. The audit by the Public Services Department set forth in Exhibit “A” accurately reflects the balance of the traffic impact fee account on the fees collected, the interest thereon, and other income and amount of expenditures and refunds of the traffic impact fee made by the City of Costa Mesa during the prior fiscal year.
Section 2. The City Council of the City of Costa Mesa hereby renews the traffic impact fee and establishes traffic impact fee regulations as follows:
a. The traffic impact fee shall be a fee of $235.00 per each new average daily vehicle trip end generated by all new commercial, industrial and residential developments. To encourage active transportation in Costa Mesa, staff shall provide a five percent (5%) reduction in ADT development trips for 27 5
active transportation project benefits and may provide an additional five percent (5%) reduction in ADT development trips for a development project which proposes to implement active transportation improvements beyond those which would ordinarily be required by the City as a condition of approval for such development project.
b. The traffic impact fee established pursuant to this resolution shall be collected and administered in accordance with all requirements of California Government Code section 66000 et seq., the Costa Mesa Municipal Code and prior resolutions of the City Council.
c. There shall be no limitation on the amount of traffic impact fees which may be allocated toward active transportation projects.
d. Staff may allocate up to ten percent (10%) of traffic impact fees towards traffic signal synchronization projects.
Section 3. The City Council of the City of Costa Mesa hereby approves the updated comprehensive transportation/circulation system capital improvement plan as identified at the June 15, 2021 City Council meeting pursuant to Government Code section 66002.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of December, 2021.
____________________________
John Stephens, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
____________________________ ____________________________ Brenda Green, City Clerk Kimberly Hall Barlow, City Attorney 28 6
THIS PAGE IS RESERVED FOR CITY CLERK’S OFFICE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss
CITY OF COSTA MESA )
I, BRENDA GREEN, City Clerk of the City of Costa Mesa, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the above and foregoing is the original of Resolution No. 2021- __ and was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Costa Mesa at a regular meeting held on the 7th day of December, 2021, by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereby set my hand and affixed the seal of the City of Costa Mesa this 7th day of December, 2021.
________________________
Brenda Green, City Clerk
29 Local Regional Total Local Regional Total
22-23 Newport (19th to 17th) Widen SB from 3 lanes to 4 lanes $9,300,000 11,114 6,160 17,274 $5,983,571 $3,316,429 $9,300,000 Future 17th (Orange to Tustin) Widen from 4 lanes to 6 lanes Future 17th (Pomona to Bluff) Widen from 2 lanes to 4 lanes Future Baker (Bear to Red Hill) Widen from 4 lanes to 6 lanes $7,210,298 5,120 2,786 7,906 $4,669,457 $2,540,841 $7,210,298 Future Bear (I-405 Overcrossing) Widen from 4 lanes to 6 lanes Future Del Mar/University (Elden to Santa Ana) Widen from 2 lanes to 4 lanes Future Wilson (Fairview to College) Widen from 2 lanes to 4 lanes Future Wilson (Newport to Fairview) Widen from 2 lanes to 4 lanes Future Wilson (Harbor to Placentia) Widen from 2 lanes to 4 lanes $16,510,298 16,234 8,946 25,180 $10,653,028 $5,857,270 $16,510,298 Future 2. Harbor & Sunflower Add WBR and EBR $914,400 4,982 2,859 7,841 $580,990 $333,410 $914,400 Future 9. Bristol & Sunflower Add NBL $1,130,733 7,038 4,344 11,382 $699,183 $431,550 $1,130,733 Future 17. Hyland & South Coast/I-405 NB On-Ramp Add WBT $863,273 1,901 604 2,505 $655,123 $208,150 $863,273 Future 18. Harbor & South Coast Add EBR $1,669,800 7,830 3,157 10,987 $1,190,000 $479,800 $1,669,800 Future 30. Hyland & MacArthur Add NBL and NBR $261,938 2,003 1,797 3,800 $138,069 $123,869 $261,938 Future 42. Bristol & I-405 NB Ramps Add WBR $90,000 13,117 5,615 18,732 $63,022 $26,978 $90,000 Future 44. Harbor & Gisler Add SBR and EBL $4,895,070 9,893 4,259 14,152 $3,421,914 $1,473,156 $4,895,070 Future 49. Bristol & Paularino Add WBL $300,210 6,710 1,690 8,400 $239,811 $60,399 $300,210 Future 51. SR-55 SB Ramps & Paularino Add SBR $413,730 1,845 2,631 4,476 $170,539 $243,191 $413,730 Future 52. SR-55 NB Ramps & Paularino Add WBR $642,750 1,649 2,504 4,153 $255,212 $387,538 $642,750 Future 65. SR-55 SB Ramps & Baker Add SBR $625,350 3,477 2,446 5,923 $367,101 $258,249 $625,350 Future 66. SR-55 NB Ramps & Baker Add NBL and EBL $1,370,325 2,728 2,001 4,729 $790,494 $579,831 $1,370,325 Future 84. Harbor & Adams Add NBL and NBR $6,037,350 10,600 3,803 14,403 $4,443,235 $1,594,115 $6,037,350 Future 101. Newport NB & Del Mar Add WBR $131,475 2,934 2,406 5,340 $72,237 $59,238 $131,475 Future 129. Newport NB & 22nd Add WBT and NBL $15,000 3,332 2,625 5,957 $8,390 $6,610 $15,000 Future 134. Placentia & 19th Add SBR $386,280 6,409 1,423 7,832 $316,097 $70,183 $386,280 Future 140. Newport Boulevard & 19th Street Add NBT and free SBR Future 151. Superior & 17th Add WBL and NBR $662,865 7,133 2,160 9,293 $508,793 $154,072 $662,865 23-24 152. Newport & 17th Add NBR $444,675 10,202 5,079 15,281 $296,877 $147,798 $444,675 Future 156. Irvine & 17th Addd SBR and EBR $793,845 3,760 1,777 5,537 $539,075 $254,770 $793,845 $21,649,069 107,543 53,180 160,723 $14,756,161 $6,892,908 $21,649,069 $38,159,367 123,777 62,126 185,903 $25,409,189 $12,750,178 $38,159,367 Traffic Impact Fee Fund Balance $5,490,214
Home Ranch TIF Funds $1,698,450
Subtotal $3,791,764
Local Cost Allocation with above subtracted $21,617,425 Active Transportation Projects $21,140,500
Total Local Share Costs and Active Transportation Projects $42,757,925 227,767
$221
CIP FY
TOTAL
New Costa Mesa Trips Generated at General Plan Buildout Cost Allocation
ROADWAYS
Location Improvement
Estimated
Cost
New Daily Trip Ends
Sub-Total
INTERSECTIONS
Sub-Total
Citywide Fee with ATP projects and 15% reduction in ADT trips ATTACHMENT 2
30 Local Regional Total Local Regional TotalCIP FY
Cost Allocation
Location Improvement
Estimated
Cost
New Daily Trip Ends
ROADWAY AND INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS IN GENERAL PLAN AND EXCLUDED FROM TRIP FEE PROGRAM 17th (Orange to Tustin) Widen from 4 lanes to 6 lanes $15,380,115 17th (Pomona to Bluff) Widen from 2 lanes to 4 lanes $7,435,650 Bear (I-405 Overcrossing) Widen from 4 lanes to 6 lanes $5,408,220 Del Mar/University (Elden to Santa Ana) Widen from 2 lanes to 4 lanes $34,971,150 Wilson (Fairview to College) Widen from 2 lanes to 4 lanes $15,058,750 Wilson (Newport to Fairview) Widen from 2 lanes to 4 lanes $2,525,753 Wilson (Harbor to Placentia) Widen from 2 lanes to 4 lanes $25,555,350 140. Newport Boulevard & 19th Street Add NBT and free SBR $23,912,528 TOTAL $130,247,516
31 CITY OF COSTA MESA
CHRONOLOGY OF TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE ACTIONS
Date Adopted Resolution
Number
Area of
Benefit
Applicable Fees
7-June-1993 93-43 Citywide $228 per daily trip end based on the exclusion of all freeway improvements 20-June-1994 94-59 Citywide $228 per daily trip end based on the exclusion of all freeway improvements 1-May-1995 95-35 Citywide $200 per daily trip end based on the inclusion of freeway improvements 17-June-1996 96-57 Citywide $200 per daily trip end based on the inclusion of freeway improvements 20-January-1997 97-15 Newport
Bl. Spec.
Plan Area
Incentive program for developments in Newport Boulevard Specific Plan Area Trip fees range from $33 to $108 per ADT based on project-related conditions. 16-June-1997 97-51 Citywide $150 per daily trip end based on the inclusion of freeway improvements 15-June-1998 98-64 Citywide $150 per daily trip end based on the inclusion of freeway improvements 4-January-1999 99-2 Citywide Incentive program for first 100 trips 0-25 ADT - $0
25-50 ADT - $50
50-75 ADT - $75
75-100 ADT - $100
>100 ADT - $150
7-June-1999 99-35 Citywide $149 per daily trip end based on inclusion of freeway improvements 7-June-1999 99-36 Citywide Incentive program for the first 100 trips 19-June-2000 00-52 District 1
District 2
$195 per daily trip end (areas north of I-405 and SR-73 Freeways) and incentive program for the first 100 trips
$149 per daily trip end (areas south of I-405 and SR-73 Freeways) and incentive program for the first 100 trips
Fees based on inclusion of freeway improvements
4-June-2001 01-34 District 1
District 2
$195 per daily trip end (areas north of I-405 and SR-73 Freeways) and incentive program for the first 100 trips
$149 per daily trip end (areas south of I-405 and SR-73 Freeways) and incentive program for the first 100 trips
Fees based on inclusion of freeway improvements
15-April-2002 02-27 Citywide Traffic Impact Fee Study Update $177 per daily trip end and incentive program for the first 100 trips of the entire site 6-October-2003 03-62 Citywide $177 per daily trip end and incentive program for the first 100 trips of the entire site
ATTACHMENT 3
32 CITY OF COSTA MESA
CHRONOLOGY OF TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE ACTIONS
Date Adopted Resolution
Number
Area of
Benefit
Applicable Fees
4-October-2004 04-59 Citywide $177 per daily trip end and incentive program for the first 100 trips of the entire site Suspension of incentive program for Newport Boulevard Specific Plan Area 20-September-2005 05-70 Citywide $181 per daily trip end and incentive program for the first 100 trips of the entire site 17-October-2006 06-85 Citywide $181 per daily trip end and incentive program for the first 100 trips of the entire site 16-October-2007 07-77 Citywide $181 per daily trip end and incentive program for the first 100 trips of the entire site Exemption of preschool and daycare facilities from traffic impact fee program (consider as part of exempt school facilities)
21-October-2008 08-81 Citywide $181 per daily trip end and incentive program for the first 100 trips of the entire site 20-October-2009 09-67 Citywide $181 per daily trip end and incentive program for the first 100 trips of the entire site 19-October-2010 10-70 Citywide $181 per daily trip end and incentive program for the first 100 trips of the entire site 18-October-2011 11-42 Citywide $181 per daily trip end and incentive program for the first 100 trips of the entire site 20-November-2012 12-73 Citywide $181 per daily trip end and incentive program for the first 100 trips of the entire site 11-November-2013 13-54 Citywide $181 per daily trip end and incentive program for the first 100 trips of the entire site 18-November-2014 14-73 Citywide $181 per daily trip end and incentive program for the first 100 trips of the entire site 1-December-2015 15-66 Citywide $181 per daily trip end and incentive program for the first 100 trips of the entire site 3-January-2017 17-02 Citywide $181 per daily trip end and incentive program for the first 100 trips of the entire site 21-November-2017 17-76 Citywide $181 per daily trip end and incentive program for the first 100 trips of the entire site 14-November-2018 18-79 Citywide $235 per daily trip end, up to 10% for signal synchronization projects, and up to 5% for active transportation projects. Terminate incentive program for new developments on an incremental basis for the first 100 trips.
17-December-2019 19-83 Citywide $235 per daily trip end, inclusion of ATP projects, up to 10% for signal synchronization projects, and no limitation on the amount of traffic impact fees allocated toward active transportation projects. Provide 5% reduction in ADT development trips for active transportation project benefits and may provide an additional 5% reduction in ADT development trips for a development project that proposes to implement active transportation improvements beyond those which would ordinarily be required by the City as a condition of approval for such development project.
17-November-2020 20-60 Citywide $235 per daily trip end, inclusion of ATP projects, up to 10% for signal synchronization projects. Provide 5% reduction in ADT development trips for active transportation project benefits and may provide an additional 5% reduction in ADT development trips for a development project that proposes to implement active transportation improvements beyond those which would ordinarily be required by the City as condition of approval. 33 FISCAL YEAR 2020-2021
Amount of Traffic Impact Fee Per Average Daily Trip $235 Beginning Fund Balance July 1, 2020 $4,690,059
1. Revenues
Traffic Impact Fees $1,212,500
Investment Earnings 64,666
(74,161)
Misc / Other Reimbursement $1,855
Revenue Subtotal $1,204,859
2. Expenditures $404,704
Percent of
project
funded by TIF
in FY 20-21
Newport Boulevard Improvements (19th to 17th) - Design $5,731 FY 20-21 1.0% Adams Avenue Bicycle Facility Project - Design $5,715 FY 20-21 4.3% Bicycle Racks Citywide $35,032 FY 20-21 23.4%
Class II and III Bicycle Projects $1,805 FY 20-21 0.6% Merrimac Way Active Transportation Improvements $181,847 FY 20-21 9.0% Fairview Traffic Signal Synchronization $174,575 FY 20-21 18.4%
3. Refunds $0
Amount of funds expended or
uncommitted after 5 years $0
4. Administrative Costs $0
5. Fund Balance as of June 30, 2021 $5,490,214
6. Projects Current and Future Appropriations $2,749,116 Newport Boulevard Improvements (19th to 17th)
West 17th Street/Active Transportation Improvements
Bicycle Racks Citywide
Class II and III Bicycle Projects
Adams at Pinecreek Intersection Improvements
Fairview Traffic Signal Synchronization
Bear Traffic Signal Synchronization
Merrimac Way Active Transportation Improvements
Mesa Del Mar Multimodal Access
Baker/ Placentia/ 19th/ Victoria TSSP
Adams Avenue Bicycle Facility Project - Design
Bicycle/ Pedestrian Infrastructure Improvement
Mesa Drive / Santa Ana Ave Bicycle Facility Improvement Mesa Verde Drive East/ Peterson Place Class II Bicycle Facility Randolph Ave Parking and Pedestrian Improvement
West 18th & Wilson Crosswalks
CITY OF COSTA MESA
CITYWIDE TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE (TIF) ACCOUNT
Fund Balance as of June 30, 2021
GASB 31 Fair Market Value adjustment on Investment
34 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: August 4, 2015 ITEM NUMBER: PH-1
SUBJECT: PROPOSED 2015 UPDATE TO THE PARK IN-LIEU IMPACT FEES (PARK FEES) DATE: JULY 29, 2015
PRESENTATION BY: DANIEL INLOES, AICP, ASSOCIATE PLANNER FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: DANIEL INLOES (714) 754-5088 [email protected]
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Adopt at
tached Ordinance and Resolution to:
1) Giv
e first reading to the Ordinance to institute new park fees for apartment projects (multi-family residences, renter);
2) Adopt resolution to update the City’s parkland impact fees for residential subdi
visions and apartments, including the corresponding formula. --OR--
1) Prov
ide direction to staff regarding the park fee update and continue the meeting to a future specified date.
Development Type Current
Fees
Fees Based
on Existing
Formula
Park Fee Alternative 1:
Park Expenditure Trends:
Based on 10-year
Historic Trends in
Park Expenditures
Park Fee Alternative 2:
Costa Mesa Housing
Trends:
Based on 10-year
Historic
Trends in Housing
Development
Single-Family
Residence $13,572 $29,713.50 $11,285 $18,006
Condominiums -
Multi-Family Residence,
Owner $13,829 $23,110.50 $8,777 $14,005
Apartments less than 50
units -
Multi-Family Residence,
Renter
No Fee No Fee $10,598 $14,005
Apartments 50 units or
more -
Multi-Family Residence,
Renter
No Fee No Fee $10,598 $5,057
BACKGROUND:
35 The proposal is an update to the City of Costa Mesa’s park i n-lieu impact fee, (“park fee”). California Government Code Section 66477, the Quimby Act, and section 66000 authorizes the legislative body of the City to allow the payment of park fees for recreation purposes for these specified residential projects. These new fees will ensure a fair fee assessment per development type while also reflecting the current cost of parkland acquisition and construction for:
• Single Family Residences;
• Multi-family Residences (Owner);
• A partments 50 units or less;
• Apartments 50 units or more.
Quimby Act of 1975
The municipal responsibility to set aside parkland and open space for its residents is additionally burdened by future development , and therefore Cities have been authorized since the passage of the 1975 Quimby Act to pass ordinances that require developers to set aside land, donate conservation easements, or pay fees for park acquisition or improvements.
AB 1600 of 1987
This bill allowed f or development impact fees to defray all or a portion of the cost of public facilities related to new development projects. Since apartment developments do not require a subdivision, new fees for apartments are not secured by Quimby ; however, apartments do place additional burdens on the City’s public open space. T he City has a General Plan goal of 4.26 acres of park space per 1,000 people; therefore, apartments may be assessed a fair and proportionate park fee through AB 1600. It is this additional fee and its methodology which requires an ordinance to be established.
Current Park Fees
The current park fees were adopted in May of 2005 and only apply to residential projects requiring a subdivision and do not apply to apartments.
The City Council approved the park fees for new residential subdivisions at $13,572 for single family homes per unit and $13,829 for multi -family homes per unit. The current park fee only applies to new subdivided residential projects and not apartments.
Single Family Residence per Unit $13,572
Multi-Family Residence per Unit $13,829
Existing 2015 Park Fees
Using the current park fees formula with the updated cost of land, people per household averages, and our general plan goal , the fees would be $29,713.50 for a single- family residence, $23,110.50 for a multi -family owner residence, and no fee for apartments since they are not subdivided. These fees would be thous ands of dollars over any other 36 park impact fee in the county and would hamper immediate development within the City.
Due to this alternative park fees and their associated methodology was investigated.
The Pl
anning Commission provided feedback on Park Fee Alternative #1. Subsequent to the Planning Commission meeting, staff further developed Park Fee Alternative #2 to address some issues that were raised at the meeting. (Attachment 4, PC staff report and minutes).
ANALYSIS:
Objec
tives of Updated Park Fee Program
Foll
owing are the objectives of the park fees update:
• To establish apartment categories. The park fees would apply to all major forms of residential development within the City including apartments. • To update the persons per household factor based on current demographic information.
• To update the per–unit-cost per development type.
• To update the parkland acquisition cost and construction cost based on histori c park funding trends, development trends within the City, and future park acquisition goals.
Types
of Residential Developments Subject to Park Fee
The updated f
ee program is intended to account for all types of new residential development, including apartments.
Residential Development Subject to Park Fees
Residential Projects subject To Park Impact Fees Residential Projects exempt from Park Impact Fees • New common-interest condominium
• New single-family “detached” subdivisions
• New townhouse “attached” subdivisions
• New condominiums in mixed-use
developments
• New condo conversions increasing units
• New apartments*
• Conversion of apartments to
condominiums without changing the unit
count.**
• Granny units and accessory apartments
• Single-family home remodels or additions
• Multi-family remodels or additions
*Note: A new category for Apartments is being proposed in the Updated Park Impact Fee Program. **Note: Additional units will be subject to a fee for new apartment conversions resulting in an increase in units.
Eligib
le Expenditures for the Park Fee
All
park fees for all types of residential development will meet the same Quimby Act requirement as to the eligible expenditures of park fee funds. The fees will be used only for the purpose of developing new or rehabilitating existing neighborhood or community parks or potential school district properties based on a specified formula that meet the State Law requirements.
New M
ethodology to be Adopted
Stat
e law requires that new parkland impact fees be adopted and that the fee schedule be set pursuant to Council conducting a public hearing and approving an ordinance. A 37 general methodology for calculating park fees is described in the Quimby Act, but AB 1600 also allows Cities to adopt their own methodology granted that; the purpose and use of the fee is identified, there is a reasonable relationship between the fee’s use and the type of development on which the fee is to be imposed, there is a reasonable relationship between the need of the public facility and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed, the fee is proportionate to the cost of the associated use. Within Article 5 of Chapter XI of Title 13 of the City’s Municipal Code the procedures for obtaining park land dedications or assessing and collecting park fees are established. Because t his section strictly applies to new residential subdivisions and not apartments, an ordinance is required to be adopted to allow application of park fees to rental projects and a resolution to institute all updated and established fees.
PROPOSED PARK FEES ALTERNATIVES
David Taussig & Associates, Inc. and Stanley R. Hoffman Associates were contracted by the City to assist in the park fee update process and assist in developing park impact fees that would meet AB 1600 benefit requirements. The following summary table provides park fee alternatives for Council to consider in the adoption of new park fees:
Development Type
Existing
Fees
Fees with
Updated
Rates but
same Quimby
Formula
Park Fee Alternative 1:
Park Expenditure Trends:
Based on 10-year
Historic Trends in
Park Expenditures
Park Fee Alternative 2:
Costa Mesa Housing
Trends:
Based on 10-year
Historic
Trends in Housing
Development
Single-Family
Residence
$13,572 $29,713.50 $11,285 $18,006
Condominiums -
Multi-Family Residence,
Owner
$13,829 $23,110.50 $8,777 $14,005
Apartments less than 50
units -
Multi-Family Residence,
Renter
No Fee No Fee $10,598 $14,005
Apartments 50 units or
more -
Multi-Family Residence,
Renter
No Fee No Fee $10,598 $5,057
PARK FEE ALTERNATIVE #1: Based on Historic Park Fee Expenditures
Park Fee Methodology
Based on Park Fee Expenditure Trends Over the past 10 years
38 949500 cost 4.26 acre 2.79 people
1 acre 1000 people 1 unit
Multi-Family Owner Residential
949500 cost 4.26 acre 2.17 people
1 acre 1000 people 1 unit
Apartments
949500 cost 4.26 acre 2.62 people
1 acre 1000 people 1 unit $10,597.56 per unit
Single-Family Residential
p
Cost per Acre = 390,000 + .2238(2,500,000) = 949,500
$11,285.19 per unit
$8,777.37 per unit
Methodology for Per Unit Cost
• Park land -to-population ratio established by 2000 General Plan . General Plan Policy OSR-1A. 1 establishes the park land-to-population ratio of 4.26 acres per 1,000 people. Any adjustment to this rate requires a General Plan amendment.
• Population density standard based on the US Census.
Since the last update, demographic trends resulted in changes in the average household size of the various types of residential units within the City. This data was gathered by Stanley Hoffman & Associates from the 2013 ACS 5- year estimates from the US Census.
Type of Dwelling Number of
Units
Number of
People
People Per
Household
Single Family 19,861 55,491 2.79
Multi-Family Owner 1,138 2,469 2.17
Multi-Family Renter 18,349 48,125 2.62
People Per Household by Dwelling Type
39 • Park land acquisition & construction costs based on 2014 study by David Taussig & Associates, Inc. For purposes of determining land costs an analysis of multiple park acquisitions and developments within our region were gathered and assessed to determine the fair market value of park land acquisition and construction. This methodology was utilized because there were few recent comparable land sales to analyze specifically in regards to infill parks which are the most likely park acquisitions the City can make moving forward.
David Taussig & Associates , Inc. reviewed land sales price data for eight (8) properties sold within the City since 2003. The weighted average sales price based on such review was $2,500,000.00 per acre, whereas the cost of construction or upgrades on existing park space is estimated at $390,000.00. The total cost of acquiring and constructing park space would be $2,890,000.00 per acre.
Park Fee Expenditures in the Past 10 (Years 2005 – 2015) Description Date
Adjusted For
Inflation
(2014 Dollars)
Total
Acres Construction Land
Acquisition
Fairview, stairs and signage 2010 $488,550 2.00 $488,549.73 Fairview, constructed wetlands 2013 $5,589,220 45.00 $5,589,220.33 Joann Street Bicycle Trail 2011 $1,262,934 2.00 $1,262,934.40 Wilson Park, picnic shelter 2014 $45,000 0.05 $45,000.00 Del Mesa Park, new picnic shelter 2014 $45,000 0.05 $45,000.00 Brentwood Park 2011 $3,262,581 1.20 $3,262,580.52
Brentwood Park Upgrades 2011 $315,734 1.20 $315,733.60
Volcom Skate Park Dev 2006 $1,761,429 1.25 $1,761,428.57 Angels Playground 2008 $1,869,232 2.00 $1,869,231.73
Lions Park/Davis Field Baseball 2011 $526,223 2.50 $526,222.66 Bark Park 2008 $208,914 2.00 $208,914.13
Shalimar Park, new playground 2014 $120,000 0.16 $120,000.00 Total $15,494,816 59.41 $12,232,235.15 $3,262,580.52
Due to the l
ack of land and priority to upgrading existing parks only 1.2 acres of land was acquired over the past ten years . This represents 22.38% of the 5.36 possible acres the City could have acquired. Therefore, having a cost per acre which includes the full cost of construction and only 22.38% of land acquisition is a reasonable approach. This comes out to $949,500.00 per acre. 40 PARK FEE ALTERNATIVE #2: Based on Historic Costa Mesa Housing Trends
Park Fee Methodology
Based on Historic Housing Development Trends Over the past 10 years Cost per Acre = 390,000 + .45 (2,500,000) = 1,515,000
1,515,000 cost 4.26 acre 2.79 people
1 acre 1,000 people 1 unit
1,515,000 cost 4.26 acre 2.17 people
1 acre 1,000 people 1 unit
Cost per Acre = 390,000 + .11 (2,500,000) = 669,750
669,750 cost 4.26 acre
1 acre 1,000 people
Single-Family Residential
*This average was calculated by finding average people per unit for various apartment sizes and calculating one rate by using the average proportions for various apartments sizes in a typical developmet with 50 units of more.
Uses an average people
per unit of 1.7723 for
large apartments.* $5,056.61
$14,005.96
$18,006.38
Large Apartment Projects
Multi-Family Owner Residential and Small Apartments
Previous park expenditures were hampered by only receiving funds from 40% of the overall units developed in the last 15 years and therefore limited the potential 41 projects that could be developed by this fund. This is shown in the infographic above. This graphic also confirms that if apartments are paying park fees in the future the potential fund overall will grow and perhaps will be sufficient for more opportunities for acquisition in the future. This alternative proposes to increase the weighting of the cost of acquisition to 45% for single family residences and multi-family projects . This provides further funding for park upgrades and acquisition but does not raise the fee much higher than the existing fees. So me of the high-end apartment projects (entitled or completed) are listed below.
Apartment Projects
Name Address Number of Units
Blue Sol (Occupied) 421 Bernard Street 113
Symphony Apartments 585 and 595 Anton Boulevard 393
Baker Street Apartments 125 Baker Street 240
Anton Midrise Residential 580 Anton Boulevard 250
Azulon (Occupied) 1500 Mesa Verde Drive 230
The t
hreshold of 50 units was taken from the Zoning Code as a starting point for discussion. The Zoning Code already recognizes 50 units as a threshold for large developments. To account for the common space amenities and the complexities of 42 person per household ratios within apartments the information below was used to create an apartment park fee, for developments with a significant number of units, of $5,056.61.
COMPARISON OF PARK FEES IN OTHER OC CITIES
The following table indicates park impact fees of other Orange County cities. Because cities vary in their approach to calculating park impact fees, and demographic and housing characteristics also differ from city to city, the following table is provided for reference purposes only and is not intended to be a direct comparison.
City Park Fee
(Per Unit)
City of Laguna Beach $4,580
City of Santa Ana Varies;
up to $4,823
City of Seal Beach $5,000 to $10,000
City of Anaheim $5,388 to $6,936
City of Garden Grove $5,500
City of Tustin $5,931 to $6,386
City of San Clemente $6,823
City of Newport Beach Varies; $6,894 to $26,125
City of Brea $6,945
City of Fountain Valley $7,421
City of Laguna Hills $7,700
City of Orange $8,894
City of Seal Beach $10,000
City of Huntington Beach No Subdivision:
Detached $11,540
Attached $8,576
Subdivision:
Detached $17,857
Attached $13,385
City of San Juan Capistrano $11,600
City of Irvine Fee varies based on acreage
value of land to be dedicated.
May be as low as $1,150 per acre
of land dedication.
City of Costa Mesa $13,572 to $13,879
Automatic Adjustment of Park Fee based on Consumer Price Index Every Year
The current park fees have not been adjusted for ten years. The consultants propose that the park fee be increased on July 1st of each year, starting July 1, 2016, based on the change to the Los Angeles – Riverside-Orange County Consumer Price Index in comparison to the previous calendar year. This would adjust for escalation and allow for the City to update the park fees in 5 years as opposed to biennially as stated in the code.
New Park Fees to be applied for Pending Entitlement Projects
State law requires that the new fees shall not go into effect until after 60 days of Council adoption of the resolution. Park fees may be applied to all pending projects, including 43 rental projects. Staff recommends that the new park impact fees shall apply to any live/work or residential development project which meets any of the following criteria:
(1) Any di
scretionary application for a live/work or residential development project which was approved by the final decision making body after the effective date of the resolution; OR
(2) Any pending ministerial application for a residential development project which was not subject to discretionary review and which was submitted into plan check after the effective date of the resolution; OR
(3) A ny previously-approved live/work or residential development project which has expired after the effective date of this resolution.
Note: If park fees are reduced, Council would need to direct staff to modify the resolution to reflect whether or not reduced fees will be applied retroactively to previously-approved projects.
LEGAL REVIEW:
The Ci
ty Attorney’s office has approved the attached resolution as to form.
ALTERNATIVES:
The Ci
ty Council may select one of the following actions with the Park Fees; • Exi
sting Fees: Keep current park fees; however, Council may wish to add new park fees for apartments as identified in Alt #1 or Alt #2. • Park
Fee Alternative #1: Adopt this alternative based on trends in park fee expenditures.
• Park
Fee Alternative #2: Adopt this alternative based on Costa Mesa housing trends.
• Conti
nue hearing: Provide direction to staff to research and identify other alternatives.
The resolution would be modified to include the selected alternative and park fees. 44 Development Type Existing
Fees
Fees with
Current Rates
but same
Quimby
Formula
Park Fee Alternative 1:
Park Expenditure Trends:
Based on 10-year
Historic Trends in
Park Expenditures
Park Fee Alternative 2:
Costa Mesa Housing
Trends:
Based on 10-year
Historic
Trends in Housing
Development
Single-Family
Residence $13,572 $29,713.50 $11,285 $18,006
Condominiums -
Multi-Family Residence,
Owner $13,829 $23,110.50 $8,777 $14,005
Apartments less than 50
units -
Multi-Family Residence,
Renter
No Fee No Fee $10,598 $14,005
Apartments 50 units or
more -
Multi-Family Residence,
Renter
No Fee No Fee $10,598 $5,057
CONCLUSION:
The City’s park fees have not been updated for over ten years. Council may select a methodology for calculating park fees and adopt new park fees. Important note: Staff recommends that the park fees be updated automatically every year based on the consumer price index and that the new park fees be applied to pending/future development projects that have not received zoning entitlements to date. ________________________ __________________________
DANIEL INLOES, AICP GARY ARMSTRONG, AICP
Associate Planner Economic Development & Development
Services slkn;lknwe;lnw;elkfnweflkn;lkmnew;lknm Director / Deputy CEO Attachments: 1. Draft Council Ordinance
2.Draft Council Resolution
3.Redlined Version of Proposed Ordinance Changes
4.Minutes from Planning Commission Meeting
5.Justification Study by David Taussig & associates, Inc.
6.Letter of Support from BIA
Distr
ibution: Director of Economic & Development/Deputy CEO
Assistant Development Services Director
Sr. Deputy City Attorney
Public Services Director
City Engineer
Transportation Services Manager
Fire Protection Analyst
File (2)
45 46
47 48
49 50
51 52
53 54
55 56
57 58
59 60
61 62
63 64
65 66
67 68
69 70
71 72
73 74
75 76
77 78
79 80
81 82
83 84
85 86
87 88
89 90
91 92
93 94
95 96
97 98
99 100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123