Folsom City Council
April 23, 2024

1 Agenda
City Council Regular Meeting
Folsom City Hall | City Council Chambers, First Floor
50 Natoma Street, Folsom, CA 95630
April 23, 2024, 6:30 PM

Welcome to Your City Council Meeting
We welcome your interest and involvement in the city’s legislative process. This agenda includes information about topics coming before the City Council and the action recommended by city staff. You can read about each topic in the staff reports, which are available on the city website and in the Office of the City Clerk. The City Clerk is also available to answer any questions you have about City Council meeting procedures.

Participation
If you would like to provide comments to the City Council, please:
 Fill out a blue speaker request form, located at the back table.  Submit the form to the City Clerk before the item begins.  When it’s your turn, the City Clerk will call your name and invite you to the podium.  Speakers generally have three minutes, unless the presiding officer (usually the mayor) changes that time.

Reasonable Accommodations
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you are a person with a disability and you need a disability-related modification or accommodation to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (916) 461-6035, (916) 355-7328 (fax) or [email protected]. Requests must be made as early as possible and at least two full business days before the start of the meeting.

How to Watch
The City of Folsom provides three ways to watch a City Council meeting:

In Person Online On TV

City Council meetings take place at
City Hall, 50 Natoma Street
Watch the livestream and replay past
meetings on the city website,
www.folsom.ca.us
Watch live and replays of meetings on
Sac Metro Cable TV, Channel 14

More information about City Council meetings is available at the end of this agenda

2 City Council Regular Meeting
Folsom City Hall | City Council Chambers, First Floor
50 Natoma Street, Folsom, CA 95630
www.folsom.ca.us
Tuesday, April 23, 2024 6:30 PM

Mike Kozlowski, Mayor

Sarah Aquino, Vice Mayor YK Chalamcherla, Councilmember Rosario Rodriguez, Councilmember Anna Rohrbough, Councilmember

AGENDA

CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL:

Councilmembers: Chalamcherla, Rodriguez, Rohrbough, Aquino, Kozlowski The City Council has adopted a policy that no new item will begin after 10:30 p.m. Therefore, if you are here for an item that has not been heard by 10:30 p.m., you may leave, as th e item will be continued to a future Council meeting.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

AGENDA UPDATE
SCHEDULED PRESENTATIONS:

1. Proclamation of the Mayor of the City of Folsom Proclaiming May 12-18, 2024 as National Police Week in the City of Folsom

2. Proclamation of the Mayor of the City of Folsom Proclaiming May 19 - May 25, 2024 as National Public Works Week and May 15, 2024 as City Works Day

3. Presentation from HART of Folsom (Homeless Assistance Resource Team) regarding the Winter Shelter

4. Police Department Report on Crime and Homelessness and Direction to Staff BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR:

Members of the public are entitled to address the City Council concerning any item within the Folsom City Council's subject matter jurisdiction. Public comments are generally limited to no more than three minutes. Except for certain specific exceptions, the City Council is prohibited from discussing or taking action on any item not appearing on the posted agenda.

3 CONSENT CALENDAR:

Items appearing on the Consent Calendar are considered routine and may be approved by one motion.

Councilmembers may pull an item for discussion.

5. Approval of April 9, 2024 Special and Regular Meeting Minutes

6. Ordinance No. 1343 - An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Folsom Repealing Chapter

9.64 of the Folsom Municipal Code Pertaining to Trespass (Second Reading and Adoption)

7. Resolution No. 11187 – A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with Helix Environmental Planning, Inc. for Environmental Support Services for the Water System Rehabilitation Project No. 1

8. Resolution No. 11188 – A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with Badawi & Associates to provide Audit Services for Three Fiscal Years Ending June 30, 2024, 2025, and 2026
PUBLIC HEARING:

9. Resolution No. 11186 – A Resolution to Adopt an Amended User Fee Schedule for Community Development Engineering and Building Services
NEW BUSINESS:

10. Ordinance No. 1344 - An Ordinance of the City of Folsom Amending Sections 3.50.020,

3.50.040 and 3.50.050 and repealing Section 3.50.060 of the Folsom Municipal Code (Introduction and First Reading) and Determination that the Project is Exempt from CEQA

11. Workshop for Community for Health and Independence Conceptual Annexation Proposal

COUNCIL REQUESTS FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS

CITY MANAGER REPORTS

COUNCIL COMMENTS

ADJOURNMENT

NOTICE: Members of the public are entitled to directly address the City Council concerning any item that is described in the notice of this meeting, before or during consideration of that item. If you wish to address Council on an issue, which is on this agenda, please complete a blue speaker request card, and deliver it to a staff member at the table on the left side of the Council Chambers prior to discussion of the item. When your name is called, stand to be recognized by the Mayor and then proceed to the podium. If you wish to address the City Council on any other item of interest to the public, when the Mayor asks if there is any “Business from the Floor,” follow the same procedure described above. Please limit your comments to three minutes or less.

NOTICE REGARDING CHALLENGES TO DECISIONS: Pursuant to all applicable laws and regulations, including without limitation, California Government Code Section 65009 and or California Public Resources Code Section 21177, if you wish to challenge in court any of the above decisions (regarding planning, zoning and/or environmental decisions), you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing(s) described in this notice/agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to, the public hearing.

As presiding officer, the Mayor has the authority to preserve order at all City Council meetings, to remove or cause the removal of any person from any such meeting for disorderly conduct, or for making personal,

4 impertinent, or slanderous remarks, using profanity, or becoming boisterous, threatening or personally abusive while addressing said Council, and to enforce the rules of the Council.

PERSONS INTERESTED IN PROPOSING AN ITEM FOR THE CITY COUNCIL AGEND A SHOULD CONTACT A MEMBER OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

The meeting of the Folsom City Council is being telecast on Metro Cable TV, Channel 14, the Government Affairs Channel, and will be shown in its entirety on the Friday and Saturday following the meeting, both at 9 a.m. The City does not control scheduling of this telecast and persons interested in watching the televised meeting should confirm this schedule with Metro Cable TV, Channel 14. The City of Folsom provides live and archived webcasts of regular City C ouncil meetings. The webcasts can be found on the online services page of the City's website www.folsom.ca.us.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you are a person with a disability and you need a disability-related modification or accommodation to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (916) 461-6035, (916) 355-7328 (fax) or [email protected]. Requests must be made as early as possible and at least two full business days before the start of the meeting.

Any documents produced by the City and distributed to the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available at the City Clerk’s Counter at City Hall located at 50 Natoma Street, Folsom, California and at the Folsom Public Lib rary located at 411 Stafford Street, Folsom, California during normal business hours.

PROCLAMATION

OF THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF FOLSOM
PROCLAIMING MaY L2 - L8,2024
AS

NATIONAL POLICE WEEK IN THE CITY OF FOLSOM
wHEREAS, it is important that all citizens know and understand the duties, responsibilities, hazards and sacrifices of those who dedicate their lives to the law enforcement profession, and to keeping our communities safe; and WHEREAS, in 1g62 president Kennedy issued a proclamation based on a joint resolution of Congress, which proclaimed May 15 as National Peace Officers Memorial Oay ani the calendar week in which May 15 falls as National Police Week in

1.".ognition of those federal, state and local law enforcement officers who havjlost their lives or have become disabled in the line of duty for the safety and Protection of others, and
WHEREAS, in2023, a total of 136 peace officers.losttheir lives either in the line of duty or from injuries received while on duty. While far too many officers were killed in ZO2g ttris was a 39olo decrease from 2022; and the service and sacrifice of all officers killed in the line of duty will be honored and the names of the officers newly engraved on the Memorial will be formally dedicated during the National Law Enforcement officers Memorial Fund's Annual candlelight Vigil, to be held on the evening of Monday, May 13, 2024; and
Folsom Police officers work selflessly and thanffiully on behalf of the exceptionally suppoftive people of this great city and, to safeguard the lives inA 'ptop.rty of ineir teliow Americans regardless of the peril or hazard to themselves; and
by their patriotic seruice and their dedicated efforts these men and women have earned the gratitude of the city.

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,
NoW THEREFoRE| r, MTCHAEL D. KozLowsKr, Mayor of the City of Folsom on behaf of the Folsom City Council, do hereby proclaim the week of May t2-t8, 2024, as NATT1NAL poLrcE wirxin the city of Foisom and extend our gratitude to the men and women of the Folsom police Department for their dedicated service to our community, their courage, diligence, and dedication to keeping our city and citizens safe' PROCLAIMED this 23'd day of April 2024'
Michael D. Kozlowski, MAYOR

04/23/2024 Item No.1.

This page is intentiona"llA Ieft blsnk
to fo.cilitote double - side d printtng
snd minimize paper use.

CITY OF

DISTINCTIVE BY NATURE
FOLSOl\{

04/23/2024 Item No.1.

Proclamation of the Mayor of the City of Folsom
Proclaiming
May tg - May 25) 2c/24 as National Public works week
and
May l^5, 2o.24 as CitY Works DaY
WHEREAS, public works services provided in the Folsom community are an impoftant part of our residents' everyday lives, and advance the quality of life for all; and
WHEREAS, the health, safety, and comfort of our residents greatly depend on te operational services of public works systems and programs such as traffic engineering, street maintenance, storm drainage, solid waste collection, recycling, and the management of hazardous materials; and WHEREAS, the planning, design, construction, and operation of these programs depend upon the dedicated skills of the City of Folsom staff; and WHEREAS, the Folsom City Charter and Folsom Municipal Code encourages broad, informed public participation in civic affairs; and
WHEREAS, the City of Folsom desires to share information with the public about municiPal oPerations; and
WHEREAS, City Works Day is designed to inspire residents to discover the City of Fobom's wide variety of services and programs. Community members are invited to attend the May 15 City Works Day event at City Lions Park:

NOW, THEREFORE, l, Michael Kozlowski, Mayor of the City of Folsom, on behalf of the Folsom City Council, do hereby proclaim the week of May 19 through May 25, 2024 as National puOtic Works Week
-and May 15, 2024 as City Works Day in the City of
Folsom, and recognize the contribution that Public Works and other City departments make daily to the health, safety and comfort of our residents.

PROCLAIMED this 23rd day of April2024'
Michael D. Kozlowski, MAYOR

04/23/2024 Item No.2.

This poge is intentionally left blank
to facilitot e double - side d printing
and minimize poper ttse.

CITY OF

DISTINCTIVE EY NATURE
FOLSOl\{

04/23/2024 Item No.2.

Folsom City Council
Staff rt
ACTI
Representatives from HART of Folsom will make a presentation regarding their winter shelter.

Respectfully submitted,
Christa Freemantle, CMC
City Clerk
MEETING DATE: 412312024
AGENDA SECTION: Scheduled Presentattons
SUBJECT: Presentation from HART of Folsom (Homeless Assistance Resource Team) regarding the Winter Shelter
FROM: City Clerk's Department
1

04/23/2024 Item No.3.

This page is intentionqlly Ieft blqnk
t o facilitot e double - side d printing
snd minimize poper ttse.

CITY OF
DISTINCTIVE tsY NATURE
FOLSOl\[

04/23/2024 Item No.3.
i i,:'i,::i::ii:\rl
Folsom City Council
Staff Re rt
RECOMMENDATION / CITY COUNCIL ACTIQI{
The Police Department will present the 2023 crime and homelessness statistics and ask the Council for direction on further action.

Submitted,
Rick Hillman, CHIEF OF POLICE
1 MEETING DATE: 412312024
AGENDA SECTION: Scheduled Presentailons
SUBJECT: Police Department Report on Crime and Homelessness and Direction to Staff
FROM: Police Department

04/23/2024 Item No.4.

This poge is intentionsllA left blqnk
to focilitate double - side d printing
qnd minimize paper ttse.

CITY OF

DISTINCTIVE BY NATURE
FOLSON{

04/23/2024 Item No.4.

File 034-21 24-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
April9,2024
Gity Gouncil Special Meeting

MINUTES
Tuesday, April 09,2024 5:45 PM

CALL TO ORDER
The City Council meeting was called to order at5.45 pm with Vice MayorAquino presiding ROLL CALL:

Councilmembers Present: Rosario Rodriguez, Councilmember Sarah Aquino, Vice Mayor
YK Chalamcherla, Councilmember
Councilmembers Absent: Anna Rohrbough, Councilmember (arrived at 5:57 pm) Mike Kozlowski, Mayor (arrived 5:46 pm)
ADJOURNMENT TO GLOSED SESSION FOR THE FOLLOWING PURPOSES:

1. Conference with Real Property Negotiator - Pursuant to Government Code section 54956.8:

Extending the lease of the VFW Post 6604 Building located at 1300 Forrest Street, APN 070-0042- OO1-0000. Negotiating Parties: City Manager Elaine Andersen on behalf of the City of Folsom, and Robert M. Lee, Jr., Post Commander, on behalf of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, Post 6604. Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Lease

2. Conference with Real Property Negotiator - Pursuant to Government Code section 54956.8:

Extending the Practical Cycle lease of City-owned real property located at 905 Leidesdorff Street in the Historic District Parking Garage. Negotiating Parties: City Manager Elaine Andersen on behalf of the City of Folsom, and Tim Castleman on behalf of Practical Cycle. Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Lease
Motion by Councilmember Rodriguez, second by Councilmember Ghalamcherla to adiourn to closed session. Motion passed by the following roll-callvote:

AYES: Rodriguez,Aquino,Chalamcherla,Kozlowski
NOES: None
ABSENT: Rohrbough
ABSTAIN: None

RECONVENE
City Attorney Steven Wang announced that no final action was taken during closed session.

Draft - Not Officiol tJntil Approved by the City Council Poge 7

04/23/2024 Item No.5.

File 034-21 24-041
Folsom City Council Minutes
April9,2024

ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the City Council, the meeting was adjourned at 6:31 pm.

SUBMITTED BY
Christa Freemantle, City Clerk
ATTEST:

Mike Kozlowski, Mayor
Draft - Not Official Until Approved by the City Council Poge 2

04/23/2024 Item No.5.

File 034-2124-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
April9,2024
Gity Gouncil Regular Meeting

MINUTES
Tuesday, April 09,2024 6:30 PM

CALL TO ORDER
The regular City Council meeting was called to order at 6:31 pm with Mayor Mike Kozlowski presiding ROLL CALL:

Councilmembers Present: Rosario Rodriguez, Councilmember Anna Rohrbough, Councilmember
Sarah Aquino, Vice Mayor
YK Chalamcherla, Councilmember
Mike Kozlowski, Mayor
Councilmembers Absent: None

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANGE
The pledge of allegiance was recited

AGENDA UPDATE
City Attorney Steven Wang advised that there were no updates to the agenda SCHEDU LED PRESENTATIONS:

1. Proclamation of the Mayor of the City of Folsom Proclaiming April 14-20,2024 as National Public Safety Telecommunicators Week in the City of Folsom
Councilmember Rohrbough predented the proclamation.

2. Proclamation of the Mayor of the City of Folsom Proclaiming April2l-27,2024 as Volunteer Appreciation Week and Recognizing the Contribution of the CAPS Volunteers Councilmember Chalamcherla presented the proclamation.

3. Proclamation of the Mayor of the City of Folsom Proclaiming April22,2024, as Earth Day, Celebrated on April 20,2024
Mayor Kozlowski presented the proclamation.

Draft - Not Official Until Approved by the City Council Poge 3

04/23/2024 Item No.5.

File 034-21 24-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
April9,2024

4. Proclamation of the Mayor of the City of Folsom Encouraging the Community to Become lnvolved in Arbor Day
Vice Mayor Aquino presented the proclamation.

5. Long-Term Liabilities Update - CaIPERS and Other Postemployment Benefits Chief Financial Officer Stacey Tamagni made a presentation and responded to questions from the City Council.

6. Presentation on the 5-Year City of Folsom Strategic PIan, lmplementation Action Plan Communications Director Christine Brainerd made a presentation and responded to questions from the City Council. Parks and Recreation Director Kelly Gonzalez, City Manager Elaine Andersen, and City Attorney Steven Wang provided additional information in response to further questions.

BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR:

The following speaker addressed the City Council:

Diane Cigelski, regarding a planned freeway overpass and traffic circulation: City Manager Elaine Andersen invited Ms. Cigelski to speak with Public Works Director Mark Rackovan.

GONSENT GALENDAR:

Items appearing on the Consent Calendar are considered routine and may be approved by one motion Councilmembers may pull an item for discussion.

7. Approval of March 12,2024 Regular Meeting Minutes

8. Approval of March 26,2024 Special and Regular Meeting Minutes

9. Resolution No. 11183 - A Resolution Approving Application for Specific Grant Funds from the Budget Act of 2023, in the Amount of $425,000 to the City of Folsom Parks & Recreation Department, for the Johnny Cash Trail Art Experience - Cash's Pick No. 2 and Appropriation of Funds

10. Resolution No. 11184 - A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Communications Site License Agreement with CCTMl LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company, at Lembi Park

11. Resolution No. 11185 - A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Amendment to the Contract with Dokken Engineering for Grant Application Assistance for the Folsom Boulevard Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing Project (Contract No. 173-21 22-066) and Appropriation of Funds
Motion by Vice Mayor Aquino, second by Gouncilmember Rodriguez, to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion passed by the following roll-callvote:

AYES: Rodriguez, Rohrbough, Aquino, Chalamcherla, Kozlowski NOES: None
Droft - Not Official Until Approved by the City Council Page 4

04/23/2024 Item No.5.

File 034-2124-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
April9,2024
ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

No
No
ne
ne
PUBLIC HEARING:

12. Resolution No. 11182 - A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Folsom Approving the lssuance of the California Statewide Communities Development Authority of Tax-exempt Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds for Vintage at Folsom Community Development Department staff member Stephanie Henry made a presentation and responded to questions from the City Council. City Attorney Steven Wang and Community Development Director Pam Johns provided additional information in response to further questions.

Mayor Kozlowski opened the public hearing at 8:15 pm. The following speaker addressed the City Council regarding the item:

Ravi Kahlon
Hearing no further speakers, the public hearing was closed Project developer Ryan Patterson, Vintage Housing, addressed the City Council.

Motion by Mayor Kozlowski, second by Gouncilmember Rodriguez to approve Resolution No. 11182. Motion passed by the following roll-callvote:

AYES: Rodriguez, Aquino, Chalamcherla, Kozlowski
NOES: Rohrbough
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
OLD BUSINESS:

13. Potential Special Sales Tax Ballot Measure for the November 2024 General Municipal Election and Direction to Staff
City Manager Elaine Andersen presented the item.

The following speakers addressed the City Council regarding the item Ronald Carter
Robert Goss
Bruce Cline
The City Council discussed the potential ballot measure.

Motion by Mayor Kozlowski, second by Councilmember Rodriguez to - within the bounds of [the in-house] communications tools available now - ask the Gity Manager to focus on communicating the current budget situation, describe the need for additional revenue and how that revenue would be most valuable; then, as [this year's] budget is developed, [the Gity Gouncill will discuss what additional resources make sense to put toward an educational Draft - Not Official Until Approved by the City Council poge 5

04/23/2024 Item No.5.

File 034-21 24-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
April9,2024
campaign; and ffurtherl to decide that the Gity Council won't be placing their own measure on the ballot at this time.

The City Council further discussed their options. Councilmember Rohrbough requested two separate motions and votes on the compound motion. Mayor Kozlowski agreed to represent his motion in two parts.

Motion by Mayor Kozlowski, second by Gouncilmember Rodriguez to direct staff not to move forward with placing a special local sales tax measure on the ballot for the November 2024 general election at this time. Motion passed by the following roll-call vote:

AYES: Rodriguez, Rohrbough, Aquino, Ghalamcherla, Kozlowski NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Motion by Mayor Kozlowski, second by Gouncilmember Rodriguez to direct the Gity Manager to [at this timel develop a plan with the communications team to use all current pathways for communicating with the public regarding the need and purpose for additional revenue; then, as part of the budget process, to bring a plan (including cost information) for the Gouncil's consideration to determine what additional resources may be needed and where they would come from, to follow through to November.

The City Council discussed the motion.

Motion passed by the following roll-call vote:

AYES: Rodriguez, Aquino, Chalamcherla, Kozlowski
NOES: Rohrbough
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
NEW BUSINESS:

14. Ordinance No. 1343 - An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Folsom Repealing Chapter

9.64 of the Folsom Municipal Code Pertaining to Trespass (lntroduction and First Reading) City Attorney Steven Wang made a presentation and responded to questions from the City Council.

Motion by Gouncilmember Rodriguez, second by Vice Mayor Aquino to introduce Ordinance No 1343. Motion passed by the following roll-callvote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Rodriguez, Rohrbough, Aquino, Chalamcherla, Kozlowski
None
None
None
Draft - Not Officiol Until Approved by the City Council Page 6

04/23/2024 Item No.5.

File 034-21 24-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
April9,2024

COUNGIL REQUESTS FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Councilmember Chalamcherla requested a funding workshop to discuss how the city might intervene in school district funding, acknowledging that the City has no authority over the school board; Councilmember Rohbrough added a request that the discussion include the potential funding impacts of a district split.

CITY MANAGER REPORTS
City Manager Elaine Andersen spoke of the recent passing of city employee Terri Hemley

GOUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Rodriguez expressed condolences to Terri Hemley's family and encouraged allto get involved in the budget process.

Councilmember Rohrbough spoke of recent attendance at the ICSC conference and invited residents to an upcoming Coffee with a Cop/Parks and Recreation Director event. She expressed condolences to Terri Hemley's family and friends.

Councilmember Chalamcherla expressed prayers for Terri Hemley, spoke of Parks and Recreation Commission meetings, urged the planting of colorful trees and school events.

Vice Mayor Aquino spoke of wildfire and biomass bus tour and expressed thoughts and prayers for Terri Hemley's friends, family, and co-workers.

Mayor Kozlowski spoke of his upcoming "listening session" on homelessness to brainstorm ideas to address the problems. He spoke of a recent SACOG land use meeting and dragon boat races.

ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the City Council, the meeting was adjourned at9.24 pm in honor and memory of Terri Hemley.

SUBMITTED BY
Christa Freemantle, City Clerk
ATTEST
Mike Kozlowski, Mayor
Droft - Not Officiol Until Approved by the City Council Poge 7

04/23/2024 Item No.5.

This page is intentionally Ieft blqnk
to focilitate double - side d printing
and minimize paper ttse.

CITY OF

DISTINCTIVE BY NATURE
FOLSON{

04/23/2024 Item No.5.
; 1. : '-l r 'r'j
Folsom City Council
Staff R ort

RECOMMENDATION / CITY COUNCIL ACTION
Staff recommends that the City Council conduct second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1343 - An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Folsom Repealing Chapter 9.64 of the Folsom Municipal Code Pertaining to Trespass.

BACKGROUND / ISSUE
The City Council introduced and conducted first reading of this Ordinance at its April 9, 2024 meeting. There is no change to the Ordinance'
The City Council in 1968 enacted Chapter 9.64 inthe Folsom Municipal Code to provide for misdemeanor citation for trespassing on business premises if the business owner or operator:
(1) issues a notice in writing; (2) signs the notice; and (3) personally delivers the notice to the trespasser.

Additionally, the notice must contain the following information: (1) date; (2) description of the premises involved; (3) name or description of the trespasser; (4) reason for requesting the trespasser to leave the premises; and (5) a statement that remaining on the premises after receiving such notice is punishable as a misdemeanor.

A much simpler process to issue misdemeanor citations for trespassing exists under State |aw. There is no need for, and law enforcement does not typically rely on, Chapter 9.64 of 1 MEETING DATE: 4t2312024
AGENDA SECTION: Consent Calendar
SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 1343 - An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Folsom Repealing Chapter 9.64 of the Folsom Municipal Code Pertaining to Trespass (Second Reading and Adoption) FROM: City Attorney's Office

04/23/2024 Item No.6.
the Folsom Municipal Code to discourage, prevent, and address trespassing problems for businesses in Folsom.

POLICY / RIII,E
All powers of the City shall be vested in the City Council, except as otherwise provided by the City Charter. Section 2.02 of the City Chaner.

ANALYSN
Section 602 of the California Penal Code contains a much simpler and less onerous process for law enforcement to issue and prosecute misdemeanor citations for trespass. In particular, the mere act of entering upon or occupying the property of another without permission is sufficient to demonstrate trespass (see, e.g., Penal Code 602(k), (m), and (o)).

Because law enforcemenl typically relies on Section 602 of the California Penal Code to discourage, prevent, and address trespassing problems, staff respectfully recommend that the City Council introduce and conduct first reading of Ordinance No. 1343 - An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Folsom Repealing Chapter 9.64 of the Folsom Municipal Code Pertaining to Trespass.

F'INANCIAL IMPACT
This item has no impact on the Crty's general fund.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not apply to activities that will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment (CEQA Guidelines 915061(c)(3)), or are otherwise not considered a project as defined by Public Resources Code g21065 and CEQA Guidelines $15060(c)(3) and $15378. This Council action meets the above criteria and is not subject to CEQA. No environmental review is required.

ATTACHMENT
Ordinance No. 1343 - An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Folsom Repealing Chapter 9.64 of the Folsom Municipal Code Pertaining to Trespass (Second Reading and Adoption)
Respectfully submitted,
2 Steven W*g, City Attorney

04/23/2024 Item No.6.

ORDINANCE NO. 1343

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FOLSOM REPEALING CHAPTER 9.64 OF THE FOLSOM MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO TRESPASS The City Council of the City of Folsom does hereby ordain as follows:

SECTION 1 PURPOSE
The purpose of this Ordinance is to repeal Chapter 9.64,"Trespass" in the Folsom Municipal Code to conform with the California Penal Code enforcement provisions regarding misdemeanor citation and prosecution for trespass'
SECTION 2 REPEAL TO CODE
Chapter 9.64,"Trespass" of the Folsom Municipal Code is hereby repealed in its entirety.

All proceedings with respect to issuing misdemeanor citations and prosecution relating to trespass shall be consistent with the requirements in the California Penal Code.

SECTION 3 SCOPE
Except as set forth in this Ordinance, all other provisions of the Folsom Municipal Code shall remain in full force and effect.

SECTION 4 SEVERABILITY
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase in this Ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be unconstitutional, invalid, or ineffective by any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity or effectiveness of the remaining portions bf tnir Ordinance or any part thereof. The City Council declares that it would have passed each section irrespective of the factthatany one or more section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase be declared unconstitutional, invalid, or ineffective.

SECTION 5 EFF'ECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days from and after its passage and adoption, provided it is published in fu1l or in summary within twenty (20) days after its adoption in a newspaper of general circulation in the City.

This Ordinance was introduced and the title thereof read at the regular meeting of the City Council on April 9,2024, and the second reading occurred at the regular meeting of the City Council on April 23,2024.

On a motion by Council Member seconded by Council Member the foregoing ordinance was passed and adopted by the City Council of the day of April,2024 by the following roll-call vote:City of Folsom, State of California,this23 Ordinance No. 1343
Page I of2
rd

04/23/2024 Item No.6.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN
Councilmember(s):

Councilmember(s):

Councilmember(s):

Councilmember(s):

Michael D. Kozlowski, MAYOR
ATTEST:

Christa Freemantle, CITY CLERK
Ordinance No. 1343
Page2 of2

04/23/2024 Item No.6.
h
Folsom City Council
Staff R ort
MEETING DATE: 412312024
AGENDA SECTION: Consent Calendar
SUBJECT: Resolution No. 11187 - A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. for Environmental Support Services for the Water System Rehabilitation Project No. I
FROM: Environmental and Water Resources Department

RECOMMENDATION / CITY COUNCIL ACTION
The Environmental and Water Resources Department recommends the City Council pass and adopt Resolution No. 11187 - A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with HELIX Environmental Planning,Inc. for Environmental Support Services forthe Water System Rehabilitation Project No. 1.
/ ISSUE
The Environmental and Water Resources (EWR) Department has developed a water infrastructure rehabilitation and replacement (R & R) program through water master plans and ongoing condition assessment programs. Through these efforts, portions of the water system in the City have been identified as needing rehabilitation or replacement. A comprehensive plan has been developed for the R & R of these aging systems, and much of this work has been completed in recent years. The projects identified and included within the Water System Rehabilitation Project No. 1 include the replacement of the waterline serving Black Miner's Bar State Park, rehabilitating the waterline on Rainbow Bridge, and replacing the upstream slide gate and downstream isolation valve on the Willow Hill Dam, known as the Willow Hill Reservoir Valve Replacement Project.

In April 2019, the City entered into an Agreement (Contract No. 173-21 19-030) with HELIX Enviionmental Planning, Inc. (HELIX) for environmental consulting services for the Willow Hill Reservoir Valve Replacement Project. Per this original agreement, HELIX performed surface water evaluations and biological resource assessment monitoring services. Due to the complexity of the design for this project (design services are currently being provided by Water Works Engineers, LLC) and the extended time to coordinate with the Division of Safety of Dams (DSOD) 1

04/23/2024 Item No.7.
for review, the design for this project has taken longer than anticipated. The agreement (Contract No. 173-21 19-030) with HELIX expired in April 2022.

This contract is for environmental support services related to the Willow Hill Reservoir Valve Replacement Project only. No additional cost for design or construction management services is being requested for the Black Miner's Bar Waterline Rehabilitation Project or the Rainbow Bridge Waterline Rehabilitation Project. These projects have been designed and constructed to date.

This resolution will authorize. the City Manager to execute an agreement with HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. for environmental support services for the Water System Rehabilitation Project No. I for a not-to-exceed amount of $79,500.

POLICY / RULE
In accordance with Chapter 2.36 of the Folsom Munisipal Code. supplies, equipment, services, and construction with a value of $73,209 or greater shall be awarded by City Council.

ANALYSIS
The Willow Hill Reservoir Valve Replacement Project will involve replacing the existing slide gate on the upstream side of the dam at the Willow Hill Reservoir and replacing the existing isolation valve on the downstream side of the dam, which is required by the DSOD. DSOD requires two working valves on the outlet pipe of the reservoir, one on both sides of the reservoir.

The existing valves on the upstream and downstream sides of the outlet pipe are no longer functional and need to be replaced.

HELIX is uniquely qualified to perform environmental support services for this project based on their previous involvement with this project, understanding and familiarity of the background and requiiements of the project, qualifications, and experience of coordinating with the design team (Water Works Engineers, LLC).

For the Willow Hill Reservoir Valve Replacement Project, HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. will provide environmental support services throughout the design phase. The following describes the services that HELIX will perform:
- Willow Hill Reservoir Valve Replacement Project
o Air Quality Assessment and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis o Cultural Resources Assessment
o Biological Resources Evaluation
o CEQA Compliance (Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration) o Regulatory Permitting
o Project Management and Meetings
This resolution will authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. for Environmental Support Services for the Water System Rehabilitation Project No. 1 for a not-to-exceed amount of $79,500. 2 Page 26
04/23/2024 Item No.7.

F'INANCIAL IMPACT
The Water System Rehabilitation Project No. 1 (Project # WAl603) is included in the Fiscal Year 2023-2024 Capital Improvement Plan with a total project budget of $2,391,061. Sufficient funds are budgeted and available in the Water Operating Fund (Fund 520). The EWR Department recommends that the contract be awarded to HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. for $79,500.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEIY
Pursuant to the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City is required to prepare the environmental documentation for the Water System Rehabilitation Project No. 1.

ATTACHMENT
Resolution No. 11187 - A Resolution Authorizingthe City Manager to Execute an Agreement with HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. for Environmental Support Services for the Water System Rehabilitation Project No. I
Submitted,
Marcus Yasutake, Director

ENVIRONMENTAL AND WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
J Page 27
04/23/2024 Item No.7.

RESOLUTION NO. 11187
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AI\ AGREEMENT WITH HELIX ENYIRONMENTAL PLAI{NING,INC. FOR

ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPORT SERVICES FOR THE WATER SYSTEM
REHABILITATION PROJECT NO. 1
WHEREAS, the City identifies projects that are critical to ensuring the delivery of adequate and high quality water supply to all residents and businesses; and WHEREAS, the City of Folsom has identified the Willow Hill Reservoir Valve Replacement Project, as a part of the Water System Rehabilitation Project No. 1 (Project # WAl603), as a priority to maintain integrity and operation of the raw water system; and WHEREAS' the City of Folsom will incorporate comments provided by the Division of Safety of Dams (DSOD) into the environmental review; and
WHEREAS, HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. by reason of their knowledge and familiarity with this project, understanding of the background and requirements of the project, and the qualifications and eiperience of the project team, are qualified to perform the required environmental support services; and
WHEREAS, the Water System Rehabilitation Project No. 1 (Project # WA1603) was included in the FY 2023-24 Capital Improvement Plan with a total project budget within the Water Operating Fund (Fund 520) of $2,391,061; and
WHEREAS, sufficient funds are budgeted and available in the Water Operating Fund (Fund 520) in the amount of $79,500; and
WHEREAS, the agreement will be in a form acceptable to the City Attomey:

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Folsom authorizes the City Manager to execute an Agreement with HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. for Environmental Support Services for the Water System Rehabilitation Project No. I for a not-to-exceed amount of $79,500.
pASSED AND ADOPTED this 23'd day of April,2024, by the following roll-call vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST:

Councilmember(s):

Councilmember(s):

Councilmember(s):

Councilmember(s):

Christa Freemantle, CITY CLERK
ResolutionNo. 11187
Page I of 1
Michael D. Kozlowski, MAYOR

04/23/2024 Item No.7.

Folsom City Council
Staff Re ort

RECOMMENDATION / CITY COUNCIL ACTION
The Finance Department recommends that the City Council pass and adopt Resolution No. 11188 - A Resolution Authorizingthe City Manager to Execute an Agreement with Badawi & Associates to Provide Audit Services for Three Fiscal Years Ending June 30, 2024,2025, artd2026

BACKGROUND / ISSUE
The Finance Department issued a request for proposal to qualified auditors, including the City's current auditors, to audit the City's financial statements for the three fiscal years ending June 30, 2024,2025, and2026. Five firms responded to the request by providing proposals for these services. The selection process was structured so that the principal factor in auditor selection was the auditor's ability to perform a quality audit. The firms were evaluated based on the following criteria:

Independent and licensed to practice in Califomia
Firm personnel having received adequate continuing professional education in the last two years
No conflict of interest with regard to other work performed for the City of Folsom Responsiveness to the requirements of the Request for Proposal Thoroughness and demonstrated understanding of the tasks to be completed Recent municipal experience in conducting similar engagements o
a
I
MEETING DATE: 412312024
AGENDA SECTION: Consent Calendar
SUBJECT: Resolution No. 11188 - A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with Badawi & Associates to Provide Audit Services for Three Fiscal Years Ending June 30, 2024,2025, and2026
FROM: Finance Department

04/23/2024 Item No.8.
o
a
a
a
Staff expertise and overall impression of personnel to be assigned to the project Time required to accomplish the requested services
Depth of industry experience
Cost

POLICY / RULE
Section 2.36.080, Award of Contracts of the Folsom Municipal Code states, in part, that contracts for supplies, equipment, services, and construction with an estimated value of $73,209 or greater shall be awarded by the City Council.

Section 3.02.160 of the Folsom Municipal Code requires the City Council shall provide for an independent annual audit of all city accounts, financial transactions, and documents, and may ptor,,ld. for more frequent, more specialized, or special audits as it may determine in its discretion to be necessary to assure the integrity of City moneys, assets, accounts, and records.

ANALYSIS
As a Recommended Practice, the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) recommends that governmental entities undertake a competitive process for the selection of independent auditors at the end of each audit contract term. GFOA further encourages governmental entities to enter into multiyear agreements of at least five years in duration when obtuinittg the services of independent auditors. Such agreements allow for greater continuity and help to minimize the potential for disruption in connection with the independent audit.

The request for proposal included an option to extend the agreement for two (2) consecutive one-year periods.

On February g,2024the Finance Department received proposals from Eide Bailly LLP, Clifton Larson Allen LLP, Chavan & Associates LLP, Badawi & Associates, and The Pun Group. The proposals were evaluated by three Finance Department staff members for technical evaluation prior to reviewing costs. The technical evaluation were scored as shown in Table 1 based on a maximum technical score of 65.

Table L' Consultant Technical Scores without Costs
Consultant FIN 1 FIN 2 F'IN 3 TotaI Average
Badawi & Associates 62 46 6l 169 56.33
Eide Baillv LLP 56 48 63 r67 5s.67
The Pun Group 55 49 60 t64 54.67
Clifton l^arson Allen LLP 55 44 53 152 50.67
Chavan & Associates, LLP 46 37 51 t34 44.67
After reviewing each proposal for technical experience, the proposals were reviewed for project costs. TLe fee r"h"d.tles for the scope of work outlined in the request for proposals for Year 1 from each consultant are shown inTable2.
2 Page 30
04/23/2024 Item No.8.

Table 2: Consultant Proiect Costs
Consultant Fee Amount
Badawi & Associates $ 81,675.00
Eide Bailly LLP $107,550.00
The Pun Group $ 85,000.00
Clifton Larson Allen LLP $ 87,260.00
Chavan & Associates, LLP $ 70,000.00
To assist in the final selection, three firms were invited to interview with the Finance Director, Financial Services Manager, Deputy Treasurer and Senior Financial Analyst. The focus of the interview process was to find the firm with the best fit in terms of expertise, communication style and ability to work closely with City staff.

Based on the evaluation and results of the request for proposals and interview processes, staff recommends the firm of Badawi & Associates, as the best qualified to provide audit services for the three fiscal years ending June 30,2024,2025 and2026. This firm was selected based upon its extensive municipal auditing experience, approach to internal control testing, analytical procedures, and ability to meet the City's reporting timeline. Table 3 shows the overall total scores including project costs based on a maximum score of 80.

Table 3: Consultant Overall Costs
Badawi & Associates is located in Berkley, CA, and has provided audit services to a variety of California cities, counties, and public agencies. The firm's references include the Cities of Berkeley, Richmond, Dublin, Antioch, and Lafayette.

J
Total Score
Cost
Score
Technical Score
(ave.)Consultant
t4 70.33s6.33Badawi & Associates
12 66.67s4.67The Pun Group
8 63.6755.67Eide Baillv LLP
13 63.6750.67Clifton Larson Allen LLP

59.6744.67 15Chavan & Associates, LL

04/23/2024 Item No.8.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
Fees for the proposed services provided by Badawi & Associates for audits of the Fiscal Years ending June 30, 2024,2025 and2026have not been budgeted. However, these services historically are budgeted in the Finance Department's budget and costs for the first year of services wiil be included in the FY 2025 preliminary budget proposal. Amounts for ihe next two years will be included in subsequent budgets. The following table outlines the proposed audit services, which include an annual audit of the City's financial statements, and bther financial and compliance audits to be performed with the associated fees.

Fiscal Year Ending
F inancial 6t30t2025 6130/2026 Total
City Financial Statements
Successor Agency Financial Statements
Folsom Public Financing Authority Financial
Statements
Folsom Ranch Financing Authority Financial
Statements
Gann Appropriation Limit
Agreed-Upon-Pro cedwes
Single Audit
$ 62,475 $
5,405
$ 66,205
5,675
$ . 193,010
16,650
2,385
4,540
3,480 3,590
4,640 4,785 L3,965
3,730 10,800
64,330
5,570
795 845
s-465
745

5.030 5 .235 15 73 0
$ 81"67s s 84.160$ 86 .705 $ 252,540

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Not Applicable.

ATTACHMENTS
l. Resolution No. I 1188 - A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with Badawi & Associates, to Provide Audit Services for Three Fiscal Years Ending June 30, 2024,2025 and2026
Submitted,
Stacey Tamagni, Finance Director
4 Page 32
04/23/2024 Item No.8.

RESOLUTION NO. 11188

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN

AGREEMENT WITH BADAWI & ASSOCIATES TO PROVIDE AUDIT SERVICES FOR THREE FISCAL YEARS ENDING JUNE 30,2024,2025 AND 2026 WHEREAS, Section 2.36.120 of the Folsom Municipal Code requires the City Council to approve professional service contracts greater than$.73,209; and WHEREAS, Section 3.02.160 of the Folsom Municipal Code requires the City Council shall provide for an independent annual audit of all city accounts, financial transactions and documents, and may provide for more frequent, more specialized, or special audits as it may determine in its discretion to be necessary to assure the integrity of City moneys, assets, accounts and records; and
WHEREAS, the Government Finance Officers Association encourages governmental entities to enter into multiyear agreements of at least five years in duration when obtaining the services of independent auditors as such agreements allow for greater continuity and help to minimize the potential for disruption in connection with the independent audit; and WHEREAS, the agreement will include an option to extend the agreement for two (2) consecutive one-year periods; and
WHEREAS, the annual cost for this agreement will be included in the FY 2025, FY 2026 andFY 2027 budgets; and
WHEREAS, based on the evaluation and results of the request for proposals and interview processes, Badawi & Associates is the best qualified to provide audit services; and WHEREAS, the agreement will be in a form acceptable to the City Attorney; and NOW' THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Folsom authorizes the City Manager to execute an agreement with Badawi & Associates to provide audit services for the three fiscal years ending June 30, 2024, 2025 and 2026 in an amount not to exceed 5252,540.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23'd day of April2024,by the following roll call vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Councilmember(s):

Councilmember(s):

Councilmember(s):

Councilmember(s):

ATTEST:

Christa Freemantle, CITY CLERK
Resolution No. 1 1188
Page I of I
Michael D. Kozlowski, MAYOR

04/23/2024 Item No.8.

This page is intentiona.IlA Ieft blank
to facilitate double- side d printing
ond minimize paper ttse.

CITY OF
DISTINCTIVE BY NATURE.

FOLSON{

04/23/2024 Item No.8.
m
Folsom City Council
Staff Re rt
MEETING DATE: 4t2312024
AGENDA SECTION: Public Hearing
SUBJECT: Resolution No. 11 186 - A Resolution to Adopt an Amended User Fee Schedule for Community Development Engineering and
Building Services
FROM: Community Development Department

RECOMMENDATION / CITY COUNCIL ACTION
Staffrecommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 11186 to adopt an amended user fee schedule for Community Development Engineering and Building services'

BACKGROUND / ISSUE
O" Mat"h 12,2024, Community Development staff conducted a workshop with the City Council to discuss proposed user fee updates for the department and receive feedback from Council and the public. As part of that process, staff had a draft" fee study prepared by ClearSource Financial Consulting that analyzed existing user fees, hourly rates, and staff time needed to perform fee- based tasks for Building, Engineering, andPlanning services as well as for Special Event Permits.

The study found that existing fees, which were last fully updated in 2006, did not adequately cover the amount of staff time and resources associated with those processes and services. The fee study proposed a new fee schedule, with some modifications to the structure itself, to better capture the iortr usso"iated with fee-based services as well as a new technology fee to cover long-term updates to the department's online permitting system to benefit the end user and an updated General Plan andZoning Code Update fee.

At the workshop, the City Council took in comments from the public regarding the proposed updated fee schedule. Public comments primarily focused on concerns about new fees and cunent pio".rses associated with special events from groups that put on several key events in the city and business owners that benefit from events being held. Members of the public also requested lower fees for appeals to ensure that the public is not priced out of appealing a project while still recognizing that stafls level of effort is not currently captured in the existing fee. Finally, the 1

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

North State Building Industry Association requested a tiered roll-out of fees of 50 percent of the proposed increase initially and then implement the remainder of the fee increase six months later to reduce the immediate impact of fee increases on applicants.

The City Council discussed the proposed fee schedule update and provided comments to staff for consideration. While Council did not suggest modifications to any specific fees for Building or Engineering services, questions were raised about the necessity of the proposed technology fee and why it needed to be called out as a separate line item rather than included in the overall permit cost. That clarification has been made to address the comment received.

With regards to proposed fees for Planning services, Councilmembers stated that better explanations are needed for the various Planning processes and how often they are utilized to determine if all listed fees are still necessary. Councilmembers also stated that the proposed appeal fees were too high even though they captured staff s level of effort. With regards to special events, Councilmembers also noted that proposed Special Event Permit fees were too high and that more research was needed to determine what types of events and organizations, such as non-profits, should be charged less for events with community or economic development benefits.

Additionally, the special event process, which is currently handled by Planning staff was also called into question with some suggestions that the Parks & Recreation or other City departments handle this process. Ultimately, Council concluded that updating fees for Planning processes and Special Event Permits should be handled separately from the rest of the fee schedule.

Ultimately, staff determined that it would be more effective to discuss Planning fees in tandem with the upcoming ZoningCode update. This update may come with modifications to, or even the elimination of, existing Planning processes that could in turn have effects on staff time and Planning fees. Staff believes that discussing changes to processes currently required in the Zoning Code should go hand in hand with discussions of the fees associated with those processes to improve efficiency. Furthermore, additional work is needed to make changes to the Special Event Permit process and how fees should be charged for events. As such, staff is only proposing updates to fees for Building and Engineering services at this time. Updated Special Event Permit fees are anticipated to go in front of Council in summer/fall2024 with a target effective date of January I't,2024. To coincide with the Zoning Code update, planning process fees are anticipated to go in front of Council in late 2024 or early 2025, with a target effective date of July I,2025.

POLICY / RULE
The objectives of the fee study, the methodology used to complete the study, and the formulation of outcomes and recommended fee updates were significantly influenced by Article XIII C of the California Constitution, Propositions 218 (1996) and 26 (2010), and Section 66014 of the California Government Code.

Article XIII C states that, 'othe local government bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that a levy, charge, or other exaction is not a tax, that the amount is no more than necessary to cover the reasonable costs of the governmental activity, and that the manner inwhich those costs are allocated to a payor bear afair or reasonable relationship to the payer's burdens 2

04/23/2024 Item No.9.
on, or benefits receivedfrom, the governmental activity. " Additionally, Article XIII C identifies the following development processing fees as items that are not defined as taxes:
. A charge imposed for a specific benefit conferred or privilege granted directly to the payer that is not provided to those not charged, and which does not exceed the reasonable costs to the local government of conferring the benefit or granting the privilege [Art. XIII, C, l(eX1)1.
. A charge imposed for a specific govemment service or product provided directly to the payor that is not provided to those not charged, and which does not exceed the reasonable costs to the local govemment of providing the service or product [Art. XI[, C, 1(e)(2)]. o A charge imposed for the ,.uronull. regulatory costs to a local government for issuing licenses and permits, performing investigations, inspections, and audits, enforcing agricultural marketing orders, and the administrative enforcement and adjudication thereof lArt. XI[, C, 1(e)(3)].

Section 6601a@) of the California Government Code includes the following, "Notwithstanding any other provision of law, when a local agency charges fees for zoning variances; zoning changes; use permits; building inspections; building permits; ...the processing of maps under the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act...; or planning services...; those fees may not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged, unless a question regarding the amount of the fee charged in excess of the estimated reasonable cost of providing the services or materials is submitted to, and approved by, a popular vote of two-thirds of those electors voting on the issue".

The outcomes and recommendations of the fee study were intended to comply with applicable federal, state, and local laws including providing confirmation that the proposed fees ("charges") recommended as a result of the fee study are not taxes as defined in Article XIII C of the California Constitution and that the proposed fees are no more than necessary to the cover the reasonable costs of the City's activities and services addressed in the fees. Additionally, the fee study shows that the manner in which the costs are allocated to a payor bear a fair and reasonable relationship to the payor's burdens on, or benefits received from the activities and services provided by the City.

ANALYSIS
The Building Division's modified fee schedule includes restructuring and new tiers and fee types so fees could more accurately reflect the level of effort that is expected as projects grow in scale and detail. The restructuring and modifications included:

Introducing flatrate fees for common residential permit types to be simpler for the public to understand and pay as well as easier for staff to administer. Staff found this to be consistent with other jurisdictions in the area.

J
a

04/23/2024 Item No.9.
o Adding the Business License Fee, CASP Training Fund Fee and State Disability Access Fee to the fee schedule. These fees (the latter two of which are required by State law) have previously been collected along with the building permit fee but were not called out in the fee schedule.

The Engineering Division also made several specific modifications to the fee schedule to reflect costs associated with the permit reviews and plan checks that they perform. Major proposed modifications include the following :

Encroachment permits were restructured with the intent to encourage applicants to obtain permits for their intended use. Subcategories of encroachment permits were added based on length of time, needs, and various types of encroachment.

Annual permits for general maintenance are proposed to be billed on a time and materials basis, with the initial deposit determined by the City Engineer, based on the scope of work. This is due to the inconsistent level of staff effort associated with this type of maintenance since it is difficult to predict the scale and size of permitting and inspections involved without a detailed scope of work.
a
a
a
a
o
Proposing lower cost recovery for residential HVAC and water heater change-out permits to promote code compliance. These have been identified as projects where people often avoid getting a permit. As such, lowering the cost of these types of projects below fuIl cost recovery encourages contractors and homeowners to obtain a permit to ensure the work is completed in accordance with the Building Code.

Restructuring the fees related to subdivision development to align with the amount of staff time utilized for each permit type. Production permits for homes in a subdivision are reviewed by all divisions in Community Development, though the current fee covers less than t hour of staff time.

Revising the current fee table for valuation-based projects to account for the same percentage cost recovery at all valuations. The current fee table utilizes a sliding scale for cost recovery, which does not reflect the estimated hours utilized. The proposed fee table is instead based on the same percentage cost recovery for any project. The previous table uses a different percentage cost recovery based on project valuation (i.e.75% recovery for a $25,000 project versus 90o/o recovery for a $10 million project).

Landscape review for production homes was changed from being based on the valuation of the project to a fixed fee, as the existing valuation method did not reflect the detailed tasks and level of effortthat goes into reviewing the plans.

Fees that are primarily for work performed by the contract City Surveyor were modified to reflect the actual billable rate of the Surveyor plus the City's overhead cost for contract administration.
a
4

04/23/2024 Item No.9.
o Currently, aflatrate of $38 is used for all tree work/removal permits, regardless of the number of trees being removed. The tree removal permit fee structure was completely revamped to ensure that when tree work or minor removal (up to two trees or any "in- decline" tree) on occupied properties is proposed, the fees are kept relatively low, as this does not take a significant amount of staff time to review and code compliance is encouraged. However, for the removal of three or more trees, any tree removal for new construction, or tree work/removal done without a permit, the fees have gone up significantly to reflect the level of staff time it takes to process and review these tasks.

Technology and GeneralPlanlZoning Code Fees
CDD is proposing a new technology fee to be applied to all building permits as a primary beneficiary of the Crty's streamlined electronic permitting process. This fee is based on the estimated long-term costs of software and licensing fees, hardware upgrades, and implementation including a ten percent contingency. While a nine (9) percent permit fee would recover 100 percent of the estimated cost allocation of the technology updates and maintenance, staff ultimately chose arate of five (5) percent, which would recover apprbximately 56 percent of cost allocation. Since Building Permit rates would also increase as part of the updated fee schedules, staff concluded that lowering the technology fee below full cost recovery would be warranted to limit the fee burden on applicants and to be in alignment with other cities of similar size in our region.

Staff considered the idea of folding the technology fee into overall building permit fees rather than separating it out as a standalone fee. However, in researching the nature of the technology fee, staff found that folding in the technology fee was not recommended for several reasons. The cost of citywide technology services is already partially captured in the overhead cost included as a part of staff s hourly rate, whereas the proposed technology fee would only be allocated for periodic purchases by the Community Development Department to update the electronic permitting process software, hardware, and related consultant services. By separating the technology fee into a different category, it ensures that all the funds collected for that fee go directly into updating systems and programs to provide electronic access for the public rather than going into the City's General Fund or for other department expenses.

Below is an example of what an applicant would currently see on a receipt for an HVAC changeout permit. Overall, the cost for a residential HVAC changeout typically ranges from $15,000 to $40,000 for a home. In this case the total permit fee is $466. As shown below, there are several permit fees outside of the standard building permit fee charge, which are earmarked to specific accounts. Most of these additional fees are required by the State of California. Staff believes that adding one additional row to the list of fees in the below table for a technology fee would not materially change what applicants see on receipts and would be consistent with common practices when specifically earmarked fees are applied.
5

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

Building- Residential Permit Fee $418.00
City Business License Fee $25.00
CASP Training Fund Fee $3.60
State Disability Access Fee $0.40
City General Plan Fee stz.s4
State Green Fee $2.00
State SMI Residential Fee $4.62
Total Fees Due $466.16
CDD is also proposing a modified General Plan and Zoning Code fee to be applied to all building permits for new construction, additions, tenant improvements, and residential remodels. Currently, a fee of three (3) percent of building permit and plan check fees is collected as a General Plan Update fee. However, there is no fee collected for Zoning Code updates or maintenance. The new proposed fee would help fund major periodic General Plan, Housing Element and Zoning Code updates as well as in-house maintenance of these documents. While a nine (9) percent permit fee would recover 100 percent of the estimated cost allocation, staff ultimately chose atate of five (5) percent, which would recover approximately 55 percent of cost allocation. Staff again chose a lower rate with the intent of not overburdening applicants with additional costs and to stay in line with what is being charged in the region for similar fees. Additionally, because General Plan and ZoningCode updates benefit the entire community rather than just project applicants, staff wanted to ensure that such applicants were not taking on the full burden of paying for such updates. Staff also chose to only charge a portion of the fee as a percentage of the building permit fee rather than on both the building permit fee and the plan check fee. Ultimately, this would result in approximately the same amount of funds that are currently being collected.

Conclusions
ClearSource performed a reasonableness test on the proposed fees using historical permit volume to forecast anticipated revenue from the fees. This test confirmed that the forecasted revenue from the fees did not exceed the actual staff costs associated with this work and should therefore be in line with State law. The study recommends monitoring permit and application volume and applicant feedback to determine if any of the fee modifications are resulting in any unanticipated chattg"r in project frequency and to provide greater detail for future revenue forecasting. The study also recommends that fees should continue to be updated on an annual basis using the Consumer Price Index (CPD. This is typical for other jurisdictions in the region and also similar to how other City fees are administered in Folsom. The study also recommends that a comprehensive fee study should be conducted periodically to ensure fee levels remain at or below legal limits and are consistent with evolving practices and local conditions.

Regarding the North State Building Industry Association's request for a tiered roll-out of fees, staif is proposing a phasing of the fee changes. Planning fees are not proposed to be updated until the Zoning Code update is complete with new Planning fees proposed to go into effect on July 1, 2025 after adoption of the new code. As such, projects that are subject to Planning fees along with their Engineering and/or Building fees will not see an increase in Planning fees until at least one year after the Building and Engineering fees have gone into effect. Staff believes that this 6

04/23/2024 Item No.9.
accomplishes the goals of a tiered roll-out by reducing the immediate impact of fee increases on applicants for larger projects. As such, no formal tiered roll-out for Building and Engineering is proposed.

Finally, staff notes that Chapter 3.50 of the Folsom Municipal Code (Fee and Service Charge Revenue/Cost Comparison System) requires that the vast majorrty of CDD user fees recover 100 percent of costs through the use of deposit-based fees. Since the department is proposing to move away from deposit-based fees in most cases because of the additional administrative staff needed to handle those type of fees, there are some new proposed flat fees that do not match the 100 percent cost recovery requirement. As a result, staff is presenting City Council with a separate ordinance that would modifr Folsom Municipal Code Chapter 3.50 to give greater flexibility to the Council to adjust the cost recovery percentages of user fees. This would allow Council to strategically adjust certain fees via resolution as the Council sees fit, such reducing fees below fuIl cost recovery to encourage compliance with City regulations. Enaction of the resolution for the updated fee schedule as proposed is contingent upon passage ofthe ordinance to update Folsom Municipal Code Chapter 3.50. The first reading of the ordinance is also scheduled for the April 23,2024 City Council meeting and is a separate report from this one.

FISCAL IMPACT
The fee study concluded that the proposed new Building and Engineering fees could result in an estimated additional $1,000,000 annually for the General Fund, based on historical permit volume and development activity. Fee revenue could be higher or lower if actual experience differs from the assumptions used in the fee study. The fee study also estimates $100,000 annually for technology updates based on current permit activity levels.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution No. I1186 - A Resolution to Adopt an Amended User Fee Schedule for Community Development Engineering and Building Services

2. Development Processing Fee Study- Building and Engineering Fees, dated March2024 Submitted,
G.

PAM JOHNS
Community Development Director
7

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 11186 - A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT AN

AMENDED USER FEE SCHEDULE FOR COMMUNITY

DEVBLOPMENT ENGINEERING AND BUILDING SERVICES

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

RE,SOLUTION NO. 11186

A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT AN AMENDED USER F'EE SCHEDULE FOR

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT'S ENGINEERING AND BUILDING SERVICES WHEREAS, City of Folsom Municipal Code Section 3.50.020 states "The city manager is hereby directed to recommend to the council the adjustment of fees and charges to recover the percentage of costs reasonably borne in providing the regulation, products or services enumerated in this chapter and on the schedule of rate review as hereinafter established in this chapter"; and WHEREAS, the City Council on April 23,2024, held a public hearing on the proposed fee updates for the Community Development Department and considered public comment; and WHEREAS Resolution No. 11110 adopted by Crty Council on October 10,2023, set the most recent User Fee schedule for the City including the Community Development Department; and
WHEREAS, the City had a consultant that performed a reasonableness test on the proposed fees and this test confirmed that fees do not exceed the actual staff costs associated with this work and are consistent with State law; and
WHEREAS any fee update reducing a fee to less than 100 percent cost recovery shall not be implemented until a time at which Section 3.50 of the Folsom Municipal Code has been updated to allow City Council to choose the desired cost recovery for user fees.

WHEREAS notice has been given at the time and in the manner required by State Law and City Code; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Folsom hereby Amends Resolution No. 1 1110 and adopts the amended user fee schedule for Community Development Engineering and Building services, as shown in Exhibit "A".

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of April2024, by the following roll-call vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Councilmember(s):

Councilmember(s):

Councilmember(s):

Councilmember(s):

ResolutionNo. 11186
Page I of 12
Michael D. Kozlowski, MAYOR

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

ATTEST:

Christa Freemantle, CITY CLERK
Resolution No. 11186
Page2 of 12

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

Exhibit A
Updated Community Development Department Fee Schedule for Building and Engineering Services
Resolution No. 11186
Page3 ofl2

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

City of Folsom

ENGINEERING AND ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FEES
L Assessment District/CFD Payment Processing
G
s4,800 Fixed Fee
Fee Fee Structure# Description
2 Encroachment Permit
a) Encroachment Contract for Parking/Staging
i. 0-6 calendar days
ii. 7-74 calendar days
iii. 14+days
b) Utility Work/Connections (lndividual Permits)
i. Wet Utilities/Service Connections
ii. Dry Utilities (per site/location)
iii. Misc. per LF of Trench in ROW/City Easement
iv. lnspections and Testing
c) Driveways/Minor Frontage lmprovements
i. Residential (per driveway)
ii. Commercial (per drivewaY)
d) Pools and Spas (in ground)
e) Traffic Control/Equipment Staging
i. lsolated Site
ii. Multiple Closures/Staging
f) Permit Extensions
i. Active Work Zone
ii. lnactive Work Zone (4+ months inactivity)
g) Annual Permits
i. Wet Utilities
ii. Dry Utilities
iii. General Maintenance/Misc. (Not Wet or Dry Utilities) iv. Vegetation Management (Utilities)
v. Long Term/Revocable Encroachments (paid annually)
h) Long Term/Revocable Encroachments (new permits only) $so
sloo
s2o0
s600
s2oo
ss.oo
540o
s4oo
s4oo
s4oo
s1,ooo
s200
56,ooo
$20,800
T&M
s2o,8oo
s2oo
$2,4OO
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
s2oo
$so
lal
tbI
Resolution No. 11186

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

City of Folsom

ENGINEERING AND ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FEES
Engineering and Landscape Plan Check and lnspection
a) Project Value Up to 510,000
b) Project Value 510,001 - S100,000
i. Base Fee for First S10,000
ii. Fee for Each Add'l s1 Up to s100,000
c) sr.0o,o01 - s199,999
i. Base Fee for First 5100,000
ii. Fee for Each Add'l St up to S200,000
d) s2oo,oo1 - s299,ess
i. Base Fee for First 5200,000
ii. Fee for Each Add'l St up to 5300,000
e) $30o,ooo or more
i. Base Fee for First 5300,000
ii. Fee for Each Add'l $1
f) Landscape Plan Review
i. Non-Development
ii. Custom Home
iii. Production Home/Subdivision
iv. Model Home Complex
v. Commercial, Streetscape, Other Development Projects
vi. Development and Civil lmprovements - Landscaping
Review
G
3 ssoo
8,OO%
LOo%
S8,ooo

6.40%
sL4,4oo

4.80%
s1e,2oo

3.60%
s2oo
s1,1oo
s2,3oo
$1,400
s1,600
S2,1oo
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
# Dcscription Fr. c Fe('Slructrrrc
4 Final Map and Parcel Map
a) Parcel Map Check
b) Final Map Check
i. Base Fee
ii. Plus, Per Lot Fee
c) Final Map Amendment/Certificate of Correction
s8,oso
s11,soo
sr44
S6,eoo
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
5 Right of Ways (ROW) and Easements
a) Review of RO@Easement Documents
b) ROWEasement Abandonment
s3,4s0
ss,7s0
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
6 SubdivisionAgreementProcessing ss,7s0 Fixed Fee
7 Transportation Permit
a) Permit
b) Annual Permit
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
$ro
se0
Appendix C: p.2
Resolution No. 11186

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

City of Folsom

ENGINEERING AND ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FEES
Tree Removal/Work Permit
a) Permitted Removal/Work
i. Existing Occupied Structure
a. 0-2 Trees
b. 3+ Trees: See New Construction Rate Below
c. "ln Decline" Tree
ii. New Construction (e.g. Custom Home, Subdivision, Parcel a.0-4Trees
b. 5+ Trees
iii. Misc.
b) w/o Permit (Does not include mitigation)
Double the Permit Rate
8 5100
s1,200
sloo
s1,2oo
51,400 + 10% per tree
s2oo
2x permit amount
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Per Hour
Fixed Fee
# Description Fee Fcc Structrrrc
9 10
TT
t2
13 74
15 16
17 18
Other Fees for Service
Research of Engineering Records
Miscellaneous Engineering Services
Excess Plan Review Fee (4th and subsequent)
Revisions
After Hours lnspection (per hour) (2-hour minimum)
Re-inspection Fee (2nd Time or More) (each)
Missed lnspection Fee
Expedited Services Fee
Residential Landscape Review
Technical Assistance/Third Party Review or lnspection
s2oo
s2oo
s2oo
s20o
5240
s100
s100
1,5x Regular Fee
Hourly Rate of Arborist
Actual Cost
Per Hour
Per Hour
Per Hour
Per Hour
Per Hour
Each
Each
Fixed Fee
Per Hour
T&M
[a] Use time and materials with initial deposit to be determined by City Engineer, based on anticipated scope of work. [b] Encroachment agreement required in addition to insurance (e.9., parklets).

Resolution No. 11186

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

City of Folsom

BUILDING FEES
A. Fees for Commonly Requested Building Permit Types. Fees shown in this section (Section A.) include all applicabte inspection, and plan review fees. Additional permit processing fees apply. Additional fees may apply for services provided by other City Departments (e.g' Planning Review), and Fees Collected on Behalf of Other Agencies (e.g. State of California)' l@r
522s1 HVAC Change-Out - Residential per permit
Fee Description Charge Basis
2 Water Heater Change-Out - Residential s180 per permit 3 Residential Re-Roof s360 per permit
4 Siding Replacement s31s per permit
5 Service Panel Upgrade - Residential s27o per permit
6 Battery Backup Storage s360 per permit
7 Electric Vehicle Charger s36o per permit
8 Generator 5360 per permit
9 Residential Solar Photovoltaic System - Solar Permit
a) Plan Review
i) Base Fee for 15kW or Less
ii) Fee for Each Additional kW above 15kW
b) Permit
s2oo
$rs
s2s0
lal,lbl
tal,tbl
tal,tbl
per permit
per permit
per permit
N
N
N
10 Commercial Solar Photovoltaic System - Solar Permit
a) Plan Review
i) Base Fee 50kW or Less
ii) Fee for Each Add'l kW above 50kW up to 250kW
ii) Fee for Each Add'l kW above 250kW
b) Permit
5444
$t
$s
sss6
per permit
per permit
per permit
per permit
Ia],Ib]
tal,Ib]
tal,tbl
tal,lbl
N
N
N
N
L7 Pool Solar s180 per permit Y
LZ Swimming Pool Replaster / Equipment Change-Out s4s0 per permit 13 Swimming Pool Remodel (e.g., Changing Pool Shape,
Adding Cabo Shelf, etc.)
Ssoo per permit
L4 Retaining Wall
a) One Type of Retaining Wall Type/Configuration
b) Each Additional Wall Type/Configuration
ss40
s27O
per permit
per permit
15 Window / Sliding Glass Door - Retrofit / Repair
a) Upto5
b) Per Window Over 5 Windows
s180
s36
per permit
per permit
Y
t6 Fences Requiring a Building Permit s360 per permit
17 Electrical and lrrigation Pedestals per pedestal s27O per permit 18 Detached and Attached ADUs s4,soo per permit
19 Junior ADUs s2,160 per permit
[a] Total fees shall not exceed amounts outlined in California Government Code 660L5(a)(1). [bJ The City will not collect additional permit processing fees. Amounts shown are total amount due for permit processing, plan review, and permit.

Resolution No. 11186
PageT of 12 Appendix C: p. 4

04/23/2024 Item No.9.
o Project valuations shall be based on the total value of all construction work, including all finish work, roofing, electrical, plumbing, heating, air conditioning, elevators, fire-extinguishing systems and any other permanent equipment. lf, in the opinion of the Building Official, the valuation is underestimated on the application, the permit shall be denied, unless the applicant can show detailed estimates to meet the approval ofthe Building Official. Final building permit valuation shall be set by the Building Official. For determining project valuations for new construction, the Building Official may use data published by the lnternational Code Council (lCC) (building valuation data table, typically updated in February and August of each year). The final building permit valuation shall be set at an amount that allows the City to recover its costs of applicant plan check, permit and inspection activities.

City of Folsom

BUILDING FEES
Determination of Valuation for Fee-s€tting Purposes
Note: For construction proiects with permit fees calculated using Section B, additional fees apply for permit issuance' Additional fees may apply for services provided by other City Departments (e,g. Planning Review), and Fees Collected on Behalf of Other Agencies (e.9. State of California). Additional fees apply for plan review, when applicable' B. permit Fee for New Buildinss, Additions, T€nant lmprovements, Residential Remodels, and Combined Mechanical, Electrical, and/or Plumbins Permits
51 to 52,000
52,001 to S2s,000
s13s.oo
st 35.OO for the first s2,000
s2s,oo1 sso,ooo 5360.00 for the first 525,000 plus
Sso,ool s100,000 5630.00 for the first 550,000 plus
s100,001 ss00,000 sr.,080.00 for the first s100,000 plus ss00,001 s1,000,000 53,960.00 for the first 5500,000 plus s1,0oo,oo1 ss,o00,0oo s7,200.00 for the first s1,000,000 plus s28,800.00 for the first s5,000,000 plus
Resolution No. 11 186

for each add'l 91,000 or fraction thereof,
to and including $25,000
for each add'l 51,000 or fraction thereof,
to and includins 550,000
for each add'l 51,000 or fraction thereof,
to and including $L00,000
for each add'l $1,000 or fraction thereof,
to and including 5500,000
for each add'l 51,000 or fraction thereof,
to and including $1,000,000
for each add'l $L,000 or fraction thereof,
to and including 55,000,000
for each additional $1,000 or fraction
thereof over S5,000,000
to
to
to
to
to
N
N
N
N
N
N
plus s9.78
s10.80
$s.oo
s7.2O

56.48 ss.40
s4.11s5,000,001 and up N
Permit FeeTotal Valuation
Appendix C: p. 5

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

City of Folsom

BUILDING FEES
D, Building Plan Revlew Fees
1 Building Plan Check Fees - Building
a) Plan Review Fee, if applicable
b) Expedited Plan Check - At Application Submittal (when applicable)
c) Tract Home / Master Plan Construction (Production Units) d) Production Permit for Multi-family permit
e) Production Permit for Fire permits and other misc. permits f) Alternate Materials and Methods Review (per hour)
g) Excess Plan Review Fee (4th and subsequent) (per hour) h) Revisions to an Approved Permit (per hour)
i) Deferred Submittal (per hour)
80%

1.5x standard plan check fee
20% of standard plan check fee
$t,440
S4so
s18o
s18o
S18o
S18o
lal N
tb1
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Activity Description
When applicable, plan check fees shall be paid at the time of application for a building permit.

The plan checking fee is in addition to the building permit fee [a] tncludes up to three plan checks. The City will bill hourly for additional plan review required. [b] For identical buildings built by the same builder on the same lot or in the same tract and for which building permits are issued at the same time.

Resolution No. 11186

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

Activity Description
City of Folsom

BUITDING FEES
E. Other Fees
1 Permit Processing Fee
2 Strong Motion lnstrumentation (SMl) Fee Calculation
a) Residential
b) Commercial
3 Building Standards (SB I473lFee Calculation (Valuation) a) $1 - Szs,ooo
b) 52s,oo1 - sso,ooo
c) Ss0,001 - S7s,000
d) s7s,001 - s100,000
e) Each Add'l $25,000 or fraction thereof
4 Business License Fee
5 CASP Training Fund Fee
6 State Disability Access Fee
7 General Plan/Zoning Code Update Fee (percent of building permit fee) 8 Technology Fee (percent of permit fee)
9 Temporary Certificate ofOccupancy (Phasing PIan) Fee
10 Permit Extension
11 Permit Reactivation Fee
a) Reactivation Fee ifAll lnspections Have Been Performed and Approved Up to But Not lncluding Final lnspection
b) Reactivation Fee - All Other Scenarios
i) Permit Expired Up to One Year
ii) Permit Expired More than One Year
s7s
S0.50 or valuation x .00013
S0.50 or valuation x .00028

53.60 so.40
S18o
50% of Original Base Building Permit Fee
L00% of Original Base Building Permit Fee
lal
lal
lal
lal
lal
tal
lal
tal
lal
N
N
51 5z
s3
s4
N
N
N
N
Ns1Add
S2s N
5o/o
5%
$soo
So
tbl
lcl
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
N
N
12 Permit Reissuance Fee
13 Damaged Building Survey (Fire, Flood, Vehicle Damage, Etc.) (per hour) other Fees
14 Phased lnspection Fee (per inspection)
15 After Hours lnspection (per hour) (4-hour minimum)
16 Re-inspection Fee (2nd Time or More) (each)
17 Missed lnspection Fee
18 Duplicate Copy of Permit
Resolution No. 11186

S180
Srso
Sreo
s216
s18o
s18o
s7s
Idl
Appendix G: p. 7

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

Activity Dcscription
City of Folsom

BUITDING FEES
E. Other Fees
19 Duplicate Copy of Certificate of Occupancy
20 Fees for Services Not Listed in this Fee Schedule (per 1/2 hour) Violation Fees
21 Investigation Fee For Work Done Without Permits
(ln addition to applicable permit fees)
S7s
se0
@r
Nequal to
permit fee
[a]AmountsestablishedbystateofCalifornia. lnthecaseofdiscrepancybetweenthisscheduleandamountsestablishedbytheState,Stateamounts shall supersede these amounts.
[b] Fee applies to new construction, additions, tenant improvements, and residential remodels requiring building permits. [c] Fee applies to all permits.
[d] Reinspection fee applies after the first re-inspection.

Resolution No. 11186
Page11of12 Appendix C: p.8

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

City of Folsom

BUILDING FEES
Building Valuation Data Table
Group (2021 lntemational Building Code) TA IB [! ilE ilt illB t\ VA V8 A-1 Assembly, theaters, with stage
A-1 Assembly, theaters, without stage
A-2 Assembly, nightclubs
A-2 Assembly, restaurants, bars, banquet halls
A-3 Assembly, churches
A-3 Assembly, general, community halls, libraries, museums A-4 Assembly, arenas
B Business
E Educational
F-1 Factory and industrial, moderate hazard
F-2 Factory and industrial, low hazard
H-1 High Hazard, explosives
H234 High Hazard
H-5 HPM
l-1 lnstitutional, supervised environment
l-2 lnstitutional, hospitals
l-2 lnstitutional, nursing homes
l-3 lnstitutional, restrained
l-4 lnstitutional, day care facilities
M Mercantile
R-1 Residential, hotels
R-2 Residential, multiple family
R-3 Residential, one- and two-family
R-4 Residential, care/assisted living facilities
S-1 Storage, moderate hazard
S-2 Storage, low hazard
U Utility, miscellaneous
33s.89
307.39
769.94
268.94
311.88
266.07
306.39
260.69
273.46
160.20
1s9.20
149.46
r49.46
260.69
262.22
434.15
307.0r
295.86
262.22
20L,37
264.67
22r,32
209.6L
262.22
148.46
r47.46
1r4.09
324.58
296.08
26L.93
260.93
300.s7
254.76
295.08
25L.t3
263.96
r52.78
151.78
742.04
t42,04
25r,t3
252.95
424.59
292.45
286.3t
252.95
193.36
255.41
2L2.06
203.74
252.95
t4L.04
140.04
r07.37
315.94
288.44
254.48
252.48
292.93
246.12
286.44
24L.86
255.62
743.34
'J.43.34
133.60
133.60
24L.86
244.3r
475.32
283.18
277.O3
244.3L
184.91
246.77
203.42
198.94
244.3t
131.60
131.60

99.89 304.9:
276.42
245.85
244.85
280.91
235.lC
275.42
231-.65
245.04
138.64
t37.64
I27.9C
t27.9C
23L.6s
235.61
405.72
272.97
266.83
235.61
177.28
238.73
794.78
795.72
235.67
126.90
125.90
9s.60

2.86.81 258,3'1
230,5e
228.5e
263.3C
276.33
256.31
270.99
228.69
!23.55
723.55
7r4.72
rr4.r2
2r0.99
2rs.42
383.35
253.83
247.95
2r5.42
76L.72
218.35
r7s.96
188.41
2I5.42
trz.t2
rrz.t2

85.13 278.04
249.54
223.99
222.99
254.43
208.46
248.50
202.73
277.00
L77.47
116.4T
L06.97
106.97
202.73
209.47

0.00 0.00
238.59
209.47
156.15
2t2.40
770.01
rg]-45
209,47
705.97
104.97

79.54 295.62
267.L2
237.02
236.02
271.60
225.80
266.12
222.56
235.61
132.48
r31.48
r27.74
L27.74
222.s6
235.77
396.02
263.88
zs7.74
235.77
168.45
238.L7
L94.82
Lgr.77
235.77
120.74
rtg.74

90.99 766.02
237.51
209.57
207.57
242.45
L95.47
235.51
186.2r
200.36
ro2.44
t02.44

93.00 93.00
186.27
193.82
358.57
229.05
223.17
t93.82
r40.73
796.75
154.36
175.86
193.82

91.00 9L.00

67.39 257.5s
229.05
202.79
20L.79
233.98
188.01
228.05
L77.81
193.94

95.93 94.93

0.0c

85.5C
L77.81
L87.73

0.0c

0.0c
272.77
r87.73
134.95
t90.67
!48.28
L65.67
L87.73

84.50 83.50

64.!9
Resolution No. 11186

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

ATTACHMENT 2

DEVELOPMBNT PROCESSING FEE STUDY- BUILDING AND
ENGINEERING FEESO DATED MARCH 2024

04/23/2024 Item No.9.
1 CITY OF FOLSOM
cleorE

SOU TCC

FINANCIAL CONSUTTING
MARCH 2024

DEVELOPMENT PFIOCESSING FEE STUDY

BUILDING AND ENGINEERING FEES

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

CONTENTS

REPORTING
Section
1 APPENDICES
Appendix
Description

TRANSMITTAL
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I Overall Findings
PROJECT ORIENTATION I Scope and Guidance
IMPLEMENTATION I Considerations for lmplementation
Description

REGIONAL FEE COMPARISON

COST OF SERVICE ANALYSIS

PROPOSED FEES
Page #
1 2
3 4
2 5
9 A
B
c
CLEARSOURCE REPORT TO CITY OF FOLSOM Page 57
04/23/2024 Item No.9.

C eorDs OU TCC

FINANCIAT CONSULTING
March2024

CITY OF FOLSOM
Attn: Pam Johns, Community Development Director
50 Natoma Street
Folsom, CA 95630

DEVELOPMENT PROCESSING FEE STUDY
Dear Ms. Johns:

ClearSource Financial Consulting submits the following report describing the findings of our preparation of a User and Regulatory Fee Study for the City of Folsom.

Please refer to the Executive Summary for the key findings of the analysis and estimated impacts to City funds. The balance of the report and its appendices provide the necessary documentation to support those outcomes.

Thank you for the opportunity to serve the City on this topic. We are happy to continue discussion on this study as the need arises or consult with you on additional topics' Sincerely,
-)*,=tlYt-^\^
{

TERRY MADSEN, PRESIDENT I CLEARSOURCE FINANCIAL CONSULTING PHONE:831.288.O608
EMAIL: TMADSEN@CLEARSOURCEFINANCIAL'COM
796O B Soquel Drive, Suite 363, Aptos, California 95OO3 831.288.O6O8 CLEARSOU RCEFINANCIAL.COM

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

STUDY OVERVIEW
The City of Folsom provides many services to ensure safe, orderly and aesthetically pleasing development and construction within the City. The broad categories of these services include, but are not limited to, project entitlement review, improvement plan check, map check, permits (building, grading, encroachment and driveway), and land action review (i.e. dedications, parcel mergers and lot line adjustments). User fees and regulatory fees are the mechanism by which the City may recoup a portion of or all of the costs associated with these services.

The City of Folsom has completed a User and Regulatory Fee Study. California cities regularly conduct these studies to justify fee amounts imposed and to optimize the overall portfolio of revenues available to the municipality to fund its services.
lndustry practice and fiscal conditions in the state have led most cities to link cost recovery for services of individual action, cause, or benefit to that same individual through user fee revenue, relieving the agency's general revenues as much as possible for use toward services of broader community benefit'

USER AND REGULATORY FEES
Cities derive annual revenue from a number of sources. These include, but are not limited to, property taxes, sales taxes, license fees, franchise fees, fines, rents, and user and regulatory fees' User and regulatory fees are intended to cover all, or a portion of, the costs incurred by the City for providing fee-related services and activities that are not otherwise provided to those not paying the fee' California law provides guidance regarding the amounts the City may charge for fee-related services and activities. Specifically, in order to avoid being considered taxes, the fees charged shall not exceed the estimated reasonabte cost of providing the services, activities, or materials for which fees are charged'

COST RECOVERY POLICY AND PRACTICE
Recovering the costs of providing fee-related services directly influences the City's fiscal health and increases the City's ability to meet the service level expectations of fee payers.

The services for which the City imposes a user or regulatory fee typically derive from an individual person or entity's action, request, or behavior. Therefore, except in cases where there is an overwhelming public benefit generated by the City's involvement in the individual action, a fee for service ensures that the individual bears most, if not all, of the cost incurred by the City to provide that service. When a fee targets "tOO% or full cost recovery," the individual bears the entirety of the cost. When a fee targets less than full cost recovery, another City revenue source - in most cases, the General Fund - subsidizes the individualized activity.
2CLEARSOURCE REPORT TO THE CITY OF FOTSOM Page 59
04/23/2024 Item No.9.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

FINDINGS AND PROPOSED ACTION
During the course of study, information and analysis was generated and is discussed substantively throughout this report and its technical appendices. However, summarized in the following findings statements by broad fee category, are outcomes and proposals of particular interest to City policymakers' Buildins Fees
o Current fees recover less than the City's full cost of providing fee-related services. o The Division collects approximately 52,845,000 annually in fee revenues. Fee-related expenditures are anticipated to be approximately S3,385,000. This results in an aggregate cost recovery level of 84% and a General Fund subsidy of approximately s540,000. o Full cost recovery is targeted for most building fees with exceptions for minor permits for residential HVAC change-out and water heater change-outs' Land Development Engineering Fees and Encroachment Permit Fees o Current fees recover less than the City's full cost of providing fee-related services. Many of the City's current fees are fixed at amounts that reflect less than the City's cost of providing services (examples include, but are not limited to, tree permitting and landscape plan review)' o The Division collects approximately 52,400,000 annually in fee revenues. Fee-related expenditures are approximately 52,880,000. This results in an aggregate cost recovery level of 83% and a General Fund subsidy of approximately 5480,000. o Recalibrate fees to encourage cost recovery of City staff and outside service provider costs. o Full cost recovery is targeted from engineering and encroachment permit fees' Deposit-Based Engineerine Fees (i.e.. Time & Materials Billines) o Fees for some of the City's more complex land development review projects are proposed to be administered using a "time and materials" billing approach. The City will collect an initial deposit and bill against that deposit for the costs of outside consultant review and support, and in-house labor efforts. lf the deposit is drawn down before project completion, staff contacts the applicant to request replenishment of funds. lf deposit amounts remain at the completion of the project, the applicant is refunded the unused deposit amount. Comprehensive tracking and billing for deposit-based projects should billing for project time such as:
o lntake and lnitial Processing and Review
o lnitial Meetings
3CLEARSOURCE REPORT TO THE CITY OF FOLSOM Page 60
04/23/2024 Item No.9.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
o ProjectCorrespondence
o Multiple Rounds of Review
o Report Preparation
o Decision Making, Meeting Preparation
o Project Close-Out and Documentation Actions
ReFional Fee Comparison
. Similar fees are collected by communities throughout the region and the State. The proposed fee amounts do not exceed the City's cost of service and are in-range of amounts charged by other- jurisdictions. Regional fee comparison information is included in Appendix A of this report' Additional Cost Recoverv from Prooosed Adiustments to Fees o The enhanced cost recovery anticipated from the proposed changes included in the fee schedule update is 51,1oo,ooo.

Fairly allocating costs to the services provided and recovering some, or all, of these costs from service recipients creates value and predictability for City customers and reimburses the City for services provided to a single party, as compared to the public at large. Collecting fees for services:
3 lncreases the availability of General Fund revenues to be used for services and activities available to all residents and businesses, such as public safety and public works services. 3 Helps meet fee-payer service level expectations by collecting fees to fund the existing level of services provided.
please continue to the following technical report and appendices for further discussion of this User and Regulatory Fee Study.
4CLEARSOURCE REPORT TO THE CITY OF FOLSOM Page 61
04/23/2024 Item No.9.

PROJECT ORIENTATION

SCOPE OF STUDY
The City of Folsom has completed a User and Regulatory Fee Study, which represents an external review of prevailing practices and development of an updated Schedule of User Fees and Charges' ClearSource FinancialConsulting has prepared this analysis during FiscalYear 2023124 and will be available to answer questions as the City proceeds in implementing findings as it chooses.

Key tasks expected by the City from this study included the following:
3 Review eligible fee-related services citywide to establish the reasonable relationship between current fees for service and the underlying costs of service.

C Calculate the full cost of service, including estimated citywide overhead costs. 3 Recommend fees to be charged for each service.
3 Recommend cost recovery strategies and best practices in setting fees, while considering the complexities and demands of responsible programs or departments. 3 ldentify underlying billable rates for cost recovery opportunities and as the basis for user fees. 3 Maintain a thoroughly documented analysis to ensure compliance with Proposition 26, and other statutes, as applicable.

DIRECT SERVICES UNDER REVIEW
Fee Categories
City fees under review in this project focused on direct services eligible for user fee methodology, as listed in the City's published fee schedules. Additionally, the project was tasked with identifying any relevant additions for services performed without a fee or for under-quantified or ineffectively structured fees' Current services shown in the City's various prevailing fee schedules and addressed in this study are summarized as follows:
3 Engineering - Services include encroachment permitting, development plan review and inspection' I Building - Building plan review, permitting, and inspection for construction and sub-trades' 5CLEARSOURCE REPORT TO THE CITY OF FOTSOM Page 62
04/23/2024 Item No.9.

PROJECT ORIENTATION

REASON FOR STUDY
Cities derive annual revenue from a number of sources. These include, but are not limited to, property taxes, sales taxes, franchise fees, fines, rents, and user and regulatory fees. User and regulatory fees are intended to cover all, or a portion of, the costs incurred by a city for providing fee-related services and activities that are not otherwise provided to those not paying the fee.

California cities regularly conduct fee studies to justify fee amounts imposed and to optimize the overall body of revenues available to the municipality to fund its services. Widespread industry practice and fiscal conditions in the state have led most cities to link cost recovery for services of individual action, cause, or benefit to that individual through user fee revenue, relieving the agency's general revenues for services of broader community benefit.

PREVAILING GUIDANCE
The objectives of this study, the methodology used to complete the study, and the formulation of outcomes and recommendations for future consideration were significantly influenced by Article L3C of the California Constitution and Section 56014 of the California Government Code.

Article 13C states that the local government bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that a levy, charge, or other exaction is not a tax, that the amount is no more than necessary to cover the reasonable costs of the governmental activity, and that the manner in which those costs are allocated to a payer bear a fair or reasonable relationship to the payer's burdens on, or benefits received from, the governmental activity. Additionally, Article 13C identifies the following as items that are not defined as taxes:
3 A charge imposed for a specific benefit conferred or privilege granted directly to the payer that is not provided to those not charged, and which does not exceed the reasonable costs to the local government of conferring the benefit or granting the privilege.

C A charge imposed for a specific government service or product provided directly to the payer that is not provided to those not charged, and which does not exceed the reasonable costs to the local government of providing the service or product'
C A charge imposed for the reasonable regulatory costs to a local government for issuing licenses and permits, performing investigations, inspections, and audits, enforcing agricultural marketing orders, and the administrative enforcement and adjudication thereof' C A charge imposed for entrance to or use of local government property, or the purchase, rental, or lease of local government property'
3 A fine, penalty, or other monetary charge imposed by the judicial branch of government or a local government, as a result of a violation of law.
3 A charge imposed as a condition of property development. 6CTEARSOURCE REPORT TO THE CITY OF FOTSOM Page 63
04/23/2024 Item No.9.

PROJECT ORIENTATION
3 Assessments and property-related fees imposed in accordance with the provisions of Article Xlll D.

Section 56014(a) of the California Government Code includes the following, "Notwithstanding any other provision of law, when a local agency charges fees for zoning variances; zoning changes; use permits; building inspections; building permits; ...the processing of maps under the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act...; or planning services...; those fees may not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged, unless a question regarding the amount of the fee charged in excess of the estimated reasonable cost of providing the services or materials is submitted to, and approved by, a popular vote of two-thirds of those electors voting on the issue' The outcomes and recommendations of the study are intended to comply with applicable federal, state, and local laws including providing confirmation that the proposed fees ("charges") recommended as a result of this study are not taxes as defined in Article 13C of the California Constitution and that the proposed fees are no more than necessary to the cover the reasonable costs of the City's activities and services addressed in the fees. Additionally, this report is intended to show that the manner in which the costs are allocated to a payer bear a fair and reasonable relationship to the payer's burdens on, or benefits received from the activities and services provided by the City.

METHODOLOGY AND DATA SOURCES
This study calculated the estimated reasonable cost of providing various fee-related services across the City organization. Generally, the estimated reasonable cost of providing the fee-related services and activities examined in this study can be calculated as the product of the composite fully-burdened hourly labor rate of the division responsible for providing services and the estimated labor time required to process a typical request for service.

The composite fully-burdened hourly rates calculated in this study are based on the estimated annual hours spent providing fee related services, and estimated labor, services and supplies, and citywide overhead expenditures, sourced as follows:
3 Labor expenditures for in-house personnel were based on budgeted salary and benefits expenditures. 3 Contract service personnel and other services and supplies related costs were based on Fiscal Year 2023/24 adopted budgets and anticipated costs.
3 Citywide overhead cost allocations were based on the City's current overhead cost allocation plan.

C Estimated labor time spent providing fee related services were developed based on interviews with City staff and are in-line with typical direct service ratios experienced by the consultant via studies of similar municipalities throughout California. Commonly used industry data also aided in the development of time estimates and proposed fee structures' Once cost of service levels are identified, the City may use this information to inform targeted cost recovery from fees. Fees set at the cost-of-service target full cost recovery. Fees set at any amount less than the cost-of-service target less than full cost recovery. 7CLEARSOURCE REPORT TO THE CITY OF FOLSOM Page 64
04/23/2024 Item No.9.

PROJECT ORIENTATION
An illustration of the methods used in this analysis is shown in Exhibit 2.

EXHIBIT 2 I STEPS lN ANALYZING COSTS OF SERVICE AND USER FEES

TFST FOR

REASONABTENESS
3 IDENTIFY ANNUAT HOURS SPENT PROVIDING FEE SERVICES FOR EACH

PARTICIPATING DIVISION
3 INFORMATION IS DEVELOPED AND TESTED USING A COMBINATION OF INTERVIEWS,

QUESTIONNAIRES, HISTORICAL PROJECT INFORMATION, AND HISTORICAL REVENUE

INFORMATION
3 IDENTIFY ANNUAL COST OF PROVIDING FEE SERVICES FOR EACH PARTICIPATING DlvlsloN
3 INFORMATION IS DEVELOPED AND TESTED USING A COMBINATION OF

INFORMATION FOUND IN THE CITY'S ADOPTED BUDGET, EXPENDITURE HISTORY, AND THE OVERHEAD COST PLAN.

C CALCULATE THE ESTIMATED FULLY BURDENFD HOURLY RATE USING INFORMATION FROM STEPS 1 AND 2
3 ESTIMATE LABOR TIME REQUIRED TO PROCESS INDIVIDUAL REQUEST FOR SERVICE

C INFORMATION IS DEVELOPED AND TESTED USING A COMBINATION OF INTERVIEWS'

QUESTIONNAIRES, COMMONLY USED MEASURES, AND INFORMATION DEVELOPED IN STEP 1
3 CALCULATE CURRENT COST RECOVERY LEVEL FOR A SPECIFIC SERVICE 3 USE LAWS, INDUSTRY STANDARDS, GOALS AND POLICIES, AND HISTORICALTRENDS

TO DETERMINE TARGETED COST RECOVERY
3 TEST TO CONFIRM FORECAST REVENUE FROM FEES WILL NOT EXCEED PROGRAM cosrs

C USE HISTORICAL PERMIT VOLUME AND PROPOSED FEES TO FORECAST ANTICIPATED

REVENUE FROM FEES
3 FORECASTED REVENUES SHOUTD NOT EXCEED PROGRAM COSTS
1 ANNUAL LABOR TIME
2 ANNUAL EXPENDITURES
3 FULLY BURDENED

HOURLY RATES
4 SERVICE/ACTIVITY LABOR
TIME
3 CALCULATE THE ESTIMATED COST OF SERVICE USING INFORMATION FROM STEPS 3 AND 4
5 UNIT COST OF SERVICE

CURRENT COST RECOVERY

TARGETED COST

RFCOVERY
6 7
8 COST OF SERVICE ANATYSIS - PROCESS AND METHODS
8CLEARSOURCE REPORT TO THE CITV OF FOLSOM Page 65
04/23/2024 Item No.9.

IMPLEMENTATION

CONSIDERATIONS FOR IMPLEMENTATION
lf the City decides to adopt or otherwise utilize outcomes generated through this study, it should 3 Update Systems for Fee Outcomes - Ensure that City staff begin using updated fees and associated outcomes once the updated schedule of fees becomes effective. Values should be included in all official fee schedules used throughout the City (e.g., departmental pamphlets, counter schedules, and online information). Additionally, ensure collections processes are updated, which may include coding in billing systems and training for personnel who handle fees directly with the public.

C Actively Monitor the Use of Fees - ln order to recover accurate and eligible amounts expected, the City should be diligent about tracking time to projects for time and materials billings and ensuring fees are applied in the correct amount and using the correct and intended basis forfixed fee billings.

C Monitor Feedback and Permit Statistics - Monitor permit and application volume and applicant feedback to determine if fee modifications are resulting in any unanticipated changes in project frequency and to increase the level of detail available for revenue forecasting' 3 Annually Review and Adjust Fee Values - ln order to generally maintain pace with regional cost inflation and/or the City's salary cost inflation, the City should adjust its fees on an annual basis. A commonly used, reasonable inflation index is the annual change in the all-urban Consumer Price lndex (CPl) representative of the region.
3 periodically Perform Comprehensive Analysis - A comprehensive fee study should be conducted periodically (e.g., every three to five years) to ensure fee levels remain at or below legal limits and are consistent with evolving service practices and local conditions' 9CLEARSOURCE REPORT TO THE CITY OF FOTSOM Page 66
04/23/2024 Item No.9.

APPENDIX A

REGIONAL FEE COMPARISON
ln order to provide the City Council with additional information as it considers potential adjustments to fees, current and proposed fees were compared to amounts collected by other agencies within the region.

City policymakers often consider fees established by other regional agencies for similar services when evaluating proposed fees.

The City of Folsom, consistent with other cities throughout the State, has an existing fee schedule that contemplates hundreds of potential unique requests for service. This can result in thousands of fee scenarios when comparing among multiple agencies. Consequently, an exhaustive comparison of the hundreds, and potentially thousands of scenarios is unrealistic. lnstead, comparison information for several fee categories commonly seen from agency to agency are provided in order to provide City Council with a reasonable sense of changes expected. For Folsom, outcomes will show that new fees may range from low, mid, to upper end of regional fee spectrum depending on the service provided. This is common among municipalities due to differing levels of service and review included among various fee categories' Engineering Fee Comparison
Building Fee Comparison
, Fee dmounts shown are lor illustrative purposes. Actuol iees collected will vary depending on seruices reviewed (e'g., new construdion, plumbing' mechdnicdl, electrical, struclurul, general plan update, technology Iees, etc,), Amounts ate intended to illustrdte pattems ond otder of magnitude. 27% so/6a% 1o.so/6 - layn 7%Mld-Rangc Mld-Rante 6%-7%Engineerint Plah Che.k ahd lhipe.tion
lmprovemehtValue Upto
Sloox
5%a.5%-10% 5% tt%s% 6.40%Mid"Range Mid-RangeEngineerlnB Plan Check and lnspection
lmprovement value S100K
S2ooK
5%3.6%- 4.4% 60/" - a.s% 2%-4% 6%-A%Mld-Range 2%- 4%Engineerlng Plan Check and lnspection
lmprovement value S2ooK -
s1M
Mld-Range
s37s S4s6 s1s8s33o S360Mld-Range Mld-RangeBuildlng Permit for 525,000 Project
s6oo s7s1 s7s7ss3o s53oMid-Range Mid-RangeBuildint Permit for $50,000 Project
S1,oso s1,1s8 91,152s880 s1,08oMid-Range Mid-RanEeBuilding Permit for S100,000 Project
varies
{res v. non-res)
s3,697 varies
(res v. non-res)
S3,280 93,960Mid-Range Mld-RangeEuilding Permit
tor S500,000 Proiect
s7,s11 $6,417 95,180S5,o3o s7,2OOMid-Range Mid-RangeBuilding Permit for S1,000,000 Proiect
Folsom -
Proposed
Folsom -
Current Fee
Folsom
RosevilleFee Fee Rancho Cordova RocklinFolsom - Current CLEARSOURCE REPORT TO THE CITY OF FOTSOM 10Page 67
04/23/2024 Item No.9.

APPENDIX B

COST OF SERVICE ANALYSIS
CLEARSOURCE REPORT TO THE CITY OF FOLSOM 11Page 68
04/23/2024 Item No.9.
l
l
V r.(}I,fil(}nil
ctfY oF
T}ISIIHCIFIVT. BY HATURE
Ilser and Reaalatow Fees
Fee-Relqted cast oJSeruke Anulysis
Appsdfix B: p. 1

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

City of Folsom
Cost of Service Analysis
Cost of Service Allocation - Communitv Development Administration Cost of Service Calculations
Engineering and Encroachment Permits
Building
General Plan / Zoning Code Update
Development Specific Technology Enhancements / Land Management Tracking Cost Allocation - Citywide Overhead
3 5
74 24
26 28
Description Page
Appendix B: p. 2

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

User and Reaulotoru Fees
Cost ol Service Calculations
Community Development - Administration
Appendix B: p. 3

04/23/2024 Item No.9.
[a]
lal24
tooo/o2L%
5 25%
62 80/.460
LL
Allocation of ln-House Labor
FTE
code
EnforcementBui ldingDescriptio n NotesTotalEngineering Planning City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Allocation of Divisional Expenses - community Development - Administration Allocation of ln-House Labor
Recurring Expenditures
[a] Based on feedback received from Community Development Department. Amounts intended to serye as reasonable estimates. Allocated based on divisional FTE Ib] Source: FY 23124 adopted budget.
[c] Adjustment to exclude non-fee related expenses.

S 813,803
s
5 )
s
)
s
s
s
s
5 5
s
5 5
5 s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
5 s
)
5 s
5 360,290
5,197
29,650
I39,s20
16,095
6,000
55,O22
4,000
5,500
7,500
55,500
17,500
358
2,500
10,000
5,500
2,000
200
s00
4,000
17,ooo
5,000
22,6L4
s,000
11,000
7,533
L8,824
s (15.000)
s
5 s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
5 s
s
s
s
s
s
5 s
s
s
s
5 s
s
(10,000)
(s,000)
S 828,803
5 360,290
S s,197
S 29,6s0
s 139,s20
5 r.6,09s
S 6,000
s ss,022
s 4,000
s s,soo
s 7,500
5 ss,soo
s 17,s00
s 3s8
5 2,s00
S 1o,ooo
S s,soo
s 2,000
5 s,ooo
s s00
s 4,000
s 200
5 1o,oo0
s 17,000
s s,000
5 22,614
s s,000
5 11,000
I 7,s33
s 18,824
Subtotal
Salaries - Permanent
Annual Leave Account
FICA
PERS
Deferred comp - City Paid
Automobile Allowance
combined Benefits
Printing
Dues & Publications
Advertising
Rents
Training & Education
Postage
Telephone
Cellular
lnternet
Travel and Meetings
Contracts
Contracts - Pre Employment
Vehicle Maintenance
Equipment Maintenance
Advisory
Computer - Hardware
Computer - Software
Computer - License & Mtnc
Office supplies
Departmental Supplies
Petroleum Supplies
lnsurance / Liability
Description Total Adjustments Total
tbl
lbl
tbl
tb1
tbl
tbl
tb1
tbl
tbl
tbl
tbl
tbl
tbl
tbl
tbl
tb1
tb1
Ib];Ic]
tbl
tb1
tb1
lbl; lcl
tbl
tbl
tbl
tb1
tbl
tbl
tbI
s 813,803
7000n
5 s
)
s
5 5
s
)
5 s
s
5 I
s
s
5 )
s
s
s
5 5
s
s
s
s
5 s
5 350,290
5,197
29,650
139,520
16,09s
6,000
55,O22
4,OOO
5,500
7,500
55,500
17,500
358
2,s00
10,000
5,500
2,000
17,000
5,000
22,6L4
s,000
11,000
7,533
18,824
500
4,000
200
s 169,s42
210/.
s
5 s
s
5 s
s
5 5
5 s
s
s
5 5
5 )
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
)
s
s
s
75,060
1,083
6,L77
29,067
3,353
1,250
1r,463
833
7,746
1,563
11,563
3,646
75 52L
2,O83
1,,L46
477
104
833
42 3,542
7,O42
4,711
I,O42
2,292
1,569
3,922
s 203,4s1
2s%
s
s
s
5 s
s
s
s
s
s
$
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
5 s
5 s
s
s
5 5
s
90,o73
L,299
7,4r3
34,880
4,O24
1,500
73,756
1,000
7,375
r,875
13,875
4,375
90 625
2,500
'J.,375
500
50 L25
1,000
4,250
1,250
5,654
L,250
2,750
1,883
4,706
S 67,8L7
8%
s
5 5
s
5 $
5 s
s
5 I
5 s
5 5
s
s
s
)
5 s
s
)
5 s
s
s
s
30,o24
433
2,47L
LI,627
'J.,347
s00
4,585
333
4s8
625
4,625
L,458
30 208
833
458
L67
42 333
17 7,4t7
477
1,885
4t7
9L7
628
1,569
5 372,993
46%
s
5 s
s
)
s
s
s
)
s
5 s
5 5
5 s
s
5 s
s
5 s
s
s
)
5 s
s
s
165,133
2,382
13,590
63,947
7,377
2,750
25,2t8
1,833
2,521
3,438
25,438
8,02r
764
r,746
4,s83
2,52r
917
229
1,833
92 7,792
2,292
10,365
2,292
5,042
3,453
8,628
NotesBu ildinB Engineering Planning Tolal
Code
Enforcement
Appendix B: p. 4

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

User dnd Reaulatorv Fees
Cost of Service Colculotions
Engi n eeri n g o nd Encrooch me nt Pe rm its
Appendix B: p. 5

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Allocation of Annual Labor Effort - Engineering
Authorized Staffing
Contract Seruices
Divisional Total
[a] Staffing based on FY 23/24 adopted budget
[b]Allocationofhoursintendedtoserveasreasonableestimate. Amountmayvaryfromyear-to-yearandpositiontoposition. [c] Source: Annual average FY 18/19 through FY 2!22.
[d] Amounts intended to serve as reasonable estimates of market rates for contract seruice providers. [e] Average hourly rate for contract seruices received. lal;Ib]
lal;Ib]
lal;Ib]
lal;Ib]
lal;Ib]
7,864
t,864
1,864
7,864
3,728
11,1E4
Lg096
7,7?6
69%
1,491,
652
L,497
1,30s
2,796
1,44
3L%
373
t,2L2
373
559
932
t0004
700%
IOO%
LOA%
TODOA
80%
35o/5
80%
700/.
750/6
20%
65%
zo%
3004
2501
tt,tu
1,864
7,864
L,864
t,864
3,728
1,864
1,864
L,a64
1,864
!,a64
2L6
216
276
2L6
2L6
2,080
2,080
2,080
2,080
2,080

1.00 1.00

1.00 1.00

2.00 6.00Total
Total
Urban Forestor
City Engineer
Senior Construction lnspector
Engineering Tech l/ll
Senior Civil Engineer
Total Hou rs
Per FTE
Less Holiday
& Leave
l-lours Per
FTE
Prod uctive
Hou rs
I nd i rect
Hou rs
Total Direct
HoursDi rectlndirect TotalFTEPos r tio n Totai Hours Notes Annual Contrast Services
NotesTotalDescri ptl o n
td1
tdl
lel
r25
205
)
s
so%l
so%l
165too%lTotal
lnspection
Plan Review
CoFtract Services Share Est. HrlV Cost Notes
to,6!49,552ro,614Contract Service Hours
TotalDrrectlndirectDescription NotesTota lndiiect Drrect 2t,798
too%
tr,784
10,614

7.736
9,552
L7,288
79%
3,448
1,061
4,510
21%
Authorized Staffing
Contract Seruices
Total
Total
Appendix B: p. 6

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Allocation of Divisional Expenses - Engineering
Recurring Divisional Expenditures [a]
Allocation of Department and citywide overhead
Total
Fully-Burdened Hourly Rate
lal Source: FY 23124 adopted budget.

Ib] Adjustment to align to FY 22/23 actual contract seruice expenditures. [c] See separate worksheets in this model. Amounts intended to serue as reasonable estimates' tb1
s 3,029,s32
s 740,794
s 10,730
S ezs
5 se,782
I 29s,014
S 15,200
s 118,434
$ 7,7st,2ss
S 37,648
S 1,051,2ss
s
s
s
s
s
s
)
s
s
L,O6L,25s
S L.968,277
s
s
s
s
5 s
5 s
s
740,794
10,730
675
58,782
295,OLA
t6,200
r78,434
690,000
37,648
Subtotal
Salaries - Permanent
Annual Leave Account
uniform Allowance
FICA
PERS
Deferred Comp - city Paid
combined Benefits
Contracts
lnsurance / Liability
NotesDe scri ptio n Totai Adlustments Total
lcl
Icl5
203,45r
220,949
S 4z4,4oo
s
s
5 s
s
203,451
220,949
$ 424,4OOSubtotal
Department Overhead
Ciwwide Overhead
N otesDe scri ptio i Total Adjustments Tctal
S 3,02e,s32
s 203,4s1
s 220,949
s 3.453.932
Recurring Divisional Expenditures
Department Overhead
Ciwwide overhead
Subtotal
Total N otesDescri ptio n
lcl
200s
s 3,4s3,932
17,288
Costs
Direct Hours
Fully-Burdened Hourly Rate
TotalDescri ptlon N ote
Appendix B: p. 7

04/23/2024 Item No.9.
city of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Engineering and Encroachment Permit Fees
Cost of Seruice Calculation
Assessment District/cFD Payment Processing
a) Encroachment contract for Parking/staging
i. 0-6 calendar days
ii.7-l4calendardays
iii. 14+days
b) Utility Work/Connections (lndividual Permits)
i. Wet Utilities/Seruice Connections
ii. Dry Utilities (per site/location)
iii. Misc. per LF of Trench in ROWCity Easement
iv. lnspections and Testing
c) Driveways/Minor Frontage lmprovements
i. Residential (per driveway)
ii. Commercial (per driveway)
d) Pools and spas (in ground)
e) Traffic Control/Equipment Staging
i. lsolated Site
ii. Multiple Closures/staging
fl Permit Extensions
i. Active Work Zone
ii. lnactive Work Zone (4+ months inactivity)
g) Annual Permits
i. Wet Utilities
ii, Dry Utilities
iii. General Maintenance/Misc. (Not wet or Dry
Utilities)
iv. Vegetation Management (Utilities)
v. Long Term/Revocable Encroachments (paid
annually)
h) Long Term/Revocable Encroachments (new
permits only)
Encroachment Permit
1 2
Fee Description
s4,800
Sso
s100
s2oo
s60o
s2oo
ss.oo
s40o
s6,ooo
s20,80o
S6,ooo
s20,800
s2oo
Sso
5200
s2,400
s2oo
s1,000
s40o
s40o
s4oo
Est. Cost of
5vc
s2oo
s2oo
s200
s20o
S2oo
s200
s2oo
s2oo
s200
s2oo
$200
s200
s2oo
s2oo
S20o
s200
s2oo
s200
s2oo
s20o
Hourly Rate

24.O0

12.00 1.00
s.00

0.25 1.00

0.25 0.50

1.00 3.O0

1.00 0.03

2.00 2.00

2.00 2.00

30.00 104.00

30.00 r.04.00

1.00 Est. Labor
Hours
x
540/o
6o/o
68%
14%
270%
680/.
23%
68%
390/0
34%
34%
34%
270%
135%
68%
44%
L3%
44%
13%

68./0
513s
s2,s78
S135
s13s
s13s
s13s
S13s
s13s
S13s
S13s
sr.3s
s13s
s13s
S13s

51.96 s2,6s1
s2,6s1
s2,6sr.

S2,5s1
s13s
Current Fee
Current Cost
Recovery
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
L00%
700%
t000/o
7000/"
100%
100%
too%
100%
t000/.

LOOo/o
7000/d
700%
LOOa/6
700%
700%
LOO6/o
L00%
1000/.
roo%
!0oo/o
Sso
s2oo
s6oo
S2oo
ss.o0
S4oo
Szoo
s1,ooo
s4,800
s2,400
540o
s4o0
s400
5so
sloo
5200
s6,ooo
s20,800
T&M
s20,8oo
s2oo
Proposed Fee
Fee
Structure
Proposed
Cost
Recovery
s46s
Sss
S3,04
S26s
s26s
)lb5
S6s
s86s
(Ses1
56s
S3,349
s18,149
518,149
52,26s
5b5
(Ses1
(5as1
5es
Fee ChanBe
lal
tbl
X
Appendix B: p. I

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Engineering and Encroachment Permit Fees
Cost of Seruice Calculation
s14,4oo

4.80%
519,200

3.60%
s11,s00
5L44
S6,9oo
ssoo
SSoo

8.OO%
s8,oso
s2,100
s8,ooo

6.400/0
s3,4so
ss,7s0
ss,7so
s2oo
s1,1oo
s2,3oo
51,400
s1,600
Est. Cost of
Svc
s200
S2oo
s2oo
s200
s200
5200
s2oo
s2oo
S2oo
s2oo
s200
s288
s288
s288
s288
s288
s288
s288
Hourly Rate

4.OO

4.00 28.00

72.O0

96.00 40.00

40.00 0.50
24-00

12.00 20.00

20.00 1.00

5.s0

11.50 7.00

8.00 10.50
Est Labor
Hours
71%
vanes
&3%
430/.
93%
o%
420/0
39%
43%
19%
830/0
56%
79%
38%
varies
varies
2%
20/o
750/o
88o/o
86%
786/.

6.OOo/o
ss,742
s10,719
9o
s2,8e9
Sgs
54L4
Valuation
Valuation
S38
$38
S6oo

7.O0%
s6,9oo

5.OO%
s11,900

4.O0%
s1s,9oo

2.O0o/o
s1,334
s2,4st
s1,083
Current Fee
Current Cost
Recovery
s2oo
s2,308
s1,1oo
S2,soo
S3,3oo
s781
s144
s4,oo1
s2,!16
s3,29s
s4,667
s162
S586
Varies
Varies
S1,s52
s2,062
Fee Change
Engineering and Landscape Plan Check and lnspection
(Fee lncludes Up to 3 Cycle Reviews - HourlY Billing
Applies for Reviews Required Beyond 3rd Cycle)
a) Project value up to 510,000
b) Project Value S10,001 - S100,000
i. Base Fee for First 510,000
ii. Fee for Each Add'l 51 Up to S100,000
cl 5100,001 - 5199,999
i. Bas€ Fee for First 5100,000
ii. Fee for Each Add'l 51 Up to 5200,000
d) s200,001 - s299,999
i. Base Fee for First 5200,000
ii. Fee for Each Add'l 51 Up to 5300,000
e) 5300,000 or more .
i. Base Fee for First 5300,000
ii. Fee for Each Add'l S1
f) Landscape Plan Review
i. Non-Development
ii. Custom Home
iii. Production Home/Subdivision
iv. Model Home Complex
v. commercial, Streetscape, Other Development
Projects
vi. Development and Civil lmprovements -
Landscaping Review
Final Map and Parcel Map
a) Parcel Map Check
b) Final Map Check
i. Base Fee
ii. Plus, Per Lot Fee
cl Final Map Amendment/certificate of Correction
Right of Ways (ROW) and Easements
a) Review of ROWEasement Documents
b) ROWEasement Abandonment
Subdivision Agreement Processing
5 6
4 3
Fee Description
x
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
LOO%
vafles
100%
100%
L000/o
700%
rooo/o
LOO%
1000/0
700%
L000/.
700%
7000/0
700%
1000/.
700%
roo%
700%
L00%
100%
100%
LOOa/o
s80o

6.40%

8.OO%

8.OO%
s8,0s0
Se,ooo
s2,100
s1r.,s00
s144
S6,eoo
s14,40o

4.80%
s19,200

3.60%
S3,4so
ss,7so
ss,7so
52oo
s1,1oo
s2,3oo
s1,400
s1,6oo
Proposed Fee
Fee
Structure
Proposed
Cost
Recovery
X
x
x
Appendix B: p. 9

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Engineering and Encroachment Permit Fees
Cost of Service Calculation
[a] Use time and materials with initial deposit to be determined by City Engineer, based on anticipated scope of work.

Ib] Enooachment agreement required in addition to insurance (e g., parklets).

X
X
X
X
s20o
s2oo
s2,40o
s2o0
s200
s2oo
5200
s240
s100
sr.00
Sloo
s1,2oo
sloo
s1,200
s1,40o
tst. Lost ol
Svc
s2oo
s2oo
s20o
s2oo
S2oo
s200
s200
5200
s2oo
s200
s20o
s200
s2oo
s2oo
s20o
Hourly Rate

1.00 n/a
n/a

1.00 12.00

1.00 1.00

1.00 1.00
1,.2O

0.50 0.50

0.50 6.00

0.s0

6.00 7.OO
Est. Labor
Hours
5L,162
varies
5162
Sgt
se7
5ez
Sez
S137
s1,152
(S:)
S+
Fee Change
Tree Removal/Work Permit
a) Permitted Removal/Work
i. Existing occupied Structure
a. 0-2 Trees
b. 3+ Trees: See New Construction Rate Below
c. "ln Decline" Tree
ii. New Construction (e.9. Custom Home,
Subdivision, Parcel Map, Multi-family, Commercial,
etc.):
a.0-4Trees
b.5+Trees
iii- Misc.
b) w/o Permit (Does not include mitigation)
Double the Permit Rate
Other Fees for 5eruice
Research of Engineering Records
Miscellaneous Engineering Services
Excess Plan Review Fee (4th and subsequent)
Revisions
After Hours lnspection (per hour) (2-hour minimum)
Re-inspection Fee (2nd Time or More) (each)
Missed lnspection Fee
Expedited Services Fee
Residential Landscape Review
Technical Assistance/Third Party Review or lnspection
Transportaiion Permit
a) Permit
b) Annual Permit
10 1.1
12 13
74 15
16 t7
18 9
7 8
Fee Description
43%
3%
30/o
190/0
t8%
520/"
52%
38%
3%
38%
s1o3
s1o3
n/a
n/a
s1o3
n/a
n/a

1.5x Regular Fee
Hourly Rate of
Arborist
Actual Cost
538
S38
s38
S38
s38
S38
s438
Srg
Sao
Current Fee
Current Cost
Recovery
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Per Hour
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Per Hour
Per Hour
Per Hour
Per Hour
Per Hour
Each
Each
Fixed Fee
Per Hour
T&M
t00%
700%
1000/6
100%
r00%
100%
roo%
100%
700%
varies
700%
too%
!oo%
s1,2oo
S1,400 + 10% per
tree above 5 trees.
s2oo
2x permit amount
s2oo
s2oo
s2oo
52oo
S240
sloo
sloo

1.5x Regular Fee
Hourly Rate of
Arborist
Actual Cost
Sre
Sgo
sloo
s1,200
Sloo
Proposed Fee
Fee
Structure
Proposed
Cost
Recovery
Appendix B: p.'10

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

City of Folsom
Engineering and Encroachment Permit Fees
lllustration of Current Fees, Maximum Fe€s, and Proposed Fees Fixed Fee 52,s78 s4,800 54%1 Assessment District/CFD Payment Processing 2 Encroachment Permit
a) Encroachment Contract for Parking/Staging
i.0-6calendardays
ii. 7-14 calendar days
iii. 1.4+days
b) Utility Work/Connections (lndividual Permits)
i. Wet Utilities/Seruice Connections
ii. Dry Utilities (per site/location)
iii. Misc. per LF of Trench in ROWCity Easement
iv. lnspections and Testing
c) Driveways/Minor Frontage lmprovements
i. Residential (per driveway)
ii. Commercial (per driveway)
d) Pools and Spas (in ground)
e) Traffic Control/Equipment Staging
i. lsolated Site
ii. Multiple closures/Staging
f) Permit Extensions
i. Active Work Zone
ii. lnactive Work Zone (4+ months inactivity)
g) Annual Permits
i. Wet Utilities
ii. Dry Utilities
iii. General Maintenance/Misc. (Not wet or Dry Utilities) iv. Vegetation Management (Utilities)
v. Long Term/Revocable Encroachments (paid annually)
h) Long Term/Revocable Encroachments (new permits only) Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
44%
13%
44%
t3%
68%
6%
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
s13s
s13s
5r.3s
5r.3s
S13s
s1.96
S13s
s13s
s13s
s13s
S13s
S2,6s1
52,6sL
s2,6s1
S2,6s1
513s
s13s
ss0
sloo
s2oo
s400
S40o
s4oo
S1,ooo
s20o
S6,ooo
s2o,8oo
s6,ooo
s2o,8oo
s20o
92,400
s4,80o
5so
sloo
s2oo
s4oo
s4oo
5400
sr.,000
s2oo
S6,ooo
s20,800
T&M
s20,80o
s200
52,400
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
23%
68%
39%
s60o
s200
Ss.oo
S40o
Sooo
s20o
Ss.oo
54oo
68%
t4%
5200
Sso
s2oo
ss0
270%
735%
680/.
roo%
r00%
roOo/o
tooo/o
700%
LOO%
7000/0
34%
34%
34%
roo%
too%
700%
too%
700%
270%
68%
!oo%
L00%
700%
too%
700%
too%
too%
700%
s13s
5135
lal
tbl
Cost of Service
(Max. Fee) Proposed Fee
Current Cost
Recovery
Proposed Cost
Recovery# Description
Appendix B: p. 1'l

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

Current
Fee
Engineering and Landscape Plan Check and lnspection
a) Project Value Up to 510,000
b) Project Value 510,001 - S100,000
i. Base Fee for First S10,000
ii. Fee for Each Add'l 51 Up to 5100,000
c) S100,001 - S199,999
i. Base Fee for First 5100,000
ii. Fee for Each Add'l 51 Up to 5200,000
d) s2oo,0o1 - s299,999
i. Base Fee for First 5200,000
ii. Fee for Each Add'l 51 Up to 5300,000
e) 5300,000 or more
i. Base Fee for First 5300,000
ii. Fee for Each Add'l S1
f) Landscape Plan Review
i. Non-Development
ii. Custom Home
iii. Production Home/Subdivision
iv. Model Home Compiex
v. Commercial, Streetscape, other Development Projects
vi. Development and civil lmprovements - Landscaping Review Final Map and Parcel Map
a) Parcel Map check
b) Final Map check
i. Base Fee
ii. PIus, Per Lot Fee
c) Final Map Amendment/Certificate of Correction
Right of Ways (ROW) and Easements
a) Review of RoWEasement Documents
b) RoWEasement Abandonment
City of Folsom
Engineering and Encroachment Permit Fees
lllustration of Current Fees, Maximum Fees, and Proposed Fees Fixed Fee 6.OO% S80o
s60o s800 75%
88%
too%
700%
E
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee

7.OO%
56,900

5.OO%
s11,9oo

4.00%
51s,9oo

2.OO%
S38
s4t4
Valuation
Valuation
s38
S38
ss,742
s10,719
So
s2,899
s1,334
sz,4sL
s8oo

8.OO%
S8,ooo

6.40%
S14,4oo

4.AOo/.
s19,2oo

3.60%
s2oo
s1,100
s2,3oo
51,400
s1,60o
S2,1oo
s8,oso
s11,5oo
5LM
s6,eoo
s3,4s0
ss,7so

8.OOo/.
a.oo%
S8,ooo

6.40%
s14,4oo

4.80%
519,200

3.60%
s2oo
s1,100
s2,3oo
s1,40o
51,600
S2,1oo
s8,oso
s11,s00
S6,eoo
S3,4so
ss,7s0
va nes
770/o
vafles
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
700%
too%
too%
100%
83%
56%
roo%
too%
86%
78%
a3%
a30/.
79%
3a%
varies
varies
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
700%
LOO%
LOO%
too%
IOOo/o
700%
2%
2%
4 to00/.

Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
5744
93%
00/a
42%
rco%
700"/a
roo%
39%
43%
700%
700%
5 Cost of Seruice
(Max. Fee) Proposed Fee
Proposed Cost
Recovery# Description
6 SubdivisionAgreementProcessing Fixed Fee s1,083 7SO ss,7so 19% Appendix B: p. 12
too%

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

CitY of Folsom
Engineering and Encroachment Permit Fees
lllustration of current Fees, Maximum Fees, and Proposed Fees Transportation Permit
a) Permit
b) Annual Permit
Tree Removal/Work Permit
al Permitted Removal/Work
i. Existing Occupied Structure
a. 0-2 Trees
b. 3+ Trees: See New Construction Rate Below
c. "ln Decline" Tree
ii. New Construction (e.g. Custom Home, Subdivision, Parcel Map, Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Per Hour
Fixed Fee
Per Hour
Per Hour
Per Hour
Per Hour
Per Hour
Each
Each
Fixed Fee
Per Hour
T&M
Srg
5ao
5103
s103
n/a
n/a
s1o3
n/a
n/a

1.5x Regular Fee
Hourly Rate of Arborist
Actual Cost
)rb
Sloo
s1,200
st o0
S1,2oo
51,400 + 10% per tree
52oo
2x permit amount
s2oo
S2oo
S2oo
s200
5240
Sloo
Sloo

1.5x Regular Fee
Hourly Rate of Arborist
Actual Cost
MM
t00%
roo%
700%
5go
8 S38
s38
S38
Sss
538
See
s438
Sloo
51,200
s1o0
51,200
51,400
s2oo
s2,4oo
s2oo
S2oo
S2oo
s20o
5240
s100
Sloo
Szoo
3%
3%
t9%
L8%
too%
38o/.
3%
3a%
a.0-4Trees
b. 5+ Trees
iii. Misc. !o00/o
variesblw/o Permit (Does not include mitigation)
Double the Permit Rate
Other Fees for Seruice
9 Research of Engineering Records
10 MiscellaneousEngineeringSeruices
11 Excess Plan Review Fee (4th and subsequent)
12 Revisions
13 After Hours lnspection (per hour) (2-hour minimum)
!4 Re-inspection Fee (2nd Time or More) (each)
15 Missed lnspection Fee
16 Expedited Services Fee
17 Residential Landscape Review
18 Technical Assistance/Third Party Review or lnspection 52%
52%
43%
too%
too%
LOO%
to00/o
too%
!oo%
t00%
[a] Use time and materials with initial deposit to be determined by City Engineer, based on anticipated scope of work.

Ib] Encroachment agreement required in addition to insurance (e.g., parklets).

Fee
Current
(Max. Fee)
Cost of Service
Proposed FeeS Description
Appendix B: p.13

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

User and Redulatorv Fees
Cost of Service Cdlculations
Building
Appendix B: p. 14

04/23/2024 Item No.9.
city of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Allocation of Annual Labor Effort - Building
Authorized Staffing
Contract Seruices
Divisional Total
lal Staffing based on FY 23124 adopted budget
[b]Allocationofhoursintendedtoserveasreasonableestimate. Amountmayvaryfromyear-to-yearandpositiontoposition [c] Source: Annual average FY 18/19 through tY 2t/22.
[d] Amounts intended to serue as reasonable estimates of market rates for contract seruice providers. [e] Average hourly rate for contract services received. lal;Ib]
lal;Ib]
lal;Ib]
lal;Ib]
lal;Ib]
lal;Ib]
lal;tbl
20,504
LO0'9l
5,592
3,728
3,728
t,864
L,864
r,864
1,864
14353
70%
4,474
2,942
L,864
7,49r
1,118
932
7,497
1,118
746
t,864
373
746
932
373
6 151
30%
r000/o
700%
LOO%
100%
TOOo/o
too%
100%
800/0
80%
50%
8A%
60%
50%
aon/o
20%
20yo
50%
20%
40%
50%
20%
20,504
5,592
3,728
3,728
1,,864
7,864
t,864
1,,864
L,864
1,864
,464
1,A64
1,864
LA64
r,864
216
2t6
216
2L6
2t6
216
2t6
2,080
2,080
2,080
2,080
2,080
2,080
2,080

11.00 3.00

2.00 2.OO

1.00 1.00

1.00 1.00
Building lnspector l/ll
Building Plans coordinator
Building Technician l/ll
Plan Check Engineer
Building lnspection Supervisor
Principal Civil Engineer
Senior Civil Engineer
Total
Total
Total Hours Less: Hoiiday
Per FTE & Leave
Hours Per
FTE
Prod uctive
Hou rs
I nd i rect
Hou rs
Total Direct
Hourslnd i rectPosltioF TotalDi rectFTE Totai Hours Notes s,592
3,728
3,728
L,464
t,864
1,864
L,864
24,50414,353
4,474
2,9a2
t,864
I,497
1,IL9
932
t,491
6,151
\Lta
746
1,864
373
746
932
373
Building lnspector l/ll
Building Plans coordinator
Building Technician l/ll
Plan check Engineer
Building lnspection Superuisor
Principal Civil Engineer
Senior Civil Engineer
Total
Position Totallndirect Direct
S 6so,oooAnnual Contract Services
N otesTotalD escn pt io n
td1
tdl
lel
110
140
s
5 130too%
330/.
67%
lnspection
Plan Review
Total
Contract Services Share Est. Hrly Cost Notes
5,0005,000Contract Service Hours
20,504
5,000
25,504
too%
14,353
4,500
18,853
7404
s00
6,151
6,651
26%
Authorized Staffing
Contract Seruices
Total
Total
Appendix B: p.15

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee StudY
Allocation of Divisional Expenses - Building
Recurring Divisional Expehditures [a]
Allocation of Department and Citywide Overhead
Support from Other Departments
Total
Fully-Burdened Hourly Rate
tbl
s 2,533,523
s 1,032,92s
$ so,ooo
s 15,12s
s 2,02s
s 82,121
5 412,624
s 23,400
S 208,931
5 55o,ooo
$ s6,472
s 385,000
s
s
s
s
5 s
s
s
5 5
385,000
s 2.t48.623
s 1,032,92s
$ so,ooo
$ 1s,12s
s 2,02s
s 82,121
s 412,624
5 23,400
$ 208,931
s 265,000
s s6,472
Subtotal
Salaries - Permanent
Salaries - Temporary
Annual Leave Account
Uniform Allowance
FICA
PERS
Deferred Comp - City Paid
Combined genefits
Contracts
lnsurance / Liability
NotesTotai Adjustments Total
lcl
lcl
s
s
372,993
747,300
s 520-293
s
s
s 372,993
s 147,300
s 520,293
Department Overhead
citvwide Overhead
subtotal
Description NotesTotai Adjustments Total
lcl
lcl
tcl
s 337.776
65,000
40,000
226,776
s
5 s
s
5 )
s
55,000
40,000
226.776
s 337.776
Plan Review and Permit Support from Other Depts
Annual ln-House Technology Licensing
Annual ln-House Maintenance of Zoning Code, Plans i
subtotal
NotesDescription Total Adjustments Total
2,533,623
372,993
337,776
747,300
s 3.385.591subtotal
Recurring Divisional Expenditures
Department Overhead
Support from Other Depanments
citvwide overhead
Description NotesTotal
Icl
S 3,38s,6e1
18,853
180s
Costs
llireal Hour!
Fullv-Burdened Hourlv Rate
NoteTotalDescription
Appendix B: p. 16

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Allocation of Divisional Expenses - Building
Cgst Recovery Ovewiew
Cost Recovery Analysis
lal Source: FY 23124 adopted budget.
[b] Adjustment to align to FY 22/23 actual contract seryice expenditures [c] see separate worksheets in this model. Amounts intended to serye as reasonable estimates. toogl
67%
o%
330/.
oot
ool
s1,910,7s8
S1,6s2
s930,637
s1,596
s1,09s
42-s4s,s3g
53,632,r6a
s1,080
s7,234,323
s7,O7O
s3,338
s4,877,97934.442.372
s3,143,495
s24o
s!,298,637
So
so
s2,2s9,0s4
s1,98s
s919,s17
s469
S331
s3.181.355
s2,022,669
S1,330
5899,484
S2,413
s4,0s1
s2.529-947
s1,757,983
s1,580
s839,076
s320
S403
52,599,46252,209,123
s7,275,767
S2,40s
$988,989
s1,854
S698
S2.132.338
s7,760,27s
s3,oo0
s956,213
s2,3oo
Ssso
s1,43s,293
52,400
5727,668
9766
s515
t2.t66.642
s1,391,334
S1,o80
s866,826
S8s9
s638

52.260.73751,6s8,432
S1,090,143
s1,320
5s6s,642
s897
S43o
,224000
3440407
3444100
34/,4300
1444400
0702320
0102320
0102320
0102320
0102320
Building Permit Fees
Building Reinspection Fee
Structure Plan Check Fees
Seismic Training Fee
State Blde Standards Fund
Total
Actuai
2Ar2/i3
Act!al
20L3 / t4
Actuai
zAMl\,s
Actua
zaLs/16
Actual
2A76111
Actua L
2AfilB
Actual
20:18/1 9
Actual
2A19/20
Actua
2C2Al2r
Actual
202L/22 10 YearObjectOrg KeyDescflption Ferceatag€ Note5 a4%
S3.38s.691
52,845,839
Annualized Costs
Average Revenues
Cost Recovery
Appendix B: p. 17

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Building Fees
Cost of Service Calculation - At Fully-Burdened Hourly Rate HVAC Change-Out - Residential
Water Heater Change-Out - Residential
Residential Re-Roof
Siding Replacement
seruice Panel Upgrade - Residential
Battery Backup Storage
Electric Vehicle Charger
Generator
Residential Solar Photovoltaic Svstem - Solar Permit
a) Plan Review
i) Base Fee for 15kW or Less
ii) Fee for Each Additional kW above 15kW
b) Permit
Commercial Solar Photovoltaic System - Solar Permit
a) Plan Review
i) Base Fee 50kW or Less
ii) Fee for Each Add'l kW above 5okw up to 250kW
ii) Fee for Each Add'l kw above 250kw
b) Permit
Swimming Pool Replaster / Equipment change-Out
Swimming Pool Remodel (e.9., Changing Pool shape,
Adding Cabo shelf, etc.)
Retaining wall
a) One Type of Retaining Wall Type/Configuration
b) Each Additional Wall Type/configuration
Window / Sliding Glass Door - Retrofit / Repair
a)Upto5
b) Per Window Over 5 Windows
Fences Requiring a Building Permit
Pool Solar
5 6
7 8
9 1
2 3
4 15
16 10
11 72
13 14
Fee Descripiion
x
s22s
s180
5360
531s
527O
s360
s36o
s360
ss40
527O
s18o
s36
5360
s18o
s4s0
s9oo
cost of Svc
s18o
s180
s18o
s18o
s18o
s18o
s18o
s18o
S18o
s18o
S18o
$180
s180
S18o
s180
S18o
Hourly Rate

2.00 1.00

2.50 5.00

3.00 1.50

7.25 1.00

2.00 1,.75

1.50 2.OO

2.00 2.00

1.00 0.20
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
vafles
vanes
vaneS
vane5
varies
varies
varies
vafles
varies
vaneS
vanes
vanes
varies
varies
varies
vaneS
vanes
vafles
vanes
vaneS
vanes
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
vafles
varies
varies
varies
Current Fee
Current Est
Cost
Ial,Ib]
lal,tbl
lal,tbl
tal,tbl
ta1,Ib]
tal,tbl
tal,tbj
s200
s1s
52s0
s444
s7
9s
$ss6
s180
s4so
ssoo
ss40
s27O
s180
S36
S360
922s
s180
s360
S31s
s27o
s36o
S360
S360
700%
100%
700%
700'/.
700%
7000/0
700%
7000/.
700%
LOO%
7000/0
7000/r
700%
1000/0
700%
1000/0
Proposed Fee Note
Proposed
Cost Recovery
X
X
Appendix B: p.18

04/23/2024 Item No.9.
city of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Building Fees
cost of Service calculation - At Fully-Burdened Hourlv Rate [a] Total fees shall not exceed amounts outlined in California Government Code 56015(a)(1).

Ib]TheCitywillnotcollectadditionalpermitprocessingfees. Amountsshownaretotalamountdueforpermitprocessing,planreview,andpermit.

Electrical and lrrigation Pedestals per pedestal
Detached and Attached ADUs
lunior ADUs
18 19
Fee Descflption

1.50 25.00

12.00 Total
180
S18o
s180
Hourlv Rate
527O
s4,soo
52,160
varles
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
Current Fee
Current Est.

Cost Recovery
527o
s4,500
$2,160
700%
700%
100%
Proposed Fee Note
Proposed
Cost Recovery
Appendix B: p. 19

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Building Fees
cost of Service Calculation - At Fully-Burdened Hourly Rate

0.75 0.75

2.00 3.50

5.00 22.OO

40.00 160.00
250.00
Est. City
Staff Labor
Hrs
s18o
S18o
S18o
s180
s18o
s180
s18o
s180
s180
Fully-
Bu rden ed
Hourly
s13s
S13s
s360
5630
s1,080
s3,950
57,2OO
s28,8oo
s46,800
Est. Cost of
Service Unit Notes
Permit Fee for New Buildings, Additions, Tenant lmprovements, Residential Remodels, and combined Mechanical, Electrical, and/or Plumbing Permits
s1 - s2,000
s2,oo1 - s2s,000
s2s,001 - s50,000
ss0,001 - s1o0,ooo
s100.001 - ss00,000
s500,001 - s1,00o,ooo
$1,000,001 - 5s,000,000
s5,000,001 - s10,000,000
s10,000,001 - s10,000,000
7 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 Fee Description
X
x
74%
74%
92%
a4%
87%
a3%
84%
900/.
1090/.
sloo
Sloo
s33o
ss3o
s88o
S3,280
s6,o3o
s26,o3o
ss1,o3o
Current Fee
Current Cost
Recovery
LOOo/o
700%
700%
700%
700%
LOO%
100%
LOO%
too%
s13s
S13s
s350
s630
s1,o8o
s3,e60
57,2oo
s28,8oo
546,800
Prc,rosed Fee
Proposed
Cost
Recovery
Appendix B: p. 20

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee study
Building Fees
Cost of Service Calculation - At Fully-Burdened Hourly Rate [a]lncludesuptothreeplanchecks. TheCitywillbillhourlyforadditionalplanreviewrequired.

Ib] For identical buildings built by the same builder on the same lot or in the same tract and for which building permits are issued at the same time x
x
I
s18o
s180
s18o
5180
S180
s18o
Fully-
Burdened
HourlV
s1,440
s4s0
s18o
s18o
s18o
s18o
Est. Cost
of Service
varies
700/.
33%
Slso
slso
slso
Current Fee
Current
Cost
Recovery
lal
tbI
Building Plan check Fees - Building
a) Plan Review Fee, if applicable
b) Expedited Plan Check - At Application Submittal (when applicable)
c) Tract Home / lvlaster Plan Construction (Production Units) d) Production Permit for Multi-family permit
e) Production Permit for Fire permits and other misc. permits f) Alternate Materials and Methods Review {per hour)
g) Excess Plan Review Fee (4th and subsequent) (per hour) h) Revisions to an Approved Permit (per hour)
i) Deferred Submittal (per hour)
1 Fee Descrl
80%

1.5x standard plan check fee
2OYo

8.00 2.50

1.00 1.00

1.00 1.00
Est. city Staff labor Hrs
19O6/.
700%
700%
rooo/o
too%
7000/o
IOO%
700%
tooo/L
8Oo/.

1.5x standard plan check fee
20% of standard plan check fee
5L,MO
s4so
s180
s180
9180
s18o
Proposed Fee
Proposed
Co st
Recovery
Appendix B: p.21

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee study
Building Fees
cost of service calculation - At Fully-Burdened Hourly Rate

1.00 o.42

1.00 1.00

1.00 7.20

1.00 5.00

0.50 Est. City
Staff Labor
Hrs
S18o
s180
5180
s180
S18o
s180
s18o
s180
s180
Fu I ly'
Burdened
Hourly
s7s
s18o
s18o
s216
s18o
9%
9%
S90o
se0
s180
s18o
Est. Cost
of Service
S2s
$3.60
so.40
Curfent Fee
Current
Cost
Recovery
tdl
tbl
lcl
lal
lal
lal
lal
lal
lal
lal
lal
lal
Permit Processing Fee
Strong Motion lnstrumentation (SMl) Fee Calculation
a) Residential
b) commercial
Building Standards (SB 1473) Fee calculation (Valuation) a) S1 - $2s,000
b) s2s,oo1 - sso,ooo
c) Ss0,001 - S7s,000
d) s7s,oo1 - s100,000
e) Each Add'l 525,000 or fraction thereof
Business License Fee
CASP Training Fund Fee
State Disability Access Fee
General Plan/Zoning code Update Fee (percent of building permit fee) Technology Fee (percent of permit fee)
Temporary Certificate of Occupancy (Phasing Plan) Fee
Permit Extension
Permlt Reactivation Fee
a) Reactivation Fee if All lnspections Have Been Performed and Approved Up to But Not lncluding Final lnspection
bl Reactivation Fee - All other scenarios
i) Permit Expired Up to one Year
ii) Permit Expired More than One Year
Damaged Building suruey (Fire, Flood, Vehicle Damage, Etc.) {per hour) other Fees
Phased lnspection Fee (per inspection)
After Hours lnspection (per hour) (4-hour minimum)
lRe-inspection
Fee {2nd Time or More) (each)
Permit Reissuance Fee
7 8
9 3
4 5
6 1
2 12
13 14
15 15
10 11
X
x
IOOo/o
roo%
TOOr/o
700%
700%
roo%
700%
55%
56%
700%
00/6
S0.50 or valuation x .00013
S0.50 or valuation x .00028
50% of Original Base Building Permit Fee
100% of Original Base Building Permit Fee
s18o
s180
s7s
s180
s18o
s216
5180
s1
(?
S:
<a
Add s1
s2s
S3.60
s0.40
5%
soA
s9oo
so
Proposed Fee
Proposed
Cost
Recovery
Appendix B: p.22

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee study
Building Fees
Cost of Service Calculation - At Fully-Burdened Hourly Rate Ib] Fee applies to new construction, additions, tenant improvements, and residential remodels requiring building permits. [c] Fee applies to all permits.
ldl Reinspection fee applies after the first re-inspection X
X
x
x

1.00 o.42
o.42

0.50 Est. City
Staff rabor
Hrs
s18o
s180
S18o
s180
Fully-
Burde n ed
Houriy Current Fee
Current
Ccst
Recovery
s180
s7s
s7s
S9o
Est. Cost
of Serv ce
Missed lnspection Fee
Duplicate Copy of Permit
Duplicate Copy of Certificate of Occupancy
Fees for services Not Listed in this Fee schedule (per 1/2 hour) Violation Fees
lnvestigation Fee For Work Done Without Permits
{ln addition to applicable permit fees)
18 19
20 21
Fee Description
LOO0/6
700%
700%
1000/.

S180
s7s
s7s
se0
equal to
permit fee
Proposed Fee
Droposed
Cost
Reccvery
Appendix B: p. 23

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

User ond Reaulotorv Fees
Cost of Service Cslculations
General PIon / Zoning Code Updote
Appendix B: p.24

04/23/2024 Item No.9.
tal;[bl
[a];Ib]
lal;Ib]
lal; [c];[d]
Periodic
Periodic
Periodic
Annual
s
s
$
s
100,000
62,500
100,000
226,776
5 489,276
5 1
205
5 5
s
2,000,000
500,000
500,000
226,776
s 3,226,776
General Plan Update
Housing Element
Zoning Code
ln-House Maintenance
Total
Amortization /
U pdate
Freq uency N otesDescrlption Total Annual Cost Cost TYPe City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
cost of Service calculation - General Plan Update / Zoning Code U pdate costs Estimated Expenditures
Cost Allocation
Allocation Base
Fee at Full Cost Recovery
Cost Re€overy Alternative Scenarios
Notes:
[a] Source: Conseruative estimates of update costs. Amounts will likely be higher. [b] Target recovery of periodic costs, or portion of periodic costs, via General Plan Update Fee [c] Recover annual costs, or portion of annual costs, via standard permit and plan review fees. [d]Amountcalculatedviaanalysisofplanningcostofseruice. Amountrepresentsl5%oftotalannualplanningcosts. [e] Assumes portion of General Plan Update costs will continue to be paid via General Fund resources. lfl Amounts represents multi-year average of building permit fee collection lal;Ie]175,000s 262,s00Periodic Costs
Target
Share to Recover Cost RecoverV NotesTotalDescri ption
tfls 1,910,7s8Estimated Building Permit Fees
Descri ption NotesTotal
5 s
175,000
1,9L0,7s8
9%
Target Recovery
Estimated Building Permit Fees
Total
TotalDescription N otes
9%
1,910,758
17s,000
17s,000
s%l
s 1.910,758 I s
s es.s38 I s
s rzs,ooo I s
s4.s9%l 100.00%
s
s
s 17s,000
ooa
r,9to,758
o.ooo/.Cost Recovery
% of Permit Fee
Estimated Building Permit Fees
Forecast Revenue
Annual Revenue Requirement
Total NotesTotalTotalDescri ption
Appendix B: p. 25

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

User and Redulatorv Fees
Cost of Service Calculstions
Development Specific Technology Enhoncements / Lond Management Trocking Appendix B: p. 26

04/23/2024 Item No.9.
lal;Ib]
lal;[c]
lal; [c]
lal;Ic]
Annual
Periodic
Periodic
Periodic
s
5 s
s
40,000
10,000
150,000
10,000
S 21o,ooo
1 5
5 s
5890,000
s40,000
sso,ooo
s7s0,000
sso,ooo
Total
Software and Licensing
Hardware Upgrades
lmplementation
Contingency (L0%)
Amortization /
U pdate
Freq uencyDescri ptlon NoteTotal Annual Cost Cost TYPe
City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
cost of seruice calculation - Technology Enhancement Fee Estimated Expenditures
Cost Allocation
Alloction Base
Fee at Full Cost Re€overy
Current Cost Recovery
[a] Useful life and ongoing licensing costs, and annual revenues estimated by Clearsource. Amounts are intended to represent reasonable estimates. [b] Recover annual costs, or portion of annual costs, via standard permit and plan review fees. [c] Target recovery of periodic costs, or portion of periodic costs, via Technology Fee. [d] Amounts represents multi-year average of building permit fee collection.

LOOo/6s 170,000Periodic Costs
Target
Share to Recover Cost RecoveryDescriptlon N otesTotal
Estimated Building Permit Fees
Description NotesTotal
s
s
170,000
1,910,7s8
9%
Target Recovery
Estimated Building Permit Fees
Total
NotesTotalDescription
s
5 s
9%
L,gLO,758
170,000
170,000
!o0.ov/o
s
s
s
50/o
1,910,758
95,538
170,000

56.20%
170,000
0%
L,970,758
o.00%
Estimated Building Permit Fees
Annual Revenue Requirement
Forecast Revenue
% of Permit Fee
Cost Recovery
Appendix B: p.27

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

User dnd Reoulatorv Fees
Cost of Service Colculations
Allocation ol Citywide Overheod
Appendix B:p.28

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Analysis
Estimated Citywide Overhead (for Cost of Service Calculation Purposes Only) Central Seryie Center - General tund Allocation [a]
City Staffing Position Total [a],[b]
Estimated Citywide Alloc to Community Development Direct Seryi.e Units * This represents a conservative indirect cost rate calculation. This estimate was developed for purposes of user and regulatory fee cost gf seruice analysis. As part of day-to-day operations, staff may categorize, assign, or quantify indirect costs using different criteria and methods. lal source: FY 23124 adopted budget.
[b] lndirect cost allocation basis is staffing levels of dired seryice departments [c] Based on feedback received f.om Community Development Department. Amounts intended to serye as reasonable estimates. 5717,437
s7,256,732
S1,234,309
s581,049
s886,511
56,246,7s9
s7,674,A68
s72,097,665
City Council
City Manager
City AttorneY
city Clerk
Human Resources
Management and Budget
Fleet Management
Total
s r2,o97,66s
s
)
5 )
s
s
s
s
s
)
5 5
s
736,498
2,454,994
1,335,608
3,096,O20
942,445
7,5a2,LO1
7,621,660
327,333
100*
0%
o%
o%
o%
6%
2004
o%
3%
o%
77%
26%
80/o
73%
73%
443.50

49.00 113,50

34.55 58.00

59.45 12.00

27.OO

90.00 (47.00)
(s.00)
{4.00)
(4.00)
(3.00)
{5.00)
(25.00)
490.50

5.00 4.00

4.00 3.00

27.OO

90.00 5.00

12.00 25.00

49.00 113.50

34.55 58.00

59.45 Iotal
:ity Council
City Manager
City Attorney
City Cle*
communitv Development
Fire Department
Human Resources
Library
Management and Budget
Parks and Recreation
Police Department
Public Works
Water Resources
Solid Waste
Adjusiment fo:

Drrect 5v. Depts
OnlY Cwide oH Al oc
Adj!sted Staffing Share cf Cwlde oH
fo. cwide oH AllocTotalDepartment A loc
Ic]
Icl
Icl
Ic]
747,300
58,920
220,949
309,329
736,498
20%
8%
30%
42%
too%
Building
code Enforcement
Engineering
Planning
lotal
Depi/Drvision Notes
share of
,Allocation
Sha.e of
Allocation
Appendix B: p. 29

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

APPENDIX C

PROPOSED FEES
CLEARSOURCE REPORT TO THE CITY OF FOLSOM L2Page 98
04/23/2024 Item No.9.

City of Folsom

ENGINEERING AND ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FEES
1 Assessment District/CFD Payment Processing
G
s4,8oo Fixed Fee
# Description Fee Fee Structure
2 Encroachment Permit
a) Encroachment Contract for Parking/Staging
i. 0-6 calendar days
ii. 7-14 calendar days
iii. 14+days
b) Utility Work/Connections (lndividual Permits)
i. Wet Utilities/Service Connections
ii. Dry Utilities (per site/location)
iii. Misc. per LF of Trench in ROWCity Easement
iv. lnspections and Testing
c) Driveways/Minor Frontage lmprovements
i. Residential (per driveway)
ii. Commercial (per driveway)
d) Pools and Spas (in ground)
e) Traffic Control/Equipment Staging
i. lsolated Site
ii. Multiple Closures/Staging
f) Permit Extensions
i. Active Work Zone
ii. lnactive Work Zone (4+ months inactivity)
g) Annual Permits
i. Wet Utilities
ii. Dry Utilities
iii. General Maintenance/Misc. (Not Wet or Dry Utilities) iv. Vegetation Management (Utilities)
v. Long Term/Revocable Encroachments (paid annually)
h) Long Term/Revocable Encroachments (new permits only) ss0
s2oo
sloo
$6oo
s200
5s.oo
s40o
s40o
s4oo
s4oo
s1,ooo
s6,000
s20,800
T&M
s20,8oo
s200
52,4oo
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
s2o0
$so
s2oo
lal
tbl
Appendix C: p. 'l

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

City of Folsom

ENGINEERING AND ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FEES
Engineering and Landscape Plan Check and lnspection
a) Project Value Up to 510,000
b) Project Value 510,001 - S100,000
i. Base Fee for First 510,000
ii. Fee for Each Add'l St up to 5100,000
c) S100,001 - S19e,e99
i. Base Fee for First S100,000
ii. Fee for Each Add'l St Up to 5200,000
d) $200,001 - s2e9,999
i. Base Fee for First 5200,000
ii, Fee for Each Add'l Sr up to 5300,000
e) 5300,000 or more
i. Base Fee for First 5300,000
ii. Fee for Each Add'l $1
f) Landscape Plan Review
i. Non-Development
ii. Custom Home
iii. Production Home/Subdivision
iv. Model Home Complex
v. Commercial, Streetscape, Other Development Projects
vi. Development and Civil lmprovements - Landscaping
Review
G
3 8.00%
s8oo
a.oo%
s8,ooo

6.40%
sr.4,4oo
4,8oo/o
s1s,200

3.60%
s20o
Sr,roo
s2,3oo
s1,4oo
s1,6oo
s2,100
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fee Structure# Description
4 Final Map and Parcel Map
a) Parcel Map Check
b) Final Map Check
i. Base Fee
ii. Plus, Per Lot Fee
c) Final Map Amendment/Certificate of Correction
Sa,oso
s11,s00

51.44 $6,soo
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
5 Right of Ways (ROW) and Easements
a) Review of ROWEasement Documents
b) ROW/Easement Abandonment
s3,4so
ss,7so
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
5 SubdivisionAgreementProcessing $s,7so Fixed Fee
Transportation Permit
a) Permit
b) Annual Permit
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
7 s16
se0
Appendix C: p. 2Page 100
04/23/2024 Item No.9.

City of Folsom

ENGINEERING AND ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FEES
Tree Removal/Work Permit
a) Permitted Removal/Work
i. Existing Occupied Structure
a. 0-2 Trees
b. 3+ Trees: See New Construction Rate Below
c. "ln Decline" Tree
ii. New Construction (e.g. Custom Home, Subdivision, Parcel a.0-4Trees
b. 5+ Trees
iii. Misc.
b) w/o Permit (Does not include mitigation)
Double the Permit Rate
G
8 s100
s1,2oo
sloo
s1,2oo
S1,400 + 10% per tree
52oo
2x permit amount
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Per Hour
Fixed Fee
# Description Fee Fee Structure
9 10
17 12
13 t4
15 76
77 18
Other Fees for Service
Research of Engineering Records
Miscellaneous Engineering Services
Excess Plan Review Fee (4th and subsequent)
Revisions
After Hours lnspection (per hour) (2-hour minimum)
Re-inspection Fee (2nd Time or More) (each)
Missed lnspection Fee
Expedited Services Fee
Residential Landscape Review
Technical Assistance/Third Party Review or lnspection
s2oo
S2oo
s200
s200
9240
Sloo
s100

1.5x Regular Fee
Hourly Rate of Arborist
Actual Cost
Per Hour
Per Hour
Per Hour
Per Hour
Per Hour
Each
Each
Fixed Fee
Per Hour
T&M
[a] Use time and materials with initial deposit to be determined by City Engineer, based on anticipated scope of work. [b] Encroachment agreement required in addition to insurance (e.9., parklets).

Appendix C: p. 3Page 101
04/23/2024 Item No.9.

City of Folsom

BUILDING FEES
A. Fees for Commonly Requested Building Permit Types. Fees shown in this section (Section A.) include all applicable inspection, and plan review fees, Additional permit processing fees apply. Additional fees may apply for services provided by other City Departments (e'9. Planning Review), and Fees Collected on Behalf of Other Agencies (e.g, State of California). @E
1 HVAC Change-Out - Residential s22s per permit
Fee Description Fee Charge Basis
2 Water Heater Change-Out - Residential s180 per permit 3 Residential Re-Roof s36o per permit Y
s31s per permit4 Siding Replacement
5 Service Panel Upgrade - Residential 5270 per permit
s360 per permit6 Battery Backup Storage
7 Electric Vehicle Charger s36o per permit Y
8 Generator s360 per permit
9 Residential Solar Photovoltaic System - Solar Permit
a) Plan Review
i) Base Fee for L5kW or Less
ii) Fee for Each Additional kW above 15kW
b) Permit
s2oo
s1s
s2s0
tal,tbl
tal,tbl
tal,lbl
per permit
per permit
per permit
N
N
N
10 Commercial Solar Photovoltaic System - Solar Permit
a) Plan Review
i) Base Fee 50kW or Less
ii) Fee for Each Add'l kW above 50kW up to 250kW
ii) Fee for Each Add'l kW above 250kW
b) Permit
5444
5t
Ss
sss6
tal,tbl
tal,tbl
lal,Ib]
tal,tbl
per permit
per permit
per permit
per permit
N
N
N
N
77 Pool Solar s180 per permit
t2 Swimming Pool Replaster / Equipment Change-Out s4so per permit 13 Swimming Pool Remodel (e.g., Changing Pool Shape,
Adding Cabo Shelf, etc.)
se00 per permit
14 Retaining Wall
a) One Type of Retaining Wall Type/Configuration
b) Each Additional Wall Type/Configuration
ss40 per permit
per permits270
15 Window / Sliding Glass Door - Retrofit / Repair
a) Upto5
b) Per Window Over 5 Windows
s180
s36
per permit
per permit
tG Fences Requiring a Building Permit s360 per permit
t7 Electrical and lrrigation Pedestals per pedestal 5270 per permit 18 Detached and Attached ADUs s4,s00 per permit
19 Junior ADUs s2,160 per permit
[a] Total fees shall not exceed amounts outlined in California Government Code 66015(a)(1). [b] The City will not collect additional permit processing fees. Amounts shown are total amount due for permit processing, plan review, and permit.

Appendix C: p. 4Page 102
04/23/2024 Item No.9.
. Project valuations shall be based on the total value of all construction work, including all finish work, roofing, electrical, plumbing, heating, air conditioning,elevators,fire-extinguishingsystemsandanyotherpermanentequipment. llintheopinionoftheBuildingOfficial,thevaluationis underestimated on the application, the permit shall be denied, unless the applicant can show detailed estimates to meet the approval of the Building Official. Final building permit valuation shall be set by the Building Official. For determining project valuations for new construction, the Building Official may use data published by the lnternational Code Council (lCC) (building valuation data table, typically updated in February and August of each year). The final building permit valuation shall be set at an amount that allows the City to recover its costs of applicant plan check, permit and inspection activities.

City of Folsom

BUILDING FEES
Determination of Valuation for Fee-Setting Purposes
Note: For construction projects with permit fees calculated using Section B, additional fees apply for permit issuance. Additional fees may apply for services provided by other city Departments (e.g, Planning Review), and Fees Collected on Behalf of other Agencies (e'g. State of California). Additional fees apply for plan review, when applicable.

B. permit Fee for New Buildlines, Additions, Tenant lmprovements. Residential Remodels, and Combined Mechanical. Electrical, and/or Plumbins Permits
Sr
$2,001
to S2,000
to $25,000
s13s.00
S135.oo for the first 52,000 plus Sg.ze for each add'l 51,000 or fraction thereof, to and includine 525,000
plus 510.80 for each add'l 51,000 or fraction thereof,
to and including 550,000

59.00 for each add'l S1,000 or fraction thereof,
to and including 5100,000
$25,001 to Sso,ooo 5360.00 for the first S25,ooo
Sso,ool to Sloo,ooo 5630.00 for the first 550,000 plus
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
S1oo,oo1 s500,000 s1,08O.OO for the first s100,000 plus $l.zo for each add'l 51,000 or fraction thereof, to and including 5500,000
to
to
to
ss00,oo1 s1,oo0,0oo 53,950.00 for the first $500,000 plus 56.48 for each add'l S1,000 or fraction thereof, to and including S1,000,000
S1,ooo,oo1 s5,000,000 s7,200.00 for the first s1,000,000 plus 55.40 for each add'l S1,000 or fraction thereof, to and including 55,000,000
S5,ooo,oo1 and up 528,800.00 forthefirst55,000,000 plus 54.11 for each additional S1,000 or fraction thereof over S5,000,000
Permit FeeTotal Valuation
Appendix C: p. 5Page 103
04/23/2024 Item No.9.

City of Folsom

BUILDING FEES
D. Buildine Plan Review Fees
1 Building Plan Check Fees - Building
a) Plan Review Fee, if applicable
@r
b) Expedited Plan Check - At Application Submittal (when applicable)
c) Tract Home / Master Plan construction (Production Units) d) Production Permit for Multi-family permit
e) Production Permit for Fire permits and other misc. permits f) Alternate Materials and Methods Review (per hour)
g) Excess Plan Review Fee (4th and subsequent) (per hour) h) Revisions to an Approved Permit (per hour)
i) Deferred Submittal (per hour)
80%
1,5x standard plan check fee
20% of standard plan check fee
S1,440
s4s0
S18o
S18o
s180
s180
lal N
Ibl
N
N
Activity Desffiption Charge Basis
When applicable, plan check fees shall be paid at the time of application for a building permit.

The plan checking fee is in addition to the building permit fee [a] lncludesuptothreeplanchecks. TheCitywill bill hourlyforadditional planreviewrequired. [b] For identical buildings built by the same builder on the same lot or in the same tract and for which building permits are issued at the same time,
Appendix C: p. 6Page 104
04/23/2024 Item No.9.

Activity Description
City of Folsom

BUILDING FEES
E, Other Fees
1 Permit Processing Fee
2 Strong Motion lnstrumentation (SMl) Fee Calculation
a) Residential
b) Commercial
3 Building Standards (SB 1473) Fee Calculation (Valuation) a) 51 - 52s,000
b) s2s,oo1 - sso,o0o
c) Sso,ool - STs,ooo
d) s7s,oo1 - sloo,ooo
e) Each Add'l 525,000 or fraction thereof
4 Business License Fee
5 CASP Training Fund Fee
6 State Disability Access Fee
7 General Plan/Zoning Code Update Fee (percent of building permit fee) 8 Technology Fee (percent of permit fee)
9 Temporary Certificate of Occupancy (Phasing Plan) Fee 10 Permit Extension
11 Permit Reactivation Fee
a) Reactivation Fee ifAll lnspections Have Been Performed and Approved Up to But Not lncluding Final lnspection
b) Reactivation Fee - All Other Scenarios
i) Permit Expired Up to One Year
ii) Permit Expired More than One Year
@r
Szs
S0.50 or valuation x .00013
S0.50 or valuation x .00028
51 52
s3
s4
Add s1
52s
S3.Go
So.4o
5%
5%
Seoo
50/o of Original Base Building Permit Fee
100% of Original Base Building Permit Fee
tal
lal
lal
lal
lal
lal
lal
lal
lal
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
tb1
lcl
N
N
N
N
N
$o
S180
N
N
12 Permit Reissuance Fee
13 Damaged Building Survey (Fire, Flood, Vehicle Damage, Etc.) (per hour) Other Fees
14 Phased lnspection Fee (per inspection)
15 After Hours lnspection (per hour) (4-hour minimum)
15 Re'inspection Fee (2nd Time or More) (each)
17 Missed lnspection Fee
18 Duplicate Copy of Permit
S180
S18o
S18o
s216
Srgo
s18o
s7s
Appendix C: p. 7
td1

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

Activity Description
City of Folsom

BUITDING FEES
E. Other Fees
19 Duplicate Copy of Certificate of Occupancy
20 Fees for Services Not Listed in this Fee Schedule (per U2 houd Violation Fees
21 lnvestigation Fee For Work Done Without Permits
(ln addition to applicable permit fees)
@r
s7s
5so
equal to
permit fee
N
[al AmountsestablishedbyStateofCalifornia. lnthecaseofdiscrepancybetweenthisscheduleandamountsestablishedbytheState,Stateamounts shall supersede these amounts.
[b] Fee applies to new construction, additions, tenant improvements, and residential remodels requiring building permits. [c] Fee applies to all permits.
[d] Reinspection fee applies after the first re-inspection.

Appendix C: p. 8Page 106
04/23/2024 Item No.9.

City of Folsom

BUITDING FEES
Building Valuation Data Table
Group (2021 hternational Building Code) $ t8 ilA ilg iltI I lt8 IV VI VE A-1 Assembly, theaters, with stage
A-1 Assembly, theaters, without stage
A-2 Assembly, nightclubs
A-2 Assembly, restaurants, bars, banquet halls
A-3 Assembly, churches
A-3 Assembly, general, community halls, libraries, museums A-4 Assembly, arenas
B Business
E Educational
F-1 Factory and industrial, moderate hazard
F-2 Factory and industrial, low hazard
H-1 High Hazard, explosives
H234 High Hazard
H-5 HPM
l-1 lnstitutional, supervised environment
l-2 lnstitutional, hospitals
l-2 lnstitutional, nursing homes
l-3 lnstitutional, restrained
l-4 lnstitutional, day care facilities
M Mercantile
R-1 Residential, hotels
R-2 Residential, multiple family
R-3 Residential, one- and two-family
R-4 Residential, care/assisted living facilities
S-1 Storage, moderate hazard
S-2 Storage, low hazard
U Utility, miscellaneous
335.89
307.39
269.94
268.94
311.88
266.01
306.39
260.69
273.46
160.20

1.59.20 L49.46
L49.46
260.69
262.22
434.15
302.01
295.86
267.22
201.31
264.67
221.32
209.61
262.22
148.46
747.46
tt4.o9
324.58
296.08
267.93
260.93
300.57
254.76
295.08
251.13
263.96
152.78
757.78
I42.04
742.04
251.13
252.95
424.39
292.45
286.31
252.95
193.36
25s.41
2I2.06
203.74
252.95
747.O4
140.04
t07.31
316.94
288.44
254.48
252.48
292.93
246.r2
286.44
247.46
255.62
743.34
I43.34
133.60
133.60
z4t.a6
244.37
415.32
283.18
277.03
244.37
184.91
246.77
203.42
198.94
244.37
131.60
131.60

99.89 304.93
276.42
245.85
244.85
280.91
235.10
275.42
231.65
245.O4
138.64
1,37.64
727.90
127.90
231.65
235.67
405.12
272.97
255.83
235.67
177.28
238.13
194.78
t95.t2
235.67
126.90
r25.90

95.60 286.87
25a.31
230.56
228.58
263.3C
276.33
256.31
2!0.99
228.69
123.55
123.55
tt4.t2
TI4,L2
7!O.99
215.42
383_35
253.83
247.95
215.42
L6L.72
218.35
175.96
188.41
215.42
tr2.72
trz.72

85.13 278.0(
249.5(
223.99
222.99
254.43
208.4t
248.5C
202.72
217.0C
r77.41
t!6.41
106.9i
106.97
202.72
209.41

0.0c

0.0c
238.6S
209.41
156.L5
2t2.4C
170.01
181.45
209.41
ro5.91
to4.91

79.54 295.62
267.r2
237.O2
236.O2
271.6A
225.80
266.72
222.56
236.61
I32.48
1,37.48
12!.74
r2r.74
222.56
235.71
396.02
263_88
257.74
235.77
168.45
238.77
194.82
19t.77
235.77
I20.74
tLg.74

90.99 266.02
237.57
209.57
207.51
242.45
795.41
235.51
146.27
200.3€
t02.44
702.44

93.0C

93.0C
186.27
193.82
358.57
229.O5
223.L7
193.82
!40.73
L96.75
154.36
175.86
193.82

91.0C

91.00 67.39
257.55
229.O5
202.75
201.79
233.9t
188,01
228.05
177.81
193.94

95.93 94,93

0.0c

85.5(
r77.81
187.73

0.0c

0.0(
212.7i
r87.73
134.95
r90.6i
t4a.2E
L65.6i
787.7?

84.5C

83.5C

64.L5
Appendix C: p. 9Page 107
04/23/2024 Item No.9.

This page is intentionally left blsnk
to facilitqt e double - side d printtng
snd minimize poper ttse.

CITY OF

DISTINCTIVE EY NATURE
FOLSOl\{

04/23/2024 Item No.9.

Folsom City Council
Staff ort
MEETING DATE: 412312024
AGENDA SECTION: New Business
SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 1344 - An Ordinance of the City of Folsom Amending Sections 3.50.020,3.50.040 and 3.50.050 and repealing Section 3.50.060 of the Folsom Municipal Code (Introduction and First Reading) and Determination that the Project is Exempt from FROM: Community Development Department

RECOMMENDATION / CITY COUNCIL ACTION
Co"d"rt th" first reading of Ordinance No. 1344 - An Ordinance of the City of Folsom Amending Sections 3.50.020,3.50.040 and 3.50.050 and repealing Section 3.50.060 of the Folsom Municipal Code.

BACKGROUND / ISSUE
@elopmentDepartmenthascompletedacomprehensivestudyofitsuserfees.

As part of that process, staff noted that Chapter 3.50 "Fee and Service Charge Revenue/Cost Comparison System" of the Folsom Municipal Code (FMC) mandated a specific percentage of costs that are required to be recovered by fees and service charges for development, public safety, recreation, maintenance, administrative and financial services. This list was created based on a cost control system study performed in 1987. The list includes several services that either no longer exist or have been modified substantially since 1987 and does not include several newer services that the City has performed since that time. Chapter 3.50 also currently lists the schedule for the review of each fee.

While Council regularly reviews and approves updated fee schedules for individual departments, these fee schedules may include services that are not specifically listed in FMC Chapter 3.50. In addition to the frequency of fee reviews, the Chapter also includes the percentage of cost recovery required for each fee. However, Council may wish to modifu the percentage of cost recovery for certain fees and service charges based on considerations such as community benefit or in support 1

04/23/2024 Item No.10.
of economic development. Under FMC Chapter 3.50, the Council cannot do this since the chapter lists specific percentages of cost recovery that have to be met.

POLICY / RULE
y"a"nS""tio.r 2.12 of the City Charter, amendments to the Folsom Municipal Code require review and approval by the City Council.

ANALYSIS
Stuff tt* p-vided proposed modifications to FMC Chapter 3.50 (provided in Attachment 1) to remove the schedule of fees and service charges table that lists specific regulations, products or services provided by the City and the percentages of costs reasonably borne by the City to be ."rorr.r"d by those fees. Staff recommends that instead of listing each of these specific facilities, products ani services, that the chapter be amended to provide general guidance about fees and the appropriate cost recovery percentage. This provides greater discretion to the Council if, for ."u*p1", it chooses to seta io*"t cost recovery percentage for a service due to community benefit o, ""orornic
development reasons. In addition, each department already maintains a Council- approved fee schedule that is publicly available, and these schedules capture each department's aciual fee-based regulations, products, facilities, and services. Removing the "percentage of costs reasonably borne to be resolved" section allows Council to review each department's fee schedule as needed to modify the percentage of cost recovery desired for each fee (up to 100 percent cost recovery).

In general, staff recommends that Council seek 100 percent cost recovery, but Council may adjust feei to a lower rate attheir discretion. Grounds for reducing fee rates are wide-ranging and could include reasons such as economic development, community benefit, public safety, to encourage the public to obtain permits, and to avoid overburdening the general public with large fees. It would also allow departmints to charge flat fees or other fee methods rather than deposit-based fees.

While deposii-based fees ensure full cost recovery for every service, they require additional administrative resources for invoicing, tracking, and collection that many departments, such as Community Development currently lack.

Staff is also recommending removing the language regarding the frequency of fee reviews by Council. The code currently prescribes either annual, quarterly or seasonal reviews. Given the costs and time involved in producing fee studies, these targets have not been achieved. Fee schedules for individual departments often get updated after the department finds that the fees no longer reflect the type or level of work that goes into specific tasks. While it is often best practice to adjust fee levels annually based on the Consumer Price Index (CPD or the Construction Cost Index (CCD depending on the type of fee, service or facility provided, it is not necessary to require this as part.of the ordinance as there may be times where staff and/or the Council do not wish to make an annual adjustment. Removing the timing mechanism would formally allow Council and the City Manager to decide when fee updates are nscessary In researching other jurisdictions with similar code chapters addressing fee and service charge revenue and cost comparison system, none that staff found dictated specific cost recoveries for individual services and only one listed out each individual service provided as Folsom's code currently does. These codes by and large gave Council the discretion to determine specific fee 2

04/23/2024 Item No.10.
rates to be collected (not exceeding I00% cost recovery) and did not prescribe the frequency with which fees need to be reviewed. As such, staff found that the proposed code modifications would be consistent with the current practices of several other jurisdictions.

F'IN IMPACT
Since the changes to ChaPter 3.50 of the FMC still stipulate that the city council shall generally seek 100 percent cost recovery for City services and this ordinance does not change any specific fee amounts, there is no impact to the General Fund. The proposed modifications to Chapter 3.50 of the FMC would let Council establish new fee and service charge types for any additional services the City provides. It would also allow Council to regularly modifu the percentage of cost recovery of each fee and service charge type on a frequency of their choice based on updated economic conditions rather than relying on cost recovery and review targets from 1987.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
@teroftheFo1somMunicipa1CodeisnotaprojectundertheCalifornia Environmintal Qualita Act (CEQA) and is therefore exempt from environmental review in accordance with Section 15061(b)(3) - Review for Exemption of the CEQA Guidelines.

ATTACHMENTS
l. O.di"*ce No. 1344 -An Ordinance of the City of Folsom Amending Sections 3.50.020,

3.50.040 and 3.50.050 and repealing Section 3.50.060 of the Folsom Municipal Code.

2. Proposed Updated Version of Chapter 3.50 "Fee and Service Charge Revenue/Cost Comparison System" of the Folsom Municipal Code
Submitted,

PAM JOHNS
Community Development Director
J

04/23/2024 Item No.10.

ATTACHMENT 1
ORDINANCE NO. 1344 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
FOLSOM AMENDING SECTIONS 3.50.020,3.50.040 AND 3.50.050 AND REPEALING SECTION 3.50.060 OF THE FOLSOM

MUNICIPAL CODB

04/23/2024 Item No.10.

ORDINANCE NO. 1344
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF FOLSOM AMENDING SECTIONS 3.50.020,

3.50.040 AND 3.50.050 AND REPEALING SECTION 3.50.060 OF THE FOLSOM

MUNICIPAL CODE
The City Council of the City of Folsom does hereby ordain as follows:

SECTION 1 PURPOSE
The purpose of this Ordinance is to amend the Folsom Municipal Code to remove the specific list of sirvices and percentage of costs reasonably bome to be resolved from fees for those sirvices and instead give City Council the discretion to determine specific services and associated cost recovery goals.

TO 020
CODE
Section 3.50.020 of the Folsom Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

3.50.020 Direction to eifirma**ger recover costs.
ffre eiq' manaser is here amount of
fees and charges established under this Chapter shall be sufficient to recover 4 the percentage of!@costsreasonablyborneinprovidingthe@servicesforwhichthe feei and charges are imposed
. Costs reasonably borne shall be as are
defined in Section 3.50.030 The n tase ofthe cost to be recovered bv the fee shall be at the sole discretion of the council but shall not exceed 100 percent. as set forth bv Section 3.50.040 below.

SECTION 3 AMENDMENT TO SECTTON 3.50.040 THE F'OLSOM CIPAL 2 CODE
Section 3.50.040 of the Folsom Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows

3.50.040 Schedule of fees and service charges.
seek
cost
or for ose. the
Ordinance No. 1344
Page I of l0 Page 113
04/23/2024 Item No.10.
pregue+s-o+-sen*ees"
iee
Ife\ri€{#
Sehedule
Bwetepme*Se*iees
+@iew
+@ins
+@ien
a@ien
+ Res*le+nspe*ie+
6@isn
+@iew
&@iew
* Yarianee Review
+C Si+ePesig!-Re{ritr
++ Uls€+e+i€r4r
#L PUDtReYi€t+r
leMict+
+aWie*
++ Speeif,e+l*n-*e*ie+v
+e iew
++@iew
+&@iew
+q iew
2e@iel+
+l- ie*
2+ ie*
?+ ien
Ifevi€{+
?4 S+ree+N*me-Rsiew
?+ Fina+Mapeheek
Ordinance No. 1344

lM
100%
+e0e/"
+gge/D
+0geh
+00e/t
|M-V.
+00e/o
+gge/o
+009u
+$Qe/o
+$Qe/E
lgOe/o
+00e/t
+00%
+$g9t
+gge/o
+0g9t
+00%
+099/t
+QQe/E
+$ge/t
tu%
+O0e/t
+$ge/o
Annual
"{n*ual
A+n*al
Anrual
An*ual
Annu*l
Annud
Annu*l
,{nnual
A,nnral
Annu*I
Ann*d
An*uat
A*nual
Annu*l
A,nn*al
Ann**I
A,nnual
Annu*l
A,nnUAl
Annud
Annual
Ann**l
Annu*l
Ann*al

04/23/2024 Item No.10.
26M
?+@ie*
2& Sign-Design-Re+i€t#
2* Generaf+lan*sie*
3+
3l=Miew
S+@is"ion
R€vi€w
-
P*eUinS
S+@i€w
-
P*eUing
3a
Ifevi€w
3+
Miw
3C iee
- giqr-lni+ia+ee
3+Wiew
3e
sq
ae@ien
at@ien
a+ S*ee+€u++*spe*ien
++ iew
+a
lnspee+ien
++ ine
PutlieSato+Senriees
acffi
a+@
a&ffi
Ordinance No. 1344

1e09;
+gQe/o
[M%
+g0e/o
+00e/o
+Q$eh
+QUqo
+Uelt
+g0e/o
+ee/o
+00e/t
14ge/E
A,nnU*l
A+nual
Annual
Annucl
An*u*t
A,nnu*l
Annr*d
Ann*nl
Ann*d
Annu*l
An***l
An*ual
Ansr*el
Ann*al
Annu*l
Ann*al
Annu*l
A.nnu+l
Anr**l
Annual
Ann*al
A.nnu*I
A+nual
An**al
Annual
Ann**l
+OQq/D
ge/o
+$ge/o
100%
+$ge/o
+gOeh
+$Ae/D
l00e/a
+gge/o
400%
140e/E
50e/o
+00e/o
s0e/o

04/23/2024 Item No.10.
aq
5+@ien
S+ Bingo+egul"+ien
5+ Blas+ing*svi€{r
5+@ien
5a
s+
S+*+eLa*
56@ien
s+@
5&
s+
6+
6t Vehieie+nspee+ien
6+@
s*@
6a ie*
6+@ien
66Mie*
e+@iens
e6& Fi+e+eper+Scles
6q Fire-Salvegesenrice
7e Le+€leaning
Tt iee
- A[€thers
++@
+e
?a@
7+
Reereatien-Sewiees
+6
- Nen-Reside*+
Ordinance No. 1344

+0geh
+e0%
l00e/o
[{iJ%
+00e/t
+00e/o
+00e4,
Annrrd
Annual
Annlr*l
A,nnu*l
An*u*l
A*n**l
Annu*l
Annual
A,nnunl
Annrr*l
Annu*l
Annud
A,nnU*l
Annu*l
A,nn**l
AnnrrC
A.nnual
Annral
A,nn+*l
,{nnual
A.nnu*l
Annu*I
Annu*l
A,nnUAI
An*ual
Annual
Annu*l
Annual
au**erty
aua**rly
l$gefr,
+099/0
l00e/t
+00ek
lg0e/t
+o0%
140e/0
+0g9'
+AQe/E
2%
+g0e/o
+Og%o
+gee/o
+0090
lggV"
+$gek
7se/o
+gge/o
25e/D
+s0%
$Uek
9$elt
|N%

04/23/2024 Item No.10.
++
- Nen-Residen+
+&
- Nen-Residen+
+q@
- Nen-Residen+
8e@
- Ne+Resident
8+
- Nen-Residen+
8;t
- Nsn-Residen+
*8+@
*8a@
8*@
86 Trips-an+Teurs
- Nen-Residen+
*8+@ien
*g& ien
*89. J*lya€ehbr*tie*
*9C@ien
9{- Flea-Ma+ke+
9+ gpcr*ien
- Ns+Re+iden+
9+
- Nen-Reside*t
9+@iens
Mdn*n*nee-Senriees
9*ffi
9e
Ordinance No. 1344

750/o
+009t
7lYo
+o0%
50eh
+00e/o
5Qe/0
|N%
sge/D
+0090
M
+O0e/o
x%
5ee/a
+e0e/0
oOLaA
+ggV"
0elt
5ge/o
ffi
ffi
E%
M
15e/o
M
+00e/a
*V.
aua*erly
auar+erty
aua*erly
au*erty
Seasenally
Seasen*lly
Seasen*lty
Seasen*lly
Se*sen*lty
Se*sen+l$
Scasen*lty
Seasenally
Ann**l
Annud
Annud
Seasenalty
Se*senally
Ann*nl
Ann**l
Annu*l
Anmr*I
A,nnu*t
Ann*al
A+nu*t
Ann*al
Annlrd
A*nu*t
+O0e/o Anm**l

04/23/2024 Item No.10.
- A.ngusg.+g88
- 'qlrgrrs+l'_1989
- +ngus#l'-1990
- Lueus+15-1g9+
-.q.ugus+l,-1g92
9+ ien
- '+ueus++r1988
- A.ugus+lr+989
- +ueus+l;1990
- +ngus++r+g++
- +"Sustlr+942
9&
Pis*iet)
- rq.ugus+Lra988
- +ugusH-,+989
- +ueus++r+990
- +ttgus+l'{gg+
- +ugus#H999
9q S+ree+S*eeping
- Msy4r+988
- Mar+r989
r+e
- lareus+t_lg88
- +ngus+t-,++S9
-,q,ugus+1;-1gAe
- +ttgus#l-r+9++
- +ueus+Hgg?
r++.
@
Ordinance No. 1344

Uelo
25%
sQ%
750/o
l00e/o
geh
ffi
Sge/o
15e/t
+$g#o
UelD
x%
sge/o
75q/"
+00e/o
see/o
|U%
M
2%
50%
750/o
+AAe/E
+O0efr-
Armal
Ann**l
Annud
Anmral
Annual
A,nnu*l
Ann**l
Ann*C
Annual
Annu*l
A,nnual
Ann*al
Annu*t
.{nnral
,{nn*al
Annu*l
Annu*l
Annu*l
Annu*l
A,nnu*l
Annucl
Asffret
Anmr*l

04/23/2024 Item No.10.
+g+ ien
Bis*ietd
103, \ilater Serviee
- PeeemUerl5+988
- Peeemger-l-,++99
- Peeember-t-r+q90
f++ ing
le* Water Turn Off/en Serviee
rse
107. Ser+erSewiee
- AfriH-r+988
- A.erillr+989
- +er+L4gge
- +e++l-t-,-t991
- A.eriH.+999
10& Refi*se-Sewiee
- +une+,++gg
- +une-+,-t989
- Jun€-lr+990
+0q@
811+ Transit Serviee
*111.ffi
ll2, Private Sewer Servie
+nspe*ien
1+*ffiiee
++a
iees
+++ ien
++c@
+++Mie*
1{&ffiien
Ordinance No. 1344

+00e4'
TgYo
#%
+Qge/E
+0ge/o
140e/o
+00e/t
50e/o
60e/t
15e/a
9M
+$ge/a
+Selt
90e/o
+gge/t
+90ryt
9Qelt
rS:v,
+O0e/t
100%
+e0e/u
+e0%
+e09o
+0ge/t
lM
Annrr*l
A,nnual
Ann*al
A,nn*al
A,nn*al
A,nnu*l
A.nnuC
A.nnu*l
Annu*l
Ann*al
Ann*d
Annu*l
Ann*at
,{nnual
Ann*al
Annu*l
AnnuC
.{nnu*l
Annral
A+nrrC
Ann*al
Annual
Annu*I
'annrr*l
'{nnl*d

04/23/2024 Item No.10.
1{* Aren*Ren+*l
+eg i€€
t+Z+ ine
#l;l.Miee
#l+ iee
#la Unspeeif,sd$enriee
#l5r N€rv$€ffiee
*%
+e0%
+00e/o
+00e/o
+00eh
IM
+00e/o
Ann**l
Annual
Annrld
A,n*ual
Ann**l
Anrual
AnnuC
* A l\4inimum fee ef $10.00 shall be eharged in all instanees exeept in the eases ef The hereinabeve serviees cs listed in this seetien are de{ined in that eertain deeunrent The sehedule ef freqneney ef review ef fee adjustments may be varied by the eity manager te'rdjnst revenues suf{ieienf te meet debt sen'iee eeverage reqnirements ef nny bendi les
heYe been issued by t
perpetreted by the
A11 new or increased fees and charges set pursuant to this section shall take effect ten days after adoption bv the clty council. except that new or increased development impact fee or charqe for processing applications for development proiects shall take effect sixtv davs after adoption.
ef this seetien have been eemplied with; and ne rvritten appeal has been filed. that ef the reqnesting department head; a gress ineqnity weuld be perpetr*ted by the 1988)
SECTION 4 AMENDMENT TO SECTION 3.50.050 OF THE FOLSOM MUNICIPAL CODE
Section 3.50.050 of the Folsom Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

Ordinance No. 1344

04/23/2024 Item No.10.

3.50.050 Statutory public meeting.

Pursuant to Califomia Government Code Sections 549n154994;* t*d 549943 66016 et seq." the city clerk shall cause notice to be provided as set out in said Govemment Code Sections 54944ry5499++ 66016 and 6062a
pr€s€n+a+ions concerning the fees and charges proposed to be increased or added. Such public meetins nolise@@ shall be provided ffie
eiqr+ouneit prior to citv council taking any action on any new or increased fees or charges. At @
SECTION 5 OF' SECTION 3.50.060 OF'THE FOLSO MIINICIPAL CODE Section 3.50.060 of the Folsom Municipal Code is hereby deleted in its entirety SECTION 6 SCOPE
Except as set forth in this ordinance, all other provisions of the Folsom Municipal Code shall remain in full force and effect.

SECTION 7 SEVERABILITY
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase in this Ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be unconstitutional, invalid, or ineffective by any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity or effectiveness of the remaining portions of this Ordinance or any part thereof. The City Council declares that it would have passed each section irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase be declared unconstitutional, invalid, or ineffective.

SECTION 8 EFFECTIVE DATE
This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days from and after its passage and adoption, provided it is published in fuIl or in summary within twenty (20) days after its adoption in a newspaper of general circulation in the City.

This ordinance was introduced and the title thereof read at the regular meeting of the City Council on April 23,2024 and the second reading occurred atthe regular meeting of the City Council on May 14,2024.

On a motion by Council Member seconded by Council Member and adopted by the City Council of
2024,by the following roll-call vote:
the foregoing ordinance was passed
the City of Folsom, State of Califomia, this l4thday of May, AYES: Councilmember(s)
Ordinance No. 1344

04/23/2024 Item No.10.

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Councilmember(s):

Councilmember(s):

Councilmember(s):

Michael D. Kozlowski, MAYOR
ATTEST:

Christa Freemantle, CITY CLERK
Ordinance No. 1344

04/23/2024 Item No.10.

ATTACHMENT 2
PROPOSED UPDATED VERSION OF CHAPTER 3.50 "FEE AND

SERVICE CHARGE REVENUE/COST COMPARISON SYSTEMO' OF

THE FOLSOM MUNICIPAL CODE

04/23/2024 Item No.10.

Sections:

3.50.010

3.s0.020

3.50.030

3.50.040

3.50.050
Chapter 3.50

FEE AND SERVICE CHARGE REVENUE/COST

COMPARISON SYSTEM
lntent.

Direction to recover costs.

Costs reasonably borne defined.

Schedule of fees and service charges.

Statutory public meeting.

3.50.0101ntent.

Pursuant to Article XlllB of the California Constitution, it is the intent of the city council to require the ascertainment and recovery of costs reasonably borne from fees and charges levied therefor in providing the regulation, products or services hereinafter enumerated in this chapter. lt is the further intent of the city councilthat the fees and charges provided for in this chapter shall not be deemed special taxes under Article XlllA of the California Constitution, nor levied for general revenue purposes. (Ord. 609 S 1, 1988)

3.50.020 Direction to recover costs.

The amount of fees and charges established under this Chapter shall be sufficient to recover a percentage of the costs reasonably borne in providing the services for which the fees and charges are imposed. Costs reasonably borne shall be as are defined in Section 3.50.030. The percentage of the cost to be recovered by the fee shall be at the sole discretion of the council but shall not exceed 100 percent, as set forth by Section 3.50.040 below.

3.50.030 Costs reasonably borne defined.

Costs reasonably borne, as used and ordered to be applied in this chapter are to consist of the following elements:

A. All applicable direct costs including, but not limited to salaries, wages, overtime, employee fringe benefits, services and supplies, maintenance and operation expenses, contracted services, special supplies, and any other direct expense incurred.

B. All applicable indirect costs including, but not restricted to, building maintenance and operations, equipment maintenance and operations, communication expenses, computer

04/23/2024 Item No.10.
costs, printing and reproduction, and like expenses when distributed on an accounted and documented rational proration system.

C. Fixed assets recovery expenses, consisting of depreciation of fixed assets, and additional fixed asset expense recovery charges, calculated on the current estimated cost of replacement, divided by the approximate life expectancy of the fixed asset. A further additional charge to make up the difference between bookvalue depreciation not previously recovered and reserved in cash and the full cost of replacement, shall also be calculated and considered a cost so as to recover such unrecovered costs between book value and cost of replacement over the remaining life of the asset.

D. General overhead, expressed as a percentage, distributing and charging the expenses of the city council, city manager, city clerk, elections, city treasurer, finance department, city attorney, unallocated nondepartmental expenses, and all other staff and support service provided to the entire city organization as now organized and as it may be reorganized at any time in the future.

Overhead shall be prorated between tax-financed services and fee-financed services on the basis of said percentage so that each of taxes and fees and charges shall proportionately defray such overhead costs.

E. Departmental overhead, expressed as a percentage, distributing and charging the cost of each department head and his or her supporting expenses as enumerated in subsections A, B, and C of this section.

F. Debt services costs, consisting of repayment of principal, payment of interest, and trustee fees and administrative expenses for all applicable bond, certificate, or securities issues or loans. Any required coverage factors of added reserves beyond basic debt service costs also shall be considered a cost, if required by covenantwithin any securities ordinance, resolution, indenture or general law applicable to the city. (Ord. 609 S 1, 1988)

3.50.040 Schedule of fees and service charges.

The city council shall periodically review and make adjustments to all services provided bythe various city departments to all users and the fees and charges associated with those services.

The city council shall generally seek 100 percent cost recovery for these services but may, at its sole discretion, adjust fees and charges to a level below full cost recovery for reasons of economic development, community benefit, or for any other lawful purpose.

All new or increased fees and charges set pursuant to this section shall take effect ten days after adoption by the city council, except that new or increased development impact fee or charge for processing applications for development projects shall take effect sixty days after adoption.

04/23/2024 Item No.10.

3.50.050 Statutory pubtic meeting.

Pursuant to California Government Code Sections 66016 et seq., the city clerk shall cause notice to be provided as set out in said Government Code Sections 66016 and 6062a concerning the fees and charges proposed to be increased or added. Such public meeting notice shall be provided prior to city council taking any action on any new or increased fees or charges.

04/23/2024 Item No.10.
i.'i{:1-t
This amended staff report is to replace and
supersede the original staff report due to staff error.

Folsom City Council
Staff Re rt
MEETING DATE: 4t2312024
AGENDA SECTION: New Business
SUBJECT Workshop for Community for Health and Independence Conceptual Annexation Proposal
FROM: Community Development Department

RECOMMENDATION / CITY COUNCIL ACTION
No formal action. Staff recommends that the City Council consider the preliminary project review request from AKT and UC Davis for their Community for Health and Independence conceptual annexation proposal and provide initial feedback. This workshop provides an opportunity for early vetting of a potential future project currently located outside City of Folsom boundaries and sphere ofinfluence.

BACKGROI IND / ISSIIE
On December 22,2023, the City of Folsom received a conceptual annexation and development proposal from AKT and UC Davis for their "Community for Health and Independence" project.

The proposed project includes land in both Sacramento and El Dorado counties. The western portion of the project, located adjacent to Folsom in unincorporated Sacramento County, includes 1,416 acres and the proposed development of 4,5 1 t housing units along with commercial, office, and medical research uses.

The proposed development area is located south of White Rock Road and adjacent to the Sacramento County border with El Dorado County. The western portion of the Community for Health and Independence project located in Sacramento County is proposed for potential future annexation into Folsom and is referred to as "The West Plan Area" in the applicant's project narrative (Attachment 1) and is the subject of this workshop. The eastern portion of the project is located within El Dorado County is referred to as "The East Plan Area" and is currently under consideration by the Board of Supervisors as part of their "Policy J-6: General Plan Amendment Initiation Process" for preliminary review of proposals that require General Plan Amendment.

See exhibit below showing the project location and jurisdictional boundaries.

I

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

Any proposed annexation that involves a change to City of Folsom boundaries is subject to ..ui.* and approval by Sacramento County's Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) in addition to aiprovat Uy ttre Folsom City Council (and in this instance Sacramento County Board of Supervisoir;. fnir is true for service district boundary changes as well. Procedurally, this type of change to a jurisdictional boundary requires extensive study, environmental analysis, public review, and detision-making that can take years and often decades to complete for a project of this magnitude. The g"n"ruil-AFCo process, along with Folsom's annexation history can be found in Attachment2.
2 Page 128
04/23/2024 Item No.11.

Folsom City Council currently has no land use authority over the project area for Community for Health and Independence, West Plan Area (referred to herein as Community West). As such, the property o*n"rrTcommunity West proponents are asking Folsom City Council to consider their project concept and to provide initial feedback to inform their future decisions and any next steps ietutirre to jurisdictional authority. The applicant is also asking El Dorado County Board of Supervisois to consider their project and provide preliminary feedback. Unlike the EI Dorado County J-6 Policy, the City of Folsom does not have a policy guiding this type of preliminary review to consider an annexation concept for potential future growth. Instead, the applicant has entered into a deposit and reimbursement agreement to cover staff time to analyze the project concept materials in Attachment I against relevant plans and policies adopted by the City of Folsom to assess consistency and identify preliminary issues.

This workshop has been structured to allow the applicant an opportunity to share their project vision/concepi and for staff to share findings of our analysis based on the project narrative provided. The workshop also creates an opportunity for the community to weigh in through public comment. While no formal action is required or allowed at this time, the workshop provides an early vetting opportunity for City Council members to share their individual comments and feedback about the proposed annexation concept.

ANALYSIS
As described in the project namative in Attachment 1, the Community for Health and Independence is a partnership and collaboration between AKT and UC Davis Health to create a uniquely designed master planned community for healthy aging and wellness. The stated vision for this mixed-use
"o111*unity
is to "promote opportunities for participation, security, and health to enhance quality of life throughout one's lifetime". The concept is derived from research and studies on the needs for older and vulnerable adults (e.g., Blue Zone Communities, Califomia Master plan for Aging) as cited in the project narrative with guiding principles around the "Eight Domains of Livability''. at the workshop, AKT and UC Davis Health will present their vision and concept in more detail.

Approximately half of the proposed Community for Health and Independence project is in El ntiado Couniy (Community East) and half in Sacramento County (Community West) with similar land use plans/patterns and each with approximately 100 acres of a combined 200-acre research complex that is central to the project vision/concept. As proposed, the Community West project includes 13 parcels within Sacramento County along the eastern border with El Dorado ^County
totaling 1,4i6 acres. The Implementation Details in Chapter 7 of Attachment 1 list the g.n.rul land pLn proposal for Community West (The West Plan Area) with a mix of housing (+,Stt dwelling unitr), research complex, a mixed-use village, regional commercial center, and parks and open space.
1 -l Page 129
04/23/2024 Item No.11.

To evaluate the proposed Community West project concept, staff compared the information in the applicant's project narrative (Attachment 1) against relevant policies and plans adopted by the City of Folsom to determine consistency/inconsistency based on the preliminary information provided. Specifically, staff from each department reviewed the proposal against relevant provisions in the City's General Plan and adopted master plans for transportation, parks and open space, as well as infrastructure. Staff also considered relevant provisions of the City Council Slrategic Plan, Folsom Plan Area Specific Plan (guiding principles and key transportation and circulation policies), as well as Measure W mandates by Folsom voters for the annexation south of Highway 50. Detailed staff analysis can be found in Attachment 3. Key considerations and summaries of the analysis are provided below by general topic area.

Growth and Considerations
State planning and zoning laws require every city and county in California to have a general plan, which is the local government's long-term framework or "constitution" for future development. The general plan contains the goals and polices upon which the city council and planning commission will base their land use decisions. Typically, a general plan is designed to uddr.s the issues facing the city for the next 20 years. The general plan document must include all territory within the boundaries of the incorporated area as well as "any land outside its boundaries which in the planning agency's judgment bears relation to its planning" (California Government Code Section 65300).

When Folsom incorporate d, in 1946, development was largely restricted to the Historic District.

By 1980, 35 years later, development had expanded east and north of the Historic District on both sides of the American River and the city limits had expanded south to Highway 50. When the last General Plan was adopted in 1988, Folsom had gone through a massive expansion; the city grew from a population of 5,800 in 1970 to 23,000 in i988 - quadrupling in size in less than 20 years. The previous 1988 General Plan guided Folsom's continued growth for 30 years.

In 2018 with a population over 77,000 residents and city limits largely developed north of Highway 50, City Council adopted the 2035 General Plan creating a blueprint for the City's growth and development over the next 20 years. That current General Plan incorporated ipproximately 3,520 acres south of Highway 50 that were annexedin20l2 in conjunction with the adoption of the Folsom Plan Area Specific Plan (after more than a decade of study, planning, analysis, and agreements). See the City's annexation history in the exhibit below. 4 Page 130
04/23/2024 Item No.11.
1972
1972
1 968
1970
1984
1984
1967
1993
2012
Date:4110124
Legend
IIIil
1947 -
1950 -
1955 -
1962 -
1967 -
1973 -
t994 -
t949
1954
1961
1966
r972
1993
2018
W
Annexation Boundaries
Cify of Folsom 1947 - 2018
N
A
I.'{} L$,{}}l 0 2
5 4
Miles

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

The Planning Area for the Folsom 2035 General Plan includes the entire city limits and approximately 5,600 acres of unincorporated land outside the city limits to the south and southwest as shown below.

City ot Folsonr
Folsom 2035 Land Use Diagram
3:B ' ..' ,..,,- , .
-,.{
r,r,'
'a) r ,\.!.':ia it '
i 1r , iir,' !
I Ir'
r s-+i
@ :-: . r.L': -- '
+
L
The Folsom General Plan Planning Area includes two master planned projects that have been approved by Sacramento County: Glenborough and Easton Place. Both projects are located south of Highway 50 to the west of the Folsom City boundary, extending just beyond the Hazel Avenue light rail station. Combined, Easton Place and Glenborough at Easton represent 1,391 acres, 4,883 housing units, and over 4.2 million square feet of commercial and office space. Both projects are fully entitled, including the certification of the EIR; services are identified, and the first phase of infrastructure plans have been prepared but construction has not commenced.

These two projects have not been annexed into the City and are not part of Folsom.

The area south of White Rock Road within the Folsom General Plan Planning Area is outside the city limits and Sphere of Influence within unincorporated Sacramento County. The area largely consists of grazingland, but also includes gravel quarries and a section of the Prairie City State Vehicular Recreation Area. In 2018 the City annexed a 55-acre property south of White Rock Road near Prairie City Road for future relocation of the City's Corporation Yard. The remaining land south of White Rock Road is entirely within Sacramento County jurisdictional boundaries.

The northern portion (approximately half) of the proposed Community for Health and Independent Living project is within the Folsom General Plan Planning Area and the southern portion is outside of the Planning Area.
6 r-

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

The Community West property is designated for General Agricultural in the Sacramento County General Plan and is located outside of the county's Urban Service Boundary (not designated for urban development and thus outside of County service district boundaries). The site is also located within the South Sacramento Habitat Conservation Plan area. Accordingly, regional land use and transportation plans adopted by Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) and referenced in ou. G.n..ul Plan do not identify land south of White Rolck Road for urban development. Any future plan to develop land south of White Rock Road would require extensive service and environmental studies to determine feasibility and impacts prior to urban land use considerations. See Attachment2 for information about the LAFCO process and the City's annexation history.

Since 1996, the City of Folsom has been in a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the Local Agency Formation Commission and Sacramento County. The MoU guarantees that the City will be notified of any land use changes in the Area of Concern adjacent to the southern edge of the current Sphere of Influence (White Rock Road and the future Corporation Yard site), as any land use changes or other governmental actions taken by Sacramento County will impact the City of Folsom.

Planning/Land Use Analysis Summary
From a Planning standpoint, the Community West land use plan is similar to that of the Folsom Plan Area and other master planned communities in the region. The major element that sets this plan apart is its focus on "Blue Zone" communities designed around the needs of the elderly and other persons with special needs. Given the growth of elderly population in Folsom and the rest of the Sacramento region, there is a need for comprehensively planned communities that will allow those who are aging or have mobility or cognitive challenges to remain in their homes and neighborhoods. In addition, the proposal includes 100 acres to be owned by UC Davis for the development of a medical research campus in the center of the plan with an additional 100 acres also to be owned by UC Davis immediately adjacent to this area in El Dorado County.

Despite the unique "Blue Zone" concept included in this proposal, it is unclear from the land use plan how this master-planned community will develop to fulfill the guiding principles in the proposal. While AKT is a master land developer, there are no other developers associated with this project at this point that would reahze the concept. Though there is a higher amount of land designated as "age-restricted" compared to the Folsom Plan Area, there is nothing in the submitted document that would prevent typical home builders and commercial developers from developing a community similar to that in the Folsom Plan Area.

In staff review of the City principles and policies, the project is consistent with many relevant General Plan policies and Folsom Plan Area guiding principles. For example, it provides land use designations that will likely provide housing for future generations (General Plan Guiding Principle #11 and GP Policy LU 6.1.6) and it also adds to the City's limited amount of land appropriate for research and development (GP Policy EP 3.2.1). 7 Page 133
04/23/2024 Item No.11.

HoweveL, there ale some signillcant conf'licts with City planning policies. First, the project is not consistent with the SACOG Blueprint Principles (General Plar-r Policy LU 1.1.15) since it is oLrtside Sacramento County's urban glowth bor-urdary and is culrently located in the South Sacramento Llabitat Conservation Plan alea. Second, the project is likely to result in an increase in Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and greenhouse gas ernissions (GFIG) dne to its location at the edge of Sacramento and lack of easy access to public transit (reler to Genelal Plan policies NCR

3.1.3 and NCR 3.2.3). Thild, the project lies or-rtside of Regional Transit's current service area and based on discussions with staff at Sacramento Regional Transit, it is unlikely that flxed route bus service, especially bus rapid transit, would serve this area due to its location and relatively low densities, which puts it in conflict with General Plan Policy LU 8.1.5. That policy encorlrages new employrnent uses to locate near existing public trausit. Fourth, the proposal does not identify how this annexation proposal would provide financial benefit to the City as required under General Plan Policy LU 1.1.3. In the proposal, UC Davis wor,rld owtr 100 acles for developrnent as a rnedical research complex. While this has the potential to create significant employment opportunities, UC Davis is part of the State of Califbrnia and properly owned by the State of Calilbrnia is exempt frorn paying property tax. It is also unclear why UC Davis would choose to develop a rnedical resealch carnpus in this area as opposed to the land adjacent to their new Folsom Center fbr Health at East Bidwell Street and Alder Cleek Parkway in the Folsom Plan Area. Finally, given the land ownership in much of the area south of White Rock Road (see land ownership map below), the proposed project lias the potential to be growth-inducing.

CitY of Folsom
ii'/A!ilAr /,
Ranch
4tr1
I ^aanrlLsgsr r\r
l-J Folsom City Boundary
' ',' .i Planning Area Boundary
Proposed Annexation
Landowners Boundaries
El Dorado County
A!.DtR !nitK trlfl
iu"
T
{:
o
Fo\sofl]9l
\.

Ir
I
I LLC/ MJ 3I8
Arcadian
Heights
l'and Betty
Wilsont
1400!LLC
cfoO
o
c
(l),
EoL
o
U)
I
I
I(atherine Tsakopoulos
.2012 Ir'revocable
Family/Etal
State of
California
L*avar{ {"} qiv sasrs} ai ra
Sinr.ril r *i' Whi tr:.1 {.uctrr'l{{l;r{.{

0.5 't 2
I
ni
Ai
Dntr::i,rl9l?4 I
B
Miles

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

Anal
The proposed Community West project as described in the applicant's project narrative is anticipated to have the following transportation/circulation-related impacts, most of which would need to be addressed through u Jo-p."h.nsive traffic impact analysis and environmental impact assessment of the project's future Specific Plan:
o The proposed access to the Capital Southeast Connector (CSEC) at Savannah Parkway - an intersection that is not cunently shown as a full access intersection in the CSEC planning documents or the Folsom Plan Area Specific Plan (FPASP). Savannah Parkway was also not designed to carry cut-through traffic'
. Additional traffic impacts to East Bidwell Street and Empire Ranch Road, including the freeway interchanges on both of those roadways'
o Impacts to the Active Transportation Plan and Intelligent Transportation Systems Plan' o Consistency with Roundabout First policy or whether the project intends to incorporate roundabouts as traffic control.
o Requires a transit master plan to identiff internal transit options and connections to regional transit Providers.
. Compatibility with approved rail operations on the Sacramento-Placerville Transportation Conidor (SpTC) raiiconidor and inclusion of rail crossing improvements on roadways crossing the SPTC.
o Roadway and trail cross sections that are consistent with the General Plan and Active Transportation Plan.
o Fair share contributions to planned transportation improvements impacted by the project' o The project narrative depicts several major roads that exit the project boundaries but needs to specify where those road*uy, .o.rn..t and what the potential traffic impacts of those connections would be.

Parks" Open Space. and Trails Analysis Summarv
The Community West proposal as outlined in Attachment 1 includes preliminary information about parks, op.n ,pu"., and trails. This project is not considered in the Folsom Parks and Recreation Master plan (pRMp) or the city;r Active Transportation Plan. Parks, open space and trail impacts or issues that would need to be addressed in any future planning effort are summarized below:
o park land requirements, as identified in the General Plan, the Folsom Municipal Code (FMC) and the pRMP, are 5.0 acres per 1,000 residents. Community West identifies 4,51 I dwelling units equal to 51.9 acres of parkland requirement and since the project is proposing 56.6 acres oiparkland it would comply. The combination of Community burtr, Neighbornood Parks and Local Parks would need to be coordinated with the City because small local parks are less desirable based on development and maintenance costs' privately owned pocket parks are allowed but should not be considered toward the parkland dedication requirement'
9 Page 135
04/23/2024 Item No.11.
a Parks need to be dispersed throughout the plan area to achieve the objective of a park within a half-mile radius of all residential units. Parks in the northeast area of the project site may not be in compliance.

Parks should be planned and located in partnership with school sites consistent with current practices.

Programming of park facilities will need to be identified in any future plans and those facilities shail be equally dispersed throughout the park sites. For example, capacity at existing and planned aquatic center and community center cannot likely accommodate the additional residents in this project.

The proposed project does not comply with the minimum 30% open space requirements ."quired by Folsom voters as a condition of support for growth south of Highway 50 through Measure W.

The proposed plan only includes a central east-west green belt open space and no Class I trail ionnections north-south. The Folsom Plan Area established the standard for Class I trail connectivity and neighborhood accessibility in the area. That same standard should apply here with irnp.ou"d north-south connections, neighborhood connectivity to the trail ryrt"., and regional connections from the project to other trail systems, especially in the Folsom Plan Area and El Dorado County.

Class I trails are minimum 12' wide containing a minimum width paved surface of 8', with 10' preferred. The trail also includes minimum 2' shoulders with preferred width of 4'. The cross section of the Parkway does not include or clearly define the shoulders. o
a
a
o
Public Facilities and Services Analysis Summary
The proposed Community West project as described in the applicant's project narrative is anticipaied to have the following public facilities and service-related impacts, most of which would be addressed through a detailed analysis and impact assessment of the project's future facilities and service needs. As previously identified, the project area is outside of Sacramento County Urban Service Boundary and is not identified in SACOG's regional land use and transp|rtation plans for urban development. As such, any proposal to develop this area in Sacramento County or Folsom would require Municipal Service Reviews for water, wastewater, fire services, police services, etc. as an exploratory analysis to identiff the current services needs provided and determine future service needs and the corresponding ability of agencies and/or special districts to meet those needs. This section simply summarizes impacts as it relates to the services and district boundaries in Folsom's control and additional information is needed.

Water and Wastewater Impacts. According to the project narrative for Community West, the applicant has not yet identified water source(s) for their project. The area is currently outside of the City of Folsom's water service area boundary and has not been evaluated.

Based on the City's 2020tJrban Water Management Plan, the City anticipates water use to be approximately 25,520 acre-feet annually at build-out (assumed to occur by year 2045). iotal surface water supplies available to the City under existing contracts total 34,000 acre-feet annually. The results in approximately 8,480 acre-feet of unused surface water supplies available to the water users north of Highway 50 under Measure W. Staff is not aware of whether the El Dorado Irrigation District (EID) or other water purveyors have sufficient capacity to serve the project. Additionally, there is not any capacity at the a
a
10 Page 136
04/23/2024 Item No.11.

City's water treatment plant to treat the water for this project. Finally, the City's existing *ui", distribution system north of Highway 50 does not have the capacity to deliver treated water to this Project.

The applicant would need to complete a Water, Supply Assessment as required by the California Water Code.

The City's wastewater system north of Highway 50 does not have any capacity to serve this project. The applicant would need to discuss with Sac Sewer the capacity for wastewater treatment and wastewater collections within the Sac Sewer system' The applicant would need to analyze if there is any capacity in the Folsom Plan Area water, wastewater, and non-potable water infrastructure to serve some or all of the project. If so, the applicant would be responsible for updating the master plan documents and corresponding improvements as necessary'
The applicant would also need to identiff a non-potable water supply for the purple pipe system discussed in the proPosal.

The project would need to be consistent with water use efficiency standards required by the State of California.

Any proposed groundwater supplies would need to be consistent with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA).

Waste and Recycling Impacts. The cross-jurisdictional nature of the project creates a service issue for orr Wurt. & Recycling Division. Would the portions of the community that lie in El Dorado County be serviced by that County, or would they enter into a service agreement for the City to provide these services? The service agreement option is prefenedlo guarantee consistent service throughout the entire community but has potential impacts in terms of vehicles, drivers and associated services such as fleet maintenance.

Safetv Imoact Summarv (Police and Fire)
The applicant's project narrative states that law enforcement, fire, and ambulance emergency serrrices would be provided through collaboration and mutual aid between various law enforcement agencies, fire districts, and other urgent responders. Because this area is not identified for urban development, any proposal to develop this area in Sacramento County or Folsom would require Municipal Service Reviews for police and fire services to determine future service needs and the corresponding ability of agencies and/or special district to meet those needs. This section simply **.u.ir.s impacts as it relates to the police and fire services and district boundaries in Folsom's control based on this preliminary information. o Police Service Impacts. Folsom Police do not currently provide any services to the project area. Any tuture project in this area would be required to identifu safety services ior policing. In keeping with current staffing levels per capital and to maintain response times, the propos"d Co-.-unity West project would require the following for police services:
10 Police Officers,2 Police Sergeants, 1 Police Lieutenant 3 Dispatchers, and 3 Records Technicians
police facility for South of 50 Services. Between the Folsom Plan Area and the Community West project, the need would arise to build a fully functioning police a
a
a
a
a
a
a
o
o
11 Page 137
04/23/2024 Item No.11.
a
facility to service the growing population (estimated 50,000 future residents). The facility would function as a full-service Police Department (South Station). o Radio and transmission coverage improvements would be necessary to support the policing services of the proposed community'
Fire Service Impacts. The proposed Community West area culrently lacks Fire/EMS services within its boundari.r. Ertublishing such services would necessitate fulfilling several fundamental requirements:
o A centrally located fire station within the proposed community. o Essential apparatus including Type I and Type 3 fire engines, along with an ambulance.
o Staffing comprising l5 personnel trained in fire and emergency medical response' o Another vitaf aspeCt to address is the possible absence of adequate radio coverage, which currently may be outside the scope of the Sacramento Regional Fire/EMS Communication Center. Addressing this issue may require the installation of a radio tower/antenna or a communications repeater'
Financial Impact Analysis Summary
Folsom's General Plan Policy LUl.l.3 (Annexation and Services) requires applicants applying for annexation of lands to demonstrate the financial benefit to the City. Additionally, Measure W passed by Folsom voters to move forward with expansion south of Highway 50 required that the project pay for itself. Specifically, Measure W states that residents north of Highway 50 shall not t. i.quit.a to pay feeslor infrastructure or improvements associated with water supply, transportation,-oi schools serving new residents south of Highway 50. Finally, Folsom's Strategic Plan value for financial stability states "Planning for the long term and making decisions in the short term to ensure the necessary resources are available to deliver City services and achieve goals established by the Council." Corresponding goals in the Strategic Plan address developmeniof funding and revenue sources for any new facilities or expansion of existing facilities and services to meet the needs. The bottom line is that the project needs to demonstrate that it will cover not only the costs associated with facilities and services, meet revenue neutrality requirements associated with annexation as required by Government Code Section 56815, but also provide financial or monetized benefit to Folsom.

At this point, there is insufficient information to determine cost coverage, revenue neutrality, or financial benefit. Without a detailed financial analysis, it is unclear whether the project would be revenue neutral or revenue positive for the City. Potential issues and questions associated with the project's conceivable financial impact are listed below:
o It is unclear whether the proposed facilities would be public or private. A nexus study would be needed to deveiop a fee program if the proposed facilities are to be City-owned, along with a funding source for maintaining said facilities. o With the potential of UC Davis owning the industrial/office park site, it is unclear whether Folsom would receive any property tax revenue. UC Davis is part of the State of California and property owned by the State of Califomia is exempt from paying property tax.
o If an amendment to the sphere of influence/annexation is agreed upon by the City and County to move forward, the City would be required to enter into a tax-sharing t2 Page 138
04/23/2024 Item No.11.
a
agreement with Sacramento County pursuant to Section 99 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.

Demonstrating financial benefit would require a formal Fiscal Impact Analysis prepared by a qualifiedionsultant to address the economic implications of the proposed project by .rti*uting the recurring fiscal impacts to the City of Folsom's General Fund including one-time costs, ongoing operation and maintenance costs, and annual revenue and expenses associated with providing services, including considerations of increases in market rate and inflation.

Conclusion
Resources for an aging population are a regionally unmet need. AKT and UC Davis Health have shared their vision to ireate a uniquely designed master planned community for healthy aging and wellness. The applicant team is asking Folsom City Council to consider this concept as a future growth proposal and opportunity for Folsom and the region. It has the potential to enhance the qualiiy of life for Folsom's seniors and other residents with cognitive, physical, or neurologicat ctrattenges. As outlined in the applicant's project narrative, the project also has the potential to create employment opportunities within the community through a myriad of services, including medical urrd r.r"ur.h complex and collaboration with other medical facilities and businesses recently expanding in Folsom and beyond.

The proposed Community West project also has predictable impacts and potential risks that have beendescribed and summarized in this report, as well as Attachment 3 to staff s report. The most significant issues involving growth and financial impacts are:
l. From a growth perspective, this project area is not planned or assumed for urban development. Riquired service studies, plans, infrastructure, and funding could likely establish necessary services for the project area. However, new impacts to land uses, City facilities, and the transportation network in the area would be potentially significant and may ultimately be growth inducing. Additionally, growth in this location would likely impact important environmental metrics in our climate action plan (e.g., greenhouse gas emissions and vehicle miles traveled) that could impact the City's funding qualifications'

2. From a financial perspective, Folsom is facing a structural deficit and without signihcant additional ..rr.nui ,orr."r, the City will face challenges to meet current service levels and maintain existing facilities. Any future annexation would not only need to pay for itself and meet revenue neutrality requirements with Sacramento County but would need to provide financial benefits to the City.
13 Page 139
04/23/2024 Item No.11.

Staff believes it would be important to have detailed plans, studies, and analysis prepared by qualified consultants (paid for by the developer) to bitter understand impacts of the project prior to any formal action/determination regarding proposed annexation. At a minimum, this should include the following:
,/ Detailed plaris and project description (and show how the "Blue Zone" concept will be implemented);
,/ Analysis of ali ."lerrant municipal services required for the project (including water supply);
,/ Environmental analysis of the proposed project (including traffic studies); and ,/ Fiscal impact analysis including one-time costs, ongoing operation and. maintenance costs, and annual i.l .rr,.r. and expenses associated with providing services'

CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS/T'EEDBACK
As a reminder, the City Council currently has no land use authority over this property and no formal action is required or allowed at this time. Rather, the project proponents are asking for preliminary reviewand early feedback from City Councilmembers regarding their project concept and potential futureannexation into the City of Folsom. Detailed studies and environmental analysis would be required at many next steps if this project does move forward in Sacramento County or Folsom. Staff has identified two primary questions to guide individual feedback from City Councilmembers :

1. Under what circumstances (if any) would the City Council members want to consider expansion of Folsom City boundaries south of White Rock Road for purposes of development of this particular project?

2. If City Council members are willing to consider this project moving.forward, what information would the applicant need to provide for that future consideration?

ATTACHMENTS
L Community for Health and Independence Project Narrative by AKT and UC Davis Health
Local Agency Formation Commission Annexation Process and Folsom Annexation History rn,..

Staff Analysis of Project Narrative Relative to Folsom Adopted Plans and Policres Public Comments

2. a
J.
4 Submitted,
Pam Johns, Community Development Director
14 Page 140
04/23/2024 Item No.11.

ATTACHMENT 1
community for Health and Independence Project Narrative by AKT and UC Davis Health

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

COMMUNITY for HEALTH
ond INDEPENDENCE
L
.r---C
AtF
/
12122123 PROJECT NARRATIVE

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

COMMUNITY ror FIEALTH orrct INDEPENDENCE
"flumcns now liys longer lhon ol any time in history.8ut odding mo/e yeors lo life con be o mixed blessing if it is noi occomponiecl by adding more iife to |eors.
"
::, , a1 ..

FOREWORD I The proportion of the U.S. oged populoiion is growing significontly; beiween 2021 ond 2050 ihe number of Colifornions oged 55+ yeors is expected to increose by 70%. Colifornions in this oge cohort will experience increosing rotes of oge-reloied disobilities ond chronic heolth conditions thot ore ossocioted wiih their longer lifespons.

Adults overwhelmingly express interest in oging in ploce, which hos strong implicoiions for supply ond demond in relotion to Cciifornic's housing shortoge. There is olso increosing interest in ond demond omong odults with disobilities ond speciol needs ond their fomilies for more offordoble independent living ond supportive housing choices.

These trends represeni mojor opportunities for innovotive design ond development of community projects thot encouroge diseose/disobility prevention, supporl heolthy oging, ond prolong independent living' fUC Dovis Community For Heotth ond /ndependence Repot,20l8)

TABLE OI CONTENTS
This project Nonotive is orgonized into vorious PARTS bosed on focused topic oreos. All PARTS will discuss the project cs o whole, except for PART FIVE where ihe jurisdiction-speclfic lond use detoils ore discussed seporoiely for the WEST ond EAST Plon Areos.

PART Cilf i IXECUTIVI SU]V|/',AR'1 Aage2
PA.RT TyVC i THr GRAI'..ID VlSiOi'J pae e 8
PARI THRET i PRCjICT POSlTlCNil'']G pcge 32
PART FOUR I LAND USI MASTER PLAN D'ge 31
PA.RT FIVE I MCBii-lTY PLA.N alge 43
PART SiX I UTILITY PLAl.l Pr:ge 50
PART SEVEI.J I lfvlPr-[naEi'lTATlOl'J DETAILS QrQ€i 54
WESi PLAI'.I AREIi
EASr- PLAi\i AREA

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

COMMUNITY ror HEALTH ond INDEPENDENCE

PART ONE I

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

COMMUNITY ror HEALTFI cn'J INDEPENDENCE
weic#ry?€ fc th* c*MMUNtTy rsft t-,rAi.rFd AzuD tiVDrpfNDrrucr" THE pROJfCT NAMf I Like the vision for the project itself, the project nome is siroighiforwordly unique: it iS thE,,COMMUNITY FOR HEALTH AND INDEPENDENCE''.INIETChONgEObIY' thTOUghOUtIhiS document, the project is olso referred to os simply "THE COMMUNITY".

THf PR$Jf;eT PURPOSil I Epidouros Monogement compony (on AKT lnvestment monoged compony) os the'Project Proponent" ls proposing o new, uniquely-designed moster plonned Community for Heolth ond tndependence designed in colloboroiion with UC Dovis Heolth.

Thc colr,vl..jt.tiTy icR llEALiH /\i.l!l il.iDE'PFi.jDriicE erlboclies lhe vi;iorr of offering peoDle llt oppcri:;niiy ic li.ye :::r:,Je: lnrJ l'rec.:llhicr li'.ze;s in i:r.'-'ir (;'rvl lrcmes i-In{.ii conliil!.r;iiiies Through meoningful ond informed lcnd use plonning, T H E C O M M U N ITY oims io become c hub of wellness' incorporoting evidence-bosed design feotures ond cutting-edge heolth technology to enhonce the well- being of older odults ond individuols with disobiliiies in o sustcinoble ond independent living environmenl.

Drowing upon its understonding of technology ond policy, os well os continuous reseorch into fcctors influencing heolth ond wellness. UC Dovis is ideolly positioned to colloborole wiih the Project Proponent to help inform this unique lond use plon.

The proposed iniegroied moster plonned community includes vorious types of housing, such os oge- restricted housing, multigenerotionol housing, multifomily housing, ond offordoble housing' Neighborhood-serving lond uses like pcrks, open spoces, retoil, ond reseorch/commerciol oreos ore olso incorporoted into the lond use plon.

I1e ;:roa::;,:i c1:o protic)=:- iCr q 2CA-r-tCrC teseArch cornpiex. As port of its commiiment to creoting heolthy oging communities, if the project is ultimctely opproved, the Project Proponent will contribute 200 ocres to UC Dovis for heolth reseorch ond educotion fociliiies' Ilii; ?JA-ctr'-r:
sllelccrr-,ptex i:; ii-r ir:e le :ri r:f Ti-.1 F ccMiluNiT i lrici is e.t'r":iair',aal ic ii':ciu'-:" l\.^ta(:a)-a)c'.: a=.t31 ia, 'na:;i'cv oi N21l',:t 1 i)9',nC

1.+...::: a:'. :1r'' '-:.-:''' \-) i'-:'.1 , .:..
;)1;1v11i-1.;ri:l ,y )i,;lrrlr:a'r'',.:Ci,rf;ClrOl' a:r:-)lJCaa;ri S}{"itae.:r:c.;:tAir'.'i';r ltr;'': '--lr3:i '^r ii:i ' ri. lr '*l =.:C'.tCt:i:Cr.iCr iq;11i1'r, .,,:ai,1)f)e(:,;,JI-:i.):.,r:iiq r:1tr,'i i'elCiive. CfrC r'a--3t'ro '"7;f '1' rjirrl;i iiir-;' OpC}rI,,SaiiieS iCr CCiiC;,:-tCrlilC;. 'rtiirt alr'er 2l1r;;c;riOnCl CnC lre':;lir'l !n;i]i'jij{lri:

Fcr.-iljries icr 1-orr:,rt,-)nt:.1 ertr;c';letr;e ni in:1.';r,-liftg r.:oantr',)r1ii'1 g:tinetifij:ccc=i (ir1'1 Q''(: :i'^t(t:
1('. '.) :at'l',
1,r;= x;ti:!,.J;.--;,. 5-t.,osirrg,:r:c-l ii.ni;-rq ci inc CAc'/e. 'rriii De Celr:rratr'a'J o';fj'l ::ni'' l'trr:: co'liri-niiy r'ttjr::Ji 111i; -a1 r 1, ^,:'13qr- ..'.t"t11'..

Guided by UC Dovis,s Big ldeo of "Heolthy Aging in o Digitol world,' ond combined with reseorch on the world's heolthiest oging communities, THE COMMuNITY presenls on opportunity to estoblish o model community where reol-time reseorch fosters higher quolity oging ond longer lives' COMMUNITY foT HEALTH ON(C INDEPENDENCE
/7<T HEATTH
rj
2i
?tj
4i
(:

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

COMMUNTTY ror HEALTH and INDEPENDENCE
lNsplRED By Ne ED, INFORMED By SCIENCE I rhe Socromento Region's populotion is ropidly oging, with the number of people over 55 expected io double to I .04 million by 2030, occording to US census doto.

This oging populotion will require significont odditionol resources for housing, heolthcore, ond services.

Most odults wont to be independent ond remoin in their own homes os they oge. However, oge-reloted chronic diseoses ond discbilities become obstocles to this choice. The COMMUNIIY FOR HEALTH AND INDEpENDENCE is conceived to overcome ihese borriers ond meet the increosing demond for supportive living onongements through thoughtful plonning ond inlegroted technologies.

Additionolly, there is on increosing populotion of odutts with intellectuol ond/or developmentol disobiliiies in the Socromento Region, with mony desiring to live independently. THE COMMUNITY seeks to occommodote opportunities for this populo'tion cs well.

The visiorr for the CCMtlUtliTY FCR HEALTH Al!D lr'lDEPEl''lDIl']CE is grounded in exlensive resecrch, concluclecl by lhe l.JC Dcvis Cenier for He olihccrre Policy cnd Reseorcfr (Cl-iPR), which includes the 2018 report "Communify for Heolth ond lndependence." ond the 2021 report "plonning Heotthy Aging Communiiies". ln oddition, oiher resources such os Don Buettne/s 2018 book "Blue Zones," supported by Notionol Geogrophic, AARP's Eight Domoins of Livobiliiy. ond the Moster plon for Aging, releosed in 2021 by the Colifornio Deportment of Aging, provided further evidence-bosed gools ond strotegies for the plonning of fhis unique community.

CHpR's londmork repori "P/onning Heotfhy Aging Communities" investigoted supportive oging communities worldwide, inspiring The COMMUNITY FOR HEALTH AND INDEPENDENCE to integrote severol core elements os described below.

EtlccuRAGE ScctALtzATlcN I TH E COMMU NtTY fosters sociolizoiion boih within ond outside iis borders. promoting interoction ocross generotions by housing older individuols, young fomilies, ond professionols in the some vicinity, connected by pothwoys ond gothering ploces' [i'.tCCURAGE Pi-IYSlCAL ACTIVITY ] Green spoces, recreotion centers, integroted wolking poths, ond bike lones linked to essentiolservices encouroge on octive lifestyle in THE COMMUNITY. pRoAtc-iE i--iEAi_TiJy Dt-T3 AND EATIi'.1G HABiIS I THE COMMUNITY plcns to provide eosy occess to community gordens, grocery stores, ond formers morkets, encouroging heolthy eoting hobits.
pRCMCTE WALKABI-F NEIGIIBCRHCODS I Multiple trovel routes, interconnecied wolking poths, ond essentiol services in proximity support wolkobility in T H E C O M M U N ITY - "simply pul. lhese opporlunities con nol onty add yer:rs lo life. but oJso odd life io yeors"" COMMUNITY foT HEALTH ond INDEPENDENCE
a

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

COMMUNITY ror HEALTH oncl INDEPENDENCE
A COMMUNITy FOR HEALTH AND INDEPENDENCE I tnspired by on oncient Greek city ond heoling center coiled Epidouros, the COMMUNITY FOR HEALTH AND INDEPENDENCE is on ongoing colloborotion with UC Dovis ond its speciolized teom of offiliotes, which hos helped inform the lond use plons through reseorch efforts, published popers, visiting lecturer presentotions, ond colloborotive design chorrettes.

Guided by ihis experiise crncl UC Dc'ris reseorch, TH E COMMU N ITY oims 1o prornote heclthy living through its design and inclusive opporiuniiies, focusing on a betler ond heclthier wcy of life. colloborotion with UC Dovis ond the community will continue to shope this vision through the formol opprovol process.

TEGSND
By integroting UC
Dovis reseorch, the

COMMUNITY FOR

HEALTH AND

I N DEPEN DEN C E
includes multi-
generotionol
housing to ottroct
young professionols
ond fomilies ocross
vorious income
levels. Addiiionolly,
technology-
enobled homes for
older odults ond
individuols with
disobilities enoble
potients, fomilies,
ond coregivers to
sioy connected
ond engoge in
doily heolthcore
monitoring ond
monogement.

Residenls retoin
control of their lives
ond privocy while
conveniently ond
efficiently
occessing the
heolthcore services
ond university clinicol experts they need
COMMUNITY foT HEALTH ONd INDEPENDENCE
1CHOCIS I FARKS iOPE1 :-r,C€
@ il;rtr"lurt":^\iJ:\
O '? r;_FE {-a
t i /.: i\F:i
ao.wtJijNi.'/
PC!t
,: "... :
f.,t' *_
^.r.()pI "t
.-:i:ru,u..Ptl
Itcc tl;$;1i.,,xI
! vl+r
i )iHO
I ar.rLt;
J rr..tr[
!t
5FilO
vi.D
!{..i1)
.':l eo"
,SCll.:Jt i
In
i ,-li
cs rc
! r:,s +r
os ra
ial,ltl w r1Y
r

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

LOCATICi\,I I The COMMUNITY FOR HEALTH
AND INDEPENDENCE is strotegicolly locoted
odjocent to iwo highly recommended ploces to
live in Colifornio: the City of Folsom ond the
community of El Dorodo Hills. Both oreos offer o
high quolity of life, robust community services,
sofety, ond effective governonce.

Situoted on the Socromento County/El Dorodo
County line south of Folsom ond El Dorodo Hills,
the properiy poses no significont risks from
eorthquokes, flooding, or wildfires, ond il does
noi encrooch upon prime formlond in the
region.

COMMUNTTY for I-IEALTH oncl INDEPENDENCE
I
I
.. I',f ,'-
:,'1;J',i'1
',u...,.],:]"
.irr^1.uri\_,
la,l-' i
\
I
I
i
I
./'
:i-a !l'?
Vltlr\'1iiv, rl"rAF
COMMUNITY for HTALTH oncl INDEPFNDENCE
PURPOSf Of, TH|S DOCUME TT I This PROJECT
NARRATIVE provides o high-level overview of the project's inient to prepore documents ond studies guiding future Specific Plons.
ihiis ir.riri: crojecf r','srrciitr::s inr,:r'rCed io o--rtiirte tlc GRAiiD Vi.:iCN ileC ocpo|i,,rr:iiic-; :l:ri ihi:
lrie-,,i-ii:-<,r.'r.d cor-nrrr 'Jiiii.y' ac-1^ cl'lei ihe r'egior-,. This is being provided to ihe City of Folsom ond El Dorodo County, to introduce the proposed project cnd seek eorly feedbcck before iniiioting formol project opplicotions.

The coMMUNtTy FOR HEALTH AND TNDEpENDENCE is c visionorymixed-use projectwith lond oreo in multiple regulotory jurisdictions. Specific Plons ore onticipoied to be prepored ond processed within their respective oreos of jurisdiction. The lond oreo within Socromento County (WEST PLAN AREA) is proposed to be processed through the City of Folsom (onnexed to Folsom) cnd will comply with City of Folsom requirements ond reloted LAFCo process. The lond oreo within El Dorodo County (EAST PLAN AREA) will be processed by El Dorodo County ond will comply wiih El Dorodo County requirements' With o bolonced ond unique lond plon, the project proponent is committed to ensuring thot the project provides o net fiscol benefit to the city of Folsom ond El Dorodo county. ln oddition, the project will include community outreoch plons to ensure eorly, meoningful, ond ironsporeni public outreoch in colloborotion with eoch jurisdiction.

Ihis is ftue COMMUN,fy FOR ,'tf.AtTl*t AfiJS JruDSPf,NDfruCf' ,,We know lhe key to heallhy aging lor people sforfs in fheir homes. We believe rr reimogined community lhuf ieveroge s 'r.cn'nctogi lor human-mocle spcces where pecple live' recreaie ond wark will p,o*oi. belier monogemeni af ehronic diseqse ond incresse independence for valuable members of fhis poprlclton.''
COMMUNITY foT HEALTH ONd INDEPENDENCE

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

COMMUNITY ror HEALTH crncl INDEPENDENCE

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

COMMUNITY for HEALTH ond INDEPENDENCE
PART T\^/O I

THE GRAND VISION
, :.. l:. ,:

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

COMMUNITY tor FIEALTFI ond INDEPENDENCE
Til{f N LFD I Society is confronted with on cging populotion thot is set to occelerote in coming yeors' More thon 35% of Colifornio's populotion will be 55 yeors of oge or older by 2050, ond with cdvonces in heolthcore, people oged 85 yeors cnd older ore estimoted to number neorly 1,000,000 people' As this populotion segmenf continues to grow ond oge, society must oddress core for this populotion, while ollowing older odults to live in their own homes heolthier, for longer, ond more productively' Addiiionolly, community development con furfher ossist ond ougment ihe lives of people with neurologicol disobilities. Although neurologicol disorders encompass o brood ronge of conditions, mony people with intellectuol disobilities con be independent ond produciive citizens with slight ossistonce ond community support. Hence the need to provide housing ond living for oll, o truly inclusive community.

TH: VISION. A CcfulfuluilIITY FOR I.IEALTH & ih!D*PEruDTI{CT IThCViSiONfOTTHE COMMUNITY promotes opportunities for porticipotion, security, ond heolih io enhonce quolity of life throughout one's lifetime. Simply puf, fhese opportunilies con nof only odd yeors lo life' bul olso odd life lo yeors' Ccri|tiJi.iiIl {-or.LABoRATjCi! I Guided by uc Dovis reseorch, The coMMUNITY FoR HEALTH A N D tN D E p E N D E N C E is designed to promote heolthy living through Project design ond inclusive opportunities ihot ollow for interoction with fellow community members for o better woy of life' ln turn' o better woy of life promoies better heolth ond longevity. This Vision is optimized through extensive colloborotion with UC Dovis Heoth ond community portners' It is ihrough the UC Dovis colloborotion process, ond the development of the UC Dovis Heolih community for Heotth ond lndependence ond Plonning Heolthy Aging communifies reports, ihoi the Vision forTHE cOMMUNITY wos developed; this Vision incorporoies the overorching coNCEPTS OF THE PLAN' The overorchlng Concepis of the Plon ore described on fhe following poges' h*xf*rr:
,.We know ihol iechnoioqy by iiself does not solve problems. it's intperoiive thci vte 'sork wtlh individuojs, fomiliesl and ccmmuniiies lo identify whoi lechnology provides lhe besl volue, ond lhe rnosi rneoningful solufions. in the conlexi of daily life"' *
ii-r*USrRAitVt T,IASTEP PLAt.l i The COMMUNITY FOR HEALTH AND INDEPENDENCE ILLUSTRATIVL MASTER PLAN is shown on the following poge-
.-lr
-,-' ':'.:'-
';:-

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

COMMUNITY ror HEALTF1 and INDEPENDENCE
l: ,3i;ii1\.,..
;,{F
'ii
!Fl'' D
r.1l/! i-i
tr,,,.'; : ,!1i'l J
r,: Sriiil
i '"\ : r'il- li
'';r . A;.,_(il )
t[ffi*&*--*.*:-*'

LTOTIJD
:OMi,lE?Cr.4L ! Qf S r-ARa il
a.)'\nlliifliiY
l
',h.i
}-i
I
bj
.l
:
,l
*
.E
'l
,..1
.l
ii
I
4 '.J\'4
I
\
I
t:
t.-
Lr
I
f..
--t--.
,Faii'
ila-:ili )al.;
!r'r. I l-
1 i ).r
J i:s *c
i5 ra
r)! ftl
il(_ji'\L-l'ti.: r
l:SiDEFlll.l L
iC:iOO!i iPAR(i if)irFi'. SPr\{li
(E i-:t\1i21;'jli!
{f,:Aio:iir
{D i?.4i:!-i 8..\D
* ,l: ,',': j.i F ti .#
I
I
.-..
:" ,fa:';|r?
l.f?.r
-: a-.
1r'%l
\;i,:3
.*;
...:
i
\
s
I
!
L.--
l
;
tt t_--=-_I
I
.-i
i,',i.n'l
ffifi r',,
f, rci.-
r\I? l;1
''- ia{-)r,lPLil(i
ii'rCi Oi-
itliSF.'\lr.ll-'1
COMMUNITY foT HEALTH Ond INDEPENDENCE

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

COMMUNITY ror HEALTH ond INDEPENDENCE
THE pROJECT RISEARCH GUIDANICF I Reseorch Guidonce hos informed the need' opplicobility', locotion, ond design of the Project. The primcry sources of Reseorch Guidonce cre described below' ccA/\Mui.jlTy FrJR i-iEALTl-l Ai..jD ItIDEPENDEFIcE I i,r 211E ihr ll/*l D':r.''.i-; /-..rr1'..-'r iri l--1:llll'ici-ri': Prli:; :irrJ iie.'e;tr-::ii iCHPRi pr'e1-'crred Conrmuniiy f*l Heclflh crnd lndependense' c brood overyiew of how such o portnership relctes to the uc Dcvis mission ond UC Dovis leodership decision-moking. lt includes o description of regionol demogrophics, existing resources for older ond vulneroble odults, exomples of model communities, ond on overview of reseorch on use of technology' the built environment, ond community-bosed interventions to focilitote oging in ploce' Finolly. opportunities ond chollenges for reseorch, educotion, ond community portnership ore discussed bosed on conversotions with selected UC Dovis foculty." (Community for Heath ond independence' 2018)
Ac:,;r:iiiigii-rie-1i1;-ii'"i1i'1,"e"'iaeri:;i'r1'afJ3;fi';3i:r+ih<-'dscncite;hnci.*i'iie:;ic :,Ji-1(')i')l-i 1-.;1.13.1r-]ilii;.,clsei]. ir:;:tiih',,.]qiil.l i; *liriirrr;i. t^iii|i sjci.riiici:ili r'3.;?'.-ir.l-;i:
l:t.r:;i,t-,.:: t..,:l. l: -.r:t:...).; -: :i,r .l.i lJiiari-ririli ll -1.;J' '--'' ))i-CS:ivnii'l::t:' :t,.Jljt!i-i.-p!1-lrlll i,l:i'riir-:ii'rl.ii;:.:,;:-l:i .ir''';i:!ic; ifir::'';'iit'-:.;ii;l-:ir::::or-r:'riiiii ini.l:-;:ir-",. a.j :)r-j?rft:ltei-]i:.-1ti:i-;ie:; i:1,-ir-l:i',tii-rt-r; .-)i,a -;isi--r',;c:: -.i+l'iii: iiisiiil'lii:rl-l-' Population Projection for california Adults Aged 55+ Years (2O21-2O5O) "This report provides
foctors imporiont to
2021
|:49.D?7
ADULTS 5'-
20Ml
151/]
lOtvl
5l'/
:
a
I
:
0 5-f
ra
I 15-85
I ;,1 -:+
E :t r:+
o
2030
1j.l) 3..Lj?i-
Atrl-ill5 5i:+
2040

14.50G i)52
ADt-rLl9 55+
2050
'l:,.-1 15.1 l:

Aiil-lLT5 55+
-'Igl'g:'I"S*'
4 ,THr colrttuluNlTy is an opporlunily tor aninnovelive, unique community, designed bosed on evidence of whal works fo suPPorl heolthY oging"

04/23/2024 Item No.11.
h*xl-*lr:

COMMUNITY for HEALTH orrd INDEPENDENCE
pl Ai,.l NING HTALIFIy AGli\lG CCMMUI,IITIES I lr 2,,-r2 I in,: i.JCl ljcr.iis r-.:ri:;r i,;r ll::,:liir,-:r-'rl:) ir.rli':)r:.ri'r1,j li : ; :-' ctri:ii cr rlilcli :1,,1 Plcn nin g tf e*lf h y'4 gin g Co mm uniiies' Colifornio's populotion oged 55 yeors ond older is projected to increose from 28% ill.3million residents) in 2021 to 35% (l5.4milllon residents) in 2050, Although 80%of older odults wont to remoin independent in their own homes os they oge, increosing raies of oge-relcted chronic diseose ond disobility creote borriers to ochieving this. The growing populciion of odults with intellectuolond developmentol disobilities is oging os well. When token in context with the existing housing shortoge in colifornio, there is o compelling need for innovotive, inclusive communities purposefully designed to support heolth ond independence throughout the life spon. Lond use plonning ond community design ore often overlooked elements thot con help 1o prevent or mitigote mony oge,reloted borriers to independent living for on oging populotion, including those who ore intellectuolly or developmentolly disobled.

Through on innovotive synthesis of evidence from peer-reviewed literoiure, current guidelines ond toolkits' interviews with key informonts, ond exomples of model communiiies, this report describes the role of lond use plonning ond design in fostering heolthy oging for oll. The gool is to inform ond inspire developers, plonners, home builders ond other key stokeholders responsible for creoting innovotive heolthy oging communities.

Flgure ?. California Aga Growth Prolectitns, 2il10-?05* 6,S0c,*0c
c
ffi *0-*4
- -
65-14
-
-;15-84
-g5r

5.#0s"il00

4.00*,0CIs
r.0CIO,u00

2.il0*,s0s

1.fl0i).$00
?--/
/
---tF)'
/ ,/
a0r* l*20 203s 2*4* 205il ?S60
//
"/
/
/
I ,/
a

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

DAN B UETlN ER
COMMUNITY ror [-lEALTlj orrd INDEPENDENCE
,$t!*$.o
Zones
tLlJI ZCr.][ CO|, MUi\iTiES i UC
Dovis Center for Heolihcore Policy
ond Reseorch (CHPR) conducted
reseorch in2022 to exomine
noturolly-occurrin g co mm u nities
wiih older populotions with o focus
on "Blue Zones" (regions where
people live longer thon overoge)
to understond elements of these
communities ond iheir imPoct on
oging, especiollY where g d$ ql-
q{;rcommunities hod o concentrotion of
centenorions (people living to oge 100+). The
elements of these communities referred to os
"POWER 9" (shown ot right).

Don Buettner (Ihe Elue Zones), with support from
Notionol Geogrophic, ideniified six unique
communities whose residents include on unusuolly
high number of centenorions with low levels of
chronic diseose.

Okinowo, Jopon I Women over oge 70 yeors comprise the longest-lived populotion in the world Lomo Lindo, Colifornio I Seventh Doy Adventists live 10 yeors longer thon oiher North Americons lkorio, Greece I One of the lowesl rotes of middle-oge
mortolity; lowest documented rote of demeniio in the
world.

Sordinio, lloly I Lorgest concentrotion of mcle
cenienorions in the world.

Nicoyo, Costo Rico I Residents ore twice os likely os U.S' residents io reoch 90 yeors old in good heolth.

Singopore I Singoporeons ronk number one in heolthy life expectoncy ond hove fhe best heolth core system'
CALiFORNiA rtriAST.r:P P,-/5,i"i rarP AGii'lG i ln2021'lhe Stote of Colifornio Deportmeni of Aging prepored the
iti
iCIAL ONE: i. ,.l r 'l i.r .i' ir;l:li', i '\'i :i
.,,, .,iil ,,._..,.,:!: '::ir,r'rjl: ;: \; )Jr: f!
.-, t-.r,t -t,.t,jr ,:rr! lij: :nt-, lf,rOiiri' jr:l
-!,, _.rr,!r: :' ,:: ,Jl.; , i ll r: l:'i ): ! J.a.jiliJ ' ll
it' farEsl: r' i-rrr t ",i ;'. -:\. i )ia:':\ti ::
i::r "'lr
€oaL Two: .r,_,.ii: :r.:tl,i:.;,f:.:.1
..,i. .t1'1 - ...: f:.-.r,3 ::r :ir.r j,t:1 i:: :i ,. | 'liji:j : - , I il !r'.;r-i- ;i i;,i .r; i::.rr:r: : lr:i I rf-r
'.....: -t). ' rlrr, rr.il .lri.il'r :;t i'i
r- . furgpt: ' i r:-.-. : l-.i. :if - r: : ; .: r.1: l
" :a".t:::t' i
COAL THPEE; : :'.,r,r:i- :. : rr,if / 'j':i jtl'li 'r'l ,,r ., ti 1l.nri_il...i -Oa,{::.'ri '_". lr! ,rif':
.:lr.r:itr': rr,; .,,,ii:'1:::'ir'.r tr :j .:l! 'l rrti 1r'l ." i :r'1:r f, a..:'-) i,: :at,r'!.,i. I ' r'i':rt 1r '-rr' ri:,j.:: :r!,:li* : ir' i:t.r:::r''i:;:t
'".j-., Ynrga!; . r. i- : ri i
Mosler Plon For Aging rePori thot
ldentified 5 Bold Gools (ot right) ond 23
strotegies to build o Colifornic for oll
oges by 2030.

This report olso includes o Doto
Doshboord for Aging to meosure
progress ond o Locol PloYbook to
drive portnerships thot helP meet
these gools.
."^{-
iii
IF{1,
r*r
?
6oAL FouP: -:jf ri ri :l I :!i ?t/i-ir;i:r
1, r .i,: l.: t.: ; tt l r:. ll ll rr.;_I?r.l :.!
'1 .t:.j!1',tt) '..' r, l', iriii-i lii'ijrt' lr _-lr:r''l'l i,,,, t,tit';:. :,,."t tt.:.-.
-a - - re.su
" :rt.

GOAL FIV€: \if.'' iLi, J '\.jr'!)
',r.,t:,,i r':,. 'a..:'.-ia tt -.-. t!\i ii'r 1l " '! t' F!- tars€t: ,:, i; ' r'"1 .1i rrt J'_'r ''r 'l
...-1.., .a t :t,.t : ,. i,
!$r?5r
?zou
$rr

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

COMMUNITY ror HEALTH ancl INDEPENDENCE
1i'.lsplRAricN McDEt. COi.4tviUi'iiTiES i UC Dovis Ptonning Heollhy Aging communifies report cited 35 model communities ond highlighted severcl of the 35 for implementing innovotive plonning ond design chorccteristics identified by the Urbon Lond lnstitute guidelines os contributing to heolthy communities' Serenbe I Chottonoogo Hills, GA. I Mosier Plonned Community Shore Konozowo I Konozowo. lshikowo Prefecture, JAPAN I Villoge Housing Development
New Ground Cohousing I High Bornett, UK I Co-Housing
Grow Community I Boinbridge lslond, WA I Villoge Community Culdesoc I Tempe, AZ I Moster Plonned Community
Firsl Ploce Phoenix I Phoenix, AZ I Supportive Housing for Neurodiverse Adults Ponosonic Peno Slolion Next I Denver, CO I Mcster Plonned Community Villoge Londois Alzheimer I Dox, FRANCE I Dementio Villoge Villoge of Hope I cleorfield county, PA I Villoge Housing community li'*llilrs
(
rl
!%
Unique models coter to sPecific
populotions, such os those with dementio,
by enhoncing sofety ond woyfinding
while ensuring residenis remoin
connected with the greoter community.

Some models incorPorote odvonced
technologies to promote, ossess, ond
mointoin heolthy living. The most unique
feolures omong these models were those
thot included the following.

Encouroge Sociolizolion I Sociolizotion both wiihin
ond outside the community, os well os sociolizotion
ocross generoiions, using connected pothwoys,
permeoble borders, cnd interior ond exterior THIRD
PLACES. (discussed in detoil loter in this nonotive.)
Promole Heolthy Diets I Providing eosy occess to
community gordens, grocery siores, ond formers
morkets within neighborhoods ond neor octivity
centers.

Encouroge PhysicolAclivity I Providing green
spoces, recreotion centers, well-integroied ond
neiworked wolking poths, ond bike lones thot
connect to essentiol services.

Promoie Wolkoble Neighborhoods I Providing
muliiple irovel routes, networks of wclking poths.
ond essentiol services within eosy occess.

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

COMMUNITY for HEALTH orrd INDEPENDENCE
A CCfllli.Ji.llT / FCR HCLISiiC LlVii'lG I The design of the COMMUNITY FOR HEALTH AND INDEPENDENCE integrotes
heolth ond wellness ottributes ond services through thoughtful eorly plonning. The community design focuses on the community os o whole by promoting inclusion ond understonding ond by creoting ploces for everyone such thot oging in one's home, living with mentolond physicol disobilities, ond conlributing to the community con be eosily ochteved.

This community for holistic living will contoin Ploces thot promote octive lifestyles ond employment, ond focililote occess to food. educotion, recreotion, exercise, ond reseorch.

A CC,Lf aTiCl.j CF F,ihCES i The plon is conceived os c well-connected collection of PLACES. These ploces, together, occount for the locotions thot support the sociol ond economic hobits of the diverse residents within the communiiy ot lorge. The COMMUNITY FOR HEALTH AND INDEPENDENCE is designed to inctude FIRST PLACES, SECOND PLACES, ond THIRD PLACES which together form o complete community. Addiiionolly, ond unique io THE COMMUNITY, the Plon includes EXCEPTIONAL PLACES:
f XCf PTlOl.iAL PL.3\Cf5 i Plcce.: We &es*crrch. Disrover. Cullivate, Adapt' Suppart Exceptionol ploces refers to the 200-ocre UC Dovis Teoching, Reseorch, ond Heolth Complex locoted ot the heorl.of ihe MASTER PLAN. The UC Dovis Site/complex is proposed to focilitote leorning (for reseorchers, students. ond residents) ond provide opportunities to conduct lifestyle ond heolth reseorch to expond knowledge obout effective community design ond promote heolthy oging ond longevity' Detoils on ihe focililies cnd
services to be provided
opporlunities ot ihe UC Dovis
Site/Complex ore in the eorlY
stoges of plonning ond Yet to
be decided by the UniversitY.

The complex is onticiPoied to
include mony comPonents,
which moy include but ore not
limited to the following:
iar 'll I
tJtr:-l j:
ad*:* i .:r!i;;.

I
Reser:rcrrlLecrning
Fociliiies
H er:l il'r c.:: re Fl ciliiies
Ciiniccl Si:cc+
Perfcrrning Aris Cppoi-luniiies
Specicliy Ccrre Hr;itsing &. S<illed l'1ur':ing Ccre
il c b i I e i
-c r; or c:f ::ry I t')r Q;:n! C cre 5 erv ic e :
ccmm,-jnii t (jtlr::ccn Eclucciir:n, & s,;pr:crt.lervices iinclucing Ai-ilcme Cc:re-Gi"ier Irr::nin3i Re;e:rch Gctr dens I Ccffi rnur^iii / Gcrde r":
r- ).,.(,'.".,,i 1 Cer.i=:
lrina\ ciive Tr.: n:ii Cc l icns
t
a
I
BODY
tRtLii,-{il'\-G
/€Airi I
MIND
i-lAihf!t";
-p3rE{tIrve
LIFE
tXrlr$Oi{c\,trctr

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

COMMUNITY ror HEALTH ond INDEPENDENCE
f IRST PLACfS I Plcces We lhrive, Live, Grow
FIRST PLACES refers to our homes; this is where we begin cnd end ecch dcy' our ,home bose'. First Ploces ore the residenliol oreos of the Plcn lhot pro'ride sofe refuge ond spoces in which to nurture, core for, crnd grow us cnd our fcmilies.

FIRST PLACES include trodiiionol sireet-occessed single fcmily detcched ond ottoched homes, multi-generoiionol homes, occessory clwelling units, olley- ond couri-looded homes, coitoge homes with shored open oreos crnd gordens, ossisted living homes, residentiol core focilities, speciclty group homes geared for iorgeted-needs core, ond oportment homes.
ti*tflss
{
I
:"
,I
9l
IxrF
lr
I7fr
i

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

COMMUNITY ror HEALTH oncl INDEPENDENCE
sfe OND PtACf;S i Flaces We WarK, Do Eusiness, Shop
SECOND pLACES refers to our workploces ond ploces of commerce; this is where we go when we leove our homes to eorn o living ond provide for ourselves ond our fomilies. Second Ploces ore the employment ond shopping oreos of the Plon ihct provide the economic engine of the community which, in iurn, provides ihe fincnciol meons to promote living. lncluded in the sECoND pLACES ore the neighborhood ond lifestyle commercicl sites, reseorch sites, civic siies such os low enforcement ond fire deportments, ond the UC Dovis Site/Complex.

THE COMMUNtTys'employment-generoting lond uses ore oniicipoted to provide jobs/housing bolonce within the communitY.

Id
tr-*
T.
**
i
I
.::

E:

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

COMMUNIIY for HEALTH orrd INDEPENDENCE
Tl{l*D PLACES j P/cces We Ploy, Learn, fxplore
THIRD PLACES refers to our ploces of recreotion, educction, ond sociol interoction, ihis is where we go when we leove our homes ond workploces to goin enrichment of our minds, bodies, ond souls. Third ploces ore the porks, open spoces, commerciol plozos, schools, ond community gothering orecs of the plon ihot provide the heolth, well-being, ond educotionol meons to promoie respect ond inclusion in the community.

THIRD pLACES olso includes the mony opportunities for smoller, more iniimoie public spoces, within lorger lond use oreos but outside of the public porks. Due to the scole of communitY,
these sites cre not shown on
the Lond Use Moster Plon but
will be implemented of the
future Tentotive Mop ond/or
Design Review stoge of
plonning entitlements. These
importont community spoces
moy include, but ore noi limited
to, the following.
{
Pocket Porks
Commerciol Plozos
Troils/Troil Heods/Noture Areos
Communily Gordens
Outdoor Fitness EquiPment Areos
Outdoor Povilions
Picnic Areos/lnformol Secting Areos
Recreotion/CommunitY Centers
Woyfinding/lnformotion/Technology Kiosks
Respite/Rechorge/Comf ort Slotions
{
k**lit;s a!lti.',..- : ' ' ir " 1-:!
I

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

COMMUNITY ror HEALTH cncl INDEPENDENCE
GREit.lit.iG AND l-lLALTl-l I Overoll Plon Areo "greening" ond ihe inclusion of o voriety of green spoces ore key to bringing the Vision for the COMMUNITY FOR HEALTH AND INDEPENDENCE to life. Green spoces refer io ihe voriety of open spoces, porks, ond plozos within TH E COMMUNITy. Greening refers to ihe lcndscope plontings in lcndscope corridors olong roodwcys, of project entries, of site develop
throughout THE COMMU NITY.
ments, ond in the froni yords of individuol home sites
Gilf f f.l lill':,qASTRUCTURE I Green spoces ond greening moke up the green
infrostructure system of the
Plon Areo which is Prioritized
throughoui THE
COMMU NITY.

The inclusion of varied ond
interconnected green
spoces ond greening
contribute to o wide vorietY
of beneficiol heolth
ouicomes, including
increosed physicol cctivitY,
reduced obesiiy, reduced
stress, enhonced sociol
interoction ond communiiY
engcgement, ond imProved
mentol heclih.
(-) [,
itl
lt-..--'
GRTEilING STRATTGITS l
. Significont iree
conopy with lorge ond
diverse tree species to
enhonce shode in
yords, porks, ond
plozos ond olong
streets ond troils.

J
o lncorporoting loyers of trees ond understory vegetotion olong sidewolks ond troils to moke these rouies more oitroctive, ecologicolly susloinoble, ond comforloble' . Allotiing spoces for community gordens thot hove good occess to sunlight ond fit the noturol terroin ond setting within wolkoble distonce to neighbors. . ldentifying noturol oreos for conservotion which preserve hobitot ond support biodiversity.

The primory green spoces (porks, open spoces, ond londscope conidors) ore shown on the exhibif obove. Additionol green spoces ond greening oreos will be locoted throughoui THE COMMUNITY in the commerciol ond employment centers, resideniiol oreos, neighborhood streets ond entries, ond other oreos ond ore not specificclly shown here due io the scole of the exhibit. Detcils of these design elements will be developed in ihe future with site-specific development. aj
.:;
'i-t
' :7-:-
il
rl

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

COMMUNITY ror HEALTH ond INDEPENDENCE
GREENING AS BRAND I Green infrostructure ot the
COMMUNITY FOR HEALTH AND INDEPENDENCE will
reinforce ihe notion thot londscope is o primory componeni of the bronding forTHE COMMUNITY' Greening (hordscope
ond londscope moteriols) will provide project continuity ond diversity in the spoces they enhonce.

SENSIBILITY + SOPHISTICATION I Greening elements often
express the locol context ond the potino of time ond reflect the volues of the people living there. Chorocteristic londscope ond hordscope feotures ore typicolly rooted in o community's response to ploce ond represent the noturol simple moteriols with ouihentic expression in green spoces defined by the noturol environment.

TIXTURE, PATTERN + COLOR I Green spoces should include
texture ond potlern through the use of diverse ond vibront living ond stotic moteriols in the londscope ond built
environmenis. These elements should be repeoted to
emphosize o sense of ploce ond moy be highlighted by
singulor opposing verticol or horizontol elements thot stond out ond ottroct ottention.

DELIGHT + PLAY I Green spoces should creote memoroble
moments, shored experiences, ond unexpected experiences' Green spoces should include whimsy ond ort, ond be
inieroctive, iconic, ond ployful. Ploy is essentiol ond con be thoughi-provoking. lough-inducing, cnd inspiring. Explorotion should be encouroged ond o noturol effect of experiencing the Ploce.

HUMAN CONNECTION + INTERACTION I Green spoces should
encouroge communify gotherings of olltypes ond sizes ond promote sociol interoction ond inclusion. Gothering ploces should be indoor, outdoor, ond oll-weother to offer voriety ond engogement opportuniiies yeor-round' Gothering ploces
should promote flex-spoces ond people wotching ond should ollow for interoction with shored resources.

HEALTH, MOBILITY + TECHNOLOGY I Heolth con be enhonced
through doily mobility. Greening should provide shody wolkoble environments thot ore occessible to oll, including physicol- ond neuro-diverse people. Protected bikewoys ollow for sofer possoge ond octive lifestyles. Micro-tronsit opportunities remove borriers to mobiliiy ond ollow for full immersion into community evenis. Grophic ond technologicol woyfinding
strotegies ollow for eose of movement within the community'

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

COMMUNITY ror HEALTH ond INDEPENDENCE
EIGHT DOA/AINS CF LIVABILITY I The evidenced-bosed Domoins of AARPs "Ei9hI Domoins of Livobilily" ore described in the UC Dovis Center for Heolthcore Policy ond Reseorch's publicotions Commvnity for Heolth ond lndependence ond Plonning Heollhy Aging Communilies.

The coMMUNtTy FoR HEALTH AND INDEPENDENCE incorporotes the notion of these EIGHT DOMAINS ond includes on odopted version (below) thot guides the design of o new community porodigm.ToiloredforiheProjectondreferredtohereinosTFiF COfvlMUl'liT/ s FIGHTDOMAII'15 OF LIVABLE COr.tt^Ul.llTiES, mindful incorporotion of these Domoins eorly in the plonning process will guide the future buili environment to creole Ploces For Everyone in o Community for Heollh + lndependence.
l'3lillhqr"r
Commun$te>
a

THE COMMUNIW'S
EIGHT DOMA'N5 OF
LIVABLE COMMUNIT'Es
EXHIBITis shown on fhe
opposing poge.

Ihe key concepls of
eoch of lhese Domoins ore illustrofed ond described on fhe fottowing poges ond ore fhe GUIDING PR'NC'PIE5 FOR THE COMMUN'IY FOR HFA LTH A,ND JNDTPfNDFNCE. **

TRANSPORTATION
WALKAB!LITY

RESFECT
rNcLusroN
OF[t\l SPACI
SUII"DINGS
+
+
+

HOUSING
+
I.IVING
soclAL

PARIICIFATION
*

CULTURAL

CONTRIBUTION
crvlc
FARTICIPATiON
+

EMPLOYMENT
HEAI.ThI
+

COMMUNITY

SUPPORI
TECHNOTOGV+

RESILIENCE

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

COMMUNITY ror HEALTH cnd INDEPENDENCE
-a!0tcFrb
Csw.lLt-Muh-C#6ts5:r
sffi. glstlg
.rlso*r tiveatly
-lrrppa.the sfl.nce
+lca&tct lcng d
fio;rirc Ctrfvorit-ini3'tatfi iFwfily
lobn{
Qecrqla.qi
*fp€i4h":

C\i,
.q
,{,
.ffrr tc€g ci
*dG6c*
+lffiaea{"ff.
f6r&.€Y
5$:e€ary .
ttBrc{*e?
\
'gLlk"qre.
fr€oorffia-F.ffiasL6F{?
Wa*Es
Crel!!{Wf*li.E
fur v<*Ftac*!g
.$rrytlna"E eoocts
lv!*ou& lpocq
COMMUNITY foT HEALTH Ond INDEPENDENCE
' .. : lt ::a
-scle ' Atlcincbls
C
F
.Celryranl r
4swriiro|lt l*dl€d 'woa Cwctor,
.lRiJrivs . Vlr*f
'&cc$rp 1$cs?t
,Acedsr .\ttdo.*\6trl
fisccr
-Sho& wdti^C Pcllt
-g,lrcts 5o€!rl
hfBsiian
{sttoslklg +
{obl.orlg
-Elpl*dnQ Arh
-:eccgtsn€nt
ot Sd{r€rrg
. CL,*tr!ris@
.eftty lcc& lo
$e(*f €sf-Lwl*qllF Cst:-R€(is€C}!Fs
c!.€ - erldld! icc
-Frffit* Fbesny
dffh,lar

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

COMMUNITY tor HEALTI-I ond INDEPENDENCE
DOMAIN ONE I Housing + liYinn
Beiler Living 1'hrouclh Cornrnuntty Dtversiiy + apportttnttY

GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Dl.l I Housing should be sofe, ottoinoble, diverse, ond occessible. Muli- generotionol housing types ond occessory dwelling units ore encouroged ond ollow for fomilies to remoin iogether to core for physicol, mentcl, cnd oging chollenges.

Dl.2 | Neighborhoods should be designed to welcome oll people, including oll oges, fomily unil lypes & sizes, ond physicol & neurologicol diversities.

Dl.3 | Neighborhoods should be conveniently locoted, well-connected' vibront' ond inclusive ond should contoin o voriety of lot types & sizes. ti*xf*rs
I : .''-'
Dl.4 | Neighborhoods should be designed to promote cctive lifestyles wherein residences ore ln close proximity io SECOND ond THIRD PLACES'
Dl.5 | Neighborhoods should be designed to promote neighbor interoction by incorporoting orchitecturol design feotures such os occessible porches ond front-focing windows to promote sociol inieroction.

Dl.6 | Neighborhoods should contoin o voriety of FIRST PLACES opportunilies in o unified setting' Homes for offordoble housing moy be verticolly or horizontolly mixed in neighborhoods ond moy be grouped or dispersed throughout neighborhoods'
,,Diverse. inclusive communifies lhol suppori heotfhy aging will require o voriely ol housing fypes, designed with occessibiliiy in mind, and inviting to a range of household sizes. individuol needs, and income levels' WalkabilitY, and proximity to retaltspoces ond recreofi on rlre d key design elemeni of communilies lo support heolthy aging'" t.:, a,

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

COMMUNITY ror l-IEALTH crnd INDEPENDENCE
DOMAIN TWO i Tronsporioiion + UJolksbility
Bs i le r I'l c :t ;! i i,t + yt.i 1y ; 1 ;, :Ji rt q'[ h r c u c) r'' 5 p c c il ; f"
w ?:iialW: ,ffi
h*xfllsGUIDING PRINCIPLES
D2.l I Tronsportotion syslems should be comprehensively-plonned to provide direct, efficient, ond sofe occess occommodoting o voriety of modes of tronsportotion.

D2.2 | Troils ond sidewolks should be user-friendly, ond to promote wolking, bicycling, ond dog wolking for doily needs ond exercise' D2.3 | Public tronsporiotion should be integroted, convenieni, ond occessible, ond should provide opporlunity for occess to heolthy food ond communiiy services.

D2.4 | Roodwoy networks should utilize grid, modified grid, ond/or circulor potterns io promote woyfinding ond disperse troffic concentrolions.

D2.5 | Roodwoys should be tree-lined to provide shody wolking poihs ond designed to focilitote oulo trcffic while promoting pedestrion ond bicycle sofety ond convenience- D2.6 | Woyfinding should be plonned olong primory tronsportotion corridors ond rood crossings should be designed to protect pedestrions ond minimize crossing distonces. ,ltabilify ond Trcnsporlation play rs fundsmental rale in helping people msinioin mony cf the importanl factors in tteatthy living, including civic cnd sociol parlicipation. occessing heclih services, employmenl, efc'" I
I
I
I
t,t
I
I
t

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

COMMTJNITY ror HEALTH crncl INDEPENDENCE
DOFiAlr\i THREf; I Socicii Pcriicipction snd cultural Conlribuiion 3 g t t g r-,-tv i t't. q i rt r o, I q i t' t"': c t r'i t a:J i'; I I ti :] rr cJ e n I e rl i ti**f*;rsGUIDING PRINCIPLES
D3.'l I Lond uses should be sited to invite engogemeni, connection, ond o sense of belonging.

D3.2 | Open oreos ond front yords of FIRST PLACES should be designed to promote opportunities to be neighborly ond encouroge sociolizotion.

D3.3 I Opportunity for THIRD PLACES should be locoted in the communiiy to promote Arts ond Culture in the communiiy.

D3.4 | Public ond semi-public spoces should be designed to promote sociol interoction, informotion gothering, ond cullurol oworeness' D3.S I Lond use odjocency should consider opportunities to contribute to ihe community ihrough volunteering.

D3.6 | District ond neighborhood design should employ ortistic ond culturol expressions in londscope ond orchitecturol design, woyfinding ond ploce moking'
s
(
ct
.)
,,Soejeii connecljon is vitol io heatthy aging and i; enricherl by lhe meaning qssocioiec with cuilurol reJevsncs - people wha came iogelhelailh cammon inleresis ond pursue cresiive ouilels hove greoier well-being ocross lhe iif+"spcn'"

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

COMMUNITY tor HEALTH cnci INDEPENDENCE
DOtulAlN F0UR I ResPeet + lnclusion
r-r'z{-:E i'Je liEr iai r.sn .t.t.;titi'/ 1-.1|zer.;e PCf;tti(t- -;' titxf*ssGUIDING PRINCIPTES
D4.l I Housing should be designed to occommodote opportunities for secondory uniis to house multi-generoiionol fomilies, speciol needs odult children, ond lower-income fomilies.

D4.2 | Housing should be designed to promote occessibillty, moximize sofety' ond ollow heolthy oging in the home.

D4.3 | Neighborhoods should include opportunities for supportive core, goods, ond services.

D4.4 | Neighborhoods should include iniegroted housing ond support services thot promote interoction, helpfulness, underslonding, ond toleronce' D4.5 | Neighborhoods should include spoces thot ore occessible io o diverse populction ond designed in woys thot promote o neuro-diverse community' D4.6 I Neighborhoods should be designed io support mixed-use neighborhoods which ollow for o person's needs to be met conveniently.
(
\,'t
-*.-*..--t.'.*
7--
{
{
.t
I
I
,'lnle sisnd ci o societol lroniier where peopi e cre living lonEer lh$n ever before in conlexls ihaf ar* incteosingly innu*"'"o'"'::iiJ;i:1il;TiJ[;JTllfiJ:''ff'if: nJ'ifJi'f '.'i''J';l'. "11;]'.'"J^:#ffi'L'ffi:

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

COMMUNITY for HEALTH cnd INDEPENDENCE
DOMAIN FlVf I Open Spoce + Buildings
Ectter Ser'rse cf Carrtrn'.to t / lr^t:t;91-t De;iqn of 5pocr:s

GUIDING PRINCIPLES
D5.l I Neighborhoods should include distinciive THIRD PLACES thotwill promote o sense of ploce, foster o sense of community, bolster mentol ond physicolwellness, ond ollow for community bonding.

D5.2 | Neighborhoods should include both noturol ond developed open spoces ond porks to promoie o vorieiy of possive ond octive uses thot support o heolihy communitY.

D5.3 | Neighborhoods should be designed to embroce lhe noturcrl ond built environment equolly to promote o holistic community.

D5.4 | Neighborhoods should include THIRD PLACES of vorying sizes ond development intensities like pockei porks, plozos, ond comfort stotions to bolster the community fobric.

DS.S I public oreos should be designed to be eosily identifioble ond novigoble, promote woyfinding ond sofety, ond encouroge progrommed ond unprogrommed community gothering D5.6 | Neighborhoods should be designed to offer sofe routes io school, ond schools should be locoted to support community meetings ond volunteering synergies.

1.-rr-
ti*'lf*lr:
**s
{
,,lnclusiye camnrunjlies lhoi supporl heallhy agirrg will require a variely of housing lypes, designed wiih accessibilily in rnjnd, and invile a ronge of household sizes, individucl needs, oncJ income tevels. Key design elemenls of communitie.r lhat promati heallhy oging include walkable sireels. including proleciive shode conopies. and proximilY lo retail spaces onf recreofion ore{ts-

04/23/2024 Item No.11.

COMMUNITY for HEALTH cnd INDEPENDENCE
DOMAIN SIX I TechnoioEy + Resilience
3 e i ie r I n i e i i i 2 e: n c e'r f 2 v i I 5 2 nt*., |a, 1 $ l; --i I o i r', r-s i: i I i t t/

GUIDING PRINCIPLES
D6.l I Neighborhoods should be designed to promote humon resiliency by providing the opportunity for integroting technology ond communicotions infrostruciure.

D6.2 | Neighborhoods should be designed to promote Environmentol Sustoinobility through use of energy- ond woter-efficient proctices.

D6.3 | Neighborhoods should be designed to promote Climote Resiliency by optimizing the opportunities to plon for climote chonge within the community.

D6.4 | Neighborhoods should provide the opportunity to occommodote technology ond communicotions infrostructure to help people remoin engoged in their communitY.

D6.5 | Neighborhoods should be designed lo occommodote modern technologicol services, like community-bosed goods delivery, which will help support independence.

D6.6 | Neighborhoods should be designed to include o vcriety of SECOND ond THIRD PLACES thot provide occess ond ollow for octive ond possive poriicipotion in Ploces such os community gcrdens .
k*xf*rs
(
ru'
DBt'JEar
,,Technology will ptay an increasingly importont role in helping people mdnage fheir heolih end wellness os they (onct iheir loved onesJ oge in lhe communily. Creating ()n environrnetrl where lechnoiogy is eqsily cccessible ond resjlienl fo disruplion will be o key feoiure af future healthy communifies. " I
".*"*'- "i]]l.---:i-;-"
.l
4tI*';';:*J'-
::::F:;