334
CITY OF LATHROP - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR DELL' OSSO FARMS, LLC. LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES FOR THE PUMPKIN MAZE EVENT OCTOBER 1, 2022 THROUGH OCTOBER 31, 2022.
E. DELL' OSSO FARMS shall be entitled to a reduction for less hours worked should circumstances ( such as rain and wind) cause the EVENT to be closed or impacted.
Additionally, closing hours in Exhibit" A" are estimates. If the EVENT closes early, officers may work less hours.
F. DELL' OSSO FARMS agrees to pay the CITY far all costs associated with providing law enforcement services for the EVENT. In addition, if further resources are needed to provide adequate security at the EVENT, including mutual aid from other agencies, those cost will be the responsibility of DELL' OSSO FARMS. Hourly rates for the additional resources that are not included in the estimated cost schedule may vary.
2) Compensation
DELL' OSSO FARMS hereby agrees to the estimated cost for law enforcement services below:
Overtime Rate Estimated Hours Estimated Cost
Police Officer 104.46 192 20, 056. 32
Ser eant 123. 11 58 7, 140. 38
TOTALS 27 196. 70
CITY will invoice DELL' OSSO FARMS for law enforcement services for actual hours of CITY personnel and any additional resource costs incurred for the EVENT. Hourly rates for additional resources that may be needed to provide adequate security at the EVENT that are not included in the estimated cost schedule above may vary.
3) Effective Date and Term
The effective date of this Agreement shall be from the date of its full execution through October 31, 2022, unless terminated earlier by either party providing thirty( 30) days' written notice. 4) Emplovment of Officer( s) and Assignments
CITY shall retain control over supervision, wages, and other terms and conditions of employment of the officers providing the services under this Agreement. The parties acknowledge that such officers are held to the requirements of the law and CITY policies and procedures. DELL' OSSO FARMS shall immediately notify the CITY of any concerns regarding the performance of the assigned officers, including, but not limited to, adherence to quality of services as detailed in this agreement.
CITY shall assign Police Officers and Sergeants to cover the EVENT on each requested day on a rotational basis. Police Officer( s) will work from a schedule with( 18) eight- hour shifts and( 8) sixhour shifts with a total of 192 hours, and Sergeant( s) will work from a schedule with( 5) eight- hour shifts and( 3) six- hour shifts with a total of 58 hours, unless otherwise adjusted due to circumstantial events as referenced in the Agreement.
335
CITY OF LATHROP — PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR DELL' OSSO FARMS, LLC. LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES FOR THE PUMPKIN MAZE EVENT OCTOBER 1, 2022 THROUGH OCTOBER 31, 2022.
5) Billines
CITY shall submit one invoice at the conclusion of the EVENT for actual law enforcement services incurred and any additional resource costs incurred for the EVENT. DELL' OSSO FARMS shall remit payment to the CITY within thirty( 30) days of receipt of invoice 6) Su_pulies & Equipment
CITY shall provide each officer with the following equipment:
A. Police Vehicles: Cit, s ll,
1. Provide a standard patrol vehicle for each officer.
2. Maintain the motor vehicles assigned to each officer.
3. Purchase gasoline, oil, replacement tires, and other expenses associated with the operation of each motor vehicle.
4. Maintain comprehensive general auto liability insurance on each motor vehicle in an amount as is currently provided through the Central San Joaquin Valley Risk Management Authority.
B. Weapons and Ammunition
1. CITY shall provide the standard issued weapons( handgun, shotgun, and rifle) and rounds of ammunition for each officer.
C. Office Su, plies
1. CITY shall provide each officer with the usual and customary office supplies and forms required in the performance of their duties.
7) Compliance With the Laws
The Parties shall keep themselves informed of and in compliance with all federal, state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, and orders that may affect in any manner performance ofthe Services or those engaged to perform Services under this Agreement.
S) Insurance
A. DELL' OSSO FARMS shall maintain commercial general liability insurance coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services Office( ISO) form CG 00 O1, in an amount not less than one million dollars ($ 1, 000, 000) per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage, including without limitation, blanket contractual liability. If a general aggregate limit applies, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. DELL' OSSO FARMS general liability policies shall be primary and shall not seek contribution from the CITY' s coverage, and be endorsed using ISO form CG 20 10( or equivalent) to provide that City and its officers, officials, employees, and agents shall be additional insureds under such policies. For construction projects, an endorsement providing completed operations coverage for the additional insured, ISO form CG 20 37 ( or equivalent) is also required.
B. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies by DELL' OSSO FARMS shall not affect coverage provided the CITY.
336
CITY OF LATHROP - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR DELL' OSSO FARMS, LLC. LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES FOR THE PUMPKIN MAZE EVENT OCTOBER 1, 2022 THROUGH OCTOBER 31, 2022.
C. Coverage shall state that DELL' OSSO FARMS insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer' s liability.
D. Coverage shall contain a waiver of subrogation in favor of the CITY. 9) Indemnif cation
A. DELL' OSSO FARMS shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers( hereafter collectively City Personnel) from and against any and all liability, claims, damage, cost, expenses, awards, fines, judgments, and expenses of litigation( including, without limitation, costs, attorney fees, expert witness fees and prevailing party fees and cost) of every nature arising out of or in connection with the any services provided by the City or any City Personnel or their performance of work or any failure to comply with any of the City' s duties contained in the Agreement, except such loss or damage which was caused by the gross or willful misconduct of City Personnel.
B. In the event of concurrent negligence on the part of DELL' OSSO FARMS or any of its officers, directors, trustees, employees, agents or volunteers, and CITY or any of its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers, the liability for any and all such claims, demands and actions in law equity for such losses, fines, penalties, forfeiture, costs and damages shall be apportioned under the State of California' s theory of comparative negligence as presently established or as may be modified hereafter.
C. If DELL' OSSO FARMS rejects a tender of defense by the City or City Personnel under this Agreement, and it is later determined that the City and City Personnel breached no duty of care and/ or were immune from liability, DELL' OSSO FARMS shall reimburse the City and/ or City Personnel for any and all litigation expenses including, without limitation, costs, attorney fees, expert witness fees and prevailing party fees and cost). A duty of care or immunity determination may be made by a jury or a court, including a declaratory relief determination by a court after the City and/ or City Personnel settles a liabiliry claim, with or without participation by DELL' OSSO FARMS.
D. The Parties acknowledge that it is not the intent of the Agreement to create a duty of care by the City or City Personnel that they would not owe in the absence of the Agreement. The Agreement does not create an affirmative duty of care( including, without limitation, a duty to protect, a duty to deter and/ar a duty to intervene) by the City or City Personnel and the absence of City Personnel is not a material breach of this Agreement. The Parties further acknowledge that by entering into this Agreement neither the City nor City Personnel intend to waive any immunities to which they would be entitled in the absence of the Agreement.
337
CITY OF LATHROP — PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR DELL'OSSO FARMS, LLC. LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES FOR THE PUMPKIN MAZE EVENT OCTOBER 1, 2022 THROUGH OCTOBER 31, 2022.
10) Inteeration of Prior Terms and Conditions
This Agreement, including all recitals, constitutes the entire agreement of the Parties. This Agreement may be amended or modified only by the mutual written agreement of the Parties. This Agreement is invalid unless approved by the legislative body of each Party, although it may be executed by an authorized agent of each Party. An authorized agent of the City shall be a person specifically authorized by the legislative body of the City to execute this Agreement, at the level of City Manager or City Attorney or equivalent. The indemnity sections shall survive termination or expiration of this agreement.
11) Termination
Either Party to this Agreement may for any reason terminate this Agreement at any time by giving thirty ( 30) days' written notice to the other party. Upon termination of this Agreement as herein provided, DELL' OSSO FARMS shall have no obligation to compensate of pay the CITY except for services provided prior to termination.
12) Notices
All contracts, appointments, approvals, authorizations, claims, demands, Change Orders, consents, designations, notices, offers, requests and statements given by either party to the other shall be in writing and shall be sufficiently given and served upon the other party( 1) personally served,( 2) sent by the United States mail, postage prepaid, by certified mail ( 3) sent by private express delivery service and addressed as follows:
To City: City of Lathrop
City Clerk
390 Towne Centre
Lathrop, CA 95330
Copy to: City of Lathrop
Lathrop Police Department
940 River Islands Parkway
Lathrop, CA 95330
To Dell' Osso Farms: DELL' OSSO FARMS, LLC.
Atrn: Susan Dell' Osso
26 W. Stewart Rd.
Lathrop, CA 95330
13) Miscellaneous
A. Consent. Whenever in this Agreement the approval or consent of a party is required, such approval or consent shall be in writing and shall be executed by a person having the express authority to grant such approval or consent.
B. Contract Terms Prevail. All exhibits and this Agreement are intended to be construed as a single document. Should any inconsistency occur between the specific terms of this
338
CITY OF LATHROP - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR DELL' OSSO FARMS, LLC. LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES FOR THE PUMPKIN MAZE EVENT OCTOBER 1, 2022 THROUGH OCTOBER 31, 2022.
Agreement and attached exhibits, the terms of this Agreement shall prevail.
C. Non- Discrimination. No party shall employ any discriminatory practices in its performance hereunder, including its employment practices, on the basis of sex, race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, age, sexual orientation, or physical and mental disability.
D. Controlling Law. The parties agree that this Agreement shall be governed and construed by and in accordance with the Laws of the State of California.
E. Force Majeure. Neither party shall be deemed to be in default on account of any delay or failure to perform its obligations under this Agreement, which directly results from an Act of God or an act of a superior governmental authority.
F. Headings. The paragraph headings are not a part of this Agreement and shall have no effect upon the construction or interpretation of any part of this Agreement.
G. Incorporation of Documents. All documents constituting the Agreement documents described in Section 1 hereof and all documents which may, from time to time, be referred to in any duly executed amendment hereto are by such reference incorporated in the Agreement and shall be deemed to be part of this Agreement.
H. Integration. This Agreement and any amendments hereto between the parties constitute the entire Agreement between the parties concerning the Project and Work, and there are no other prior oral or written agreements between the parties that are not incorporated in this Agreement.
I. Modification of Agreement. This Agreement shall not be modified or be binding upon the parties unless such modification is agreed to in writing and signed by the parties.
J. Provision. Any agreement, covenant, condition, clause, qualification, restriction, reservation, term or other stipulation in the Agreement shall define or otherwise control, establish or limit the performance required or permitted or to be required of or permitted by either party. All provisions, whether covenants or conditions, shall be deemed to be both covenants and conditions.
K. Severability. The invalidity in whole or part of any provision of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of any other provision of this agreement. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Agreement is void or unenforceable, the provisions of this Agreement not so affected shall remain in full force and effect.
L. Successors and Assigns. The provisions of this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of, and shall apply to and bind, the successors and assigns of the parties.
M. Venue. In the event that suit is brought by either party hereunder, the parties agree that trial of such action shall be vested exclusively in the state courts of California in the County of San Joaquin or in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California.
N. Recovery of Costs. The prevailing party in any action brought to enforce the terms of this Agreement or arising out of this Agreement may recover its reasonable costs, including
339
CITY OF LATHROP - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR DELL' OSSO FARMS, LLC. LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES FOR THE PUMPKIN MAZE EVENT OCTOBER 1, 2022 THROUGH OCTOBER 31, 2022.
reasonable attorney' s fees, incurred or expended in connection with such action against the non- prevailing party
14) Sienatures
The individuals executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they have the right, power, legal capacity, and authority to enter into and to execute this Agreement on behalf of the respective legal entities of DELL' OSSO FARMS and the CITY. This agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns.
340
CITY OF LATHROP — PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR DELL'OSSO FARMS, LLC. LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES FOR THE PUMPKIN MAZE EVENT OCTOBER 1, 2022 THROUGH OCTOBER 31, 2022.
In Witness Whereof, each Party to this Agreement has signed this Agreement upon the date indicated, and agrees, for itself, its employees, officers, partners, and successors, to be fully bound by all terms and conditions of this Agreement.
City of Lathrop: Dell' Osso Farms, LLC:
Stephen J. Salvatore Date Susan Dell' Osso Date
City Manager
Approved as to Form:
9-- LZ
Salvador Navarrete Date
City Attorney
Attest:
Teresa Vargas Date
City Clerk
341
2022 CORN MAZE STAFFING SCHEDULE
Exhibit A
October 1, 2022 through October 31, 2022
DATE SHIFI' ASSIGNED STAFF Dep Hrs Sgt. Hrs
Officer S t. NAME
1- Oct Saturday 2pm- lOpm 1 8
2pm- lOpm 1 8
2- Oct Sunday 1pm- 9pm I 8
1pm- 9pm 1 8
7- Oct Friday 4pm- lOpm 1 6
4pm- lOpm 1 6
8- Oct Saturday 2pm- lOpm 1 8
2pm- lOpm 1 8
9- Oct Sunday 1pm- 9pm 1 8
1pm- 9pm 1 8
14- Oct Friday 4pm- lOpm 1 6
4pm- lOpm 1 6
4pm- lOpm 1 Sgt 6
15- Oct Saturday 2pm- lOpm 1 8
2pm- lOpm 1 8
2pm- lOpm 1 8
16- Oct Sunday 1pm- 9pm 1 8
1pm- 9pm 1 8
1pm- 9pm 1 Sgt 8
21- Oct Friday 4pm- lOpm 1 6
4pm- lOpm 1 6
4pm- lOpm 1 Sgt 6
22- Oct Saturday 2pm- lOpm 1 8
2pm- lOpm 1 8
2pm- lOpm 1 Sgt 8
23- Oct Sunday 1pm- 9pm 1 8
1pm- 9pm 1 8
1pm- 9pm 1 Sgt 8
28- Oct Friday 4pm- lOpm i 6
4pm- lOpm 1 6
4pm- lOpm 1 6
29-0ct Satutday 2pm- lOpm 1 8
2pm- lOpm 1 8
2pm- lOpm 1 S S
30- Oct Sunday None
Total Hours 192 58
342
ITEM 4. 19
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
ITEM: APPROVE THE RIVER ISLANDS PHASE ONE
PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution Approving the River
Islands Phase One Parks and Open Space
Master Plan
SUMMARY:
The Parks and Recreation Commission recommends the City Council adopt a Resolution to approve the River Islands Phase One Parks and Open Space Master Plan. The Parks and Open Space Master Plan is intended to provide a string of parks and open spaces that are valuable community assets and recreational opportunities for individuals and families throughout the River Islands development.
BACKGROUND:
The Parks Master Plan for River Islands is intended to provide a network of master planned parks and open spaces throughout the River Islands development. The park locations along the river provide opportunities to experience the river in multiple ways.
Open spaces are woven throughout at varying scales in order to support an assortment of passive and active recreation. Several types of sports fields are included as well as ample opportunities to enjoy nature and the water' s edge.
Pedestrian and bicycle circulation is designed to enable residents to move safely throughout the community. Varying classes of bicycle paths are integrated and promote easy access to open space and extended cycling or running.
Community and neighborhood park acreages for Phase One were used to calculate and meet the State' s minimum parkland dedication requirements. Neighborhood Parks must be provided at a rate of 2 acres per 1, 000 population and Community Parks at 3 acres per 1, 000 population.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt a Resolution Approving the River Islands Phase One Parks and Open Space Master Plan.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact.
343
CITY MANAGER REPORT PAGE 2
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
APPROVE THE RIVER ISLANDS PHASE ONE PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN
ATTACHMENTS:
A. A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lathrop Approving the River Islands Phase One Parks and Open Space Master Plan
344
CITY MANAGER REPORT PAGE 3
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
APPROVE THE RIVER ISLANDS PHASE ONE PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN
APPROVALS:
0 2z.
Tod Se ian Date
Dire or - Parks, Recreation, and Maintenance Services
F rt c. I73 2 2
Cari James Date
Director - Finance
Z3- z-Z
Salvador Navarrete Date
City Attorney
9'Z ' Zli
Stephen J. Salvatore Date
City Manager
345
ATTACHMENT A
RESOLUTION NO. 22-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LATHROP
APPROVING THE RIVER ISLANDS PHASE ONE PARKS AND OPEN SPACE
MASTER PLAN
WHEREAS, the Parks and Open Space Master Plan for River Islands is intended to provide a network of master planned parks and open spaces throughout the River Islands development; and
WHEREAS, the park (ocations along the river provides opportunities to experience the river in multiple ways; and
WHEREAS, the open spaces are woven throughout at varying scales in order to support an assortment of passive and active recreation; and WHEREAS, several types of sports fields are included as well as ample opportunities to enjoy nature and the water's edge; and WHEREAS, pedestrian and bicycle circulation is designed to enable residents to move safely throughout the community; and
WHEREAS, varying classes of bicycle paths are integrated and promote easy access to open space and extended cycling or running; and WHEREAS, community and neighborhood park acreages for Phase One were used to calculate and meet the State' s minimum parkland dedication requirements; and
WHEREAS, neighborhood parks must be provided at a rate of 2 acres per 1, 000 population and Community Parks at 3 acres per 1, 000 population.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Lathrop does hereby approve the River Islands Phase One Parks and Open Space Master Plan.
346
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 12th day of September, 2022, by the following vote of the City Council, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Sonny Dhaliwal, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Teresa Vargas, City Clerk Salvador Navarrete, City Attorney 347
348
ITEM 4. 20
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
ITEM: APPROVE TWO RIVER ISLANDS COMMUNITY
PARK DESIGNS
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution Approving Two New River Islands Community Park Designs for Lathrop
Landing Community Park and STEAM Academy
Community Park
SUMMARY:
The Parks and Recreation Commission recommends City Council approve the designs for two new community parks within the River Islands community. Community Park C- 1, to be named Lathrop Landing Community Park is a 37. 13- acre park, including trail way, and Community Park C- 3, to be named STEAM Academy Community Park is a joint use park that is 15- acres.
BACKGROUND:
Lathrop Landing Community Park is located adjacent to the Lathrop Police Department on River Islands Parkway. The proposed Lathrop Landing Community Park design features a youth and tot themed playground, two tennis courts with a pickle ball overlay, two half-court basketball courts, a splash pad, two rentable picnic areas, restrooms, a large turf open space, walking path, fitness equipment and a parking lot. It is also the start and end point for the river trail access.
STEAM Academy Community Park is located adjacent to the STEAM Academy on Somerston Parkway in River Islands. This park will be a joint use location which will be shared with the Banta School District for youth and adult sports programming.
This proposed park design features a youth and tot themed playground, cricket pitch, shade structure, and restroom. The Banta School District portion will feature soccer fields and a baseball field and there will also be a parking lot.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt a Resolution approving the two new River Islands Community Park designs for Lathrop Landing Community Park and STEAM Academy Community Park.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact.
349
CITY MANAGER REPORT PAGE 2
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
APPROVE TWO RIVER ISLANDS COMMUNITY PARK DESIGNS
ATTACH M E NTS:
A. A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lathrop approving the two new River Islands Community Park designs for Lathrop Landing Community Park and STEAM Academy Community Park
B. Parks Map
350
CITY MANAGER REPORT PAGE 3
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
APPROVE TWO RIVER ISLANDS COMMUNITY PARK DESIGNS
APPROVALS:
1 3. 2 Z
To Seb an Date
Director - Parks, Recreation, and Maintenance Services
G
G J 2 3 2Z.
Cari James Date
Director - Finance
T --- 9 co• 2ozZ
Michael King Date
Assistant City Manager
zz
Salvador Navarrete Date
City Attorney
2•LZ
S en J. Sa vatore Date
City Manager
351
ATTACH M E NT A
RESOLUTION NO. 22-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LATHROP
APPROVING TWO NEW RIVER ISLANDS COMMUNITY PARK DESIGNS FOR
LATHROP LANDING COMMUNITY PARK AND STEAM ACADEMY COMMUNITY PARK
WHEREAS, Lathrop Landing Community Park is located adjacent to the Lathrop Police Department on River Islands Parkway; and WHEREAS, the proposed Lathrop Landing Community Park design features a youth and tot themed playground, two tennis courts with a pickle ball overlay, two half- court basketball courts, a splash pad, two rentable picnic areas, restrooms, a large turf open space, walking path, fitness equipment and a parking lot; and WHEREAS, it is also the start and end point for the river trail access; and WHEREAS, STEAM Academy Community Park is located adjacent to the STEAM Academy on Somerston Parkway in River Islands; and WHEREAS, this park will be a joint use location which will be shared with the Banta School District for youth and adult sports programming; and WHEREAS, the proposed STEAM Academy Community Park design features a youth and tot themed playground, cricket pitch, shade structure, and restroom; and WHEREAS, the Banta School District portion will feature soccer fields and a baseball field and there will also be a parking lot.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Lathrop does hereby approve the two new River Islands Community Park designs for Lathrop Landing Community Park and STEAM Academy Community Park. 352
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 12th day of September, 2022, by the following vote of the City Council, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
A BSTAI N:
Sonny Dhaliwal, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Teresa Vargas, City Clerk Salvador Navarrete, City Attorney 353
r
m u
m
c
Y
y.
1 , g,:.+, . '
1 . a
1 ,
4_ 3"'';
B.
sr ,+> ' ,
z...;. rk- ',.
T
f
s
d k
J
r c
J
y
f
e...
a. t-`
y!
4 N
G.` L/ t t '
t'
V:.
f
y
r .
5 s 4%1
fi§.
t:
s ` i-.;
t,+- t .'
4 f
W, . ' t f ` .
A a
s 3
as '^ .
a
r.ss
C
L
V ,.
v
C ' c
L o c
a
a _
U L
U fd Q'
ca
o
J ." °
A HM NT ,_._.
o =
V ` • J
354
3niao vNiavw
r ,- , ,_ ::._ a . . ,:
aP.Re er aw a. m. v4 A. i?: .. <. , . w e r e or
Q
s E ". ,. I 3 fi :
v+
4 ` . t
F
E
t
pi.
i )
t
w
r - , em.} w
q: .., #,,' y r
P
x . , 3
y'
s r
t', i` i
x _
t ' _
t r., _
v az a a w a ir o,"
w
w
F"'
L^
a
t. ,. . 7 t j
i
a •
a
i zv
V 4
su
a`
u:
7 :: v
r ,
t
o °
I n; ,
a
I'
s '
s; s ,
y: o
ea
M
1..
N
a
c n
y
V ;
a..,
v r
L o
L .
a = ' A
o °
n
L' f°
A ro
6 ' _ r'.s" w" r" ,.. .:
r.
a 3Ya a Flew=• . a.
i,M A& 33iraSY. . '.:. t4fi' fJ'.'*'
Nf
f0 0
a '.....
s.. .;
V O Q
a • 3niaa nw nv r
Qacn
Q W
V •
355
ITEM 4. 21
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
ITEM: ACCEPT PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDING A
WATER TANK, BOOSTER PUMPS, AND A SEWER PUMP
STATION, AND APPROVE A COMMON USE
AGREEMENT WITH RD2062, AND ACCEPT AN
IRREVOCABLE OFFER OF DEDICATION FOR STORM
DRAIN EASEMENT AND A GRANT DEED FOR A
PORTION OF PARCEL 1 OF TRACT 3876
EMPLOYMENT CENTER) FROM RIVER ISLANDS
DEVELOPMENT, LLC
RECOMMENDATION: Accept Public Improvements, including a Water Tank, Booster Pumps, and a Sewer Pump Station,
and Approve a Common Use Agreement with RD
2062, and Accept an Irrevocable Offer of Dedication
for Storm Drain Easement and a Grant Deed for a
Portion of Parcel 1 of Tract 3876 ( Employr ent
Center) from River Islands Development, LLC
SUMMARY:
River Islands Development, LLC ( RID), the developer for the River Islands Project, has completed construction of a 1. 5- million- gallon Water Tank ( Water Tank), Booster Pumps ( Boosters), and a Sewer Pump Station on a portion of Parcel 1 of Tract 3876.
The approximate value of the required improvements is $ 6, 635, 000, as shown in the GASB 34 Report included as Attachment C". City staff has inspected the improvements and confirmed that the improvements have been completed in accordance with City specifications and are deemed complete by the City Engineer.
A location map is included as Attachment " B". RID has provided a one- year warranty bond based on 10% of the construction costs and lien releases for the improvements proposed for council acceptance.
RID is also providing a Common Use Agreement ( Attachment " F"), Irrevocable Offer of Dedication for Storm Drain Easement ( Attachment " G"), and a Grant Deed for a portion of parcel 1 of Tract 3876 ( Attachment E").
Staff recommends City Council accept the improvements, including the Water Tank, Boosters, and Sewer Pump Station, and approve the proposed Common Use Agreement, accept the Irrevocable Offer of Dedication for Storm Drain Easement, and accept the Grant Deed for a portion of Parcel 1 of Tract 3876. 356
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT PAGE 2
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
ACCEPT PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDING A WATER TANK, BOOSTER
PUMPS, AND A SEWER PUMP STATION, AND APPROVE A COMMON USE AGREEMENT WITH RD2062, AND ACCEPT AN IRREVOCABLE OFFER OF
DEDICATION FOR STORM DRAIN EASEMENT AND A GRANT DEED FOR A PORTION OF PARCEL 1 OF TRACT 3876 ( EMPLOYMENT CENTER) FROM RIVER
ISLANDS DEVELOPMENT, LLC
BACKGROUND:
Conditions of Approval of the Vesting Tentative Map ( VTM) for Tract 3694 required the installation of a Water Tank, Boosters, and a Sewer Pump Station in conformance with the City Water and Sewer Master Plans. Tract 3694 was further subdivided to include Tract 3876.
RID completed the construction of the Water Tank, Boosters, and Sewer Pump Station improvements in accordance with the conditions of the VTM and the approximate value of the proposed improvements is $ 6, 635, 000, as shown in the GASB 34 Report.
After the initial one- year warranty period, the utility infrastructure will be maintained by the City and the costs to maintain these facilities will be funded through the existing City of Lathrop water and sewer utility rates to be paid by residents benefitting from the infrastructure.
RID has provided a warranty bond ( Bond No. 0799677) in the amount of $ 663, 500 to guarantee replacement and/ or repair of the improvements as a result of defective materials, equipment, or defective workmanship for a period of one year from the date of acceptance. Staff requests Council accept the improvements so that City can take ownership of the facility and provide maintenance.
RID also offers the land upon which these improvements were built to the City in fee pursuant to the Grant Deed attached hereto as Attachment E".
RID also offers an Irrevocable Offer of Dedication of Easement for Storm Drain Purposes, included as Attachment G", for a portion of Parcel 1 of Tract 3876. The storm drain easement is necessary for storm drain maintenance but is not part of the large parcel that is being conveyed to the City in fee with the Grant Deed.
There is also a need for a Common Use Agreement ( CUA) between the City and Reclamation District 2062 ( RD2062) as a portion of the storm drain easement shares an area with an easement recorded in favor of RD2062 for the levee system. RD2062 provides flood control and other similar services for the River Islands portion of the Stewart Tract. The proposed CUA, included as Attachment " F", sets forth the terms and conditions to which the RD2062 access can coexists with the City storm drain easement and pipe.
Escrow instructions are included as Attachment " D" to ensure proper execution and recordation of the documents.
357
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT PAGE 3
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
ACCEPT PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDING A WATER TANK, BOOSTER
PUMPS, AND A SEWER PUMP STATION, AND APPROVE A COMMON USE AGREEMENT WITH RD2062, AND ACCEPT AN IRREVOCABLE OFFER OF
DEDICATION FOR STORM DRAIN EASEMENT AND A GRANT DEED FOR A PORTION OF PARCEL 1 OF TRACT 3876 ( EMPLOYMENT CENTER) FROM RIVER
ISLANDS DEVELOPMENT, LLC
REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:
The Water Tank, Boosters, Sewer Pump Station, and other improvements for portion of Parcel 1 of Tract 3876 have been inspected by City staff and have been deemed complete by the City Engineer and are ready for acceptance by the City Council. Staff has received the as- built drawings and lien releases for the improvements constructed by RID. Staff recommends Council accept the Water Tank, Boosters, and Sewer Pump Station, and approve the Common Use Agreement with RD2062, accept the Irrevocable Offer of Dedication for Storm Drain Easement, and accept the Grant Deed for a portion of Parcel 1 of Tract 3876 from RID.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The approximate value of the improvements proposed to be accepted is $ 6, 635, 000 as shown in the attached GASB34 Report. The costs to maintain the infrastructure will be funded through Council approved water and sewer utility rates.
The one- year warranty bond guarantees any repairs or replacements that become necessary during the one- year period beginning upon acceptance due to defective materials or workmanship in connection with the completed improvements.
ATTACH M ENTS:
A. Resolution to Accept Public Improvements, including a Water Tank, Booster Pumps, and a Sewer Pump Station, and Approve a Common Use Agreement with RD2062, and Accept an Irrevocable Offer of Dedication for Storm Drain Easement and a Grant Deed for a Portion of Parcel 1 of Tract 3876 Employment Center) From River Islands Development, LLC
B. Location Map - Water Tank Parcel
C. GASB 34 Report - Water Tank, Boosters, and Sewer Pump Station D. Escrow Instructions
E. Grant Deed - Water Tank and Pump Station Parcel
F. Common Use Agreement with Islands Reclamation District No. 2062 G. Irrevocable Offer of Dedication - Storm Drain Easement 358
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT PAGE 4
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
ACCEPT PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDING A WATER TANK, BOOSTER
PUMPS, AND A SEWER PUMP STATION, AND APPROVE A COMMON USE AGREEMENT WITH RD2062, AND ACCEPT AN IRREVOCABLE OFFER OF
DEDICATION FOR STORM DRAIN EASEMENT AND A GRANT DEED FOR A PORTION OF PARCEL 1 OF TRACT 3876 ( EMPLOYMENT CENTER) FROM RIVER
ISLANDS DEVELOPMENT, LLC
APPROVALS:
3 I 2 2
Bellal Nabizadah Date
Assistant Engineer
1/ I
f
202Z
Brad T lor Date
City Engineer
m a 9// 2dZC
Cari James Date
Finance Director
T - _ !— 9 l • 2oZZ
Michael King Date
Assistant City Manager
r - z ?-
Salvador Navarrete Date
City Attorney
9•b•ZZ
Step en J. Salvatore Date
City Manager
359
RESOLUTION NO. 22 -
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LATHROP TO ACCEPT
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDING A WATER TANK, BOOSTER PUMPS, AND A
SEWER PUMP STATION, AND APPROVE A COMMON USE AGREEMENT WITH RD2062, AND ACCEPT AN IRREVOCABLE OFFER OF DEDICATION FOR STORM DRAIN EASEMENT AND A GRANT DEED FOR A PORTION OF PARCEL 1 OF TRACT 3876 ( EMPLOYMENT CENTER) FROM RIVER ISLANDS DEVELOPMENT, LLC WHEREAS, Conditions of Approval of the Vesting Tentative Map ( VTM) for Tract 3694 required the installation of a 1. 5- million- gallon Water Tank ( Water Tank), Booster Pumps ( Boosters), and a Sewer Pump Station in conformance with the City Water and Sewer Master Plans. Tract 3694 was further subdivided to include Tract 3876; and
WHEREAS, River Islands Development, LLC, ( RID) completed the construction of the Water Tank, Boosters, and Sewer Pump Station improvements on a portion of Parcel 1 of Tract 3876 in accordance with the conditions of the VTM and the approximate value of the proposed improvements is $ 6, 635, 000, as shown in the GASB 34 Report included as Attachment C" to the City Manager' s Report; and WHEREAS, after the initial one- year warranty period, the utility infrastructure will be maintained by the City and the costs to maintain these facilities will be funded through the existing City of Lathrop water and sewer utility rates to be paid by residents benefitting from the infrastructure; and
WHEREAS, RID has provided a one- year warranty bond in the amount of 663, 500 to guarantee replacement and/ or repair of the improvements as a result of defective materials, equipment, or defective workmanship for a period of one year from the date of acceptance; and
WHEREAS, RID also offers the land upon which these improvements were built to the City in fee pursuant to the Grant Deed included as Attachment " E" to the City Manager' s Report; and
WHEREAS, RID also offers an Irrevocable Offer of Dedication of Easement for Storm Drain Purposes, included as Attachment " G" to the City Manager' s Report, for a portion of Parcel 1 of Tract 3876; and
WHEREAS, the storm drain easement is necessary for storm drain maintenance but is not part of the large parcel that is being conveyed to the City in fee with the Grant Deed; and
WHEREAS, there is also a need for a Common Use Agreement ( CUA) between the City and Reclamation District 2062 ( RD2062) as a portion of the storm drain easement shares an area with an easement recorded in favor of RD2062 for the levee system. RD2062 provides flood control and other similar services for the River Islands portion of the Stewart Tract; and
360
WHEREAS, the proposed CUA, included as Attachment " F" to the City Manager' s Report, sets forth the terms and conditions to which the RD2062 access can coexist with the City storm drain easement and pipe; and WHEREAS, escrow instructions are included as Attachment " D" to the City Manager Report to ensure proper execution and recordation of the documents; and WHEREAS, City staff inspected the improvements and confirmed that the improvements have been completed in accordance with City specifications and are deemed complete by the City Engineer; and
WHEREAS, RID has submitted lien releases for the improvements proposed to be accepted and staff received a one- year maintenance bond and as- built drawings for said improvements.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Lathrop does hereby accept the Water Tank, Boosters, and Sewer Pump Station, approves a Common Use Agreement with RD2062, accepts an Irrevocable Offer of Dedication for Storm Drain Easement, and accept conveyance of real property by Grant Deed for a portion of Parcel 1 for Tract 3876 from RID. 361
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 12th day of September, 2022, by the following vote of the City Council, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Sonny Dhaliwal, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Teresa Vargas, City Clerk Salvador Navarrete, City Attorney 362
ATTACHMENT B
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
00 Qa
Oc~n t
C Z
H
Q o u
C J
LLwW Z
1 H
o
nQ l7
N Ow Z
r
m 41
U
i \ ro
O j
O
l
Gj
m o
oM
I I
ZO o
J
jlsd o N
Z
f=
o
W d
W O W \ y \ d
c
Z
w G o Q
Y
Q ^ w a Z rv
aY UI— W
w Q I
z w o
v i
2 a _ A lLJ Z I
Q
o Q \ y\ p
Z
d
a Y' \ \\
z
O a
3 J '
N ''
z
W U i
1 sn
w n -
2 W W
r •, `',
Q
1 oWN
I
I
363
ATTACHMENT C
CITY OF LATHROP
PROJECT ACCEPTANCE
GASB 34 REPORT)
Project Name: City of Lathrop Potable Water Storage and Pump Station and Sewer Pump Station at River Islands- Phase I Submitted by: PACE Date: 8/ 3/ 2022
Item Number Description UM Qty Unit Price Total Price
1 Site- 42" City Sewer w/6' MH L. F. 346 $ 462 $ 160, 000 2 Site- 6"& 8" City Sewer Pipe L. F. 353 $ 113 $ 40, 000 3 Site- 12"& 18" City SSFM L. F. 528 $ 133 $ 70, 000
4 Site- 16"& 30" Transmission Water Lines L. F. 394 $ 508 $ 200, 000 5 Site- 24"& 30" City Water Line L. F. 335 $ 328 $ 110, 000 6 Site- 24" City Drain Pipe L. F. 35 $ 429 $ 15, 000
7 Site- 24" Tank Overtlow Pipe L. F. 35 $ 429 $ 15, 000 8 Site- 3! 4" Stainless Steel Pipe LS 1 $ 10, 000 $ 10, 000 9 Site- 2" Water Pipe LS 1 $ 25, 000 $ 25, 000
10 Site- 3" Stilling Well Pipe LS 1 $ 25, 000 $ 25, 000 11 Site- 3" Chemical PVC Pipe LS 1 $ 30, 000 $ 30, 000
12 Site- Misc Precast LS 1 $ 55, 000 $ 55, 000
13 Site- Bollards LS 1 $ 10, 000 $ 10, 000
14 Site- Site Paving LS 1 $ 170, 000 $ 170, 000
Tank- 1. 5 Million Gallon Welded Steel Tank
14 ( Excluding Installation Labor) LS 1 $ 400, 000 $ 400, 000 15 Tank- Foundation CY 75 $ 1, 800 $ 135, 000
16 Tank- Coating LS 1 $ 300, 000 $ 300, 000
17 Tank- Tank Mixer LS 1 $ 180, 000 $ 180, 000
18 Tank- InIeUOutlet Piping LS 1 $ 60, 000 $ 60, 000
19 Sewer Wet Well- Wet Well LS 1 $ 635, 000 $ 635, 000
20 Sewer Wet Well- Hatches LS 1 $ 145, 000 $ 145, 000
21 Sewer Wet Well- Floor Slope LS 1 $ 20, 000 $ 20, 000 22 Sewer Wet Well- Siuice Gates EACH 2 $ 20, 000 $ 40, 000 23 Sewer Wet Well- Sewer Pumps EACH 2 $ 120, 000 $ 240, 000 24 Sewer Wet Well- Pipe Supports LS 1 $ 30, 000 $ 30, 000 Sewer Wet Weli- Underground Mechanical
25 Piping and Valves LS 1 $ 50, 000 $ 50, 000
Sewer Wet Well- Aboveground Mechanical
26 Piping and Valves LS 1 $ 70, 000 $ 70, 000
27 Site B Building- Pump Barrels S 1 $ 105, 000 $ 105, 000 Site B Building- Aboveground Suction and
28 Discharge Piping LS 1 $ 250, 000 $ 250, 000 _
Site B Building- Underground Mechanical Piping
29 and Valves LS 1 $ 100, 000 $ 100, 000
Site B Building- Building and Columns
30 Foundation LS 1 $ 75,000 $ 75, 000
31 Site B Building- Masonry Walls LS 1 $ 100, 000 $ 100, 000 32 Site B Building- Concrete Equipment Pad LS 1 $ 80, 000 $ 80, 000 33 Site B Building- Structural Steel LS 1 $ 100, 000 $ 100, 000 34 Site B Building- Roofing System LS 1 $ 70, 000 $ 70, 000 35 Site B Building- Chemical Tank LS 1 $ 40, 000 $ 40, 000 36 Site B Building- Small and Large Booster Pumps LS 1 $ 160, 000 $ 160, 000 37 Site B Building- Air Compressor LS 1 $ 10, 000 $ 10, 000 38 Site B Building- Hydropneumatic Tanks LS 1 $ 150, 000 $ 150, 000 39 Site B Building- Instrumentation LS 1 $ 45, 000 $ 45, 000 Site B Building- Motor Control Center and
40 Control Panel LS 1 $ 300, 000 $ 300, 000
41 Site B Building- Conduit, Wires, Junction Boxes LS 1 $ 70, 000 $ 70, 000 42 Site B Building- HVAC Equipment LS 1 $ 50, 000 $ 50, Q00 43 Site B Building- Conduit, Wires, Junction Boxes LS 1 $ 70, 000 $ 70, 000 364
CITY OF LATHROP
PROJECT ACCEPTANCE
GASB 34 REPORT)
Project Name: City of Lathrop Potable Water Storage and Pump Station and Sewer Pump Station at River Isiands- Phase I Submitted by: PACE Date: 8/ 3/ 2022
Item Number Description UM Qty Unit Price Total Price
44 Site B Building- HVAC Equipment LS 1 $ 50, 000 $ 50, 000 45 Site C Building- Foundation LS 1 $ 55, 000 $ 55, 000 46 Site C Building- Masonry Walls LS 1 $ 80, 000 $ 80, 000 47 Site C Building- Equipment Pads LS 1 $ 10, 000 $ 10, 000 48 Site C Building- Structural Steel LS 1 $ 50, 000 $ 50, 000 49 Site C Building- Trusses LS 1 $ 50, 000 $ 50, 000
50 Site C Building- Roofing System LS 1 $ 95, 000 $ 95, 000 51 Site C Building- Chemical Tank LS 1 $ 40, 000 $ 40, 000 52 Site C Building- Instrumentation LS 1 $ 35, 000 $ 35, 000 Site C Building- Motor Control Center and
53 Control Panel LS 1 $ 250, 000 $ 250, 000
54 Site C Building- Conduit, Wires, Junction Boxes LS 1 $ 45, 000 $ 45, 000 55 Site C Building- HVAC Equipment LS 1 $ 50, 000 $ 50, 000 Site C Site- Exterior Concrete Work and
56 Equipment Pads LS 1 $ 105, 000 $ 105, 000
57 Site C Site- Conduit, Wires, Pullboxes LS 1 $ 130, 000 $ 130, 000 58 Site C Site- Switch Board LS 1 $ 200, 000 $ 200, 000 59 Site C Site- 900 kW Generator LS 1 $ 300, 000 $ 300, 000 60 Site C Site- Radio Tower LS 1 $ 75, 000 $ 75, 000
Total $ 6, 635, 000
365
ATTACHMENT D
JOINT ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS
RECORDATION OF GRANT DEED
RIVER ISLANDS AT LATHROP)
September 12, 2022
Via Email and Hand Delivery
Old Republic Title Company
1215 W. Center Street, Suite 103
Manteca, CA 95337
Attn: Lori Richardson
Re: Recordation of Grant Deed ( Water Tank & Pump Station Site); Escrow No. 1214022687
Dear Lori:
This letter constitutes the joint escrow instructions (" Escrowlnstrucfions") of Califia, LLC, a California limited liability company (" Califia") and the City of Lathrop (" City') in connection with the above- referenced escrow (" Escroud'). The Escrow was opened in connection with recordation of the above- referenced Grant Deed (" Grant Deed').
Recordation of the Grant Deed is subject to the conditions set forth below. The transactions described in these Escrow Instructions are referred to as the " Transaction." Old Republic Title Company is referred to as " you" or" ORTC." A. Date for Closinqs
The Grant Deed will be recorded at the time designated by Califia as set forth below. The Grant Deed can only be recorded after the City has accepted and approved the site in writing. The closing date for the Transaction is intended to occur by October 31, 2022, at the time designated in writing by Califia, subject to satisfaction of the conditions set forth below ( each a " Closing'). If the Grant Deed has not been recorded by December 31, 2022, ORTC will return the Grant Deed to the City.
B. Documents to be Delivered and Recordation Documents
In connection with the Transaction, you have in your possession or will receive the following documents from City and Califia for recordation in the Official Records of San Joaquin County, California (" Official Records").
B. 1. One original Grant Deed for the water tank and pump station site, executed and acknowledged by Califia and accepted by the City ( provided to title by City).
B. 2. One original Common Use Agreement with Island Reclamation District No. 2062 for portion of levee easements in River Islands Employment Center, including Offer of Dedication for Storm Drain Purposes ( provided to title by City).
B. 3. One original Offer of Dedication for Storm Drain Purposes (provided to title by City).
The documents listed in Items B. 1, B. 2 and B. 3 above are referred to as the " Recordation Documents." The Recordation Documents shall be recorded in the order referred to above. The date on which the Recordation Documents are recorded in the Official Records is the Recordation Date.
1 366
JOINT ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS
RECORDATION OF GRANT DEED
RIVER ISLANDS AT LATHROP)
C. Closinq Requirements
When the following has occurred, you are authorized to close the Escrow at the time( s) and in accordance with the process set forth below:
C. 1. You have delivered copies of your Settlement Statement by email transmission to: ( a) Susan Dell' Osso ( [email protected]); ( b) Debbie Belmar dbelmar@riverislands. com); ( c) Brad Taylor ( bta lor@ci. lathrop. ca. us); ( d) Salvador Navarrete ( snavarrete@ci. lathrop. ca.us; ( e) Sandra Lewis ( slewis@ci. lathrop. ca. us), and have confirmation ( by telephone or email) from Susan Dell' Osso and Brad Taylor that the Settlement Statement is accurate and acceptable;
D. 2. You have not received any instructions contrary to these Escrow Instructions;
D. 3. The Recordation Documents and all other documents described herein as being held by you or delivered to you have been received by you and have been fully executed and, where applicable, acknowledged, and you have attached all legal descriptions or have confirmed that all exhibits and legal descriptions are attached; D. 4 You are prepared to record the Recordation Documents, as designated, and complete the Transaction in compliance with these Escrow Instructions; D. 5. You have delivered a copy of these instructions, executed by an authorized signatory of ORTC with authority to bind ORTC, and initialed all pages, by email transmission ( with original hard copy to follow by U. S. Mail) to Debbie Belmar and Brad Taylor at the email addresses set forth above; and D. 6. You have received confirmation ( by email or other writing) from Susan Dell' Osso and Brad Taylor to record the Recordation Documents and complete the Transaction.
D. 7. You have confirmed that the following documents have been recorded in the Official Records, prior to recording the Recordation Documents:
Common Use Agreement with Island Reclamation District No. 2062 for portion of levee easements in River Islands Employment Center and Offer of Dedication for Storm Drain Purposes.
D. Closinq Process and Priorities
When you have fully satisfied all of the closing requirements set forth in Section D, then you are authorized and instructed to do the following in the chronological order given:
E. 1. Date the Recordation Documents to be recorded;
E. 2. Record the Recordation Documents in the Official Records; E. 3. Pay the costs associated with the Transaction;
2 367
JOINT ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS
RECORDATION OF GRANT DEED
RIVER ISLANDS AT LATHROP)
E. 4. Refund any funds delivered to you by Califia that are not disbursed at the time of the final Closing pursuant to these Escrow Instructions to the following entity and address:
Califia, LLC
73 W. Stewart Road
Lathrop, CA 95330
Attn: Susan Dell' Osso
E. S. Notify Susan Dell' Osso ( sdellosso@riverslands. com), Debbie Belmar ( dbelmar@riverislands. com), Brad Taylor ( btaylor@ci. lathrop. ca. us), Sandra Lewis ( slewis@ci. lathrop. ca. us), Teresa Vargas ( tvaraas@ci. lathrop. ca. us), Sarah Pimentel ( spimentel@ci. lathrop. ca. us), and Jose Molina ( JMolina@siqov. orq) of the completion of the Transaction;
E. 6. Within five ( 5) business days after each Recordation Date, deliver by overnight delivery via recognized, national, overnight delivery carrier to: ( 1) Susan Dell' Osso, Califia, LLC, 73 W. Stewart Road, Lathrop, CA 95330; and ( 2) Brad Taylor, City Engineer, City Attorney, City of Lathrop, 390 Towne Centre Drive, Lathrop, CA 95330:
A) a certified copy of the Recordation Documents, showing all recording information of the Recordation Documents; and B) a certified copy of the final Settlement Statement.
E. Additionallnstructions
When assembling the final documents, signature pages from all parties shall be inserted into each respective final document in creating fully executed counterparts.
Please acknowledge receipt of these instructions and your agreement to act as Escrow agent in connection with this Transaction in accordance with these Escrow Instructions, by executing and dating a copy of these Escrow Instructions where indicated below, initialing all pages and returning it to both of the undersigned.
The Escrow Instructions may be modified only in a writing signed by both of the undersigned.
Very truly yours,
Stephen J. Salvatore Date Susan Dell' Osso Date
City Manager President
City of Lathrop Califia, LLC
3 368
JOINT ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS
RECORDATION OF GRANT DEED
RIVER ISLANDS AT LATHROP)
ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND AGREEMENT:
Receipt of the foregoing Escrow Instructions from Califia and the City is hereby acknowledged. The undersigned agrees, for itself, and on behalf of ORTC, to proceed in strict accordance with these Escrow Instructions. The undersigned represents and warrants to Califia and the City that the undersigned is authorized to execute this Acknowledgement and Agreement, for itself, and on behalf of ORTC.
Old Republic Title Company
By:
its:
Date:
4 369
ATTACHMENT E
RECORDING R QUESTED BY, AND
WHEN RECORDED MAIL T4 AND
MAIL TAX STA'TEMENT TO:
CITY 4F LATHROP
ATTN: CITY CLERK
39Q TOWNE CENTRE DRNE
LATHROP, CA 95330
Exemptfrom payment ofrecordingfees( GC 27383)
SPACE ABOVE THjS LIN POR RECORDER' S USE
GRANT DEED
WATER TANIt& PUMP STATIOI I S1TE)
FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hareby acknowledged, CALITIA, LLC, a California limited liability company (" Granto"), hereby grants ta the CITY OF LATHROP, a Calzfornia municipal corporation(" Grantee"}, that certain real property located in the City of Lathrop, County of San Joaquin, State of California, along with a11 improvements thereon, as described in the legal description and plat attached hereto as EXHIBTT A(" Lantl") incvrporated herein by this reference.
Grantor intends to convey the Land in fee, subject to the limit tions noted below.
Grantor intends to convey with the Land any and all riparian rights or other water interests to which the Land is entil:led therein appurtenant or relating to the Property, whether such water rights shall be riparian, overlying, littoral, percolating, prescriptive, adjudicated, statutory or contraetual Water Rights").
While Grantor intends to transfer the Water Rights with the Land, it does not intend by this grant to sever the riparian ri hts ofthe surrounding properties. With this conveyance Grantor intends to retain to any and all land surrounding the Property all riparian rights to which those lands are entitled.
Nfltwithstanding the above grant, Grantor intends to except at d reserve unto Grantor, its successors and assigns, together with the right to grant and transfer all or a portion of the same:
A. All rights that the Land may have zn and to that Water Right License 2637 Application 5155/Permit 2720} granted by the State Water Resources Control Board and held by Island Reclamation District No. 2062.
B. The right and power to utilize, convey, remove, treat, and store the Water Rights from the Land, to divert or otherwise Lttilize such water, rights or interests on the Land or other property, but without, however any right to enter upon the surface of the Land in the exercise of such rights.
370
C. All oil, oil rights, minerals, mineral rights, natural gas rights and other hydrocarbons by whatsoever narne known, geotherrnal steam and all products derived. from any of the foregoing, that may be within or under the Land, together with the perpetual right of drilling, mining, exploring and operating therefor and storing in and removing the same from said Land or any other land including the night ta whipstock or directionally drill and mine from lands other than the Land, oil or gas wells, tunnels and shafts into, through or across the subsurface of the Land, and to battom such whipstocked or directionally drilled wells, tunnels and shafts under and beneath or beyond the exterior limits tl ereof, and to redrill, retunnel, equip, maintain, repair, deepen and operate any such wells or mines without, however, the right to drill, mine, stare, explore ar operate through the surface or the uppex five hundred feet ( 500'} of the subsurface of the Land.
SUBJECT TO:
1. General and special real property taxes and assessments and supplemental assessments, ifany, for the current fiscal year.
2. Rights ar claims of parties in possession not shown hy the public records.
3. Encroachments, ovexlaps, boundary line disputes, or other matters which would be disclosed by an accurate survey or inspection of the prernises.
IN VJITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has executed this Grant Deed as of August 25, 2422.
GRANT R:
CALIFIA, LLC,
a California limited liability campany
By:
Susan Dell' Osso, President
ATTACH NOTARY ACKNOWLEDGMENT]
371
EXHIBIT A
Legal Description of Land
Attached)
372
JN25503 7/ 7/ 2022
LEGAL DESCRtPTION
WATER TAIdK SITE
RIVER ISLANDS
LA'FHRUP, CALIFORNIA
CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY SITUATE IN THE CITY OF LATHROP, COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIIV, STATE UF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIB D AS FOLLOWS:
BEING A PORTION OF PARCEL 1, AS SAID PARCEL! S SHOWIV ON THE MAP ENTITLED.` TRACT 3876, RIVER ISLANDS, ? HASE 1 B, LARGE L07' FINAL MAP", FILED MARCH 31, 2016, IN BOOK 42 OF MAPS AND PLATS, AT PAGE 56, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAN dOAQUIN COUNTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT QN THE EAST LINE OF J7 COURT( NOW KNOWN AS CIRRUS COURT}, AS SAID COURT IS DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2020- 076610, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAN
JOAQUIN COUNTY, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE SOUTHWEST CORN R OF THE PARCEL DESCRIBED IN THE GRANT QEED TO THE CITY OF tATHROP BY DOCUMENT NO. 2020- 076609, OFF[ CIAL RECORDS OF SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY;
THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL, THE FOLLOWING 7HREE( 3) COURSES:
1) EAST 81. 72 FEET,
2} NORTH 40. 00 FEE7 AND
3) WES7 90. 00 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID COURT;
TFiENCE ALONG SAID EAST L. INE, NORTH 14. 50 FEET;
THENCE E. EAVING SAID EAST LINE, EAST 634. 85 FEET;
THENCE, SOUTH 30° d0' 00" EAST 195. 42 FEET;
THENCE, SOUTH 71° 53' 26" WEST 474. 68 FEET;
7HENCE, NORTH 18° 06'34" WEST 159.04 FEET;
THENCE, WES7147. 54 FEET;
THENCE, NORTH 18°08'02" WESl" 38. 51 FEET;
THENCE, NORTH 53° 02' 44" WEST 64. 37 FEET T THE EAST LINE OF SAID COURT;
THENCE ALONG SAI EAST LINE, NORTHERLY ALONG A NON- TANGENT CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 56. 00 FEET, FROM WHICM POIfVT THE CENTER OF SAID CURVE BEARS NORTH 89°42' 17" 1NEST, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 39° 40' 44" AND AN ARC DiSTANCE OF
38. 78 FEET TO THE POIfVT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING 3.279 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
ATTACHED HERETQ IS A PLAT TO ACCOMPANY LEGAL DESCRIP710N, AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF.
PAGE 9 OF 2
T:125503- Rlver fslandslPhase 22- Final Water Tank SiteIACADhLEGAL DESCi21PTlOM25503- LEGAI.- CIT`! WATER TANK SITE.doac 373
JN25503 7/ 7/ 2022
END OF DESCRIPTION
THIS REAL PROPERTY DESCRIPTtON HAS BEEN PREPARED BY ME, OR UNDER MY DIRECTION, IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR' S ACT.
PM
LMNo
SG
c, , f'
o L.
03 7 Z-4 ?. u2Z
W! L IAM M. KOCH
No. 8092 '
DATE
PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR *
CALIFORNIA NO. 8092 Q'
9lF 0' CAUF
Q
PAGE 2 OF 2
T: 125503-River IslandslPhase 22- Finaf Water Tank SiteWCAD1LEGAL DESCRIPTION125503- LEGAI-CITY WATER TANK SITE. docx 374
GOLDEN VALLEY PARKWAY( D. N. 2d19- 070952)
Oo
U
h
PARGEL 1 ( 42 MP 56) p CITY OF LATHROP
O N
COMMfUNICAl10N S1TE
V
D. N. 2020-- 0766Q9
cn
Z - 4 EAST 634.85'
oC L3
U
1 woo
i v PaINT OF o
8 BEGINNING WAS
ANK o,
s
3279 ACRES
WEST
147. 54'
o.
UTUR
0 3'26"' .
68,
5SJID S17E S'
0 2
LINE TABLE CURVE TABLE
d
LINE# DIRECTION LENGTH GURVE# RADIUS DELTA LENGTH 0
Li EAST 81. 72' C1 56. 00' 39°46'44" 38.78' N
n
4 L2 NORTH 40. 00' U
s WEST sa. ao LEGEND
Yz
D. N. DOCUMENT NUMBER o so toa
L4 NORTH 14. 5' P MAPS AND PLATS( BK- PG) SCALE: 1^= 100' L5 N 18° 08' 02" W 38. 51'
P08 POINT OF BEGINNING
R) RADIAL BEARING
i L6 N53° 02' 44" W 64. 37'
N
7 sso° ss 5s vv s,00 PLAT
L8 S89 42' 17" E 56. 00' RIVER ISLANDS
CITY WATER TANK SITE
SCALE: 1
N=
100' DATE: 2022—Q7- 08
JOB NO,: 25503
oF
N N G 1 N E E f '[ N G
FILE: 25503- PlAT- WATER TMIK TE, DWG
375
Attachment F
RECOR. DING REOUESTED BY, AND
WHEN RBCORDED MAIL TO:
CITY OF LAT'HROP
ATTN: CITY CLERK
390 TOWNE CENTRE DRIVE
LATHROP, CA 95330
Exemptfrom paymeni ofrecordingfees( GC 27383}
SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR R CORDER' S USE
COMMON USE AGREEMENT
FOR A PORTION OF LEVEE EASEMENTS IN
R VER ISLANDS EMPLOYMENT CENTER
BY AND BETWEEN THE
CITY OF LATHROP
AND
ISLAND RECLAMATION DISTRICT NO. 2062
This COMMON USE AGREEMENT FOR A PORTION OT' LEVEE EASEMENTS IN RIVER ISLANDS EMPLOYMENT CENT R, assaciated with Phase 1 of River Islands at Lathrop entered into an this fih day of September, 2022 (" Agreement") and is made and entered irtto by ISLAND RECLAMATION DISTRICT NO. 2062, a reclamation district organized under the laws of the State of Caiifornia( the " District"), and the CITY OF LATHROP, a municipal corporation in the State of California( the " City"}, together, " the Parties".
RECITALS
A. This Agreement relates to certain real property to be dedicated by Cali a, LLC, to City for public utility purposes, including water tanks, pump stations and appurtenances, along with a storm drainage line that will need an easement to transverse off-site, B. The Agreement also sets forth the process and includes a grant of Easements Deed ( included herein as Exhibit" B" to this Agreement) that will be dedicated by Califia, LLC, for a storm drainage line that will extend into the levee easement of the District.
C. On April 19, 2016, the District recorded easements across properties owned by Califia, LLC and River Islands Develapment, LLC for the right to control and maintain the levees constructed by District for flood protection purposes to protect development of Stage 1 sub-planning area ofthe River Islands Site(" Levee Easements").
D. As part of the River Islands project, Califia, LLC is dedicating water tanks, pump stations and appurtenaaces within the River Islands Employment Center that includes a starm drainage pipeline that will transverse the portion of the existing Levee Eascments as depicted in E ibit " A" to this Agreement.
E. Since the Levee Easements have been recorded to provide appropriate legal access and autharity to District for its flood protection works (" District Works") in accordance with the State 1 376
Water Code and applicable FEMA regulations, and these Ievees are designed to provide 200- year Urban Level of Plood Protection ( ULOP} in accordance with approved State Department of Water Rasources Standards, prior to the approval of the City' s water tanks and pump stations, the Parties acknowledge and agree that it is necessary for the Parties to enter into an agreement to outline the duties and responsibilities of each Party, for the betterment of the public and to avoid conflicts in each Party' s individual obligations under applicable law to the portion ofthe storm drainage easement within portions of the Levee Easements(" Common Use Area").
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration ofthe premises and ofthe mutual cavenants hereinafter set forth, the Parties do hereby agree as fo(lows:
1. City hereby agrees to the construction, reconstruction, maintenance or use by District of the District Worlcs located within the Common Use Area which is more particularly described on. E chibit A" to this Ageeement, incorporated herein by this reference.
2. District hereby agrees ta the construction, reconstruction, maintenance or use by City of the storm drainage line within the Common Use Area whieh is more particularly described on Exhibit" A" to this Agreement, incarporated herein by this reference.
3. District and City acknowledge the priority of title of each other wherever applicable to the Common Use Area.
4. District has reviewed the irnprovement plans for the storm drainage line prepared by O'Dell Engineer'rng and has no objections to the design and proposed construction of the facifities located within the Common Use Area.
5. In the event that the future use af the storm drainage easement shall at any time necessitate rearrangetnent, relocation or reconst vction of any of the Distric' s works within the Common Use Area, City shall notify District in writing of such necessity pursuant to applicable sections ofthe Water Code and City agrees to pay the cost of such rearrangement, relocation or reconstruetion of District Works following approval of all plans and specifications of said rearrangement, relocation, or reconstruction by the District, which approvai shall not be unreasonably withheld. b. In the event that the future use of the District Works shall at any time necessitate rearrangement, reEocation or reconstruction of any ofthe Vil(age MM Portion of Walsh Court within the Coxnmon Use Area, District shall notify City in writing of such necessity and District agrees to pay the cost of such rearrangement, relocation or reconstruction of the storm drainage line following approval of all p(ans and specifications of said rearrangement, relocation, or reconstruction by the City, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld.
7. City shall pay the cost to rnaintain, repair or replace City' s facilities located in the Common Use Area at its sole expense, and for construction, rearrangement, modification, alteration or relocation not requested or undertaken by District, except for damage resulting from maintenance, repair or replaceinent by District.
8. District or its assignees shall pay the cost to maintain, repair and replace District's facilities located in the Common Use Area at its sole expense, and for construction, rearrangemant, modification, 2 377
alteration or relocation not requested or undectaIcen by City, excepting damage resulting from maintenance, repair or replacement by City.
9. District, when working within tha Comrnon Use Area shall comply with the following provisians:
a) Except in times of emergency, including during a high water or flooding event, District shall provide reasonable natice to City before performing any work in the Common Use Area where such work will be performed in or on the traveled way or ianproved shoulders, sidewalk or landscaping ofthe roadway or will otherwise obstruct vehicular and(or pedestrian traffic. b} In a(1 cases, District shall make adeyuate provisions for the protection of the travelling puhlic and provide such barricades and safety devices as are required by City standards, and in cases of non- emergency, provide a Traffic Control Flan as required by City standards and specifications. c) All work shall be pfanned and carried out so there will be minimum inconvenience to the traveting public.
d) All worlc shall be replacement in kind, c nfarm to the existing facilities as to width and depth of surfacing thereof, meet all applicable City standards and specifications as determined by the City Engineer and shall be subject to inspection 6y City.
10. District and City shall use said Common Use Area in such manner as to not unreasonably interfere with the rights of either Party.
11. District shall not be responsible for any damage occurring to the City facilities in the Common Use Area that are not as a direct result of the District' s maintenance, constcuction or reconstruction activities, or from its flood control facilities located on or near the Common Use Area. All costs for repairing such darnage to City' s facilities shall be borne by City.
12. City shall not be responsible for any damage occurring to District facilities in the Common Use Area that are not as a direct result of the City' s maintenance, construction or reconstruction activities of its right of way or improvements on or near the Common Use Area. All costs for repairing such damage to District' s facilities shall be borne by District.
13. District shall be respansible for the vegeYation and weed control activities of its levee slopes and adjacent areas that may transverse the Common Use Area. City shall be responsib( e for any landscaping and irrigation improvements within its right of way, including within the Common Use Area. The City or its assignees shaIl become responsibility for weed control within portions of the Cocnmon Use Area that are landscaped by the City.
14. To the extent that the City's rights to its storm draina e easement undec the applicable laws of the State of California do not hrnder or conflict with the rights of the District under applicable laws of the State of California, such rights of the District shall remain and be in full force and effect. Should any conflict with the rights of the City by rights of the District be identified, the District hereby subrogates its rights to the City, subject to review and approval of the District' s legal counsel.
15. This Agreement shall not have a prescribed tecm. Termination of Agreement shall only occur if the Common Use Area ceases to be in existence and the need for this Agreement and its rights and 3 378
obligations contained herein cease to be necessary. Either Party may pravide written notice of such termination, subject to review and verification of the other Patty.
16. Notices. Any and all notices reyuired to be given hereunder will be deemed to have been delivered upon deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to either of the parties at the address hereinafter specified or as later amended by either party in writing:
City of Lathrop
Attention: City Engineer
390 Towne Centre
Lathrop, CA 95330
Reclamation District No. 2062
3 West Stewart Road
Lathrop, CA 95330
Attention: President
17. This Agreement, and all terms, cavenants, and conditions hereof, will apply to and bind the successors and assigns ofthe respective parties hereto. Neither Party wilI assign nor sublet this Agreement without the prior written consent ofthe other Party.
18. This Agreement is governed by California law.
19. This Agreement may not be rr odified or amended except in writing signed by both parties.
20. Each party must, in all activities undertaken pursuant to this Agreement, comply and cause its contractors, agents and employees to comply with all Federal, State and local Iaws, statutes, orders, ordinances, rules, and regulations.
21. It is expressly understood that this Agreement does not in any way whatsoever grant or convey any permanent easement, fee or other interest in a parly' s real property to the other Party.
22. This Agreement, together with all exhibits attached hereto, constitutes the entire a reement between the Parties and supersedes all prior written or oral understandings. 4 379
IN WI'INESS WHEREOF, the City and District have signed this Agreement effective as of the Effective Date.
CITY OF LATHROP ISLAND RECLAMATION DISTRICT
A California municipal corporation NO. 2062, a California reclamation district
By: By;
Stephen Salvatore, City Manager Susan Dell' Osso, President ATTEST:
By:
Teresa Vargas, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY THE CITY OF LATHRUP CITY ATTORNEY:
By:
Salvador V. Navarrete, City Attorney
5 380
EXHIBIT " A"
COMMON USE AI2 A DEPICTION
6 381
GOLDEN VALLEY PARKWAY( D. N. 2019- 470952)
Oor
co
CITY OF LATliRQP PARCEL 1 ( 42 MP 56)
o
O N
COMMUNICATEON SITE
D. N. 2020- 076609
Q
L15 EAST 634. 85'
L14
U
L12 -'
N'
o,
POB v F' UIURE o
lAT R 7ANK
rr 5
L?
7 WESI' 147. 54'
C2
L10 N
i ( c'
8 r L.4
6 '
i
F'U7' UR 5gZ:
a
32g°E hi,-
N
55,lID 517 or 32 1 ?
o o
3 N 6a
0 ca S- 153 26 W, r `\ 2
STORM DRAIN EASEMEN7
o so 100
11 190 S. F.
o
SCALE: 1"= 100'
n
o LINE TABLE LINE TABLE LINE TABLE
Fo.
N l.INE# DtRECTION L. ENGTH LINE# DIRECTION L NGTH LIN# DIRECTION LENGTH 0 L1 582 52' 07" E 99. 86' L8 N20° 29' 21" W 56. 00' L15 NORTH 14. 50' WJ
L2 SOUTN 90. 52' L9 N40° 39' 58" W 56. 00'
CtJRVE TABLE L3 S28° 21' 29" E 135. 69' L10 N18° 08' 02" UV 38, 51' CURVE# RADIUS DELTA LENGTH L4 S18° 06' 34" E 12. 40' L11 N53° 02' 44"W 64. 37' C1 56.00' 39° 40' 44" 38. 78' L5 N28° 21' 29" W 148. 74' L12 EAST 81. 72' C2 56. 00' 20 10' 37" 19. 72' L6 NORTH 82.96' L13 NORTH 40. 00' L7 N82° 52' 07" W 104. 79' L14 WEST 90. 00'
PLAT
LEGENQ RIVER ISLANDS
D. N. DOCUMENT NUMBER 10' STORM DRAIN EASE IENT
MP MAPS AND PLATS( BK-PC) SCALE: 1"= 100' DATE: 2022- 07- 25 a POB POINT OF BEGiNN1NG
JdB NO.: 25503 R) RADIAl. BEARING
i E N G 1 N E E FZ 1 N G
LE: 255Q3- PLAT- SD EASENENT. DWG
382
EXHIBIT " B"
OFFER OF D DICATION FOR STORM DRAINAGE ASEMENT
7 383
Recording Requested by and
Plecrse Return to:
City Clerk.
City ofLathrop
390 Towne Centre Drive
Lathrop, California 95330 •
7'his Instrument Benefts City Only
No Fee Required
This Space Above for Recorder's Use Only
IRREVOCABLE OFFER OI' DEDICATION OF EASEMENT
F R STORM DRAIN PURPOSES
RIVER ISLANDS MPLOYMENT CENTER)
FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt ofwhich is hereby acknowledged, CALIFIA, LLC, a California limited liability campany, hereby grant( s} to the CITY OF LATHROP, a municipal corporation in the County of San 3oaquin, State of ealifornia, an easement for ingress and egress for storm drain pipeline mainten ce, repair, replacement and other public purposes, over and across the hereinafter described real property situated in City of Lathrop and x nore particularly describecl as follows:
SEE EXHIBIT " A" ATTAC`I-IED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF This Offer of Dedicatian is made pursuant to Section 7050 of the Government Code of the State of California and may be accepted at any time by the City Engineer af the City of Lathrop. This 4ffer of Dedication nnay be termin. ted and righi to accept such offer abandoned in tlae same manner as is prescribed fbr the vaca ion of atreets or highways by Part 3 oF Division 9 or Chapter 2 of Division 2 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of Caiifornia, whichever is applicable.
The above described easement is to be kept open, cleax and free from buildings and structures of any kind. This Offer of Dedication shall be irrevocable and shall be binding on the Gxantor' s heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns.
SIGNATURES:
Signed this 25' day of August, 2022.
CALIFIA, LLC
a California limited liability company
By:
Susan Dell' Osso, PresidenY
Notary Acknowledgment Required for Each Signatary}
384
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
STORM DRAIN EASEMENT
RIVER ISLANDS EMPLOYMENT CENTER)
See Attached)
385
JN25503 7(25/ 2p22
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
12' STORM DRAtN EASEMENT
RIVER fSLANDS
LATHROP, CALIFORNIA
CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY SITUATE iN THE ClTY 4F LATHROP, COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRfBED i4S FOLLOWS:
BEWG A PORTION OF PARCEL 1, AS SAID PARCEL IS SHOWN ON THE MAP ENTITLED TRACT 3876, RIVER ISLANDS, PHASE 1 B, LARGE LOT FINAL MAP", FILED MARCH 31, 2016, IN BOOK 42 OF MAPS AND PLATS, AT PAGE 56, C} FF[ CIAL RECORDS OF SAN lOAQUIN COUNTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT UN THE EAST LfNE OF J7 C URT( NOW KNOWN AS CIRRUS COURT), AS SAID COtJRT IS DESCR( BED IN DQCUMENT NO. 2020- 076610, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY, SAID POINT ALSO BE[ NG SOUTH 40°39'S8" EAST
56. 00 FEET FROM THE CENTER OF THE CUL- DE- SAC OF SAID J7 C URT; THENCE LEAVING SAID EAST LINE, SOUTH 82° 52' 07° EAST 99. 86 FEET; 7H NCE, SOUTH 90. 52 FEET;
THENCE, SOUTH 28° 21' 29" EAST 135. 69 FEET;
THENCE, NORTH 71° 3' 26" EAST 597. 10 FEET;
THENCE, SOUTH 18°06'34" EAST 12.00 FEET;
THENCE, SOUTH 7'!° 53' 26" WEST 607. 13 FEET;
THE ICE, NORTH 28° 21' 29" WEST 148. 74 FEET;
THENC, NORTH 82. 96 FEET;
THENCE, NORTH 82° 52' 07" WEST 104. 79 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID J7 COURT;
THENCE ALONG SAID EAST LINE, NORTHERLY ALONG A NON- TANGENT CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADlUS OF 56. 00 FEET, FRUM WHICH POINT THE CENTER OF SAlD CURVE BEARS NORTH 20°29' 21" WEST, THROUGH A CENTRAI. ANGLE QF 20° 10'37" AND AN ARC DISTANCE F 19. 72 FEET TO THE PO1NT OF BEGINNiNG.
C( NTAINING 11,' f90 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS.
ATFACHED HERETO IS A PLAT TO ACCOMPANY LEGAL DESCRIPTIf3N, AND BY TH1S REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF.
PAGE 1 OF 2
T:125503- Rlver IslandslPhase 22- Flnal Water Tank SIte1ACA41LEGAl. DESCR[ PTIONt25503- LEC,AL- STORM DRAIN EASEMENT. docx 386
JN25503 7/25/2a22
END OF DESCRIPTtON
THIS REAL. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION HAS BEEN PREPARED BY ME, OR UNDER MY
DIRECTION, IN CONFORMANCE WETH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR' S ACT.
ov A MND SG
4 n
WlLL1AM M. KOCH
a a L
No. s092 * DATE
PROFESSI NAL. LAND SURVEYOR +, Q
CALIFORNIA NO. 8092 TFOF CAi-'
PAGE2QF2
7:125503- River IslandslPhase 22- Final Water Tank Site1ACADU. EGAt. DESCRiPTIONl25503- LEGAL- STORM DRAIN EASEMF1V7. docx 387
GOLDEN VALLEY PARKWAY ( D. N. 2d19- 070952}
a
00co
CITY OF LATHRQP PARCEL 1 ( 42 MP 56}
ac Q
O N
COMMUNICATION SITE
v
D. N. 2020- 07fi609
L15
y
EAST 634. 85'
oG L14 ,
V
L12 -'
oo
POB v U7UR o
9 IAI' TANK
r
ry 5t
j
9 c,
7"" 1 WEST 147. 54`
C2
L10
J
r L4
6 , '
F' U7Uf2 59 53 26"E ,,.'
55JID SIT
1 3'26 N 1g N
532,. 0 s\\ 2
2 S
o:
ti
STfJRM DRAIN EASEMENT
0 50„ 100
SCALE: 1 = 100 i, a s.F.
N
o L1NE TABL. E LINE TABLE L1NE TABLE
LINE# DIRECTION LENGTH LINE# DIRECTION LENGTH L. INE# DIRECTION LENGTH 0 L1 S82° 52'07" E 99. 86' L8 N20 29'21" W 56.00' Li v NOR' CN 14. 50' L2 SOUTH 90. 52' L9 N40° 39' S8" W 56. 00`
CURVE TABLE L3 S28° 21' 29" E 135. 69' L10 N18° 08`02"W 38. 51' rCURVE# RADIUS DELTA LENGTH L4 S18° 06' 34" E 12. 00' L11 N53° 42' 44" W 64.37' L5 N28° 21' 29" W 148. 74' L12 EAST 81. 72'
C1 56. 00' 39 40' 44" 38. 78'
J
G2 56. 00` 20° 10' 3T' 19, 72' L6 NOR7H 82. 96' L13 NORTH 40. 00' L7 N82° 52' 07" W 104. 79' L14 WEST 90. 00'
PLAT
RIVER ISLANDS LEGEND
10' STORM DRAIN EASEMENT D.N. DOCUMENT NUMBER
MP hrfAPS AND PLATS( BK• PG) SCAI.. E. 1= 100' DATE: 2Q22- 07- 25
POB POINT OF BEGINNING
JOB NQ.: 25503
oF
R RADIAL BEARfNG
N G 1 N E E R 1 N G
FILE: 25503- PLAT- SD EASF. ENLDWG
388
Attachment G
Recording Requested by and
Please Return to:
City Clerk
City of Lathrop
390 Towne Centre Drive
Lathrop, California 95330
This Instrument Berrefits City 4nly
No Fee Required
This Space Above for Recorder' s Use Only
IRREVOCABLE OFF R F DEDICATION OF EASEMENT
FUR STORM DRAIN PURPO5ES
RIVER ISLANDS MPLOYMENT CENTER)
FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, CALIFIA, LLC, a California limited liability company, hereby grant(s} to the CITY OF LATHRQP, a municipal corporation in the County of San Joaquin, State of California, an easernent for ingress and eg7ress for storm drain pipeline maintenance, repair, replacement and other public purposes, over and across the hereinafter described real groperty situated in City of Lathrop and more particularly described as follows:
SEE EXHIBIT" A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF
This OFfer of Dedication is made pursuant to Section 705Q ofthe Government Code of the State of California and may be accepted at any time by the City Engineer af the Cirty of Lathrop. This Offer of Dedication may be terminated and right to accept such affer abandoned in the same manner as is prescribed for t,he vacation of streets or hi hways by Part 3 of Division 9 or Chapter 2 of Division 2 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, whichever is applicable.
The above described easement is to be kept apen, clear and free from buildings and structures of any kind. This Offer of Dedication shall be irrevocable and shall be binding on the Grantor' s heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns.
SIGNATURES:
Signed this 2Stn day af August, 2022.
CALIFIA, LLC
a California limited liability company
By:
Susan Dell' Qsso, President
Natary Acknowledgment Required for Each Signatory)
389
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
STORM DRA1N EASEMENT
RIVER ISLANDS EMPLOYMENT CENTER)
See Attached)
390
JN255Q3 7/25/2022
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
12' STORM DRAIN EASEMENT
RIVER ISLANDS
L.,,ATHR P, CALIFORNIA
CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY SfTUATE IN THE CITY OF LATHROP, COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN, STATE F CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEING A PORTIC N OF PARCEL 1, AS SAID PARCEL IS SHOWN N THE MAP ENTITLED TRACT 3876, RIVER ISLANDS, PHASE 16, LARGE LOT FINAL MAP", FIL. ED MARCH 31, 2016, IN BOOK 42 C F MAPS AND PLATS, AT PAGE 56, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY, MORE PART{ CULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A P INT ON THE EAST LINE OF J7 COURT( NOW KN4WN AS CIRRUS COURT), AS SAID COURT IS DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2020-076610, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY, SAID POINT ALSO BEfNG SOUTH 40°39'58" EAST
56. 00 FEET FR M THE CENTER OF THE CUL- DE- SAC OF SAID J7 COURT; THENCE LEAVING SAID EAST LINE, S UTH 82° 52' 07" EAST 99. 86 FEET; THENCE, SOUTH 90. 52 FEET;
THENCE, SOUTH 28° 21' 29 EAST 135. 69 F'EET;
THENCE, NORTH 71° 53' 26" EAST 597. 10 FEET;
THENCE, SOUTH 18°06'34" EAST 12. 00 FEET;
THENCE, SOUTH 71° 53' 26" WEST 607. 93 FEET;
THENCE, NORTH 28° 21' 29" VVEST' 148. 74 FEET;
THENCE, NORTH 82. 96 FEET;
THENCE, NORTH 82° 52' Q7" WEST 104. 79 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID J7 COURT; THENCE ALONG SA[ D EAST L[ NE, NORTHERLY ALONG A NON- TANGENT CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS F 5fi.00 FEET, ' ROM WHICH POINT THE CENTER OF SAID CURVE BEARS NORTH 20°29'21" WEST, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 20°10'37" AND AN ARC DISTANCE OF 19.72 FEET TO THE PDINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINlNG 11, 190 SQUARE FEET, MORE R LESS.
ATTACHED HERETO IS A PLAT TO ACC MPANY LEGAL DESCRIPT( ON, AND BY THfS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF.
PAGE 1 OF 2
T:125503- Wver IslandslPhase 22- Flnal Water Tank SIieU1CADiLEGAL DESCRIPTiOM25503- 1. EGAL- STORM DRAIN EASEMENT. docx 391
GOLDEN VALLEY PARKWAY( D. N. 2019- 070952)
0 0
ti
ti
Q CITY OF LATHROP PARCEL 1 ( 42 MP 56)
O N
COMMUNICATION SiTE
v
D. N. 2020- 076609
Q
L15 EAST 634. 85'
oC L14
V
N
L12
oo
POB v FVfUR d
WAT R 7ANK
q
r SCI j
L 1
r
Lj' WEST 147. 54'
C2
r,, L10
I f
g,
L.4
6 o N
S5,! D Sl`I 1or 3,Zg" SN o53'26„
3 /-'
o y7
J
n 60'f
II 5326
U s \ ` L
N
STORM DRAfN EASEMENT
0 5o ioo .''
11, 190 S. F. SCALE: 1"= 100'
LINE TABLE LINE TABLE LINE TABLE
LINE# DIRECTION LENGTH LINE# DIRECTIOfd LENGTH LINE# DIRECTION LENGTH 0 Li S82° 52' 07" E 99.86' L8 N20' 29'2" W 56. 00' L15 PJORTFi 14. 50' L2 SOUTH 90. 52' L9 N40 39' 58" W 56. d0'
a
CURVE 7ABLE
L3 S28° 21' 29" E 135. 69' L10 N18° 08' 02" W 38. 51'
CURVE# RADIUS DELTA LENGTH L.4 S18° 06' 34"E 12. 4' L11 N53° 02' 44" W 64. 37' C1 56. 00' 39° 40' 44" 38. 78' L5 N28° 21' 29" W 148. 74' L12 EAST 81. 72' J
Z C2 56. 00' 20° 10'37" 19. 72' L. 6 NORTH 82. 96' L13 NQRTH 40. 00' N
L7 N82° 52' 07"W 104. 79' L14 WEST 90.ap'
PLAT
LEGEND RIIIER ISLAN S
D. N. DOCUMENT NUMBER 10' STORM DRAIN EASEMENT
MP MAPS AND PLATS( BK- PG) SCALE: 1"= 100' DATE: 2022- 07- 25 POB POINTOFBEGINNiNG
J OB N O.: 2 550 3
p
R) RADIAL BEARING
E N G 1 N E R 1 N G
FILE: 25503- PLAT- SQ EASEb11ENLDNIG
392
JN25503 7/ 25/ 2022
END OF DESCRIPTION
THIS REAL PROPERTY DESCRIPTION HAS BEEN PREPARED BY ME, OR UNDER MY
DIRECTION, IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR' S ACT.
P a k0
o'` p. M M'
O' L
3 p q ZU L Z._
WILLIAM M. KOCH No. 8092 * DATE
PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR s, Q
CALIFORNIA NO. 8092 4rFo CA4`Eo
PAGE20F2
T:125503- River IsiandsiPhase 22- Final Water Tank SiteU1CADI EGAL DESCRIPTION125503- LEGAL-STORM DRAIN EASEMENT. dowc 393
This is to certify that the interest in real property offered herein to the City of Lathrop is hereby acicnowledged by the undersigned, City Clerk, on behalf ofthe City ofLathrop City Council to authoxify conferred by the Lathxop Municipal Cade axad the grantee( s) consent( s} to the recordation thereof by its duly authorized officex
TERESA VARGAS, CITY CLERK
By:
Date:
394
395
ITEM 5. 1
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
ITEM: RECEIVE UPDATE ON CIP GG 22- 35 CAMERA
SURVEILLANCE SYSTEMS FOR MA70R CITY PARKS
AND APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT WITH IXII GROUP, INC. TO PROVIDE
CONSULTING SERVICES RELATED TO TECHNOLOGY
PLATFORMS AND EQUIPMENT ASSOCIATED WITH
GATHERING VIDEO DATA AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS
WITHIN THE CITY, CIP GG 22- 35
RECOMMENDATION: Council to Receive Update on CIP GG 22- 35 Camera Surveillance Systems for Major City Parks and Adopt
Resolution Approving Professional Services
Agreement with IXII Group, Inc. to Provide
Consulting Services Related to Technology Platforms
and Equipment Associated with Gathering Video
Data at Various Locations within the City, CIP GG 22-
35 SUMMARY:
City Council approved Capital Improvement Project GG 22- 35 Camera Surveillance Systems for Major City Parks and approved the Lathrop Police Department ( LPD) Policy, Public Safety Video Surveillance System in regards to operations and maintenance of the City' s camera system. At the December 13, 2021 Council Meeting, staff provided Council with the proposed camera locations and requested Council' s input and direction. Council directed staff to finalize park camera locations and costs for the camera equipment and to bring back to Council for approval.
On August 19, 2022, staff inet with IXII Group, Inc. to discuss the City' s desired goals. During that meeting, the group conducted site visits at three City parks identified by City management as being appropriate for the first phase of a citywide park camera security initiative.
The three parks visited were:
Apolinar Sangalang Park - 13470 Slate Street
Manuel Valverde Park - 15557 5th Street
Woodfield Park - 801 Lathrop Road
IXII Group, Inc. has prepared a task report for Council to consider. IXII Group, Inc. will provide research and recommendations to the City for adding additional camera surveillance systems and equipment in and around major City parks, associated infrastructure equipment as needed, and real- time monitoring logistics considerations.
396
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT PAGE 2
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
RECEIVE UPDATE ON CIP GG 22- 35 CAMERA SURVEILLANCE SYSTEMS FOR
MAJOR CITY PARKS AND APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT WITH IXII GROUP, INC. TO PROVIDE CONSULTING SERVICES
RELATED TO TECHNOLOGY PLATFORMS AND EQUIPMENT ASSOCIATED WITH
GATHERING VIDEO DATA AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS WITHIN THE CITY, CIP GG 22- 35
Staff recommends Council approve the agreement with a not- to- exceed amount of 10, 000 with IXII Group, Inc. to provide consulting services related to technology platforms and equipment associated with gathering video data at various locations within the City, CIP GG 22- 35.
BACKGROUND:
On September 13, 2021, the City Council approved the creation of Capital Improvement Project ( CIP) GG 22- 35 for Camera Surveillance Systems for Major City Parks, and directed staff to propose camera placements in the approved parks.
On December 13, 2021 the City Council adopted the Lathrop Police Department Policy, Public Safety Video Surveillance System regarding the retention and use of data obtained by the system. Staff provided Council with the proposed camera locations and requested Council' s input and direction. Council directed staff to finalize park camera locations and costs for the camera equipment and to bring back to Council for approval.
On August 19th, 2022, IXII Group, Inc. met with several City leaders and employees to discuss this task and obtained City philosophy and desired goals. During that meeting, the group conducted site visits at three City parks identified by City management as being appropriate for the first phase of a citywide park camera security initiative.
The three parks visited were:
Apolinar Sangalang Park - 13470 Slate Street
Manuel Valverde Park - 15557 5th Street
Woodfield Park - 801 Lathrop Road
The City desires to assess the feasibility of installing live- view and recorded video assets into City parks for the purpose of increasing public safety and to preserve all parks as desirable public recreational destinations. Additional focus will be centered around the concept of real- time monitoring of new and existing camera assets within the City. Ultimately the research and recommendations are reflective of what is believed to be optimal placement of specific camera equipment to accomplish the desired goal of the City, along with the beginning of incorporating real- time monitoring.
Staff is recommending Council approve professional services agreement with a notto exceed amount of $ 10, 000 with IXII Group, Inc. to provide consulting services related to technology platforms and equipment associated with gathering video data at various locations within the City, CIP GG 22- 35.
397
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT PAGE 3
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
RECEIVE UPDATE ON CIP GG 22- 35 CAMERA SURVEILLANCE SYSTEMS FOR MA] OR CITY PARKS AND APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH IXII GROUP, INC. TO PROVIDE CONSULTING SERVICES
RELATED TO TECHNOLOGY PLATFORMS AND EQUIPMENT ASSOCIATED WITH
GATHERING VIDEO DATA AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS WITHIN THE CITY, CIP GG 22- 35
REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:
IXII Group, Inc. will provide research and recommendations to the City for adding additional camera surveillance systems and equipment in and around major City parks, associated infrastructure equipment as needed, and real- time monitoring logistics considerations. The cost for the agreement is not- to- exceed $ 10, 000 and there is sufficient funds in CIP GG 22- 35 to cover the cost.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is sufficient funds in CIP GG 22- 35 to cover the not- to- exceed cost of $ 10, 000 of the agreement.
ATTACH M ENTS:
A. Resolution Approving Professional Services Agreement with IXII Group, Inc.
Provide Consulting Services Related to Technology Platforms and Equipment Associated with Gathering Video Data at Various Locations Within the City, CIP GG 22- 35
B. Professional Services Agreement with IXII Group, Inc. to Provide Consulting Services Related to Technology Platforms and Equipment Associated with Gathering Video Data at Various Locations Within the City, CIP GG 22- 35 C. IXII Group, Inc. Task Report
398
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT PAGE 4
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
RECEIVE UPDATE ON CIP GG 22- 35 CAMERA SURVEILLANCE SYSTEMS FOR
MA) OR CITY PARKS AND APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH IXII GROUP, INC. TO PROVIDE CONSULTING SERVICES
RELATED TO TECHNOLOGY PLATFORMS AND EQUIPMENT ASSOCIATED WITH
GATHERING VIDEO DATA AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS WITHIN THE CITY, CIP GG 22- 35
APPROVALS:
1 - - . oa2
ernandes Date
Chief Information Officer
v z Z--
Raymond Bec ler Date
Chief of Police
9 d'
Cari Jam Date
Finance i ctor
6 - o Zz
Salvador Navarrete Date
City Attorney
9 •fo •
Ste en J. Salvatore Date
City Manager
399
RESOLUTION NO. 22 -
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LATHROP APPROVING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH IXII GROUP, INC.
TO PROVIDE CONSULTING SERVICES RELATED TO TECHNOLOGY
PLATFORMS AND EQUIPMENT ASSOCIATED WITH GATHERING VIDEO DATA AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS WITHIN THE CITY, CIP GG 22- 35
WHEREAS, on September 13, 2021, the City Council approved the creation of Capital Improvement Project ( CIP) GG 22- 35 for Camera Surveillance Systems for Major City Parks, and directed staff to propose camera placements in the approved parks.; and
WHEREAS, on December 13, 2021 the City Council adopted the Lathrop Police Department Policy, Public Safety Video Surveillance System regarding the retention and use of data obtained by the system; and
WHEREAS, Council directed staff to finalize park camera locations and costs for the camera equipment and to bring back to Council for approval; and WHEREAS, on August 19th, 2022, IXII Group, Inc. met with several City leaders and staff to discuss this task and obtained City philosophy and desired goals; and
WHEREAS, the group conducted site visits at three City parks identified by City management as being appropriate for the first phase of a citywide park camera security initiative; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to assess the feasibility of installing live- view and recorded video assets into City parks for the purpose of increasing public safety and to preserve all parks as desirable public recreational destinations; and WHEREAS, IXII Group, Inc. will provide research and recommendations to the City for adding additional camera surveillance systems and equipment in and around major City parks, associated infrastructure equipment as needed, and real- time monitoring logistics considerations; and
WHEREAS, there is sufficient funds in CIP GG 22- 35 to cover the not- toexceed cost of $ 10, 000 for the agreement with IXII Group, Inc.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Lathrop does hereby approve the agreement with with IXII Group, Inc. to provide consulting services related to technology platforms and equipment associated with gathering video data at various locations within the City, CIP GG 22- 35. 400
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 12t'' day of September 2022, by the following vote of the City Council, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Sonny Dhaliwal, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO F RM:
Teresa Vargas, City Clerk Salvador Navarrete, City Attorney 401
DocuSign Envelope ID: 421C63CA- 48AE- 4643- A192- 573DDC3E36AF Attachment B
CITY OF LATHROP
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES
WITH IXII GROUP, INC.
TO PROVIDE CONSULTING SERVICES RELATED TO TECHNOLOGY PLATFORMS
AND EQUIPMENT ASSOCIATED WITH GATHERING VIDEO DATA AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS WITHIN THE CITY, CIP GG 22- 35
THIS AGREEMENT, dated for convenience this day of September is by and between IXII Group, ( nc. (" CONSULTANT") and the City of Lathrop, a California municipal corporation (" CITY");
RECITALS:
WHEREAS, CONSULTANT is specially trained, experienced, and competent to perform Professional Services, which are required by this agreement; and WHEREAS, CITY selected the CONSULTANT pursuant to said qualifications; and WHEREAS, CONSULTANT is willing to render such Professional Consulting Services, as hereinafter defined, on the following terms and conditions; NOW, THEREFORE, CONSULTANT and the CITY agree as follows:
AGREEMENT
1) Scoae of Service
CONSULTANT agrees to provide consulting services related to technology platforms and equipment associated with gathering video data at various locations within the City in accordance with the scope of work and fee proposal provided by CONSULTANT, attached hereto as Exhibit" A" and incorporated herein by reference. CONSULTANT represents it is prepared to and can diligently perform these services in accordance with the upmost standards of its profession and to CITY'S satisfaction. The fee proposal shall include all reimbursable costs required for the performance of the Scope of Services. Payment of additional reimbursable costs considered to be over and above those inherent in the original Scope of Services shall be approved of in advance and in writing, by the CITY. 2) Compensation
CITY hereby agrees to pay CONSULTANT a sum not to exceed $ 10, 000. 00 for the Professional Services set forth in Exhibit" A". CONSULTANT shall be paid any uncontested sum due and payable within thirty ( 30) days of receipt of billings containing all information pursuant to Paragraph 5 below. Compensation for any task must be equal to or less than the percentage of task complete. In no event shall CONSULTANT be entitled to compensation for work not included in Exhibit " A", unless a written amendment or authorization describing the extra work and payment terms has been executed by CITY' s authorized representative prior to the commencement of the work. Payment is made based on a time and materials basis.
402
DocuSign Envelope ID: 421C63CA- 48AE- 4643-A192- 573DDC3E36AF CITY OF LATHROP — TO PROVIDE CONSULTING SERVICES RELATED TO TECHNOLOGY
PLATFORMS AND EQUIPMENT ASSOCIATED W ITH GATHERING VIDEO DATA AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS WITHIN THE CITY, CIP GG 22- 35
3) Effective Date and Term
The effective date of this Agreement is September , 2022 and it shall terminate no later than December 31, 2022.
4) Independent Contractor Status
It is expressly understood and agreed by both parties that CONSULTANT, while engaged in carrying out and complying with any of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, is an independent contractor and not an employee of the CITY. As an independent contractor, CONSULTANT is responsible for controlling the means and methods to complete the scope of work described in Exhibit" A" to City' s satisfaction. CONSULTANT expressly warrants not to represent, at any time or in any manner, that CONSULTANT is an employee of the CITY. 5) Billin s
CONSULTANT shall submit invoices for completed work on a monthly basis, or as otherwise agreed, providing without limitation, details as to amount of hours, individual performing said work, hourly rate, and indicating to what aspect of the Scope of Services said work is attributable. CONSULTANT' S bills shall include a list of all tasks, a total amount due, the amounts previously billed, and the net amount due on the invoice. Except as specifically authorized by CITY, CONSULTANT shall not bill CITY for duplicate services performed by more than one person. In no event shall CONSULTANT submit any billing for an amount in excess of the rates or the maximum amount of compensation provided in section ( 2) for either task or for the entire Agreement, unless modified by a properly executed change order.
6) Advice and Status Reoortina
CONSULTANT shall provide the CITY with timely reports, orally or in writing, of all significant developments arising during performance of its services hereunder, and shall furnish to CITY such information as is necessary to enable CITY to monitor the performance of this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall submit to CITY such reports, diagrams, drawings and other work products developed pursuant to the Scope of Services. 7) Auditinq
CITY reserves the right to periodically audit all charges made by CONSULTANT to CITY for services under this Agreement. Upon request, CONSULTANT agrees to furnish CITY, or a designated representative, with necessary information and assistance needed to conduct such an audit. CONSULTANT agrees that CITY or its delegate will have the right to review, obtain and copy all records pertaining to performance of this Agreement. CONSULTANT agrees to provide CITY or its delegate with any relevant information requested and shall permit CITY or its delegate access to its premises, upon reasonable notice, during normal business hours for the purpose of interviewing employees and inspecting and copying such books, records, accounts, and other material that may be relevant to a matter under investigation for the purpose of determining compliance with the requirement.
CONSULTANT further agrees to maintain such records for a period of three ( 3) years after final payment under this agreement.
403
DocuSign Envelope ID: 421C63CA- 48AE- 4643-A192- 573DDC3E36AF CITY OF LATHROP — TO PROVIDE CONSULTING SERVICES RELATED TO TECHNOLOGY
PLATFORMS AND EQUIPMENT ASSOCIATED WITH GATHERING VIDEO DATAAT VARIOUS LOCATIONS WITHIN THE CITY, CIP GG 22- 35
8) Assiqnment of Personnel
CONSULTANT acknowledges that the CITY has relied on CONSULTANT' s capabilities and on the qualifications of CONSULTANT' s principals and staff as identified in its proposal to CITY. The services shall be performed by, or under the direct supervision, of CONSULTANT' s Authorized Representative: Jamie Hudson, Chief Executive Officer.
CITY shall be notified by CONSULTANT of any change of its Authorized Representative, and CITY is granted the right of approval of all original, additional, and replacement personnel at CITY's sole discretion, and shall be notified by CONSULTANT of any changes of CONSULTANT' s project staff prior to any change. CONSULTANT shall assign only competent personnel to perform services pursuant to this Agreement. If CITY asks CONSULTANT to remove a person assigned to the work called for under this Agreement, CONSULTANT agrees to do so immediately, without requiring the Cityto process a reason or explanation for its request.
9) Assiqnment and Subcontractinq
It is recognized by the parties hereto that a substantial inducement to CITY for entering into this Agreement was, and is, the professional reputation and competence of CONSULTANT.
Neither this Agreement nor any interest therein may be assigned by CONSULTANT without the prior written approval of CITY' S authorized representative. CONSULTANT shall not subcontract any portion ofthe performance contemplated and provided for herein, other than the subcontractors noted in the proposal, without prior written approval of the CITY' S authorized representative.
10) Insurance
On or before beginning any of the services or work called for by any term of this Agreement, CONSULTANT, at its own cost and expense, shall carry, maintain for the duration of the Agreement, and provide proofthereof that is acceptable to the CITY the insurance specified in subsections (a) through (c) below with insurers and underforms of insurance satisfactory in all respects to the CITY. CONSULTANT shall not allow any subcontractor to commence work on any subcontract until all insurance required of the CONSULTANT has also been obtained for the subcontractor. Verification of this insurance shall be submitted and made part of this Agreement prior to execution.
a) Workers' Compensation. CONSULTANT shall, at CONSULTANT' S sole cost and expense, maintain Statutory Workers' Compensation Insurance and Employer' s Liability Insurance for any and all persons employed directly or indirectly by CONSULTANT. Said Statutory Workers' Compensation Insurance and Employer' s Liability Insurance shall be provided with limits of not less than one million dollars ($ 1, 000, 000). In the alternative, CONSULTANT may rely on a self- insurance program to meet these requirements provided that the program of self- insurance complies fully with the provisions of the California Labor Code. The insurer, if insurance is provided, or the CONSULTANT, if a program of self-insurance is provided, shall waive all rights of subrogation against the CITY for loss arising from work performed under this Agreement.
404
DocuSign Envelope ID: 421C63CA- 48AE- 4643- A192- 573DDC3E36AF CITY OF LATHROP — TO PROVIDE CONSULTING SERVICES RELATED TO TECHNOLOGY
PLATFORMS AND EQUIPMENT ASSOCIATED WITH GATHERING VIDEO DATAAT VARIOUS LOCATIONS WITHIN THE CITY, CIP GG 22-35
b) Commercial General and Automobile Liability Insurance. CONSULTANT, at CONSULTANT' S own cost and expense, shall maintain commercial general and automobile liability insurance forthe period covered bythis Agreement in an amount not less than one million dollars ($ 1, 000, 000) per occurrence, combined single limit coverage for risks associated with the work contemplated by this Agreement. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or an Automobile Liability form or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the work to be performed under this Agreement or the general aggregate limit shall be at least twice the required occurrence limit. Such coverage shall include but shall not be limited to, protection against claims arising from bodily and personal injury, including death resulting therefrom, and damage to property resulting from activities contemplated under this Agreement, including the use of owned and non- owned automobiles.
Coverage shall be at least as broad as Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability occurrence form CG 0001 and Insurance Services Office Automobile Liability form CA 0001 Code 1 ( any auto).
Each of the following shall be included in the insurance coverage or added as an endorsement to the policy:
i) CITY, its officers, employees, and volunteers are to be covered as additional insured with coverage from ISO form CG 20 10 or its equivalent. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to CITY, its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers.
ii) The insurance shall cover on an occurrence or an accident basis, and not on a claim made basis.
iii) An endorsement must state that coverage is primary insurance and that no other insurance affected by the CITY will be called upon to contribute to a loss under the coverage.
iv) Any failure of CONSULTANT to comply with reporting provisions of the policy shall not affect coverage provided to CITY and its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers.
v) Insurance is to be placed with California- admitted insurers with a BesYs rating of no less than A: VII.
vi) Notice of cancellation or non- renewal must be received by CITY at least thirty days prior to such change.
c) Professional Liabilitv. CONSULTANT, at CONSULTANT' S own cost and expense, shall maintain for the period covered by this Agreement professional liability insurance for licensed professionals pertorming work pursuant to this Agreement in an amount not less than Two Million Dollars($ 2, 000, 000) per claim made and per policy aggregate covering the licensed professionals' errors and omissions, as follows:
405
DocuSign Envelope ID: 421C63CA- 48AE- 4643-A192- 573DDC3E36AF CITY OF LATHROP — TO PROVIDE CONSULTING SERVICES RELATED TO TECHNOLOGY
PLATFORMS AND EQUIPMENT ASSOCIATED WITH GATHERING VIDEO DATAAT VARIOUS LOCATIONS WITHIN THE CITY, CIP GG 22- 35
i) Any deductible or self- insured retention shall not exceed $ 150, 000 per claim.
ii) Notice of cancellation, material change, or non- renewal must be received by the CITY at least thirty days prior to such change shall be included in the coverage or added as an endorsement to the policy. iii) The policy must contain a cross liability or severability of interest clause.
iv) The following provisions shall apply if the professional liability coverages are written on a claims made form:
1. The retroactive date of the policy must be shown and must be before the date of the Agreement.
2. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five years after completion ofthe Agreement or the work, so long as commercially available at reasonable rates.
3. If coverage is canceled or not renewed and it is not replaced with another claims made policy form with a retroactive date that precedes the date of this Agreement, CONSULTANT
must provide extended reporting coverage for a minimum of five years after completion of the Agreement or the work.
The CITY shall have the right to exercise at the
CONSULTANT' S cost, any extended reporting provisions of the policy should the CONSULTANT cancel or not renew the coverage.
4. A copy of the claim reporting requirements must be submitted to the CITY prior to the commencement of any work under this Agreement.
d) Deductibles and Self- Insured Retentions. CONSULTANT shall disclose the self- insured retentions and deductibles before beginning any of the services or work called for by any term of this Agreement. During the period covered by this Agreement, upon express written authorization of the CITY' s authorized representative, CONSULTANT may increase such deductibles or self-insured retentions with respect to CITY, its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers. The CITY' s authorized representative may condition approval of increase in deductible or self-insured retention levels upon a requirement that CONSULTANT procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses that is satisfactory in all respects to each of them. e) Notice of Reduction in Coverape. In the event that any coverage required under subsections ( a), ( b), or( c) of this section of the Agreement is reduced, limited, or materially affected in any other manner, CONSULTANT shall provide written notice to CITY at CONSULTANT' S earliest possible opportunity and in no case later than five days after CONSULTANT is notified of the change in coverage.
406
DocuSign Envelope ID: 421C63CA- 48AE- 4643- A192- 573DDC3E36AF CITY OF LATHROP — TO PROVIDE CONSULTING SERVICES RELATED TO TECHNOLOGY
PLATFORMS AND EQUIPMENT ASSOCIATED WITH GATHERING VIDEO DATA AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS WITHIN THE CITY, CIP GG 22- 35
fl In addition to any other remedies CITY may have if CONSULTANT fails to provide or maintain any insurance policies or policy endorsements to the extent and within the time herein required, CITY may, at its sole option:
i) Obtain such insurance and deduct and retain the amount of the premiums for such insurance from any sums due under the Agreement;
ii) Order CONSULTANT to stop work under this Agreement or withhold any payment which becomes due to CONSULTANT hereunder, or both stop work and withhold any payment, until CONSULTANT demonstrates compliance with the requirements hereof;
iii) Terminate this Agreement.
Exercise of any of the above remedies, however, is an alternative to other remedies CITY may have and is not the exclusive remedy for CONSULTANT' S breach.
11) Indemnification - CONSULTANT' S Responsibilitv
As to the CONSULTANT' S work hereunder, it is understood and agreed that ( a) CONSULTANT has the professional skills necessary to perform the work, ( b) CITY relies upon the professional skills of CONSULTANT to perform the work in a skillful and professional manner, and ( c) CONSULTANT thus agrees to so perform.
Acceptance by CITY of the work performed under this Agreement does not operate as a release of said CONSULTANT from such professional responsibility for the work performed.
It is further understood and agreed that CONSULTANT is apprised of the scope of the work to be performed under this Agreement and CONSULTANT agrees that said work can and shall be performed in a fully competent manner in accordance with the standard of care applicable to CONSULTANT' S profession.
CONSULTANT shall indemnify, defend, and hold CITY, its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers harmless from and against any and all liability, claims, suits, actions, damages, and causes of action arising out of any personal injury, bodily injury, loss of life, or damage to property, or anyviolation of anyfederal, state, or municipal law or ordinance, to the extent caused by the willful misconduct or negligent acts or omissions of CONSULTANT, its employees, subcontractors, or agents, or on account of the performance or character of this work, except for any such claim arising out of the negligence or willful misconduct of the CITY, its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers. It is understood that the duty of CONSULTANT to indemnify and hold harmless includes the duty to defend as set forth in Section 2778 of the California Civil Code. Acceptance of insurance certificates and endorsements required under this Agreement does not relieve CONSULTANT from liability under this indemnification and hold harmless clause. This indemnification and hold harmless ctause shall apply whether or not such insurance policies shall have been determined to be applicable to any of such damages or claims for damages.
407
DocuSign Envelope ID: 421C63CA- 48AE- 4643- A192- 573DDC3E36AF CITY OF LATHROP — TO PROVIDE CONSULTING SERVICES RELATED TO TECHNOLOGY
PLATFORMS AND EQUIPMENTASSOCIATED WITH GATHERING VIDEO DATAAT VARIOUS LOCATIONS WITHIN THE CITY, CIP GG 22-35
12) icenses
If a license of any kind, which term is intended to include evidence of registration, is required of CONSULTANT, its employees, agents, or subcontractors by federal or state law, CONSULTANT warrants that such license has been obtained, is valid and in good standing, and CONSULTANT shall keep it in effect at all times during the term of this Agreement, and that any applicable bond has been posted in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations.
13) Business Licenses
CONSULTANT shall obtain and maintain a CITY of Lathrop Business License until all Agreement services are rendered and accepted by the CITY. 14) Termination
Either CITY or CONSULTANT may cancel this Agreement upon 30 days written notification to the other party. Upon termination, or completion of services under this Agreement, all information collected, work product and documents shall be delivered by CONSULTANT to CITY within ten ( 10) calendar days.
15) Fundin
CONSULTANT agrees and understands that renewal ofthis agreement in subsequentyears is contingent upon action by the City Council consistent with the appropriations limits of Article XI II ( B) of the California Constitution and that the Council may determine not to fund this agreement in subsequent years.
16) Notices
All contracts, appointments, approvals, authorizations, claims, demands, Change Orders, consents, designations, notices, offers, requests and statements given by either parryto the other shall be in writing and shall be sufficiently given and served upon the other party if( 1) personally served, ( 2) sent by the United States mail, postage prepaid, ( 3) sent by private express delivery service, or ( 4) in the case of a facsimile transmission, if sent to the telephone FAX number set forth below during regular business hours of the receiving party and followed with two ( 2) Days by delivery of a hard copy of the material sent by facsimile transmission. Personal service shall include, without limitation, service by delivery and service by facsimile transmission.
To City: City of Lathrop
City Clerk
390 Towne Centre
Lathrop, CA 95330
Copy to: City of Lathrop
Lathrop Police Department
940 River Islands Parkway
Lathrop, CA 95330
MAIN: ( 209) 647- 6416
408
DocuSign Envelope ID: 421C63CA- 48AE- 4643- A192- 573DDC3E36AF CITY OF LATHROP — TO PROVIDE CONSULTING SERVICES RELATED TO TECHNOLOGY
PLATFORMS AND EQUIPMENT ASSOCIATED WITH GATHERING VIDEO DATAAT VARIOUS LOCATIONS WITHIN THE CITY, CIP GG 22- 35
To Consultant: IXII Group, Inc.
910 Pleasant Grove Blvd. Suite 120- 349
Roseville, CA 95678
Phone: 1- 855- 494- 4911
17) Misceilaneous
a) Consent. Whenever in this Agreement the approval or consent of a party is required, such approval or consent shall be in writing and shall be executed by a person having the express authority to grant such approval or consent. b) Contract Terms Prevail. All exhibits and this Agreement are intended to be construed as a single document. Should any inconsistency occur between the specific terms of this Agreement and attached exhibits, the terms of this Agreement shall prevail.
c) Controlling Law. The parties agree that this Agreement shall be governed and construed by and in accordance with the Laws of the State of California. d) Definitions. The definitions and terms are as defined in these specifications. e) Force Majeure. Neither party shall be deemed to be in default on account of any delay or failure to perform its obligations under this Agreement, which directly results from an Act of God or an act of a superior governmental authority. fl Headings. The paragraph headings are not a part of this Agreement and shall have no effect upon the construction or interpretation of any part of this Agreement. g) Incorporation of Documents. All documents constituting the Agreement documents described in Section 1 hereof and all documents which may, from time to time, be referred to in any duly executed amendment hereto are by such reference incorporated in the Agreement and shall be deemed to be part of this Agreement. h) Integration. This Agreement and any amendments hereto between the parties constitute the entire Agreement between the parties concerning the Project and Work, and there are no other prior oral or written agreements between the parties that are not incorporated in this Agreement.
i) Modification of Agreement. This Agreement shall not be modified or be binding upon the parties unless such modification is agreed to in writing and signed bythe parties.
Q) Ownership of Documents. All documents, photographs, reports, analyses, audits, computer media, or other material documents or data, and working papers, whether or not in final form, which have been obtained or prepared under this Agreement, shall be deemed the property of the CITY. Upon CITY' s request, CONSULTANT shall allow CITY to inspect all such documents during the CONSULTANT' s regular business hours.
k) Provision. Any agreement, covenant, condition, clause, qualification, restriction, reservation, term or other stipulation in the Agreement shall define or otherwise
409
DocuSign Envelope ID: 421C63CA- 48AE- 4643- A192- 573DDC3E36AF CITY OF LATHROP — TO PROVIDE CONSULTING SERVICES RELATED TO TECHNOLOGY
PLATFORMS AND EQUIPMENT ASSOCIATED WITH GATHERING VIDEO DATAAT VARIOUS LOCATIONS WITHIN THE CITY, CIP GG 22- 35
control, establish or limit the performance required or permitted or to be required of or permitted by either party. All provisions, whether covenants or conditions, shall be deemed to be both covenants and conditions.
I) Severability. The invalidity in whole or part of any provision of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of any other provision of this agreement. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Agreement is void or unenforceable, the provisions of this Agreement not so affected shall remain in full force and effect.
m) Status of CONSULTANT. In the exercise of rights and obligations under this Agreement, CONSULTANT acts as an independent contractor and not as an agent or employee of CITY. CONSULTANT shall not be entitled to any rights and benefits accorded or accruing to the City Council members, officers or employees of CITY, and CONSULTANT expressly waives any and all claims to such right and benefits. n) Successors and Assigns. The provisions of this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of, and shall apply to and bind, the successors and assigns of the parties. o) Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence of this Agreement and each of its provisions. In the calculation of time hereunder, the time in which an act is to be performed shall be computed by excluding the first Day and including the last. If the time in which an act is to be performed falls on a Saturday, Sunday or any Day observed as a legal holiday by CITY, the time for performance shall be extended to the following Business Day.
p) Venue. In the event that suit is brought by either party hereunder, the parties agree that trial of such action shall be vested exclusively in the state courts of California in the County of San Joaquin or in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California.
q) Recovery of Costs. The prevailing party in any action brought to enforce the terms of this Agreement or arising out of this Agreement may recover its reasonable costs, including reasonabte attorney's fees, incurred or expended in connection with such action against the non- prevailing party.
18) No ice to Proceed
Prior to commencing work under this agreement, CONSULTANT shall receive a written Notice to Proceed" from CITY. A Notice to Proceed shall not be issued until all necessary bonds and insurances have been received. City shall not be obligated to pay CONSULTANT for any services prior to issuance of the Notice to Proceed. 19) Siqnatures
The individuals executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they have the right, power, legal capacity, and authority to enter into and to execute this Agreement on behalf of the respective legal entities of the CONSULTANT and the CITY. This agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns.
410
DocuSign Envelope ID: 421C63CA-48AE-4643-A192-573DDC3E36AF CITY OF LATHROP — TO PROVIDE CONSULTING SERVICES RELATED TO TECHNOLOGY
PLATFORMS AND EQUIPMENT ASSOCIATED WITH GATHERING VIDEO DATA AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS WITHIN THE CITY, CIP GG 22- 35
Approved as to Form: City of Lathrop
City Attorney
Z
Salvador Navarrete Date
Recommended By: Lathrop Police Department
Police Chief
Raymond Bechler Date
Recommended By: Information Systems Department
Information Systems Director - CIO
Tony Fernandes Date
Approved By: City of Lathrop
390 Towne Centre Dr.
Lathrop, CA 95330
Stephen J. Salvatore Date
City Manager
Consultant: IXII Group, Inc.
910 Pleasant Grove Blvd. Suite 120- 349
Roseville, CA 95678
Fed I D #
Business License #
DacuSipned by:
ArMtt, iA. Sbin, 8/ 30/ 2022
Signature Date
amie Hudson CEO
Print Name and Title
411
DocuSign Envelope ID: 421C63CA- 48AE- 4643- A192- 573DDC3E36AF
EXHIBIT A
August 5, 2022
Stephen Salvatore
City Manager
City of Lathrop
390 Towne Centre Drive
Lathrop, CA 95330
Mr. Salvatore,
Please find the general consulting services proposal below. The proposal is focused on consulting related to leveraging technology platforms, equipment, and philosophy development to ensure the most efficient acquisition and effective installation of these platforms and equipment are considered. The proposed project cost quote is valid for 90 days from the date of this letter.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide you the proposal.
Thank you,
Jamie Hudson
Owner— Chief Executive Officer IXII
Group, Inc.
Location out of Roseville, CA 910
Pleasant Grove Boulevard Suite 120-
349
Roseville, CA 95678
1( 855) 494- 4911— Toll- Free
1( 916) 580-9392— Mobile
Jamie@ixiigroup. com www. ixiigroup. com
412
DocuSign Envelope ID: 421C63CA- 48AE- 4643- A192- 573DDC3E36AF u.,. a. w , , »,»,,,,
Background
IXII Group, Inc.( IXII) understands the City of Lathrop( City) has requested a quote proposal for consulting services related to technology platforms and equipment associated with gathering video data at various locations within the City, with an emphasis on City park locations.
Currently, the City does not have any live-feed or recorded cameras at park locations and has a desire to conduct location analysis, equipment purchase, and installation at those locations. There are over 25 parks in the City with over 120 acres of space to be considered for appropriate placement of necessary equipment. It is understood the City uses an Avigilon Video Management System to gather and store video data and that infrastructure is perForming as expected.
IXII further understands there is not a real- time crime or information center established with the City or the City' s police department. The City desires a feasibility report related to harnessing the various technology platforms already in place, combined with any additional platforms which would allow the police department to effectively develop and disseminate real-time intelligence to first responders.
Through the proposed services listed below, IXII will research, analyze, and deliver comprehensive reports to the City, which will be useful tools when determining the most appropriate technology platforms, equipment, and philosophy development related to gathering video data within the City, as well as determining the feasibility and potential need for incorporating real- time crime and information center practices within the police department operations.
413
DocuSign Envelope ID: 421C63CA- 48AE- 4643-A192- 573DDC3E36AF Project Summary( proposed scope of work)
This proposed project summary can be modified and mutually agreed upon before formal contracting between the parties. The main project being proposed will consist of:
1. Consulting services to determine the most appropriate (ocation placement and most appropriate video/ photo data gathering equipment at City park locations
2. Consulting services to determine other locations within the City where placement of video/ photo data gathering equipment would optimize and/ or enhance current equipment placement
3. Consulting services to assess current technology platforms and assist with enhancing the use of those platforms to maximize each
4. Consulting services to assist with leveraging technologies to effectively develop and disseminate realtime intelligence to first responders
5. Consulting services to assess new technologies and technology platforms to augment current platforms and technologies to begin modeling real-time crime and information center philosophies and practices
6. Comprehensive written reports for all consulting services provided to be used as reference by the City when incorporating any of the recommendations
Timeline
IXII understands there is a desire for an exigent but comprehensive completion of this project. IXII will begin the research and analysis of the locations, data and other factors without delay once contracted. This commitment is dependent on the efficient and expeditious production of requested data from the Cityas needed.
IXII will begin the research and analysis within 14 calendar days of execution of a contract with the City. This various consulting focuses listed in the Scope of Work will be prioritized by the City and IXII will conduct these services based on the priority desired by the City. The first initial report draft will be delivered to the City no more than 21 calendar days after contract execution.
Other consulting within the Scope of Work will be conducted within timelines mutually agreed upon between the City and IXII prior to the commencement of any service. 414
DocuSign Envelope ID: 421C63CA- 48AE- 4643- A192- 573DDC3E36AF r`'s
P w, . w ,,
Project Management
Fees and Payment Structure
IXII shall provide the services listed in the" Project Summary( proposed scope of work)" for a total fee not to exceed 10, 000.
The fees are billed to the City will be billed at a$ 180. 00 hourly rate, broken down to the quarter hour.
Invoices will be sent electronically directly to the Accounts Payable personnel at the City and payment would be invoiced and due on a Net- 30 cycle.
415
T A S K R E P O R T : 2 2 - 0 0 1
CAMERA RESEARCH AND LOCATION FEASIBILITY — REAL- TIME MONITORING August 29, zoz2
ATTACH M ENT C
This task report is focused on three of the City of Lathrop parks: Apolinar Sangalang, Manuel Valverde, and Woodfield. The task was born from the City' s desire to assess the feasibility of installing live- view and recorded video assets into City parks for the purpose of increasing public safety and to preserve all parks as desirable public recreational destinations.
Additional focus for this task was centered around the concept of real- time monitoring of new and existing camera assets within the City. Ultimately the research and recommendations listed below are reflective of what is believed to be optimal placement of specific camera equipment to accomplish the desired goal of the City as listed above, along with the beginning of incorporating real- time monitoring.
THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
i , . ;. ,
416
y _. . _ _. TASK REPORT : 22 - 001
CAMERA RESEARCH AND LOCATION FEASIBILITY — REAL- TIME MONITORING
TASK RESEARCH AND RECOMMENDATIONS
IXII Group met with several City leaders and employees to discuss this task and obtained City philosophy and desired goals on August 19th, 2022. During that meeting, the group conducted site visits at three City parks identified by City management as being appropriate for the first phase of a citywide park camera security initiative.
The three parks visited were:
Apolinar Sangalang Park— 13470 Slate Street
Manuel Valverde Park— 15557 5th Street
Woodfield Park— 801 Lathrop Road
It was noted during the site visits the City of Lathrop has a combination of existing fiber infrastructure and existing fiber ready infrastructure, and areas wireless connections would be most feasible for optimal equipment placement and connectivity. For areas which are fiber ready, the City' s Public Works Department has indicated fiber installation is feasible for various projected camera located.
Apolinar Sanqalanq Park
This park is surrounded by three roadways and an elementary school. Opal Street is on the west side, Deerwood Way is on the north side, Slate Street is on the east side, and Joseph Widmer Elementary School is on the south side. There are tennis and basketball courts in the southern portion of this park, with a baseball diamond on the northeast, with a play structure and picnic gazebo area centered on the north side. Two restrooms are located just south of the play structure on the north side of the park, and on the very southeast corner of the park.
Factors in determining optimal video equipment and placement included:
Play Structure observation for public safety and vandalism prevention and investigation Northside restroom building exterior observation for public safety and vandalism prevention and investigation
Baseball Diamond area observation for public safety
Southeast restroom building exterior observation for public safety and vandalism prevention and investigation
Tennis and Basketball court area observation for public safety The infrastructure in place at this park is conducive with fiber connections at most recommended locations, with wireless connectivity at one. A total of five locations were identified as areas for consideration of camera placement based on the factors listed above. Image A ( below) shows a depiction of the type of equipment and the estimated view area for each camera. A total of three 270° view Avigilon H4 Multisensor cameras, combined with two Avigilon pan- tilt- zoom ( PTZ) HSA- PTZ cameras are recommended at this park.
2 417
j
r__ TASK REPORT : 22 - 001
CAMERA RESEARCH AND LOCATION FEASIBILITY — REAL - TIME MONITORING The three 270° view cameras are recommended for placement at:
The streetlight on the northside of the park, just north of the play structure and south of the roadway on Deerwood Way
The lamppost located just east of the restroom building on the northside of the park at the entrance to the picnic gazebo area
The lamppost on the west side of Slate Street at the southeast corner of the park The two PTZ cameras are recommended for placement at:
The northwest corner of the tennis courts in the center of the southside of the park. If fiber is not accessible at this location, the recommendation to place this camera is rescinded due to power connectivity issues which would exist
The northeast corner of the park directly east of the baseball diamond backstop a , m
t,. .. < 3 ,_
r,
i
i'
w 5. 1
t
s;. 1
m
h
i'
r
e
IC, m
Image A
Manuel Valverde Park
This park has residential homes on its north and south property lines, and a limited use property which used to be a school yard to the west. It is accessed off 5th Street to the east into the general parking lot area. There is a Park and Ride in the parking lot off 5th Street and has an array of solar panels which serve as shade structures for parking within the northern portion of the parking lot. A community center sits between 5th Street and the park on the northside of the property.
There is a play structure to the west of the community center, along with a restroom building just southwest of the play structure. There are two baseball diamonds to the west of the restroom facility which account for the entire westside of the park, from north to south. There is a basketball court area between the parking lot and the baseball diamond on the southside of the park. 3 418
1. L .
y_ TASK REPORT : 22 - 001
CAMERA RESEARCH AND LOCATION FEASIBILITY - REAL- TIME MONITORING Factors in determining optimal video equipment and placement included:
Community center building northside observation for public safety and vandalism prevention and investigation
Play Structure observation for public safety and vandalism prevention and investigation Baseball Diamond area observation for public safety
Restroom building exterior observation for public safety and vandalism prevention and investigation
Basketball court area observation for public safety
Parking lot observation for public safety
The infrastructure in place at this park is conducive with a majority fiber connection and one wireless connection. Conduit and fiber will need to be installed to complete the fiber connections, and this park is fiber ready as fiber already exists on site. A total of five locations were identified as areas for consideration of camera placement based on the factors listed above. Image B ( below) shows a depiction of the type of equipment and the estimated view area for each camera. A total of two 360° view Avigilon H4 Multisensor cameras, combined with three Avigilon pan- tilt- zoom ( PTZ) H5A- PTZ cameras are recommended at this park.
A total of two locations were identified as areas for consideration of Automated License Plate Reader ALPR) camera placement.
The two 360° view cameras are recommended for placement at:
The solar array in the northern parking lot area. There are two arrays, and the recommendation is for placement on the western most array
The lamppost to the north of the basketball court. This installation will require a taller lamppost to be installed
The two PTZ cameras are recommended for placement at:
The lamppost situated in the center of the two baseball diamonds on the east side. This lamppost will have two PTZ cameras installed to provide coverage from the north to south of the entire baseball diamond area
The two LPR cameras are recommended for placement at:
Northern entrance to the parking lot off 5th Street to capture license plates on the ingress to the parking lot
Southern entrance to the parking lot off 5th Street to capture license plates on the ingress to the parking lot
Additionally, replacement of two existing cameras with two new 270° cameras is necessary as the existing cameras are near their end of usable life. Both are listed in Image B and will be placed at:
Northeast corner of the community center building
Northwest corner of the community center building
q G>;: ;_
419
TASK REPORT : 22 - 001
CAMERA RESEARCH AND LOCATION FEASIBILITY — REAL- TIME MONITORING Px.. > a..,
w,
e 8
V h..
t;: " 4
t1 r_%„
f . ' ._.._.
r
ti F
r _.
r.tt.
i
y
i' , ak'' fi,
x,. ;"
t
u
a fi
y,.
Image B
Woodfield Park
This park is situated between residential homes and Cedar Ridge Court to the north, Woodfield Drive to the east, West Lathrop Road to the south, and residential homes to the west. The park as a restroom structure on the northwest side with the entrance to the structure facing north. It is understood this structure will be demolished soon. There is a play structure and basketball court located on the westside of the park. East of the basketball court is open field for the remainder of the park. Access to the park is from Cedar Ridge Court.
Factors in determining optimal video equipment and placement included:
Play Structure observation for public safety and vandalism prevention and investigation Restroom building exterior observation for public safety and vandalism prevention and investigation ( while still in existence)
Basketball court area observation for public safety
Park open space observation for public safety
The infrastructure in this park is most conducive to wireless connectivity.
A total of three locations were identified as areas for consideration of camera placement based on the factors listed above. Image C ( below) shows a depiction of the type of equipment and the estimated view area for each camera. A total of one 360° view Avigilon H4 Multisensor camera, combined with two Avigilon pan- tilt-zoom ( PTZ) H5A- PTZ cameras are recommended at this park.
The 360° view camera is recommended for placement at:
The lamppost on the south side of Cedar Ridge Court with views of the park entrance and exterior of the restroom building while it stands.
The two PTZ cameras are recommended for placement at:
5 '
420
TASK REPORT : 22 - 001
CAMERA RESEARCH AND LOCATION FEASIBILITY — REAL - TIME MONITORING The south side of the park, north of West Lathrop Road, on the existing communications tower The northeast corner of the park near the pump station, just west of Woodfield Drive ti.
w
s4 t
w
v
f,.
j
ta • t, r.;;. wi-,.,
ri.,
z
4. 3 r
Image C
Note
Generally, 270° view, 360° view or PTZ cameras are recommended. A PTZ camera is recommend for maximum ability for a live operator to manipulate the camera to pan, tilt, or zoom as necessary to assist with a public safety response. PTZ cameras have a home position which allow for view angle of approximately 90° from left to right. While PTZ cameras are a recommended asset for proactive live viewing, 270° or 360° view cameras are recommended for a wider view area in a passive view setting.
These cameras have a fixed viewable area of 270° or 360 ° from left to right, which allow for a significant viewable area, but greatly diminished proactive manipulation features. A combination of PTZ and 270° or greater cameras are ideal for these locations.
6 ; ,;; r
421
I " ;
r_______......- -- -_ . _ ___ TASK REPORT : 22 - 001
CAMERA RESEARCH AND LOCATION FEASIBILITY — REAL- TIME MONITORING
ESTIMATED COSTS
A total estimated project cost is$ 250, 800, which includes a 10% contingency estimation of$ 22,800.
Apolinar Sangalang Park
270° Avigilon H4 Multisensor camera ( quantity 3)
36, 000 cost for cameras and hardware, licensing, installation, and configuration 1, 000 estimated communications cost, including wiring ( quantity 2) 4, 000 estimated communications cost, wireless ( quantity 1) Avigilon H5A PTZ ( quantity 2)
24,000 cost for cameras and hardware, licensing, installation, and configuration 1, 000 estimated communications cost, including wiring
Total estimated cost: $ 66,000
Manuel Valverde Park
270° Avigilon H4 Multisensor camera ( quantity 2)
24, 000 cost for cameras and hardware, licensing, installation, and configuration No cost for communications as City will run conduit and Cat6 wiring 360° Avigilon H4 Multisensor camera ( quantity 2)
24, 000 cost for cameras and hardware, licensing, installation, and configuration 4,000 estimated communications cost, including wiring (quantity 1) 3, 500 estimated communications cost, including wiring ( quantity 1) 7, 500 estimated cost for new light pole ( quantity 1)
5, 000 estimated cost for electrical upgrade/ installation ( quantity 1) Avigilon H5A PTZ ( quantity 2)
24, 000 cost for cameras and hardware, licensing, installation, and configuration 3, 500 estimated communications cost, including wiring ( quantity 2) 7, 500 estimated cost for new light pole ( quantity 1)
5, 000 estimated cost for electrical upgrade/ installation (quantity 1) Vigilant L6Q LPR ( quantity 2)
4, 500 annual cost
Total estimated cost: $ 116, 000
Woodfield Park
360° Avigilon H4 Multisensor camera ( quantity 1)
12,000 cost for cameras and hardware, licensing, installation, and configuration 4, 000 estimated communications cost, including wiring
5, 000 estimated cost for electrical upgrade/ installation Avigilon H5A PTZ ( quantity 2)
24, 000 cost for cameras and hardware, licensing, installation, and configuration 1, 000 estimated communications cost, including wiring
Total estimated cost: $ 46, 000
7 422
TASK REPORT : 22 - 001
CAMERA RESEARCH AND LOCATION FEASIBILITY — REAL- TIME MONITORING
REAL- TIME MONITORING
As indicated above, real- time monitoring of the cameras within the network, specifically PTZ cameras, is recommended. Monitoring these installed assets in real time enhances the response to public safety calls by providing additional real-time updates to responding resources, which increases the safety of the responders and the community nearby.
Real- Time Crime Centers ( RTCC) are being built as additions to police departments nationwide. While many of them are built in physical spaces that include video walls, the concept, and operational procedures of an RTCC is more valuable initially than the physical space. With the use of a computer, a desk, and a designated employee, a police agency can begin real- time operations without the initial infrastructure investment necessary for a physical space. The single desk, computer, and designated employee can begin information/ data analysis and provide that new intelligence to stakeholders in real time.
The general assumption is that a video wall is the most valuable tool in an RTCC. A combination of a data aggregation mapping platform ( City of Lathrop has Peregrine) and a traffic management camera network monitored live by a designated employee ( City of Lathrop has Avigilon Video Management System), and a robust Automated License Plate Reader platform ( City of Lathrop has Vigilant), prove to be more valuable.
Those three platforms allow an agency to front- load intelligence and push it out to responders, while also assisting agencies in finding wanted vehicles, while directing resources to precise locations, and safely recover the vehicle and/ or detain the wanted person.
The Lathrop Police Department already has the technology infrastructure in place to leverage live and still shot camera resources to provide a force multiplier in the shape of real- time monitoring.
It is recommended the agency perform some trial periods with various personnel such as Detectives or Records staff, to monitor live video cameras and still shot License Plate Reader notifications. This can be completed as an ancillary task to their normal assignment. By simply installing the Avigilon Client onto their workstations, provide them with a portable radio and access to the agency' s Computer Aided Dispatch ( CAD) system, those employees can monitor live calls and access camera assets immediately, while resources are responding.
If desired, IXII Group can provide a more comprehensive analysis on the implementation of real- time procedures at the agency in another task.
8 ; r , f
423
ITEM 5. 2
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
ITEM: PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF THE SAN
OAQUIN AREA FLOOD CONTROL AGENCY' S
MOSSDALE TRACT AREA REGIONAL URBAN LEVEL OF
FLOOD PROTECTION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
UPDATE NEXUS STUDY AND RELATED COLLECTION
AGREEMENT
RECOMMENDATION: Council to Consider the Following:
1. Hold a Public Hearing; and
2. Adopt a Resolution Approving the Nexus
Study; and
3. Adopt a Resolution Delegating Authority to
the City Manager to Execute the Amended
Collection Agreement with the San 7oaquin
Area Flood Control Agency, San 7oaquin
County and the Cities of Manteca and
Stockton
SUMMARY:
Approval of the San ) oaquin Area Flood Control Agency' s (" S) AFCA") Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection (" ULOP") Development Impact Fee Update Nexus Study, is the first step in the process of implementing an updated SJAFCA Mossdale Tract Regional Levee Impact Fee Program. The purpose of the update is to incorporate changes and refinements in SJAFCA' s financing plan for 200- year ULOP levee improvements for the Mossdale Tract ( Project"). The requested action includes conducting a required public hearing and approving the updated Nexus Study as well as approving a collection agreement with SJAFCA for the fee.
As a Separate item, staff will present a new fee resolution for the Council' s consideration, which would approve and implement the fee.
Amendments to the SJAFCA Collection Agreement include incorporating terms related to the Mossdale Tract Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District ( EIFD"). As described further in more detail below, the Collection Agreement provides the mechanism for the City to recoup its investment by way of additional allocation of Tax Increment to the Mossdale Tract EIFD.
Staff requests that City Council hold a public hearing, consider all information and public testimony and, if determined to be appropriate, adopt a resolution approving the SJAFCA ULOP Impact Fee Update Nexus Study and delegating authority to the City Manager to execute the amended SJAFCA Collection Agreement. 424
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT PAGE 2
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF THE SJAFCA CONTROL AGENCY' S
MOSSDALE TRACT AREA REGIONAL ULOP DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
UPDATE NEXUS STUDY AND RELATED COLLECTION AGREEMENT
BACKGROUND:
In December 2018, the City Council approved a collection agreement with SJAFCA, San Joaquin County, and the cities of Manteca and Stockton to collect the Mossdale Tract Regional Levee Impact Fee (" Regional Levee Fee") to fund 200- year flood protection for the Urban/ Urbanizing Areas of the Mossdale Tract Basin (" Basin"). The Regional Levee Fee has been collected since 2018. It is currently the primary local funding source for SJAFCA' s continued efforts to implement ULOP 200- year flood control improvements for the Basin.
The Regional Levee Fee Program started with the cities of Lathrop and Manteca, which had, prior to 2018, implemented an interim development impact fee for ULOP within the respective portions of their jurisdictions impacted by ULOP requirements. Their programs were supplanted in November 2018 with SJAFCA' s approval of the Regional Levee Fee Program and the subsequent approval of collection agreements by each of S) AFCA' s member agencies.
Since 2018, several key factors / variables that are part of the calculations that determine the impact fee rates have changed, necessitating an update to the Regional Levee Fee Program. In summary, these changes include:
Overall Program Costs
o Since 2018, SJAFCA has incorporated the costs of the Climate Ada tation Policy into the financing plan reflect d in the Adequate Progress report. The update to the Fee Program will ensure consistency with the costs reflected in the financing plan.
EIFD Funding Approach and financing of improvements
o To generate the funding needed to cover the capital costs of the Project by the required 2028 deadline, advance funding of future impact fees is needed. The proposed EIFD provides an opportunity to issue debt and finance future fee revenues. The land use agencies collecting the development impact fee will also be participants in the EIFD. As a result of participation in the EIFD, the land use agencies' general funds will experience fiscal impacts. Fee revenues collected after the completion of the Project will be utilized to mitigate a portion of these fiscal impacts.
Fee revenues collected after the completion of the Project will be directed back to the participating agencies to mitigate the fiscal impacts of financing the flood control improvement. The updated Nexus Study now reflects the use of the fee revenues after the completion of the Project and this financing approach.
425
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT PAGE 3
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF THE S) AFCA CONTROL AGENCY' S
MOSSDALE TRACT AREA REGIONAL ULOP DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
UPDATE NEXUS STUDY AND RELATED COLLECTION AGREEMENT
Updated Development Projections
o Since the approval of the Nexus Study in 2018, updated development projection information has been provided by the land use agencies. The development planning information was refined as part of the efforts to analyze the EIFD financing approach and supporting analyses. This update to the Nexus Study incorporates these refinements in the planned development.
SJAFCA staff and consultants have prepared drafts of required documentation needed to implement a proposed Mossdale Tract Area Regional Impact Fee Program Update.
The following discussion summarizes the attached materials and provides additional context for the Council' s consideration of the recommendation.
DRAFT MOSSDALE TRACT AREA REGIONAL URBAN LEVEL OF FLOOD PROTECTION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE UPDATE NEXUS STUDY ( Attachment " 8"):
The preparation of a nexus study is the first step in the process of approving any update to a development impact fee. As part of the update to the Regional Levee Fee Program, SJAFCA is required to comply with the Mitigation Fee Act ( also known as AB 1600," Government Code sections 66000 et seq.), as well as more recently approved legislation, AB 602 ( 2021), ( Government Code § 65940. 1, 66016. 5, and 66019 and Health and Safety Code § 50466. 5).
The Mitigation Fee Act identifies the required findings which must be made in any action establishing, increasing, or imposing a development impact fee as a condition of approval of a development project. The attached Nexus Study has been prepared in a manner that establishes an equitable development impact fee that can be imposed on all planned development projects in the Mossdale Tract that are provided ULOP. Development impact fees would be collected to continue providing the funding necessary to pay for the levee system improvements. In general, the study establishes the ' nexus" between the impacts of development projects and the costs associated with the construction of public facilities to mitigate the impacts on infrastructure.
The findings required by the Mitigation Fee Act and supporting discussion for the development impact fee update are presented within the Nexus Study.
AB 602 sets forth additional procedural requirements for the preparation of a nexus study, and the adoption of a development impact fee. As it relates to the identification of level of service the following must be identified and provided:
1. The existing level of service;
2. The new level of service; and
426
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT PAGE 4
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF THE SJAFCA CONTROL AGENCY' S
MOSSDALE TRACT AREA REGIONAL ULOP DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
UPDATE NEXUS STUDY AND RELATED COLLECTION AGREEMENT
3. An explanation of why the new level of service is appropriate.
In addition, AB 602 requires that the calculation of the fee on a housing development project be proportionate to the square footage of the proposed units of the development. A nexus study is not required to comply with this requirement if all of the following exemption findings are made:
1. An explanation as to why square footage is not an appropriate metric to calculate fees imposed on housing development projects.
2. An explanation that an alternative basis of calculating the fee bears a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development.
3. The other policies in the fee structure support smaller developments, or otherwise ensure that smaller development are not charged disproportionate fees.
The AB 602 required level of service information is presented in the Nexus Study.
Further, the Nexus Study presents a fee that is calculated on a Gross Developable Acreage ( GDA) basis versus a square footage basis. As such, the required AB 602 exemption findings are presented in the Nexus Study.
Tables 1 and 2 below summarize the proposed Updated Fee Rates documented within the Nexus Study compared to the current fee rates in effect today. It is SJAFCA' s goal to work Wftll each of tl- e P 1err ber land use agencies to implement this Update with the new fee rates effective as soon as practicable.
TABLE 1 — Proposed Rates for Adoption
Fiscal Year
20/ 21 Updated
Regional Regional Change
Fee Rates Fee Rates from
Land Use Per GDA) Per GDA) Current Rate
Single Family
Residential 19, 428 22, 106 14%
Multi- Family
Residential 17, 691 20, 686 17%
Commercial 18, 399 20, 916 14%
Industrial 15, 309 16, 384 7%
427
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT PAGE 5
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF THE S.IAFCA CONTROL AGENCY' S
MOSSDALE TRACT AREA REGIONAL ULOP DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
UPDATE NEXUS STUDY AND RELATED COLLECTION AGREEMENT
TABLE 2 - Demonstrative Rates on Per Unit Basis
Fiscal Year Change
20/ 21 Updated from
Regional Regional Current
Land Use Basis Fee Rates Fee Rates Rate
Single Family Per 3, 169 3, 770 19%
Residential [ 1] Unit
Multi- Family Residential Per 922 1, 095 19%
2] Unit
Commercial [ 3] Per 1, 442 1, 713 19%
1, 000
SF
Industrial [ 4] Per 1, 113 1, 053 5%
1, 000
SF
1] Current assumption is 6. 13 units per GDA. Proposed assumption is 5. 86 units per GDA. 2] Current assumption is 19. 19 units per GDA. Proposed assumption is 18. 89 units per GDA. 3] Current assumption is 12, 763 SF per acre. Proposed assumption is 12, 207 SF per acre. 4] Current assumption is 13, 756 SF per acre. Proposed assumption is 15, 553 SF per acre.
AMENDED AGREEMENT FOR COLLECTION OF SAN JOAQUIN AREA FLOOD CONTROL AGENCY MOSSDAL E TRACT AREA REGIONAL URBAN L_FVEL OF FLOOD PROTECTION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE ( Attachment " C"):
The City Council entered into an agreement for collection of the San Joaquin Area Flood Control Agency Mossdale tract area regional urban level of flood protection development impact fee (' Collection Agreement") with SJAFCA' s member agencies in December 2018 as part of the initial implementation of a Regional Levee Fee Program.
As part of this update to the program, there is a need to update the Collection Agreement (" Amended Collection Agreement") ( Attachment C") to reflect additional provisions of the updated program. With the Amended Collection Agreement, provisions for the repayment of EIFD are payments consistent with Exhibit ' A" of Attachment C, to the Agreement, the Key Terms Related to the Repayment of EIFD Payments to Land Use Entities from Impact Fees. As noted above, the fee revenues collected after the completion of the development project will be directed back to the participating agencies to mitigate the fiscal impacts of financing the flood control improvements through the EIFD.
The Amended Collection Agreement to collect the fee and S) AFCA would direct future funding from the fee back to the agencies pursuant to the recommended terms associated with the EIFD contributions.
428
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT PAGE 6
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF THE SJAFCA CONTROL AGENCY' S
MOSSDALE TRACT AREA REGIONAL ULOP DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
UPDATE NEXUS STUDY AND RELATED COLLECTION AGREEMENT
SJAFCA requests that the Council delegate authority to the City Manager to execute the Amended Collection Agreement substantially in the form attached to this report.
The following summarizes the substantive terms reflected in the attached form of the Amended Collection Agreement:
As soon as the development impact fee is adopted and effective within all of the land use agencies, consistent with the requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act, the land use agencies will commence collection of the updated development impact fee.
The land use agencies will deposit all development impact fee revenues collected, including any interest earned on funds collected, less 3% administrative costs of collection, with SJAFCA.
SJAFCA will provide a 60- day notice to the land use agencies of any changes to the development impact fee.
SJAFCA and the land use agencies will administer a Fee Crediting and Reimbursement Program consistent with the principles identified within the Amended Collection Agreement. ( These Principles for fee crediting are the same as principles previously approved within the original November 2018 adoption of the Regional Levee Fee Program. There are no recommended changes here).
The Amended Collection Agreement also addresses reimbursement of the development impact fee in the event of collection errors or building permit cancellation, appeals of fee calculations or applicability, indemnity, notice and other standard legal agreement provisions.
Finally, the Amended Collection Agreement directs payments from the development impact fee back to the land use agencies participating in the EIFD commencing in 2030, pursuant to the terms described further below.
FEE CREDITING AND REIMBURSEMENT PRINCIPLES:
In November 2018, in coordination with the land use agencies, staff and Agency consultants developed and included within the collection agreement a set of Fee Crediting and Reimbursement Principles ( Exhibit " B" of Attachment " C"), which are summarized as follows:
Creditable Funding consists of all " Prior Advance Funding" collected and documented within a Credit & Reimbursement Analysis ( Credit Study) completed by SJAFCA.
That creditable funding is applicable to all of those development projects identified within the Credit Study.
The obligation to fund levee improvements is based on all undeveloped acreage within the identified projects in the Credit Study as of April 2017 ( when Lathrop and Manteca adopted their Interim Development Fee Programs). 429
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT PAGE 7
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF THE S] AFCA CONTROL AGENCY' S
MOSSDALE TRACT AREA REGIONAL ULOP DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
UPDATE NEXUS STUDY AND RELATED COLLECTION AGREEMENT
All development with issued building permits as of January 8, 2019 ( when SJAFCA' s Regional Levee Fee Program was effective) is considered to be absorbed and will have a fee obligation based upon the fee rate effective on that date.
All funding provided will first be used to satisfy this fee obligation and will then be applied proportionately to all remaining acreage on a pro- rata basis.
Going forward, from January 8, 2019, each development permit pulled will be required to fund the remaining proportional amount of development impact fees due on an acreage basis.
Any developer- constructed facilities will be afforded credit for the construction of those facilities based upon the terms of an agreement between the land use agency and S) AFCA. Any credits for developer construction facilities will be utilized in the same manner as Prior Advance Funding.
In the event that a developer is due a reimbursement as a result of providing more funding than a development project' s fee obligation, reimbursements will only be provided from the collection of future fees from other development projects in the future.
Reimbursements will only be provided in the future once the levee improvement program has been completed and certified unless otherwise determined by SJAFCA that payment of such reimbursements is financially feasible and legally defensible by SJAFCA.
For land use agencies that are due reimbursement for providing funding to advance the program in advance of January 1, Z018 ( not including funding provided by Interim Seed Money Funding Agreement dated June 12, 2018), no reimbursements should be paid from development impact fees until all levee improvement Project costs are paid and the levee improvement program has been completed and certified unless otherwise determined by SJAFCA that payment of such reimbursements is financially feasible and legally defensible by SJAFCA.
For land use agencies due repayment pursuant to the Interim Seed Money Funding Agreement dated June 12, 2018, repayment will be made consistent with Section 6 of that agreement.
There are no changes to these policies and procedures as a result of the Amended Collection Agreement.
EIFD REPAYMENT TERMS:
As part of negotiations related to the amount of Tax Increment to be allocated to the EIFD, the participating agencies and S) AFCA, parties to the Amended Collection Agreement, have incorporated the use of future development impact fees collected after the implementation of the Regional Levee Fee Program to help mitigate the impacts to participating agencies' general funds as a result of participation in the 430
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT PAGE 8
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF THE SJAFCA CONTROL AGENCY' S
MOSSDALE TRACT AREA REGIONAL ULOP DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
UPDATE NEXUS STUDY AND RELATED COLLECTION AGREEMENT
EIFD and the allocation of Tax Increment through the EIFD. As a reminder, the tax allocation rates proposed for the EIFD are as follows:
UI. OP Project Construction
anticipated to run through 2029 ( Initial Years)`
Additional EIFD
Entities flat Contribution/ Property
Total
rate)/ Initial
Tax Increment
Base Rates
City of Lathrop 10% 10%
City of Manteca 5% 5%
City of Stockton 1% 1%
San Joaquin County 10% 37% 47%
This additional contribution would be subject to priority repayment, with interest, by SJAFCA from future Mossdale Tract Area Regional Development m act Fee revenues collected after 2029.
Following the Initial Years, the maximum portion of the total property Tax Increment revenue allocation proposed to be apportioned to the EIFD will be 20% until such time as the cost of eligible EIFD facilities has been satisfied.
The cumulative County Additional EIFD Contributions ( portion of the County Contributions making up the 37% contributions) will be repaid to the County using development impact fees on a priority basis. The County will receive 100% of development impact fees until the cumulative Additional County EIFD Contributions are repaid with interest.
Following the repayment of the cumulative County Additional EIFD Contributions with interest from development impact fees, the fee payments would be implemented as follows.
All development impact fees received by SJAFCA after repayment to the County would be allocated and paid to the cities and the County based on their respective proportionate share of the cumulative total of each participating agency' s contributions during the Initial Years plus their all contributions made after the completion of the Project.
The duration ( i. e., term) of the impact fee payments to the agencies is yet to be determined. The term will be finalized during the process of updating the SJAFCA Mossdale ULOP Program Impact Fee Nexus Study. As part of the recurring 5- Year Impact Fee Update processes, the Member Agencies will have an opportunity to weigh in on duration of the impact fee program. 431
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT PAGE 9
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF THE SJAFCA CONTROL AGENCY' S
MOSSDALE TRACT AREA REGIONAL ULOP DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
UPDATE NEXUS STUDY AND RELATED COLLECTION AGREEMENT
REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:
Approval of the SJAFCA ULOP Development Impact Fee Update Nexus Study is the first step in the process of implementing an updated SJAFCA Mossdale Tract Regional Levee Impact Fee Program. The purpose of the update is to reflect changes and refinements in SJAFCA' s financing plan for 200- year ULOP levee improvements for the Mossdale Tract. Amendments to the SJAFCA Collection Agreement include the incorporation of terms related to the Mossdale Tract EIFD.
Staff requests that City Council hold a public hearing, consider all information and public testimony and, if determined to be appropriate, adopt a resolution approving the SJAFCA ULOP Impact Fee Update Nexus Study and delegating authority to the City Manager to execute the amended SJAFCA Collection Agreement.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no immediate fiscal impact to the City by adopting the attached Resolution approving the Nexus Study and authorizing the execution of the Amended Collection Agreement. Also, during the September 12, 2022 City Council meeting a separate item is scheduled for Council' s consideration for the proposed fee as further described below.
ATTAC H M E NTS:
A. A resolution of the City Council of the City of Lathrop Approving the San Joaquin Area Flood Control Agency' s Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection Development Impact Fee Update Nexus Study and Related Collection Agreement
B. Draft Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection Development Impact Fee Update Nexus Study, Dated May 12, 2022 C. Amended Agreement for Collection of San Joaquin Area Flood Control Agency Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection Development Impact Fee
o Exhibit A - San ) oaquin Area Flood Control Agency Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection Development Impact Fee Key Terms Related to the Repayment of EIFD Payments to Land Use Entities from Impact Fees
o Exhibit B - San Joaquin Area Flood Control Agency Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection Development Impact Fee Credit & Reimbursement Policies
432
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT PAGE 10
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF THE S7AFCA CONTROL AGENCY' S
MOSSDALE TRACT AREA REGIONAL ULOP DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
UPDATE NEXUS STUDY AND RELATED COLLECTION AGREEMENT
APPROVALS
I3o ZOZ2
Brad T or Date
City Engineer
t I
Fu2 ca 8 3
2o2Z
Cari James Date
Finance Director
f - -- 8 ' 31 • Zo2Z
Michael King Date
Assistant City Mana er
3p `' LO z-- L
c>
Salvador Navarrete Date
City Attorney
a' Z'Z.
St en J. Sa{ vatore Date
City Manager
433
RESOLUTION NO. 22-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LATHROP APPROVING THE SAN 70AQUIN AREA FLOOD CONTROL AGENCY' S
MOSSDALE TRACT AREA REGIONAL URBAN LEVEL OF FLOOD PROTECTION
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE UPDATE NEXUS STUDY AND RELATED
COLLECTION AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, the Mitigation Fee Act ( the Act") ( California Government Code Section 66000 et seq.) authorizes a local agency to impose impact fees as a condition of approval of development projects to help defray the costs of public infrastructure and facilities that will be needed to serve the proposed development; and WHEREAS, Section 66016. 5( a) of the Act requires that prior to adopting a development impact fee, a local agency must adopt an impact fee nexus study that establishes the connection between the proposed fee and the actual impacts of development on the local public infrastructure and facilities; and WHEREAS, the Central Valley Flood Protection Act of 2008 and Department of Water Resources (" DWR") standards require that all cities and counties within the Sacramento- San Joaquin Valley make findings related to a 200- year Urban Level of Flood Protection (' ULOP") or the national Federal Emergency Management Agency FEMA") standard of flood protection before making certain land use approvals; and WHEREAS, in January of 2018 the City of Lathrop ( City"), the San Joaquin County Flood Control and Water Conservation District ( SJCFCWCD"), the City of Stockton, the City of Manteca, and the County of San Joaquin executed an Amended and Restated Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement to reform the Sar, 7oaquin Area Flood Control Agency (" SJAFCA"), with a common goal of reducing flood risk in the Mossdale Tract Area ( Mossdale Tract"); and
WHEREAS, in 2018 SJAFCA, on behalf of its member agencies, approved a nexus study and Regional Levee Fee Program to fund 200- year flood protection improvements for Mossdale Tract; however, several key factors affecting the fee calculations have changed in the intervening years, necessitating an update to the Regional Levee Fee Program; and
WHEREAS, SJAFCA has prepared the updated Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection Development Impact Fee Update Nexus Study Nexus Study"), attached hereto as Exhibit 1, which incorporates updated costs, funding approaches, and development projections; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 66016. 5( a)( 7) of the Act, notice was published in the Manteca Bulletin on August 12, 2022, providing 30 days' notification of the time and place for a public hearing to consider and adopt the Nexus Study.
Notice of the hearing was also provided 14 days prior to the public hearing to those interested parties who requested, in writing, notice of ineetings on new or increased fees or service charges; and
434
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on September 12, 2022, at a regularly scheduled meeting of the Lathrop City Council ( the Council") to hear and consider the Nexus Study and its findings, as presented by SJAFCA staff and consultants, and any written and oral presentations from interested members of the public regarding the Nexus Study and the proposed development impact fee; and WHEREAS, the Nexus Study identifies the existing level of service and states that the existing levees protecting the Mossdale Tract do not meet state Urban Levee Design Criteria ( ULDC") standards adopted by DWR in May 2012, and are not currently certified to provide 200- year ULOP; and
WHEREAS, the Nexus Study finds the development impact fee will fund levee improvements that meet state ULDC standards and achieve 200- year ULOP while offsetting the increase in damageable property that will be placed in the leveeprotected floodplain as new development occurs in the area, and that the fee is needed to implement Phase 4 levee improvements to the Mossdale Tract and repay funds advanced by developers and local agencies to support early implementation of the improvements; and
WHEREAS, the Nexus Study includes appropriate findings that a fee charged on a gross developable acreage basis bears a reasonable relationship between the fee being charged and the burden posed by the development, and that fees charged on housing developments need not be calculated on a square footage basis, consistent with the requirements of Section 66016. 5( a) of the Act; and WHEREAS, SJAFCA has requested that the County of San Joaquin and the cities of Lathrop, Stockton, and Manteca enter into an amended agreement to collect the proposed development impact fees as a condition of issuina building permits for new development in the Mossdale Tract within each party' s respective land use authority, and provide those funds to SJAFCA; and
WHEREAS, SJAFCA has prepared an Amended Collection Agreement for Collection of the San Joaquin Area Flood Control Agency Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection Development Impact Fee (' Collection Agreement"), attached as shown in Attachment C", for the County and the cities of Lathrop, Stockton, and Manteca to execute.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Lathrop as follows:
l. The Council hereby approves and adopts the Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection Development Impact Fee Update Nexus Study prepared by SJAFCA as shown in Attachment B" of the City Manager' s Report dated, September 12, 2022.
2. The Nexus Study adopted by this Resolution supersedes any prior nexus study adopted in relation to development impact fees for the Mossdale Tract Area, and shall be updated at least every eight years, in accordance with Section 66016( a)( 8) of the Act.
435
3. The proposed development impact fee, along with any evidence regarding the proposed fee calculation, assumptions, or methodology, shall be considered for adoption by resolution at a future public hearing ( September 12, 2022), to be noticed and held in accordance with Sections 66018 and 66019 of the Act.
4. The Council also hereby approves the Amended Agreement for Collection of San Joaquin Area Flood Control Agency Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection Development Impact Fee, attached hereto as Exhibit 2, and affirms that any adopted impact development fee will be collected by the City in accordance with the Collection Agreement.
5. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the Collection Agreement substantially in the form attached, subject to review and approval by City Counsel, and take whatever other actions are necessary and appropriate to carry out the purpose and intent of this Resolution.
6. The adoption of this Resolution is not a " project" subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (" CEQA") because it is in furtherance of the creation of a government funding mechanism which does not involve any commitment to any specific project ( CEQA Guidelines Section 15378( b)( 4)), and because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the resolved actions may have a significant effect on the environment, in that this Resolution contains no provisions modifying the physical design, development, or construction of residences or nonresidential structures ( CEQA Guidelines Section 15061( b)( 3)). 436
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 12th day of September 2022, by the following vote of the City Council, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Sonny Dhaliwal, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Teresa Vargas, City Clerk Salvador Navarrete, City Attorney 437
i • •
Z
Mossda ( e Tracfi Area
Regional Urban Level of Flood
Protection Levee Impact Fee
PUBLIC DRAFT
NEXUS STUDY UPDATE
Prepered tor an oaq^ County + t, oi c. i- rop City o , J cnfiPcr, a^ d City of kton Prepared b y_ Larsen ' JJurzel Associc: tes Inc
Prepared on Behaif oE The San Jcaquin : Floed Control , genc, SJ . FCA IV,ay 12 %0? 2
www. larsenwurzel. com
438
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
RESOLUTION/ ORDINANCE PLACEHOLDER
LWA RSE PLEt
l.$ kssrx fe? s. Irc
1801011SlAFCAMossdaleNexusStudyUGDAiE- Pu6licDiaft20210512 439
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Summary................................................................................................................................................. 1 Overview................................................................................................................................................. 1 Background............................................................................................................................................. 1 Senate Bill 5 ( 2007) and ULOP Context............................................................................................ 1 Regional Levee Fee Program............................................................................................................ 1 Updated Regional Levee Fee Program.................................................................................................... 2 Authorityand Procedures....................................................................................................................... 2 Assembly Bill No. 1600: Mitigation Fee Act..................................................................................... 2 Assembly Bil) No. 602 ( 2021)............................................................................................................ 8 ProceduralRequirements.............................................................................................................. 10 LandUse Categories............................................................................................................................. 11 Mossdale Tract Area Land Uses........................................................................................................... 11 Planned New Development........................................................................................................... 12 Capital Improvements and Projects........................................................................................................ 14 Capital Costs Allocable to Planned Development................................................................................ 14 Summary of Capital Improvements Funded by the Development Impact Fee................................... 14 Regional Levee Fee Methodology........................................................................................................... 17 Cost Allocation and Calculation........................................................................................................... 17 FeeProgram Implementation................................................................................................................. 26 Regional Levee Fee Collection ............................................................................................................. 26 FeeTriggers% Applical ilfty .................................................................................................................... " L6 FeeCollection Deferral ........................................................................................................................ 26 Regional Levee Fee Program Boundary............................................................................................... 26 ExemptionsFrom the Fee.................................................................................................................... 27 Exceptions to the Exemptions....................................................................................................... 27 CoveragePeriod................................................................................................................................... 27 AdministrationCosts............................................................................................................................ 27 Variationsin Method........................................................................................................................... 28 Fee Credit/ Reimbursement for the Design and Construction of Facilities........................................ 28 Refunds and Appeals Process.............................................................................................................. 28 AnnualInflation Adjustment................................................................................................................ 29 FeeProgram Administration................................................................................................................... 30 FeeCalculation..................................................................................................................................... 30 LandUse Categorization................................................................................................................ 30 Determining the Gross Developable Acreage ( GDA) of a New Development.............................. 30 CalculationSteps.................................................................................................................................. 35 Per Unit Fee Collection for Single- Family Residential Development................................................... 35 FeeRevenue Accounting...................................................................................................................... 35 LWA' tARSEN NiURZEi
Associoles Ir<
18010115JAF[ AMossdoleNexusSNdyUPDATE- Pu6licOra) t20220512 440
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
Periodic Review and Cost Adjustment................................................................................................. 35 NexusFindings....................................................................................................................................... 37 Authority.............................................................................................................................................. 37 Summary of Nexus Findings................................................................................................................. 37 Requirement 1: Purpose of Fee..................................................................................................... 37 Requirement 2: Use of the Fee ..................................................................................................... 37 Requirement 3: Relationship Between Use of Fees and Type of Development........................... 37 Requirement 4: Relationship Between Need for Facility and Type of Development................... 38 Requirement 5: Relationship Between Amount of Fees and Cost of Facility ............................... 38 LWA<<A N E
1' Assaricfet. Irc
1801011 LAFCA Mossdole Nexus SNdy UPDATE- Pu61ic OroJ[ 2022 0512 441
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Planned Development Summary........................................................................................................ 13 Table 2: Cost Estimate Summary...................................................................................................................... 16 Table 3: Damageable Square Feet of Structure Per GDA................................................................................. 20 Table 4: Relative Structure Damage Per GDA................................................................................................... 21 Table 5: Relative Land Damage per GDA.......................................................................................................... 22 Table 6: Relative Property Damage Index......................................................................................................... 23 Table 7: Apportionment of Costs Per GDA....................................................................................................... 24 Table 8: Development Fee Rate Summary ....................................................................................................... 25 Table 9: Example ADU Fee Calculations............................................................................................................ 34
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Regional Levee Fee Program Boundary Map........................................................................................ 4
UST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A— Planned Development Details
Appendix B— SJAFCA Project Expenditures Discount & Escalation to 2021 Dollars Appendix C— Estimated Cost Allocation BY Project and Revenue over time Appendix D— Example Gross Developable Acreage Calculation nKSEN v u ze
t: f+.ssxiofst. Irc
1801011 SIAFCA Mossdale Nexus Study UGOA7E- Public Diaf[ 102Z 0512 442
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
2018 Nexus Study Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection Levee Impact Fee Final Nexus Study dated November 8, 2018
AB 1600 Assembly Bill 1600, Mitigation Fee Act
ADUs Accessory Dwelling Units
CFD Community Facilities District
DWR California Department of Water Resources
EAD Expected Annual Damage
EIFD Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
GDA gross developable acreage
JADUs Junior Accessory Dwelling Units
Local Agencies San Joaquin County, City of Lathrop, City of Manteca, and City of Stockton LFMA Local Flood Management Agency
LSRP Levee Seepage Repair Project
LWA Larsen Wurzel & Associates, Inc.
Nexus Study Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update dated May 12, 2022 ( Presented for Adoption) Regional Levee Fee Mossdale Tract Area Regional Levee Fee Program SB 5 Senate Bill 5 ( 2007)
SFR Single- Family Residential
SJAFCA San Joaquin Area Flood Control Agency
ULDC Urban Levee Design Criteria
ULOP Urban Level of Flood Protection
V 1801011 SIAFCA Mossdale Nexus Study UPDATE- 7ublic Dr h 20110513 443
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
SUMMARY
Overview
Larsen Wurzel & Associates, Inc. ( LWA) has prepared this Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update ( Nexus Study) for San Joaquin County, City of Lathrop, City of Manteca, and City of Stockton ( collectively the Local Agencies) in coordination with the San Joaquin Area Flood Control Agency ( SJAFCA). A series of levee improvements are needed to ensure that the levees surrounding the Mossdale Tract Area meet the California Department of Water Resources( DWR) Urban Levee Design Criteria ( ULDC), that the flood protection system can provide an Urban Level of Flood Protection ULOP), and the requirements of Senate Bill 5 ( 2007) ( SB 5) can be met. This Nexus Study provides the basis for the Mossdale Tract Area Regional Levee Fee Program ( Regiona) Levee Fee) that ensures new development pays its proportionate share of the levee improvement costs needed to provide ULOP to the Mossdale Tract Area.
Background
Senate Bill 5( 2007) and ULOP Context
SB 5 defines ULOP as the" leve) of protection that is necessary to withstand flooding that has a 1- in- 200 chance of occurring in any given year using criteria consistent with, or developed by, the California Department of Water Resources." This bill requires all cities and counties within the Sacramento- San loaquin Valley, as defined in California Government Code § 65007( h), to make findings related to ULOP or the national Federal Emergency Management Agency( FEMA) standard of flood protection before:( 1) entering into a development agreement for any prapert th t i l cated v, ithin a flood hazard zane; ( 2) anproving a discretionar permit or other discretionary entitlement, or a ministerial permit that would result in the construction of a new residence, for a project that is located within a flood hazard zone; or( 3) approving a tentative map, or a parcel map for which a tentative map was not required, for any subdivision that is located within a flood hazard zone see California Government Code § 65865. 5, 65962, and 66474. 5).
Regional Levee Fee Program
The Regional Levee Fee was implemented in two steps. As described within the 2018 Adequate Progress Update prepared by LWA, the Local Agencies entered into an agreement designating SJAFCA as the Local Flood Management Agency( LFMA) responsible for planning, implementing, funding, and financing the Phase 4 levee improvements identified within the Adequate Progress Report. The Adequate Progress Report identifies several sources that would fund the Phase 4 improvements, one of which is a regional development impact fee. Before designating SJAFCA as the regional governing agency, the Cities of Lathrop and Manteca implemented interim development fee programs. In 2018, the SJAFCA structure was reorganized to include the Cities of Lathrop and Manteca and effectively becoming the regional governance entity. The Cities of Lathrop and Manteca transitioned their interim fee programs to a permanent program established and administered by SJAFCA, covering the entire Mossdale Tract Area.
LARSEI` d' AJURZEi
Associe fes. rc
1801011 5/ AFCA Mossdale Nexus SNdy UPDA E- P blic DiaJt 2022 OSl2 444
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
Updated Regional Levee Fee Program
This Nexus Study is an update of the November 8, 2018, Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection Levee Impact Fee Final Nexus Study( 2018 Nexus Study) prepared by LWA, formally adopted by the SJAFCA Board by Resolution Number 18- 21 and effective January 8, 2019. This update reflects an updated program cost estimate that addresses climate change and updates to program funding from other sources.
This Nexus Study is being prepared as a regional fee with the intent that each ofthe Local Agencies individually adopt the Region Levee Fee and collect and remit the fees to SJAFCA.
Authority and Procedures
Assembly Bill No. 1600: Mitigation Fee Act
This Nexus Study has been prepared to update the established Regional Levee Fee program in accordance with the provisions of the Mitigation Fee Act ( AB 1600) as codified in Government Code § 66000 et. seq.
AB 1600 sets forth the procedural requirements for establishing and collecting development impact fees.
These procedures require that " a reasonable relationship," or nexus, must exist between a governmental exaction and the purpose of the condition. This Nexus Study documents that reasonable relationship between the development impact fee to be levied on each land use category and the cost of the facility improvements.
Nexus Study requirements include:
1. Identifying the purpose of the fee.
2. Identifying how the fee is to be used.
3. Determining that a reasonable relationship exists between the fee' s use and the type of development proj ct on v hich the fee is in posed.
4. Determining how a reasonable relationship exists between the need for the public facility and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed.
5. Demonstrating a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed.
AB 1600 Requirement 1: Purpose of Fee
The Regional Impact Fee will provide funding for 200- year levee improvements in compliance with 56 5 and DWR' s ULOP criteria to protect the Cities of Lathrop, Manteca, Stockton, and unincorporated portions of San Joaquin County within the Mossdale Tract Area as further described within this Nexus Study. All new planned development projects located within the area shown in Figure 1 that lie within the Mossdale Tract Area will be subject to this Regional Levee Fee as it is adopted by each Local Agency.
AB 1600 Requirement 2: Use of the Fee
Fee revenue will be used to implement Phase 4 levee improvements to the Mossdale Tract Area as well as to repay any funds advanced by developers and Local Agencies to support early implementation of the improvements ahead of Fee payments. The improvements funded by the Fee consist of levee improvements to be implemented by SJAFCA that ensure the levees meet ULDC standards.
A
IAKSEN NillRLEC
2 Asso[ iofrs. lrc
18010I1LAFCAMossdoleNexusStudyUPOATE- VublicDiaJt10210511 445
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
The levee improvements required for enhanced flood protection to meet the ULDC standard and achieve ULOP, including, among various other items, the following work:
ULDC engineering analysis and identification of deficiencies Design and environmental evaluation of levee improvements to cure ULDC deficiencies Implementation of levee improvements to cure ULDC deficiencies As previously noted, this Nexus Study provides the required findings needed to impose a development impact fee pursuant to AB 1600. AB 1600 requires that the fee is to be calculated by spreading the costs among the anticipated future development in proportion to that development' s impact on the services provided. An Interim Levee Fee was imposed and collected by the Cities of Lathrop and Manteca as a condition of new development' s approval. Now that SJAFCA has been designated as the regional governance entity to administer, implement, fund, and finance the needed improvements, SJAFCA requests that each of the Local Agencies approve this updated Regional Levee Fee. SJAFCA also requests that the Local Agencies collect and remit the Fees to SJAFCA to complete the necessary work. taRSErs N uazet
3 k5suriafay. r<
1801011 SJAFCA Mossdale Nexus Study UVDATE- Pu61ic Oiaft 20Z2 0512 446
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
Figure 1: Regional Levee Fee Program Boundary Map
t
w
4,i
City of Sboc cbor..,,
w,
r ~',.,'",""•~ '..`+ `"
1 M,
1'
1"
1 t
1'*,,
c= 3
City=of,La hrt>p
L"
City of ManGeca
I=-
N
4 i'
r— t,r 1. M..,,, t.,.a
Le end Manteca City Limit ff/f Lathrop Fee Area i Stockton Fee Area 200- Vear Flood Plain
Lathrop City Limi[ ```
r// Mante aFeeArea A SanloaquinCounryFeeArea
Stock[ on City Limit f
A`a.RSEtv' v uRz i
A.su[ iates Ir.c 4 1801011 SIAFCA Mossdale Nexus 5[ udy UGDATE- Guhlic OraJ[ 2022 0512 447
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
AB 1600 Requirement 3: Relationship Between Use of Fees and Type of Development Development of Residential, Commercial, and Industrial land uses within the Mossdale Tract Area require improved flood control and flood protection services.
Flood risk has two aspects: the probability of flooding and the consequences that follow. An area could have a high probability of flooding, but minimal consequences because it is vacant and contains no infrastructure or people. In this case, flood risk would be considered low. Conversely, a highly urbanized community that has a moderate or low probability of flooding would be considered high risk because of the greater consequences of a flood in that location ( i. e., loss of life, livelihood, property, health, and human suffering).
Risk can be expressed and quantified in terms of Expected Annual Damage ( EAD). EAD is the product of the probability of flooding ( percent chance in any given year) and consequences ( dollars of damage as a result of flooding). Without mitigation, additional development increases the EAD by increasing developed property at risk. To protect life and property, it is important for the LFMA to maintain a high level of service ( in terms of maintaining low flood risk) within the Mossdale Tract Area as development increases. To maintain the current level of EAD and reduce the level flood of risk to offset increased EAD, the LFMA must improve the flood protection facilities as development occurs.
Each development project will ad J to the necessity of flood protection due to the increased EAD as a result of that development. Additionally, each development project will benefit from the levee infrastructure already in place at the time of development. For the new development described in this Nexus Study to occur in the Mossdale Tract Area, levee improvements that meet the requirements of the ULDC are necessary.
AB 1600 Requirement 4: Relationship Between Need for Facility and Type of Development As sated under AB 1600 Requirement 3, development of Residential, Commercial, and Industrial lanci uses within the Mossdale Tract Area require improved flood control and flood protection services to protect use and life. Each development project will add to the necessity of flood protection due to the increased EAD as a result ofthat development. For the new development described in this Nexus Study to occur in the Mossdale Tract Area, levee improvements that reduce the probability of flooding are necessary.
AB 1600 Requirement 5: Relationship Between Amount of Fees and Cost of Facility This study includes the following components:
1. A determination of the amount of planned development upon which the costs of the fee funded facilities will be allocated.
2. The identification of costs associated with each improvement, facility, or program funded by the fee.
3. The development of a standard metric by which to proportionately allocate the costs of the facilities between land use categories based upon a damage index that considers the relative impact to EAD.
4. A determination of the fee cost per acre for each land use category.
5. A determination of the estimated fees per unit by land use category.
6. A discussion of how the program will be administered by the land use agencies.
LWA A E E
5 4., Asscciafas Irc
1801011 LAFCA Mossdole Nexus SNdy UPOATE- Puhlic Dio)[ 20210512 448
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
The Regional Levee Fee is calculated on a gross developable acreage ( GDA) basis and will be collected on a per unit basis for all types of development. All development projects within the Mossdale Tract Area are subject to the fee. To determine costs associated with the Project and the planned development upon which to allocate the costs, a planning horizon of 30 years has been assumed. The calculation and collection of the fee is assumed to occur prior to the issuance of a building permit. The details of the calculation and collection of the fee are further described within the Fee Program Administration section of this Nexus Study. Subsequent to the adoption of the Regional Levee Fee and this Nexus Study by the Local Agencies, each agency will further define the administrative procedures for the efficient administration, collection, and remittance of Regional Levee Fees.
Table S- 1 provides a
summary of the proposed initial per acre fee rates by land use category. Table S- 2 provides the estimated initial fees per unit by land use category.
LWA' ARS NN, zE
6 l+. sscciafes Ir<
1801011SlAFCAMossdoleNexusStudyUPDAiE- PublicOrof[ 20120511 449
Table S- 1
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Summary of DIF Rates by Land Use Category
Land Use Initial Fee Rates [ 1]
Single- Family Residential 22, 106 Per GDA
Multi- Family Residential 20, 686 Per GDA
Commercial 20, 916 Per GDA
Industrial 16, 384 Per GDA
1] Per Gross Developable Acre( GDA). Initial Fee Rate for FY 2021/ 22 and 2022/ 23. Fee rates will increase each July 1 commencing luly 1, 2023.
Table S- 2
Mossdale Tract Area: Regiona) ULOP Levee Impact Fee Provided for Demonstrative Estimated Fee Per Unit or 1, 000 Square Feet Purposes Only Land Use Estimated Fee Assumption
Single- Family Residential 3, 770 / Unit @ 5. 86 Units per GDA Multi- Family Residential 1, 095 / Unit @ 18. 89 Units per GDA Commercial 1, 713 / 1, 000 SF @ FAR of 12, 207 SF per Acre Industrial 1, 053 / 1, 000 SF @ FAR of 15, 553 SF per Acre Prepared by LWA 7 1801101 ULOP Mossdale Regional Fee Mode120210512 450
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
Assembly Bill No. 602( 2021J
Level of Service Identification Requirements
This Nexus Study has also been prepared in accordance with the provisions of Assembly Bi11602 ( 2021) AB 602) as codified in Government Code § 65940. 1, 66016. 5, and 66019 and Health and Safety Code § 50466.5. AB 602 sets forth additional procedural requirements for the preparation of a Nexus Study and the adoption of a development impact fee. As it relates to the identification of level of service the following must be identified and provided:
1. The existing level of service;
2. The new level of service; and
3. An explanation of why the new level of service is appropriate.
AB 602 Requirement 1: Existing Level of Service
Currently, the existing levees protecting the Mossdale Tract Area do not meet the updated DWR ULDC standards adopted in May 2012, and the existing levees are not currently certified to provide 200- year protection. As such, the flood protection system does not provide ULOP as defined by DWR guidelines, and the land use related impacts imposed by SB 5 are in effect. A report prepared by a team of Professional Engineers led by Peterson Brustad, Inc., dated March 22, 2016 and later supplemented on June 18, 2021 to address Climate Change, outlined the deficiencies to the levee system and identified the needed improvements to meet DWR ULDC standards.
AB 602 Requirement 2: New Level of Service
The Reeional Impact Fee, in combination with other funding sources being implemented by SJAFCA, will provide funding needed to improve the levee system compliant with DWR' s ULDC standards. As a result of these improvements, ULOP would be achieved, and the land use restrictions would be removed.
AB 602 Requirement 3: Explanation of why the New Level of Service is Appropriate As previously noted, SB 5 requires that all Cities and Counties within the Sacramento- San Joaquin Valley which includes the Mossdale Tract Area) make findings related to ULOP or the national FEMA standard of flood protection before: ( 1) entering into a development agreement for any property that is located within a flood hazard zone; ( 2) approving a discretionary permit or other discretionary entitlement, or a ministerial permit that would result in the construction of a new residence, for a project that is located within a flood hazard zone; or ( 3) approving a tentative map, or a parcel map for which a tentative map was not required, for any subdivision that is located within a flood hazard zone. Essentially, without the ability to make these required findings, all new development and building permit issuances for residential development in the Mossdale Tract Area would halt. This would exacerbate the current housing shortage, result in declining property values overtime, and impact the economic vitality of the Mossdale Tract Area. As such, it has been determined that achieving ULOP in the Mossdale Tract Area is appropriate.
LWA I RSE SUP E
8 1801011 SIAFCA Mossdale Nexus Sf dy UPOATE- Public OraJ[ 2022 0512 451
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
Housing Development Square Footage Basis Exemption Findings AB 602 requires that the calculation of the fee on a housing development project be proportionate to the square footage of the proposed units of the development. A nexus study is not required to comply with this requirement if all of the following exemption findings are made:
1. An explanation as to why square footage is not an appropriate metric to calculate fees imposed on housing development projects.
2. An explanation that an alternative basis of calculating the fee bears a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development.
3. The other policies in the fee structure support smaller developments, or otherwise ensure that smaller development are not charged disproportionate fees.
AB 602 Exemption Finding 1: Why Square Footage is Not an Appropriate Metric The Regional Levee Fee is to be charged on a GDA basis. The GDA metric is more appropriate than a square footage metric because it removes housing density from consideration with respect to the amount of fees charged for a development project. Because the immediate need for additional flood protection is driven in large part by the land use restrictions imposed by SB 5, the demand or necessary amount of flood protection doesn' t vary with respect to the number of housing units. The restrictions on the issuance of permits for new residential dwelling units by SB 5 are imposed on any dwelling units regardless of size. Thus, there should be no functional relationship between total amount of fees collected per acre of development. Because, in general, smaller housing units tend to be developed in higher density ( more units and thus a greater tota) amount of square feet per acre) than larger housing units( fewer units and generally less total square footage per acre), the effective per unit cost of the Regional Levee Fee will be lower on smaller homes than for larger homes. Further, the total amount of Regional Levee Fees collected per acre for higher density housing( smaller homes) would be lower as compared to a fee that would be consistent on a per square foot basis. Thus, the fees are lower for smaller housing consistent with the intent of AB 602 to make smaller housing for affordable.
AB 602 Exemption Finding 2: An Alternative Basis That Bears a Reasonable Relationship The Regional Levee Fee is to be charged on a GDA basis. The GDA basis bears a reasonable relationship for the reasons discussed in the previous section. The immediate need for flood protection for residential development is primarily driven by the SB 5 restrictions which are not related to the size and density of development. As such, the GDA basis is more equitable as it is not functionally related to size and density of development. However, it still results in a lower effective fee rate per unit for smaller more dense development. Additionally, the methodology behind the calculation for the GDA basis, detailed in the Regional Levee Fee Methodology section, takes into consideration the estimated total building square feet and the resulting damageable square feet of structure per acre for each land use category. Therefore, the GDA basis still bears a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development.
L' tARSEN^ rURZEi
9 hsscriafes. I.
1801011 SIAFCA Mossdole Nexus SNdy VPDATE- P blic DiaJ[ Z022 0512 452
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
AB 602 Exemption Finding 3: Avoidance of Disproportionate Fees on Smaller Developments The GDA basis used in this Nexus study does not impose disproportionate fees on smaller development as the total amount of Regional Levee Fees charged is directly related to the total size of development project. As described above, more dense/ smaller development projects will have a lower effective per unit fee than larger less dense development projects. Further, for development projects that do not require a subdivision map, as described in the Fee Program Administration section, the calculation of the Regional Levee Fee provides consideration for new, smaller Single- Family development on Vacant land between 0. 15 acres and 5 acres by utilizing the assumed coverage ratio of a typical Single- Family home on a standard residential lot.
This calculation ensures that smaller residential developments are not charged a disproportional fee in comparison to larger typical Single- Family housing development.
Additionally, subsection ForAdditional Residential Development on Land with Existinq Structures under the Fee Calculation section, addresses relatively new amendments to California law related to development of accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units.
Procedural Requirements
It is intended that the Local Agencies will individually adopt the Regional Levee Fee program pursuant to the procedural requirements of AB 1600 and AB 602. The procedures include the following:
Conduct a Noticed Public Hearing to Adopt the Nexus Study: Each Local Agency shall conduct a noticed Public Hearing, to adopt this Nexus Study, at which oral or written presentations can be made, this may be part of a regularly scheduled meeting or a special meeting. This public hearing shall be noticed at least 30 days prior in accordance with Government Code§ 66016. 5( a)( 7).
Conduct a Noticed Public Hearing to Adopt the Development Impact Fee: Each Local Agency shall conduct a noticed Public Hearing, to adopt the development fee associated with this Nexus Study, at which oral or written presentations can be made, as part of a regularly scheduled meeting. This public hearing shall be noticed by publication at least 10 days prior in accordance with Government Code 6062( a). In addition, notice of the time and place of the meeting, including a general explanation of the matter to be considered, and a statement that any data required by Government Code§ 66016( a) is available, shall be mailed at least 14 days prior to the meeting to any interested party who files a written request with the Local Agency for mailed notice of ineetings on new or increased fees or service charges.
Provide Public Information: The Local Agency shall provide public information, at least 10 days prior to the Public Hearing, including available public data indicating the amount of estimated costs required to provide the service for which the fee is to be levied.
Adopt a Resolution or Ordinance: AB 1600 requires that any action by a local agency to levy a new fee or service charge or to approve an increase in an existing fee or service charge shall be taken only by ordinance or resolution. Each of the Local Agency City Councils are expected to adopt the fee by resolution and the County Board of Supervisors is expected to implement the fee through an amendment to their Ordinance Code.
t,aRs, w v uR E
kssr. iafes 10 Ir.
1801011 5/ AFCA Mossdale Nexus Study UPDATE- Public proJ[ Z022 0512 453
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
Note that Government Code§ 66017 states that fees adopted pursuant to the provisions of Government Code 66016( those outlined above) are effective no sooner than 60 days after final action on the adoption of the new fee or increase to an existing fee.
Land Use Categories
AB 1600 sets forth standards by which monetary exactions on development projects are measured. The need for a public facility must be reasonably refated to the level of service required, which varies in proportion to a particular land use type.
The following is a list of the land use type categories utilized for the purpose of this Regional Levee Fee:
Single- Family Residential: Includes structures that are single- family dwellings and duplexes.
Condominiums, half- plexes, and rural homes are included in this category.
Multi- Family Residential: Includes structures that are occupied by three or more families living independently of each other, under one roof. This category includes triplexes, four- plexes, apartment complexes.
Commercial: Inc udes offices, retail facilities, hotels, motels, restaurants, service stations and car washes, medical and dental offices, banks, and any other development typically serving and open to the general public.
Industrial: Includes development occupied by manufacturing, warehouses, processing plants, heavy and light industry, lumber yards, storage, bulk plants, truck transfer terminals, and any other development typically serving the manufacturing, storage, or processing industries.
Any development on Agricultural and/ or Vacant land are not allocated costs duP to the fact that only new urban development necessitates the need for the facilities funded by the fee as a result of increasing EAD.
Further details with respect to the specifics of each land use category is discussed within the Fee Program Implementation and Fee Program Administration sections of this Nexus Study.
Mossdale Tract Area Land Uses
A central principle to determining a development impact fee is to consider the amount of anticipated future growth over the time horizon of the proposed program. In this case, the scope of facilities needed to provide ULOP within the Mossdale Tract Area are not necessarily functionally related to the amount of planned or existing development. The new facilities will provide a benefit to existing development. As described within the Adequate Progress Report, this Regional Levee Fee program is one of several sources of funding needed to construct the improvements. The facilities funded by this fee need not be allocated to existing development as a separate funding mechanism will cover the benefit received and service provided to existing development.
This fee only applies to planned development within the Mossdale Tract Area that benefits from the facilities providing ULOP. For the purposes of determining the allocation base for the fee, ptanned development is all development that has been identified by the land use jurisdictions and is expected to obtain a building permit after the implementation of this fee program.
LW ta s ra vauFz
11 Assueiofes r<
18010115/ AFCAMossdaleNexusSfudyUPDATE- Pu6licOroJI20720511 454
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
Planned New Development
Planned new development within Mossdale Tract Area was estimated based on extensive research and coordination with the Local Agencies and development interests. The details of the planned development estimate over the 30- year horizon of the fee program are documented in Appendix A. Additional details on the approach and methodology of data collection and synthesis, as well as a detailed summary of planned development byjurisdiction, development area, and land use type, can be found in the RD 178asin Financing P/an Implementation Updated Development Absorption Projections Fina/ Updated Technical Memorandum prepared by LWA, dated August 18, 2017 and as updated by LWA since 2017 based on actual development and input from the Local Agencies. Table 1 provides a summary of planned new development by land use that is subject to the fee for the duration of the fee program. This table provides the total GDA by land use category as well as the total number of Single- Family and Multi- Family units and thousands of building square feet for Commercial and Industrial development. The number of units and square footage is provided as a reference for an estimate of the Regional Levee Fee cost per unit or thousand square feet. lAR5EN WUP.ZE
1Z K A:[ ip1C5. Ir,:
1801011 UAFCA Mossdale Nex s 5[ udy UPDATE- Gu61ic OroJ[ 2022 0512 455
Table 1
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Planned Development Summary
Planned Development
Gross Developable Units or 1, 000
Land Use Acreage( GDA) Building Sq Ft Measure
Reference Table A- 1 Table A- 2
Single- Family Residential 1, 766 10, 356 Units
Multi- Family Residential 139 2, 626 Units
Commercial 1, 211 14, 779 1k Bldg Sq Ft
Industrial 1, 466 22, 809 1k Bldg Sq Ft
Total 4, 582
Prepared by LWA 13 1801101 ULOP Mossdale Regional Fee Mode12022 0512 456
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS AND PROJECTS
Capital Costs Allocable to Planned Development
As described above and within the 2016 Adequate Progress and each subsequent Annual Adequate Progress Report Update, a series of improvements are needed to ensure that the levee system meets ULDC and provides ULOP were identified. A detailed cost estimate has been prepared by an engineering team and a financing plan has been developed in support of the 2021 Adequate Progress Report Update to demonstrate how the LFMA, SJAFCA, intends to generate the funds needed to implement the levee improvement program.
The LFMA plan for flood protection through the year 2029 consists of two components; ( 1) RD 17' s ongoing Levee Seepage Repair Project ( LSRP) and ( 2) SJAFCA' s Phase 4 Project that will achieve ULDC 200- year flood protection for the Mossdale Tract Area.
SJAFCA is implementing the Phase 4 Project in the following outlined steps:
1. ULDC engineering analysis and identification of deficiencies ( completed March 22, 2016)
2. . Design and environmental evaluation of levee improvements to cure ULDC deficiencies
3. Implementation of levee improvements to cure ULDC deficiencies The Regional Levee Fee will only be levied on Planned Development within the Mossdale Tract Area. This means that the portion of the costs allocable to existing development will not be raised through this fee program. As described in the 2021 Adequate Progress Report Update, the LFMA has identified various other funding sources including:
Net revenues from RD 17' s existing Special Assessment District; A new Overlay Assessment District;
A new Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District( EIFD); and, State and/ or Federal grant funding opportunities
Summary of Capital Improvements Funded by the Development Impact Fee The estimated costs for the Phase 4 Project and associated ULOP program implementation costs are shown in Table 2 in 2021 dollars. Appendix B provides the discount and escalation of total SJAFCA project expenditures found in the 2021 Adequate Progress Report Update. The net costs funded by this Regional Levee Fee, along with the near-term assumptions related to the specific costs and associated fee program revenues generated through 2029 are also shown on Table 2. The total cost of capital improvements, repayment of the County EIFD Loan, and EIFD reimbursements to the Local Agencies total approximately 332. 8 million in 2021 dollars. Based upon the financing plan detailed within the 2021 Adequate Progress Report Update, other sources of funding are estimated to contribute approximately$ 244. 2 million which will fund existing development' s portion of the costs of the Phase 4 Project. The remaining estimated
88. 6 million will be funded by Planned Development through this Regional Levee Fee program. This amount is used as the basis for calculating the Regional Levee Fee.
LV/ tARSEN WUP.ZE'
14 Asscciafez Irt
ISOlO1151RFCAMossdoleNexusSfudyUPDA7E- 7ublic0iaf[ 20I20512 457
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
In the near term ( through 2029), as detailed within the 2021 Adequate Progress Report Update and summarized in Table 2, the Regional Levee Fee program is expected to generate approximately$ 76. 2 million and cover a portion of the upfront costs of the levee improvement program.
A detailed outline of the allocated costs to each development project is identified in Appendix A. An estimate of the revenues generated by the Regional Levee Fee over time are included in Appendix C. These estimates and associated analyses support the information contained in the 2021 Adequate Progress Report Update.
LVI A
a S N,; E
s
k Auociatzs. Ir<
18010ll LAFCA Mossdale Nexus Study UPOATE- Vu61ic OroJt 2022 0512 458
Table 2
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Cost Estimate Summary& Near- Term Costs Covered by the Fee Item Estimated Cost [ 1]
local Cost Funded by the Fee
SIAFCA Project Expenditures 235, 358, 352
County EIFD Loan Repayment 24, 486, 962
EIFD Reimbursement to Agencies 73, 000, 000
less) Assumed other Funding Sources [ 2] 244, 238, 456
Net Local Cost Funded by the Fee 88, 606, 858
Near Term Project Costs Funded by the Fee [ 3]
ULOP Program Planning& Implementation
Pre- Project Expenditures 3, 229, 308
Funding Program Implementation Costs [ 4] 1 554 259
Subtota! ULOP Program Planning& Implementation 4, 783, 568 Fix- In Place Project Soft Costs ( Fee Funded) 71, 436, 826 Total Near Term Project Costs Funded by the Fee 76, 220, 394 Near Term Projected Fee Revenues
Developer dvances & Agency Funding [ 5) 4, 782, 419
Development Fee Program ( Fee Revenues) 71, 437, 974
Total Near Term Fee Program Revenues 76, 220, 394
Source: 2021 A equate Progress Up ate Report wit up ates y LWA as o Decem er 2021. 1] Costs and other revenues, reflect amounts received between 2014& 2029 stated in 2021 dollars based on a 3% escalation rate. Present value$.
2] Other funding sources include those described within the Adequate Progress Report including escalation) as follows:
Net revenues available from RD 17' s existing Mossdale Tract Assessment District A new SJAFCA Overlay Assessment District
A new SJAFCA Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District EIFD/ Overlay Assessment Bond Net Bond Proceeds
3] Reflects Project Costs assumed to be incurred through 2029 as detailed within the Adequate Project Report( Reference Table 4 Sources& Uses). Gross Nominal$ from APR. 4] Includes costs associated with development of other funding sources. Could include reimbursements to the Cities for bridge funding.
5] Reference Table C- 8.
Prepared by LWA 2 1801101 ULOP Mossdole Regional Fee Mode12022 0512 459
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
REGIONAL LEVEE FEE METHODOLOGY
In accordance with AB 1600, a calculation of development impact fees must be accompanied by an analysis with enough detail to justify that a thorough consideration was applied in the process of determining how the fees relate to the impacts from new development. Findings must ensure that a reasonable relationship exists between the proposed fees and the development upon which they will be levied. This section describes the methodology utilized in this report in accordance with the requirements of AB 1600.
The fee methodology utilized here includes the following steps:
1. Qualitatively determine and describe the land use categories utilized as the basis for the fee.
2. Quantify the projected growth within the benefiting area in each of the land use categories in terms of GDA.
3. Describe and estimate the capital improvement costs and their applicability to planned new development.
4. Estimate the total building footprint square feet in each land use category and the resulting damageable square feet of structure per acre for each land use category.
5. Use the estimated damageable square feet per acre, an assumed relative structure value per structure type, and the assumed flood damage percentage to estimate the average structure damage per acre per structure type.
6. Use an estimated relative land value per land use category and assumed flood damage percentage to estimate an average land damage per acre per land use category.
7. Use the estimated structure and land damages to determine an estimated total damage per acre per fand use category.
8. Apply a loss of use and life safety factor to adjust the total damage per acre to determine an adjusted damage per acre per land use category.
9. Determine a relative Property Damage Index by relating the adjusted damage per acre for each land use category to that of the adjusted damage per acre for the Single- Family Residential land use category.
10. Utilize the Property Damage Index to determine the adjusted equivalent acreage which represents a weighted amount of planned development acreage by land use type within the Mossdale Tract Area.
11. Proportionately allocate the capital improvement costs to each land use category based upon the adjusted equivalent acreage.
12. Determine the cost per GDA by dividing the allocated costs by the GDA of each land use category.
13. Add to each cost per acre the costs of administration of the fee program to determine the fee amount per acre per land use category to be collected by the land use agencies.
Cost Allocation and Calculation
The purpose of allocating the capital improvements costs among the various land uses is to provide an equitable method of funding the required improvements. The key to the cost apportionment of capital improvements to different land use types is the assumption that the benefits derived from the facilities are LWA EAR P t
X+ssucwfes rt
3010ll 5/ AFCA Mossdale Nexus Study UPDATE- Public OiaJ[ 2022 0512 460
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
related to land use type and that such benefits can be stated in relative terms. Only by relating the benefit received from the facilities and the services they provide to land use types can a reasonable nexus, or relationship, be established for the apportionment of costs to that land use.
Since the nature of the improvements in this Nexus Study relate to establishing ULOP in the Mossdale Tract Area, the equivalency factor determined in Step 9 above and utilized here is the Property Damage Index. The Property Damage Index is a relative factor that relates the adjusted property damages by land use to the property damage of an acre of Single- Family development. The greaterthe index value, the greaterthe impact in terms of property damage and loss of use and life associated with a possible flood. An index value closer tcj zero would indicate lower damage costs and loss of use and life associated with a flood. Given these facts, utilizing the Property Damage Index as described above is a reasonable method to allocate costs proportionately based on land use.
The following describes the series of tables that calculate the Regional Levee Fee using the method described above:
Using the estimated total building square feet and the assumed average building stories, Table 3 determines the estimated building footprint square feet and the associated damageable square feet of structure per acre.
After calculating the damageable square feet of structure per acre for each land use category, the value is then multiplied by the relative structure value per square foot and the assumed flood damage percentage to find the average structure damage per acre, as shown in Table 4. The relative structure value and assumed flood damage percentage are based upon similar values utilized within the Reclamation District No. 17 Mossdale Tract Assessment Engineer' s Report prepared by Kjeldsen, Sinnock & Neudeck, Inc. dated May 15, 2008. Tabfe 5 uses the relative land value per acre and assumed damage percentage to find the average land damage per acre. The relative land value per GDA is based upon recent land value research completed by LWA to determine equivalent land value estimates for land within the region. Information was obtained from various sources including recently completed appraisal prices for vacant land.
By summing the average structure and land damage values per acre determined in Table 4 and Table 5, a total damage per acre can be determined. The total damage is then adjusted by a loss of use and life safety factor, a factor determined by how many hours per day individuals occupy structures in each land use category. This factor is multiplied by the total damage per acre to determine an adjusted damage per acre. The adjusted damage per acre amount is then used to the find the Property Damage Index or equivalencq factor, as illustrated in Table 6.
The Property Damage Index from Table 6 is used to determine an adjusted equivalent acreage. This amount is used to allocate the local cost to each land use category on a proportional adjusted equivalent acreage basis for each land use category. The allocated cost is then divided by the total GDA in each land use category to find the cost share per GDA. Finally, using the total local cost share and the total number of units/ 1, 000 building square feet in Table 7, a demonstrative average cost per unit and cost per 1, 000 building square feet can be determined.
LWA EARs PLE
g
8 Asseciefez Irt
1801011 SIAFCA Mossdale Nexus Study UGDATE- Public DiaJ[ 20Z2 0512 461
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
Table 8 shows the allocated costs per GDA of the fee and the additional administrative charge of 3% to determine the total fee amount on a per GDA basis for each land use type.
Appendix C shows the cost allocated on each project based on the Planned Development description in Appendix A.
LINA ARSEN RZ:
19 B Assccioles Irc 18010115JAFCAMossdoleNexusSNdyUPOATE- FublicOraf[ 20220512 462
ONtiv7 NONN
y
a0
j
a
U
p
3 a I . I
m a,
y
Y
0 Q
t O O u1
a
hp y
7 w
O IlN Ln
v
o
O LL Ql 00
f6 ar Q
LL
C.
o
N
o c- I'
a.+
a
LL
O
y dD yaj l^D
OlD 1
j
o
I 1 `
1 u1 `
1 Oo
ti
O
u
t 00 I O
T
o
W
m
O
w
Ol c- I I 00 I •
p
c- i N ! f1
O LL
oncL
L '
Q
L
y
OA
a
N
p -- I O O
O
yC c1 N - I c- I n 3 O n 7 v y m
bA
Q
NC
0 yi
N
O
LL
00OO u'1 M
N I f1 OMO
G 1
v
OM Ql 00 .-
1 aJ
a+ "
l0
M I 00 ll1
v '^ 00
N CrN 00
N
m
c-- I '
N t!' 1
W
LLG! v
0 Q
i
o
a rn
m
n
n c o
v
m
m
n oo
QJL
9 GlO FN
i--I ( NV
Ja
G.
i
O
t
0 7C
J a' 7
d
L @ N VI N l Ql - i lD N
LL
l0 M - I lD 00
N
O .
n Q'
0 0
o v a r+ c in
m
V,
y
Q ri ri ri d' in
un
LL
OO
O Q1 GJ y_
Q 3
GUbA
Y
S
u
m
V
VIN
NN
d
N f0
y U —
N UJ
jp Gl
Vf 6 .
M -
a
4 0
v,
f6 4J . n
n
C1D ,
QQ
Q
FC
0 J v'
1 G U = i,
N3TUNmQvd
21 463
Table 4
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Relative Structure Damage Per GDA
Relative Damageable Assumed Flood Average
Structure Value Sq Ft of Structure Damage Structure
Land Use Per Sq Ft[ 1] per GDA Percentage [ 1j Damage Per GDA Reference Table 3
A B C D= A* B* C
Single- Family 60. 00 9, 047 39% 213, 496
Multi- Family 60. 00 8, 501 39% 198, 928
Commercial 70. 00 12, 207 72% 618, 049
Industrial 50. 00 15, 553 79% 616, 927
Source: Reclamation District No. 17 Mossdale Tract Assessment Engineer' s Report 1) The RD 17 Area Engineer' s Report does not distinguish Single- Family from Multi- Family in the Residential land use category therefore the same relative structure value and flood damage percentage were utilized for both land uses.
Prepared by LWA 22 I801101 ULOP Mossdale Regional Fee Mode12022 0512 464
Table 5
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Relative Land Damage Per GDA
Relative Land Assumed Flood
Value Per GDA Damage Average Land
Land Use 1] Percentage Damage Per GDA
a e c=a* s
Single- Family 134, 000 10% 13, 400
Multi- Family 134, 000 10% 13, 400
Commercial 260, 000 10% 26, 000
Industrial 137, 000 10% 13, 700
Prepared by LWA 23 I801101 ULOP Mossdole Regional Fee Mode12022 0512 465
NtiONONa0
Xd
t' '
C O ct illV
C
O
c
01 01 I
o
d O O
O o,
fD G.
3 41 f0
w
n
v
OC a LL
@
a
to
c
0 o
oc
aOJ f6 u o lD Q1 O
a o
v
v cv „', oo
m cro
3 0
a
o n
aQ
cL
r1
O
y V
L
0 M
@
p
O
O O O 00
0 O v
m m .-+ o
0 v
N NJ LL
J0
Q
GJ
EOL
fp
v
lD 00 Ol I
N
Q
Q
o0M O
p i
ci d
o
0 L
U
N c- I
M
p
N
N l0 lD
a
ioLW
G1 41
v
LL
V
f0
J
V
v
O OOO vi
p_ Q m t ' ci'
O I
i
F
M M lD rrl
7 i--I ci N - I 7 d i/? i/} V} i/
f6
a
ai
J
NN
O
1L
L
J
3 V
o
Q tD o0
m I
CA
L1D
y
V C7 Ql
O Ql L _
C
CL
L
n' °
Q
M OO OO lD Q
c- I Ol c- I e-- I m
Cl a-+ OA N - I lD lD
@
h0
Q
V f0 i/
T i/? i./? i/} N •
i
r
f6O7
G1
0 0 6 '
6 v
L
y
a i+'
O
i
w
U G! c-{ i
Q.
MO
a
6 uD
d 6 i (p
Ov
c
N
u= '' ryo
7 N
n i+ v
iL
Q
f6
y p '
O
3 H OC cn U
a3J4NQNma
24 466
ONtihNONai H 4 O Q' O M M
tif
l l l
N
v
y
DO lDO
O L
W M -
i H -io
U
O v. v. v. v.
0 O _
v
Q Q
p
p
w
Oi a°
a.,
aa p Vaj .-
D Ol Ol
a
l
M lND
n
op
U
O
o
O
N `-
N
m ro
G! i'
Q N 1 I
l0 00OO
Vf w
OM Ql
OO uJ
v
i p ` N NN c1
v
Q i/} {/} {/} y/}
76O
Ql lD Ct Ql 0
v rn m
no
o0
0 N
p
O
v
uO VI
O Ql 00
N
O
v*' i 00 rn
n m c .
c
V
M i/? NN Op
w
y/} {/} t/} y/}
t
G1
O
N o o o° '
@
V .-+
N oo c
m
O
n
N
M I lD
O
3 N N ` I
u
N
i
u0
a
c
a
a
c
v o
m
LL m eM-1 -- I O
N
i
Y
n o
a ti
v
3 L ri ri ri ; E
Q- a ' a
Qv
o n
t
y
o rn rn
c
a Q m - i o0o
c
O
o
m
3 Q
a
f0
p
0 0
T
C
O
@
OD ti l0 Ql -- I lD
a vNi
Q c0 v
D m .-
i l0
N +-'
v
i! ¢ t c- I N ct
3 ai
u c- i .- i .-? ; a
Q
0 p
cv
T
E
a,
o
E ' LL a
L
L
O v
f 0 QC v O -
p
p
N
FQ v1 U H
TaNNdv R
25 467
ONtiut
NNOai
i `.
O H ti
L o
O Oo
l =
M ti ti ti
v
4 :d ? ?
zv
a"'
a
O OCmO
a
o
Q1 ~
4 O
Lu
o
p
Q
o
O *\' N
v
ti
Oi
L a '
o ti
H
0 O
a
co
w Of
a'
a
o
3m
00 ric
1 Q
o o1Oo ,°-
o
o
s
rnm
a
NO
O l
@
UNNN c- I iLL d
t/} i/ t!? t/}
7nC
N
r°
a
m rn
OJ
L
OO I
L u. N D D tD e
y, LL
a il'r il} iJ} i!}
ii
Qm
Up
a
y
a
J
G' f0 l0 00
OO
O
N v
om rn
3 i
@
a
N N N i--I
co
c
VQ
O
LLY
Y
L
Q v LL
a+
iC T —
1— 41
C
l0
p
C 1.. ai L
Q.
n LL, ca
y .
u
00 p
v
Cl uf
y
Q .
N
oA
p >
H in U
aJTNQva
26 468
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
FEE PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
The Regional Levee Fee calculations presented in this Nexus Study are based on the best improvement cost estimates, administrative cost estimates, and land use information available at this time. If costs change significantly, if the type or amount of new projected development changes, or if other assumptions significantly change such as federal or state standards, this Nexus Study and the program should be updated accordingly.
Regional Levee Fee Collection
This Nexus Study is being prepared as a regional fee with the intent that each of the Local Agencies individually adopt the Region Levee Fee and collect and remit the fees to SJAFCA. It is expected that agreements will be entered into with the respective land use agencies in the Mossdale Tract Area to remit the Regional Levee Fee to SJAFCA to complete the Project. It is expected that subsequent to the adoption of this Nexus Study, each Local Agency will develop formal procedures needed for the efficient administration and collection of the fee.
These Administrative Procedures are expected to clarify any specific conditions that would trigger the collection of the Regional Levee Fee as well as clarify the specific conditions that may exempt a property from the Regional Levee Fee as further described in the subsection Exemptions From the Fee, below. The procedures will also specify how the Local Agency will ensure the appropriate imposition of the fee through a development condition as well as any specifics as to the calculation and collection of the fee. The procedures will allow for variations in the method of payment as described in this section.
Fee Triggers/ Applicability
1 he Fee will appfy to all Planned Development in the fJiossdale Tract Area that creates a flood protection impact. Planned Development is defined as all development that is required to obtain a building permit within the Mossdale Tract Area. Fee collection will take place prior to issuance of a building permit by the Local Agency.
Fee Collection Deferral
As stated above, Fee collection is to take place prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. Collection of the fee may be deferred beyond this point if the Local Agency has adopted an agency-wide fee deferral program applicable to all development projects. Any other deferral of Fee collection must be incorporated into a Local Agency' s conditions of approval of the proposed development and/ or into a development agreement or other contractual arrangement for the project. In all cases, Fee collection must take place before Final Inspection or Certificate of Occupancy as applicable.
Regional Levee Fee Program Boundary
The Regional Levee Fee calculations are based upon the total costs of the levee improvement program and estimated amount of development within the 200- year floodplain in the Mossdale Tract Area which encompasses the entire benefit area. By virtue ofthe cost allocation process, this Regional Levee Fee program WA,lAR5EN NtIJP,ZEi
Z6 k Assneiefes. rr
180] 011 SIAFCA Mossdale Nexus Study UPDATE- Public D aft 1022 0512 469
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
will generate a proportional amount of fee revenue from the share of Planned Development within each of the Local Agencies. Figure 1 illustrates the Regional Levee Fee Program Boundary.
Exemptions From the Fee
The following land uses and/ or development projects are exempt from the Regional Levee Fee:
1. A ricultural: Development projects on agricultural land including development of Rural Residential parcels greater than 5 Acres in size.
2. Pre- Existin Structures: Development projects that require a building permit and are not increasing the amount of new structure square footage are exempt from the fee if the project involves adding less than 300 new square feet. Projects adding more than 300 square feet are subject to the fee and the fee will be applicable to the additional square footage in excess of 300 new square feet.
3. Replacement due to Damage: Development projects that are a replacement, in kind, because of damage ( such as fire damage or other natural disaster). Any additional square footage in excess of 300 new square feet will be subject to the fee ( reference No. 2 above).
4. Accessory Dwellin Units( ADUs): Development projects considered to be Accessory Dwelling Units by the permitting agency and are less than 750 square feet.
5. Structures Raised Above the 200- Year Floodplain Elevation: Development projects with structures raised above the 200- year flood elevation as determined by the Local Agencies or structures removed from the 200-year floodplain by flood control improvements that meet the design standards applicable to the federal- state flood control system as determined by the Local Agencies.
6. Open Space: Any development project that takes place on open space land.
7. Public A ency Owned Land ( including federal, state, and local agencies): Any development project located on land owned by a government agency and is to be used solely for public use.
Exceptions to the Exemptions
With written approval from the Local Agency havingjurisdiction, any or all portions ofthe proposed fees may be waived if it can be determined that a proposed project will not derive permanent benefit from the improvements for which the fees are collected ( i. e., it can be shown that the property does not benefit from the flood protection). Written fee waivers may be available on a case- by- case basis for certain temporary structures, such as a mobile temporary structure used for construction management purposes.
Coverage Period
The Regional levee Fee is to be collected beginning the 61st day after the adoption of the Resolution approving the fee, as adopted by the SJAFCA Board of Directors and for 30- years thereafter, unless further amended or repealed.
Administration Costs
The estimated cost of administration for the Regional Levee Fee has been included in the fee rates shown in Table S- 1, Table S- 2 and Table 8. The proposed administrative fee is 3% of the cost of the fee. However, to IARSEiV wURZEt
27 l$ ksscciotes. Irc
1801011 SJAFCA Mossdale Nexus 5[ utly UPORTE- Public OraJ[ 2022 0512 470
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
the extent each Local Agency has its own process for determining the administrative cost of the fee, this amount may be adjusted by each Local Agency accordingly. These administrative costs will cover the following:
The development and administration ofthe Regional Levee Fee Program.
Accounting costs associated with the Regional Levee Fee.
Annual review of the fee program costs, fees, and policies.
Annual reporting requirements associated with the fee program.
Any other ongoing and recurring administrative procedures associated with the program.
Variations in Method
The Local Agencies will allow for variations in the method of fee payment, including:
Use of any lawfully created Assessment District or Community Facilities District ( CFD) to finance fee payment;
Voluntary accelerated payment of the fee at the time of filing of any application for a tentative subdivision map, parcel map, or an earlier land use application, at the then- applicable rate; and, The collection of fees or other payments to fund improvements by the land use jurisdictions that are to be used by agreement to directly fund or reimburse the cost of the facilities funded by the fee.
The use of these alternative payment mechanisms and the collection of the Regional Levee Fee may vary among the Local Agencies, however, in any case, the alternative method of payment will be documented within an agreement or memorandum by the Local Agency.
Fee Credit/ Reimbursement for the Design and Construction of Facilities Developers may fund the planning, design, and construction of a portion of the facilities funded by the fee in exchange for credits against their individual project' s fee obligation. In the event that a developer agrees to advance fund fees or directly plan, design, construct, and/ or deliver facilities, a Local Agency will enter into a separate agreement with the developer specifying the level of fee credit, the process for receiving the credit, and the terms for utilizing the credit, in exchange for the planning, design, construction, and delivery of the facilities. In the event the value of the fee credit exceeds the Regional Levee Fee obligation and a reimbursement might be due, the agreement would also specify the specific terms upon which a reimbursement would be provided. Any fee credits and/ or reimbursements will be provided in a manner consistent with SIAFCA adopted fee crediting policies. No credit for the Regional Levee Fee or reimbursement will be provided to a developer before entering into a credit and/ or reimbursement agreement with the applicable Local Agency.
Refunds and Appeals Process
An applicant who has paid the Regional Levee Fee may request that such fee be refunded at any time prior to commencement of the development, although to do so would terminate any approved application or permit.
Refunds will be made according to the policies and procedures of the Local Agencies and SJAFCA, as they are tt,Rs, w akzE
28 Asscciotes Irc
180101] 5/ AFCA Mossdole Nex s 5[ udy UPDATE- Pu61ic Oraft 2022 0512 471
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
developed, and may reflect deductions to compensate for handling and administrative costs incurred by the Local Agencies and SJAFCA in processing the fee calculation, collection, and refund request.
Appeals regarding the determination of the applicability and amount of the development fee are to be made in writing to the SJAFCA Executive Director. The Executive Director shall respond to the appeal request in writing within 30 days. The Executive Director' s determination may be appealed to the SJAFCA Board of Directors. Any determination by the Board of Directors shall be considered final.
Annual Inflation Adjustment
The Regional Fee shall be adjusted each succeeding July 15Y, commencing July 1, 2023, to reflect inflationary costs. The base fee rate shown in this study shall increase annually by the ratio which the Engineering News Record' s Construction Cost Index( 20 Cities) for the most recent December bears to the December 2021 index.
LWA, RS, R:
z9 Assc. eiafes Irr
1801011 SIAFCA Mossdale Nexus SNdy UPDATE- Public Oraft 2022 0512 472
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
FEE PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION
The following describes the general procedures for the administration of the Regional Levee Fee. Each Local Agency' s staff may develop more detailed administrative procedures or implement more specific policies after the adoption of the program to more efficiently administer the program and provide needed clarification in certain circumstances.
Fee Calculation
To calculate the Regional Levee Fee the following information is required:
Land use category of the new development
The Gross Developable Acreage ( GDA) of the New Development as defined below The current fee rates
The following provides detailed information on each requirement.
Land Use Cateqorization
Each Local Agency' s respective building department will determine the correct Regional Levee Fee rate by classifying the proposed development into one of the following four land use categories:
Single- Family Residential
Multi- Family Residential
Commercial
Industrial
To classify the proposed development into one of the four land use categories, the agency will use the following information:
The land use type from each Local Agency' s zoning code that applies to the land upon which the development is proposed; and
The descriptions of the four land use categories in this report found in the Land Use Categories discussion on Page 11.
Determining the Gross Developable Acreage( GDA) of a New Development A GDA of a New Development, for purposes of this fee calculation, is determined as described below:
For New Development of Vacant Land
In the case where a New Development is being constructed on vacant land or land that has not previously been developed:
lA(ZSEN 44UP,ZEt
Ac; ne' iatws O 1801011 SJAFCA Mossdale Nexus 5[ udy UPDATE- Public Ora] t 20Z2 OS] Z 473
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
Residential Land Uses
For Single- Family residential projects that consist of residential uses that require a Tentative and Final Map( i. e. more than 4 units), the GDA is the gross acreage of the large lot parcel or resulting parcels excluding major dedicated public land uses, such as major arterials, major collectors, drainage, utilities corridors, parks, schools, and other public facilities. An example calculation of GDA for this case is shown in Appendix D.
For all other Single- Family residential projects that have impacts to the Mossdale Tract Area facilities the GDA is determined as follows:
o For parcels up to 0. 15 acres, the GDA is the actual acreage of the parcel. o For parcels greater than 0. 15 acres but less than S acres, the acreage is based on an assumed coverage ratio of a typical Single- Family home on a standard residential lot.
The GDA will be calculated by multiplying the square footage1 of the residential structure by three and expressing this square footage in terms of acres ( dividing by 43, 560 square feet per acre). However, in no case will this resulting amount exceed the actual acreage of the parcel.
For all Multi- Family residential projects, GDA is determined to be equivalent to the entire gross acreage of the parcel being developed.
Nonresidential Land Uses( Commercia/ and Industrial)
For Retail/ Office/ Industrial/ Commercial projects, GDA is determined by the actual acreage of the parcel where a structure being constructed less major dedicated public land uses, such as major arterials, major collectors, drainage, utilities corridors, parks, schools, and other public facilities.
For Devefopment on Land with Existing or Pre- Existing Structures In the case of expansion in excess of 300 square feet of an existing structure or the construction of a new structure within two years after demolition of a previous structure, GDA will be calculated as follows:
Residential Land Uses
For a residential expansion project, if the project involves the addition of new square footage of 300 square feet or more, the GDA will be calculated by multiplying the square footage of the expansion in excess of 300 square feet by three then expressing this square footage in terms of acres ( dividing by 43, 560 square feet per acre.)
For residential replacement projects, if the project involves development of a new residential structure after the demolition of a pre- existing structure ( regardless of the use of the pre- existing structure), and the new structure is larger than the demolished structure by more than 300 square feet, the GDA will be calculated by multiplying the net new square footage in excess of 300 square 15quare Footage can be generally classified as all square footage of the structure excluding the square footage of garages, porches, decks, external entryways, awnings, carports, driveways, breezeways, out- buildings, carriage houses, sheds, and other similar nonhabitable portion of the structure.
A
IARSEfV Hi`URZEL
Associefes. lre
1801011 SIAFCA Mossdale Nexus Study UPDATE- Public Oraft 2022 0512 474
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
feet by three then expressing this square footage in terms of acres( dividing by 43, 560 square feet per acre). The net new square footage in excess of 300 square feet will be determined by subtracting the documented previously existing structure square footage plus 300 square feet from the new structure square footage.
For a residential development project that involves development of a new residential structure, separate from the existing structure, please see the follow section, For Additional Residential Development on Land with Existing Structures.
Nonresidential Land Uses
For Retail/ Office/ Commercial or Industrial expansion projects, if the project involves the addition of new square footage of 300 square feet or more, the GDA will be calculated by calculating the total net new square footage in excess of 300 square feet and expressing this square footage in terms of acres ( dividing by 43, 560 square feet per acre).
For Retail/ Office/ Commercial or Industrial replacement projects, if the project involves development of a new nonresidential structure after the demolition of a pre- existing structure regardless of the use of the pre- existing structure) and the new structure is larger than the demolished structure by more than 300 square feet, the GDA will be calculated by calculating the total net new square footage in excess of 300 square feet and expressing this square footage in terms of acres( dividing by 43, 560 square feet per acre). The net new square footage in excess of 300 square feet will be determined by subtracting the documented habitable square footage of the previously existing structure from the new square footage.
For a Retail/ Office/ Commercial or Industrial project that involves development of a new nonresidential structure, separate from the existing structure, the GDA will be calculated by calculating the total net new square footage and expressing this square footage in terms of acres dividing by 43, 560 square feet per acre).
For Additional Residential Development on Land with Existing Structures This section addresses the impacts of amendments to California law, effective January 1, 2020, related to ADUs and junior accessory dwelling units ( JADUs) on Regional Impact Fee Program. Chapter 653, Statutes of 2019 ( Senate Bill 13, Section 3), Chapter 655, Statutes of 2019 ( Assembly Bill 68, Section 2), and Chapter 659 ( Assembly Bill 881, Section 1. 5 and 2. 5) build upon recent changes to ADU and JADU law ( Government Code Section 65852. 2, 65852. 22 and Health & Safety Code Section 17980. 12), collectively " ADU Law", and further address barriers to the development of ADUs and JADUs.
This section relies on the information provided in the State of California — Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency, Department of Housing and Community Development, Division of Housing Policy Development memorandum issued by Zachary Olmstead, Deputy Director, dated January 10, 2020, regarding Local Agency Accessory Dwelling Units. The State of California memorandum is attached hereto for reference.
The ADU Law impacts the Regional Levee Fee by requiring new exemptions or limitations based on the size of an ADU. The ADU Law requires that ADUs up to 750 square feet be exempt from impact fees and impact fees LWA,«s N; u z.
3z f•.ssnciafes Irc
1801011 SIAFCA Mos50ale NeXus SNdy UPDA7E- PubliC OfoJ[ 2022 0512 475
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
for an ADU of 750 square feet or larger be proportional to the relationship of the ADU to the primary dwelling unit( Government Code § 65852. 2 ( f)(3)).
Residential Accessory Dwelling Units
For ADUs and 1ADUs less than 750 square feet, the Regional Levee Fee will not be collected.
For ADUs of 750 square feet or more, the Fee will be calculated proportionately in relation to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit. First the fee for the existing primary residence needs to be calculated, then the proportionate fee for the ADU will be calculated using this information.
Table 9 provides example ADU calculations based on the Single- Family Residential ( SFR) Fee rate per GDA calculated in this Nexus Study.
LW, taRSEr w uRz t
33 l. e Associales Irx
1801011LAFCAMossdaleNexusStudyUPDATE- PublicOroJ[ 20220512 476
NtiO
NNOaN
n
o
M
o m ~
ai N ,
n
a'
Q,
v
O. O
N
l0
0 C1
i
lf
O
1 c
WN V. f, u'
i
t!?
CvOa0
cn
u1
O
M
O o0
I
CO
O
N
o
d. O
p
N
N
o
No
W
N
1. N1, 1?
cn m
o
ti o o
N 1 O p O o0
O
M j
N
W
N
t/}
N M O
y
OO d.
I O p
O tD y
O. O ...
i
M
NH
W
N
N1, 1.
T
LLata-+N
n'7 O
y
O
Q
p
O
LL O
O
o
Z
O
y
d
Q
E
N
Q c6
N
N
W
vO
d
w
d 0p CJ L
Ja
Q
mU
Q
w
w iFQ
O
O
II II II
LL
@Y
N
4-
O
oa
m
v
o
u
6 f6
V
a! V
Q +
a a, v
va °'
s
VIY
L =
6 41 U1 x vi
f—
C
v p[ aJ
l
N W
Q LL =
Q
Ql CD Lv , y
3 v
V 6
a
O
Z
a
C
X
y
X
cn
Q cn
d t
a
3 C
W0W
Z
vnai a
34 477
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
Calculation Steps
The following steps are required to calculate the development fee:
1. Determine the land use category based on the characteristics ofthe New Develop and the descriptions of the land use categories.
2. Determine the GDA of the New Development using the definition of GDA above.
3. Determine the total Regiona) Levee Fee by multiply the fee rate from step 1 and the GDA from step 2.
This is the fee applicable to the New Development.
Per Unit Fee Collection for Single- Family Residential Development The above steps describe the calculation of the Regional Levee Fee on a New Development basis. In the case where a New Development is for subdivision of Single- Family Residential units and the fee has been calculated for an entire subdivision, the fee may be collected at the issuance of each building permit ( and deferred to Final Inspection) for each residential unit. In this case, each Local Agency will determine the per unit GDA by dividing the GDA of the entire subdivision by the number of Single- Family units in the subdivision. This resulting per unit GDA will be multiplied by the current fee rate at the time of payment to determine the per unit fee cost.
Fee Revenue Accounting
The revenues raised by payment of the Regional Levee Fee shall be placed in a separate fund established by the SJAFCA( the Regional Levee Fee Fund). Separate and special accounts may be established in the Regional Levee Fee Fund and used to account for collected revenves, along vith any interest earnings. Each Local Agency will remit the collected funds to SJAFCA pursuant to the terms of the collection agreement executed between SJAFCA and the Local Agency.
Periodic Review and Cost Adjustment
SJAFCA will periodically review actual project costs and Regional Levee Fee collections to determine if any updates to the program are warranted. The periodic review will occur no less than every eight years. During these reviews, the following aspects will be analyzed:
Changes to the Improvements to be funded by the Regional Levee Fee program Changes in the cost to update or administer the Regional Levee Fee program Changes in annual financing costs
Changes in assumed land uses
Changes in other funding sources
Any changes to the Regional Levee Fee based on the periodic update will be presented to the Local Agency' s Board for approval before an increase of the fee will take effect.
AEAkSEN' vVUP.ZE-.
Auccialas Irc 3 5 1801011 SIAFCA Mossdale Nexus 5tudy UGDATE- Vu61ic Diaft 20ZI 0512 478
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
Pursuant to Government Code§ 66001( d), the fifth fiscal year following the first deposit into the fee account or fund, and annually thereafter, each Local Agency is required to make all the following findings about that portion of the account or fund remaining unexpended:
Identify the purpose for which the fee is to be used.
Demonstrate a reasonable relationship between the fee and the purpose for which it is charged.
Identify all sources and amounts of funding anticipated to fulfill the Phase 4 improvements.
Designate the approximate dates that the funding referred to in the above paragraph is expected to be deposited in the appropriate account or fund.
SJAFCA must refund the unexpended or uncommitted revenue portion for which a need could not be demonstrated in the above findings unless the administrative costs exceed the amount of the refund.
AIARSEN wUBZEt
A Assncinles Ir< 36 18010115/ AFCAMossdaleNexusSfudyUPDATE- PublitOraft20220512 479
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
NEXUS FINDINGS
Authority
This report has been prepared in support of the Regional Levee Fee in accordance with the procedurai guidelines established in AB 1600, codified in California Government § 66000 et. seq. This code section sets forth the procedural requirements for establishing and collecting development impact fees. The procedures require that a" reasonable relationship or nexus must exist between a governmental exaction and the purpose of the condition."
Specifically, each Local Agency imposing a fee must:
1. Identifying the purpose of the fee.
2. Identifying how the fee is to be used.
3. Determining that a reasonable relationship exists between the fee' s use and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed.
4. Determining how a reasonable relationship exists between the need for the public facility and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed.
5. Demonstrating a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed.
Summary of Nexus Findings
The Regional Levee Fee to be collected by each Local Agency is calculated based on applicability of planned ne n development to the capital impro ement pro; ect and standardized acreage proportion of the land use category to the total cost of the improvement. With this approach, the following findings are made regarding the Regional Levee Fee.
Requirement 1: Purpose of Fee
The capital improvements funded by the Regional Levee Fee are necessary to serve new Residential, Commercial, and Industrial development as described in the 2016 Adequate Progress Report and each subsequent Annual Adequate Progress Report Update.
Requirement 2: Use of the Fee
The Regional Levee Fee will be used to design and construct levee improvements that meet ULDC standards to provide ULOP for the Mossdale Tract Area as further described in the 2016Adequate Progress Report and each subsequent Annual Adequate Progress Report Update approved by SJAFCA.
Requirement 3: Relationship Between Use of Fees and Type of Development Development of Residential, Commercial, and Industrial land uses within the Mossdale Tract Area will require improved flood control and flood protection services. This Regional Levee Fee, in conjunction with other funding sources, will fund the improved SJAFCA flood protection system that will provide ULOP.
LWAtARS N P E.
37 1., 5' 1+ssocidle5 I<
18010115JAFCA Mossdole Nex s SNdy UPDATE- Cublic Drof[ 2022 0512 480
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
Requirement 4: Relationship Between Need for Facility and Type of Development Each Residential, Commercial, and Industrial development project adds to the incremental need for flood protection because of the increase in damage that would occur as a result of an uncontrolled flood, and the increased burden that the damages will place on the Local Agencies and SJAFCA. For the new development described in this Nexus Study to occur within the Mossdale Tract Area, the level of flood control needs to be improved to provide ULOP to the Area.
Requirement 5: Relationship Between Amount of Fees and Cost of Facility The appropriate common use factor for allocating costs to each land use is the Relative Property Damage Index. Table 6 shows the respective Relative Property Damage Index for each land use.
SJAFCA, acting as LFMA has estimated the total cost of the required facilities. The allocation of the costs based on the acres adjusted by the Property Damage Index has been presented in Table 7. The result is the cost of the improvements attributed to each acre of Residential, Commercial, and Industrial development. This allocation demonstrates the relationship between the amount of fee and the cost ofthe portion of the facility attributed to the specific type of development upon which the fee is imposed.
At,aRSEra wuPZE:
38 Aunciotes Irt
1803011 LAfCA Mossdale Nexus 5[ udy UPOATE- Pu61ic D oJt 20I2 0512 481
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
APPENDIX A - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DETAILS
Summary of Planned Development
1. Development that is expected to take place over the next 30- years is subject to the Fee. Development projections through 2060, as described in the RD 17 Basin Financing Plan Implementation Updated Development Absorption Projections Fina/ Updated Technical Memorandum prepared by LWA, dated August 18, 2017, and as updated by LWA since 2017 based on actual development and input from the Local Agencies, have been utilized to determine the amount of development expected to take place over the next 30- years.
2. The Mossdale Tract Area includes over 6, 345 acres of highly developed agricultural lands that produce a variety of crops. The basin also includes urban areas within San Joaquin County, the Cities of Lathrop, Manteca, and Stockton, and the urbanizing areas between these cities ( as shown in Figure 1). The area subject to the Regional Levee Fee is expected to increase by approximately 1, 766 Single- Family GDA, 139 Multi- Family GDA, 1, 274 Commercial GDA, and 1, 543 Industrial GDA over the ensuing 30- Years Table A1).
3. Growth in the City of Lathrop subject to the Regional Levee Fee is expected to amount to approximately 775 Single- Family GDA, 47 Multi- Family GDA, 496 Commercial GDA, and 724 Industrial GDA.
4. Growth in the City of Manteca subject to the Regional Levee Fee is expected to amount to approximately 793 Single- Family GDA, 39 Multi-Family GDA, 359 Commercial GDA, and 391 Industrial GDA.
5. Growth in the City of Stockton subject to the Regional Levee Fee is expected to amount to approximately 40 Single- Family GDA, 53 Multi-Family GDA, 127 Commercial GDA, and 214 Industrial GDA.
6. Growth within the currently unincorporated portions of San Joaquin County that would ultimately be annexed ir,to one of the Cities that v ould be subject te the Regional Levee Fee is estimated as follows. As described further below, assumptions were made in order to estimate the amount of development that would occur outside of the current City limits.
a. City of Lathrop to annex 24 Commercial GDA.
b. City of Manteca to annex 141 Single- Family GDA, 28 Commercial GDA, and 137 Industrial GDA. c. City of Stockton to annex 178 Commercial GDA.
City of Lathrop
Active projects on vacant parcels identified by City staff include Central Lathrop Specific Plan, Crossroads/ Industrial, Gateway, South Lathrop Specific Plan, East Lathrop, Mossdale Landing, Mossdale Landing East, Mossdale Landing South, and Sharpe Depot. PDFs and excel files that analyze development potential, undeveloped properties, and land use were provided by City staff to summarize total developable acreage for each project. City of Lathrop staff identified the potential for future development outside of the current City limits. Specific development projects have not been identified.
City of Manteca
Active projects on vacant parcels identified by City staff include Airport/ Daniels, Alma Apartments, Center Point South, Cerri, Denali, Embarcadero, Family Entertainment Zone, HWY 120, Kiper, Lewis Estates, Oakwood Trails, Oleander, Railroad Industrial, Sundance, Telles& Wilson, Terra Ranch, The Trails of Manteca, Villa Ticino LWA« s Ee
t.$';. s rc
y— 18030115JAFCAMossdoleNexusS[ udyUPDATE- PublicDiaf[ 20220512 482
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
West, Wackerly, Yosemite Greens, and Yosemite/ Fishback. Land use summaries were provided by City staff to summarize total developable acreage by project. City of Lathrop staff identified the potential for future development outside of the current City limits. Specific development projects have not been identified.
City of Stockton
Active projects on vacant parcels identified by City staff include the undeveloped portions of Weston Ranch and South Airport. City of Stockton staff identified the potential for future development outside of the current City limits. The City of Stockton is currently updating its General Plan and the General Plan will need to conform to the requirements of the Delta Plan. Specific development projects have not been identified.
Assumptions were made regarding the amount of development outside of the City limits and these assumptions have been reviewed by stakeholders working on the development of Adequate Progress Reports.
It is expected that as the City of Stockton finalizes its General Plan update and additional information is obtained over time, future updates of this report will reflect new information.
ARSEN WURZEi
sscciotes Ir A' 803011 SIAFCA Massdole Nex s 5[ udy UPOAtE- Public OroJ[ 2022 0512 483
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
Planned Development Details
Table A- 1.................................................................................................................... Total Developable Acreage Table A- 2............................................................................... Total Developable Dwelling Units and Square Feet EAR,, EN V'NP.ZEI
S' Asscciafes I.
y' 1801011 SIAFCA Mossdale Nexus Study UPDAiE- Puhlic D oJt 2022 0512 484
Table A- 1
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Total Developable Acreage
Area/ Project Single- Family Multi-Family Commercial Industrial Total Acreage City of Lathrop
Central Lathrop 827. 9 40.8 301. 4 0. 0 1, 170. 2
Mossdale Landing 0. 0 0. 0 6. 0 0.0 6. 0
Mossdale Landing East 0. 0 33 31. 5 0. 0 34. 7
Mossdale Landing South 32. 7 5. 8 17. 1 0. 0 55. 5
South Lathrop 0. 0 0. 0 9. 3 184. 2 193. 5
Lathrop Gateway 0. 0 0. 0 123. 9 190.8 314.7
Lathrop Crossroads 0. 0 0. 0 2. 6 55. 7 58.3
Historic/ EastLathrop 0. 0 0. 0 30. 5 103. 9 1343
Sharpe Depot 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 227. 9 227. 9
Subiotal City of Lathrop 860.6 49.9 522.2 762. 5 2, 195. 1 City of Manteca
Railroad Industrial 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 105. 7 105. 7
Center Point South 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 4 0.4
Telles& Wilson 37. 1 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 37. 1
Villa Ticino West 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 242. 2 242. 2
Yosemite Greens 12. 2 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 12. 2
Kiper 12. 2 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 12. 2
Alma Apartments 0. 0 10. 8 0. 0 0. 0 10. 8
Yosemite/ Fishback 17. 0 0. 0 53 0. 0 223
Family Entertainment Zone 0. 0 0. 0 132. 3 0. 0 132. 3
Embarcadero 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 35. 9 35. 9
Airport/ Daniels 0.0 19. 7 49. 8 0. 0 69. 5
HWY 120 0.0 0. 0 129. 7 27. 6 1573
Oakwood Trails 157. 2 0. 0 47. 2 0. 0 204.4
Denali 105. 0 0. 0 13. 0 0.0 118.0
Sundance SZ7 0. 0 00 10 52. 7
The Trails of Manteca 294. 1 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 294. 1
Cerri 123. 6 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 123. 6
Terra Ranch 24. 8 10. 3 0. 0 0. 0 35. 1
Wackerly 12. 9 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 12. 9
Lewis Estates 9. 9 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 9. 9
Oleander 22. 7 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 22. 7
Subto[ al City of Manteca 881. 4 40.8 377.4 411. 8 1, 711. 5 City of Stockton[ 3]
Weston Ranch 44.9 55. 7 133. 2 0. 0 233. 8
South Airport 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 225. 0 225. 0
Subtota/ City of Stockton 44. 9 55.7 133. 2 225. 0 458.8 San Joaquin County
Oakwood Shores 18. 6 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 18. 6
Future lathrop Annex 0. 0 0.0 25. 2 0. 0 25. 2
Future Manteca Annex 156. 8 0. 0 293 1443 330. 4
future Stockton Annex 0. 0 0. 0 187. 1 0. 0 187. 1
Subtota/ Sanlooquin County 175. 4 0. 0 241. 6 144.3 561. 2 Total Developable Land 1, 962. 3 146.3 1, 274.4 1, 543. 6 4, 926. 7 Gross Acreage to GDA Adjustment Factor 90. 0% 95. 0% 95. 0% 95. 0% Total GDA 1, 766. 0 139. 0 1, 210. 7 1, 466. 5 4, 582. 2 Source: Final Update Technical Memorandum RD 17 Basin Financing Plan Implementation Updated Development Absorption Projections, August 18, 2017 prepared by LWA with data later updated by LWA hased on input from SJAFCA member agency staff.
Prepared by LWA 1801101 ULOP Mossdale Regional Fee Mode12022 0512 485
Table A- 2
Mossdale Trect Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Total Developable Dwelling Units and Square Feet
Units Square Feet
Area/ Project Single- Family Multi-Family Totals Commercial Industrial Totals City of Lathrop
Central Lathrop 4, 968 613 5, 581 3, 283 0 3, 283
Mossdale Landing 0 0 0 66 0 66
Mossdale Landing East 0 50 50 343 0 343
Mossdale Landing South 196 87 283 186 0 186
South Lathrop 0 0 0 101 2, 809 2, 910
Lathrop Gateway 0 0 0 1, 349 2, 909 4, 258
Lathrop Crossroads 0 0 0 29 606 635
Historic/ East Lathrop 0 0 0 332 1, 584 1, 915
Sharpe Depot 0 0 0 0 3, 475 3, 475
Subiota/ City of Lathrop 5,164 750 5,914 5, 687 11, 383 17,070 City of Manteca
Railroad Industrial 0 0 0 0 691 691
Center PointSouth 0 0 0 0 99 99
Telles& Wilson 294 0 294 0 0 0
Villa Ticino West 0 0 0 0 4, 000 4, 000
Yosemite Greens 99 0 99 0 0 0
Kiper 115 0 115 0 0 0
Alma Apartments 0 268 268 0 0 0
Yosemite/ Fishback 102 0 102 69 0 69
Family Entertainment Zone 0 0 0 1, 729 0 1, 729
Embarcadero 0 0 0 0 469 469
Airport/ Daniels 0 295 295 651 0 651
HWY 120 0 0 0 1, 696 361 2, 056
Oakwood Trails 676 0 676 412 0 412
Denali 315 0 315 170 0 170
Sundance 289 0 289 0 0 0
The Trails of Manteca 1, 268 0 1, 268 0 0 0
Cerri 495 0 495 0 0 0
Terra Ranch 102 200 302 0 0 0
Wackerly 60 0 60 0 0 0
Lewis Estates 54 0 54 0 0 0
Oleander 116 0 116 0 0 0
Subtota/ City of Manteca 3,985 763 4, 748 4, 727 5,619 10,346 Gity of Stockton[ 3]
Weston Ranch 267 1, 113 1, 380 1, 262 0 1, 262
South Airport 0 0 0 0 3, 921 3, 921
Subtotal City of Stockton 267 1, 113 1, 380 1, 262 3, 921 5, 183 San Joaquin County
Oakwood Shores 107 0 107 0 0 0
Future Lathrop Annex 0 0 0 275 0 275
Future Manteca Annex 833 0 833 383 1, 886 2, 268
Future Stockton Annex 0 0 0 2, 446 0 2, 446
Subtotal San loaquin County 940 0 940 3, 103 1, 886 4, 989 Total 10,356 2, 626 12, 982 14, 779 22, 809 37, 588
Source: Final Update Technical Memorandum RD 17 Basin Financing Plan Implementation Updated Development Absorption Projeciions, August 18, 2017 prepared by LWA with data later updated by LWA based on input from SJAFCA member agenry staf(.
Prepared by LWA 1801101 ULOP Mossdale Reqional Fee Mode12022 0512 486
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
APPENDIX B - SJAFCA PROIECT EXPENDITURES DISCOUNT & ESCALATION TO 2021 DOLLARS
Table B- 1.................................................... SJAFCA Project Expenditures Discount& Escalation to 2021 Dollars Table B- 2 ................................................................................................ County EIFD Loan Repayment Schedule Table B- 3 ...................................................................................................... EIFD Revenue Repayment Schedule WA: AR5EN NJI RZEL
A.ssr, ciofas. rc
I801011 SIAFCA Mossdole Nexus 5[ udy UPDATE- Gublic O aJ[ Z022 0512 487
Table B- 1
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
SJAFCA Project Expenditures Discount& Escalation
Total SJAFCA Project Discount/ Escalation to
Year Expenditures 2021 Dollars
2014 719, 212 884, 540
2015 719, 212 858, 776
2016 789, 704 915, 483
2017 1, 001, 181 1, 126, 838
2018 61, 170 66, 842
2019 215, 845 228, 990
2020 296, 015 304, 896
2021 927, 295 927, 295
2022 6, 109, 023 5, 931, 091
2023 4, 578, 590 4, 315, 760
2024 44, 531, 401 40, 752, 540
2025 51, 401, 717 45, 669, 760
2026 53, 939, 064 46, 528, 310
2027 51, 538, 640 43, 162, 800
2028 46, 749, 904 38, 011, 950
2029 7, 185, 728 5, 672, 480
Tota1 27( 3, 763, 701 235, 358, 352
Source: 2020 Adequate Progress Report Update
Note:
Escalation Formula: FVZoz= PVvea* ( 1 + 0. 03)^( 2021- Year) Discount Formula: PVZoz1= FVvea* ( 1+ 0. 03)^-( Year- 2021) Prepared by LWA 1801101 ULOP Mossdole Regional Fee Mode12022 0512 488
Table B- 2
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP levee Impact Fee
County EIFD Loan Repayment Schedule
Development Fee Revenue Allocation
Beginning Annual Additional
County Loan Interest County EIFD Annual DIF Revenue Dedicated Remaining Ending County Year Balance Accrued[ 2) Contribution[ 3] Revenue[ 3j to Repayment Fee Revenue Loan Balance Reference Table C3
zoi6 So. 00 So. 00 So. 00 So. 00 So. 00 So. 00 o. 00
xoi o. 00 So. 00 so. 00 So. 00 So. 00 So. 00 So. 00
zois So. 00 So. 00 So. 00 o. 00 So. 00 o. 00 o. 00
zoi9 So. 00 So. ao So. 00 So. 00 So. 00 So. 00 So. 00
ioxo o. 00 o. 00 o. 00 303, soi. ss o. 00 303, soi. sa So. 00 2021 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 $ 5, 359, 232. 26 0. 00 $ 5, 359, 232. 26 0. 00 2022 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 $ 10, 123, 403. 80 0. 00 $ 10, 123, 403.80 0. 00 2023 0. 00 0. 00 $ 670,974. 51 $ 7, 537, 64136 0. 00 $ 7, 537, 64136 670, 974. 51 2024 $ 670,974. 51 $ 20, 129. 24 $ 1, 488,921. 27 $ 5, 374, 398.44 0. 00 $ 5, 374, 398. 44 $ 2, 180,025. 01 2025 $ 2, 180,025. 01 $ 65, 400. 75 $ 2, 151, 985. 02 $ 5, 955, 610.47 0. 00 $ 5, 955, 610.47 $ 4, 397,410. 78 2026 $ 4, 397,410. 78 $ 131, 92232 $ 2, 917, 456. 83 $ 5, 055, 639.42 0. 00 $ 5, 055, 639.42 $ 7, 446,789. 93 2027 $ 7, 446,789. 93 $ 223, 403. 70 $ 3, 644,078. 03 $ 4, 230,00531 0. 00 $ 4, 230, 005. 31 $ 11, 314, 271. 65 2028 $ 11, 314, 271. 65 $ 339,428. 15 $ 4, 379, 119. 24 $ 3, 842, 944.41 0. 00 $ 3, 842, 944.41 $ 16, 032, 819.04 2029 $ 16, 032,819. 04 $ 480,984. 57 $ 5, 078,149. 92 $ 3, 563, 169. 61 0. 00 $ 3, 563, 169. 61 $ 21, 591,953. 54 2030 $ 21, 591, 953. 54 $ 647,758. 61 0. 00 $ 3, 505, 366. 94 $ 3, 505, 366. 94 0. 00 $ 18, 734,345. 21 2031 $ 18, 734,345. 21 $ 562, 03036 0. 00 $ 3, 371, 931. 57 $ 3, 371, 931. 57 0. 00 $ 15, 924, 443. 99 2032 $ 15, 924, 443. 99 $ 477, 73332 0. 00 $ 2, 818, 838. 81 $ 2, 818,838. 81 0. 00 $ 13, 583,338.50 2033 $ 13, 583, 338.50 $ 407, 500. 15 0. 00 $ 3, 387, 055. 15 $ 3, 387, 055. 15 0. 00 $ 10, 603, 783. 50 2034 $ 10, 603, 783. 50 $ 318, 113. 51 0. 00 $ 3, 341, 88834 $ 3, 341, 888. 34 0. 00 $ 7, 580,008. 66 2035 $ 7, 580, 008. 66 $ 227, 400. 26 0. 00 $ 2, 787, 263. 21 $ 2, 787, 263. 21 0. 00 $ 5, 020,145. 71 2036 $ 5, 020, 145. 71 $ 150, 604. 37 0. 00 $ 2, 529, 715. 08 $ 2, 529, 715. 08 0. 00 $ 2, 641, 035. 00 2037 $ 2, 641, 035. 00 $ 79,231. 05 0. 00 $ 1, 899, 031. 64 $ 1, 899, 031. 64 0. 00 821, 234. 42 2038 $ 821, 234.42 $ 24, 637. 03 0. 00 $ 1, 245, 384. 98 845, 871. 45 399, 513. 53 0. 00 2039 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 $ 1, 211, 576. 38 0. 00 $ 1, 211, 576. 38 0. 00 2040 0. 00 04 0. 00 $ 2- 147, 708. 83 0- 00 $ 2, 947, 708? 3 0. 00 2041 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 $ 1, 829, 62239 0. 00 $ 1, 829,62239 0. 00 2042 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 $ 1, 829, 62239 0. 00 $ 1, 829,62239 0. 00 2043 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 $ 1, 835,68733 0. 00 $ 1, 835, 687. 33 0. 00 2044 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 $ 1, 469,360. 01 0. 00 $ 1, 469,360. 01 0. 00 2045 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 $ 1, 469,360. 01 0. 00 $ 1, 469, 360. 01 0. 00 2046 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 $ 1, 469,360. 01 0. 00 $ 1, 469, 360. 01 0. 00 zoa o. 00 o. 00 So. 00 S1, 4si,zs. o4 o. 00 S1, 4ss, zs. oa 50. 00 zoas So. 00 So. 00 So. 00 Sl, a3o, s a. 2o So. 00 51, 430, s n. zo o. 00 2049 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 $ 1, 430, 574Z0 0. 00 $ 1, 430, 574. 20 0. 00 2050 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 220, 916. 65 0. 00 220, 916. 65 0. 00 zosi So. 00 o. o0 50. 00 2o6, zss. zl So. 00 zo6, zss. zi o. 00 2052 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 155, 34630 0. 00 155, 346. 30 0. 00 2053 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 155, 346. 30 0. 00 155, 346. 30 0. 00 2054 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 155, 34630 0. 00 155, 346. 30 0. 00 zoss So. 00 o. 00 o. o0 51ns, si. sa o. 00 ias, si. aa so. 00 2056 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 87, 684. 35 0. 00 87, 684. 35 0. 00 zos o. 00 o. 00 o. 00 Sss, as. si o. 00 3s, as. a1 o. 00 zass o. 00 o. 00 o. 00 3s, ss. si go. 00 3a, ss. si o. 00 zos9 o. 00 So. 00 o. 00 S3s, ss. si o. 00 S3a, ss. s1 o. 00 ioeo So. 00 So. 00 So. 00 So. 00 So. 00 So. 00 o. 00
Totai 4, 156, 277. 38 $ 20, 330, 684. 81 $ 95,049, 789.84 $ 24,486,962. 19 $ 70, 562, 827. 64 Source: LWA, EPS
1] Represents the additional EIFD allocation above the base County allocation of 10 percent eligib e for repayment. 2) Assumed 3 percent annual interest rate reflective of 2 percent plus the annual County treasury yield( estimated at 1%) applied to the prior year ending balance. 3) Represents development impact fee revenue for all development within the Mossdale Tract boundaries as estimated by LWA included in Appendix A.
Prepared by LWA 1801101 ULOF Mossdole Fegional Fee Mode120220512 489
Table B- 3
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
EIFD Revenue Repayment Schedule
Estimated EIFD Revenue Contribution Estimated Repayment Calculation fiscal Year Total EIFD Beginning Fee Revenue for
Ending Lathrop Manteca Stockton County Revenue Balance Repayment[ 1] Ending Balance Reference Table B- 2
Zo2i o So So o So o So o
zoiz 5o So So So So 50 o So
2023 58, 543 19, 577 2, 200 $ 850, 840 $ 931, 161 0 0 $ 931, 161 2024 110, 211 53, 516 4, 488 $ 1, 888, 050 $ 2, 056, 266 931, 161 0 $ 2, 987, 426 2025 152, 452 80, 855 6, 118 $ 2, 728, 859 $ 2, 968, 284 2, 987, 426 0 $ 5, 955, 710 2026 198, 704 $ 117, 093 7, 268 $ 3, 699, 528 $ 4, 022, 593 5, 955, 710 0 $ 9, 978, 303 2027 246, 620 $ 145, 464 9, 059 $ 4, 620, 931 $ 5, 022, 074 9, 978, 303 0 $ 15, 000, 377 2028 298, 458 $ 170, 849 10, 983 $ 5, 553, 012 $ 6, 033, 302 $ 15, 000, 377 0 $ 21, 033, 679 2029 348, 069 $ 196, 197 12, 358 $ 6, 439, 429 $ 6, 996, 052 $ 21, 033, 679 0 $ 28, 029, 731 2030 515, 760 $ 581, 368 $ 179, 175 $ 2, 020, 721 $ 3, 297, 024 $ 28, 029, 731 0 $ 31, 326, 755 2031 588, 890 $ 655, 415 198, 377 $ 2, 294, 279 $ 3, 736, 961 $ 31, 326, 755 0 $ 35, 063, 716 2032 639, 365 $ 733, 207 $ 218, 281 $ 2, 537, 438 $ 4, 128, 290 $ 35, 063, 716 0 $ 39, 192, 007 2033 505, 615 $ 594, 970 $ 178, 211 $ 2, 044, 214 $ 3, 323, 010 $ 39, 192, 007 0 $ 42, 515, 017 2034 544, 651 $ 658, 355 $ 207, 001 $ 2, 257, 967 $ 3, 667, 974 $ 42, 515, 017 0 $ 46, 182, 991 2035 584, 910 $ 724, 777 $ 235, 997 $ 2, 479, 601 $ 4, 025, 284 $ 46, 182, 991 0 $ 50, 208, 275 2036 624, 668 $ 782, 732 $ 266, 334 $ 2, 690, 088 $ 4, 363, 823 $ 50, 208, 275 0 $ 54, 572, 098 2037 665, 961 $ 836, 682 $ 298, 069 $ 2, 900, 689 $ 4, 701, 401 $ 54, 572, 098 0 $ 59, 273, 499 2038 702, 717 $ 884, 456 $ 331, 256 $ 3, 098, 381 $ 5, 016, 811 $ 59, 273, 499 399, 514 $ 63, 890, 796 2039 740, 754 $ 927, 405 363, 415 $ 3, 275, 850 $ 5, 307, 424 $ 63, 890, 796 $ 1, 211, 576 $ 67, 986, 644 2040 780, 116 $ 972, 006 $ 395, 157 $ 3, 457, 937 $ 5, 605, 216 $ 67, 986, 644 $ 2, 147, 709 $ 71, 444, 151 2041 831, 445 $ 1, 016, 848 $ 429, 041 $ 3, 665, 782 $ 5, 943, 116 $ 71, 444, 151 $ 1, 829, 622 $ 75, 557, 644 2042 885, 329 $ 1, 054, 788 $ 464, 390 $ 3, 870, 920 $ 6, 275, 427 $ 75, 557, 644 $ 1, 829, 622 $ 80, 003, 449 2043 l '-73 $ 1, C93, 96G $ 501, 264 $ 4, G8a, 087 $ 6, 6 G, G84 $£ s0, 00, 449 $ i,b35, 6S7 $ 84, 788, 445 2044 473, 522 $ 537, 350 $ 255, 713 $ 2, 039, 708 $ 3, 306, 292 $ 84, 788, 445 $ 1, 469, 360 $ 86, 625, 378 2045 502, 232 $ 557, 130 $ 268, 914 $ 2, 140, 446 $ 3, 468, 722 $ 86, 625, 378 $ 1, 469, 360 $ 88, 624, 740 2046 532, 085 $ 577, 553 282, 578 $ 2, 244, 928 $ 3, 637, 143 $ 88, 624, 740 $ 1, 469, 360 $ 90, 792, 524 2047 563, 122 $ 598, 639 $ 296, 719 $ 2, 353, 288 $ 3, 811, 769 $ 90, 792, 524 $ 1, 451, 287 $ 93, 153, 005 2048 595, 390 $ 620, 410 $ 311, 130 $ 2, 464, 763 $ 3, 991, 692 $ 93, 153, 005 $ 1, 430, 574 $ 95, 714, 123 2049 628, 932 $ 642, 887 $ 325, 804 $ 2, 579, 411 $ 4, 177, 035 $ 95, 714, 123 $ 1, 430, 574 $ 98, 460, 584 2050 663, 797 $ 666, 094 $ 340, 979 $ 2, 698, 256 $ 4, 369, 126 $ 98, 460, 584 220, 917 $ 102, 608, 794 2051 700, 034 $ 690, 055 $ 356, 671 $ 2, 821, 445 $ 4, 568, 205 $ 102, 608, 794 206, 255 $ 106, 970, 743 2052 737, 375 $ 714, 792 $ 373, 069 $ 2, 948, 810 $ 4, 774, 046 $ 106, 970, 743 155, 346 $ 111, 589, 444 2053 776, 172 $ 740, 332 $ 388, 644 $ 3, 079, 107 $ 4, 984, 254 $ 111, 589, 444 155, 346 $ 116, 418, 351 2054 816, 479 $ 766, 700 $ 404, 716 $ 3, 214, 103 $ 5, 201, 998 $ 116, 418, 351 155, 346 $ 121, 465, 003 2055 858,353 $ 793, 923 $ 421, 304 $ 3, 353, 963 $ 5, 427, 542 $ 121,465, 003 145, 782 $ 126, 746, 764 2056 901, 850 $ 821, 828 $ 438, 422 $ 3, 498, 578 $ 5, 660, 678 $ 126, 746, 764 87, 684 $ 132, 319, 758 2057 947, 030 $ 848, 508 $ 456, 208 $ 3, 645, 921 $ 5, 897, 668 $ 132, 319, 758 38, 786 $ 138, 178, 640 2058 993, 956 $ 875, 989 $ 473, 836 $ 3, 795, 567 $ 6, 139, 348 $ 138, 178, 640 38, 786 $ 144, 279, 202 2059 1, 042, 691 $ 904, 294 $ 492, 011 $ 3, 950, 446 $ 6, 389, 442 $ 144, 279, 202 38, 786 $ 150, 629, 858 2060[ 2) $ 1, 093, 301 $ 933, 448 $ 510, 750 $ 4, 110, 737 $ 6, 648, 236 $ 150, 629, 858 0 $ 157, 278, 095 Total 23, 790, 934 $ 24, 590, 453 $ 10, 715, 910 $ 117, 398, 078 $ 176, 495, 375 19, 217, 281 Source: EPS
i] Repayment of general EIFD Revenue Contributions by agencies will only begin once repayment of the County EIFD Loan amount has been satisfied.
Prepared by LWA 05/ 11/ 22 P. II BOf000 SJAFCA MossdaleV BO7011 Regional DIFlModelsll BO7101 ULOP Mossdale Regional Fee Model 2022 0512 490
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
APPENDIX C - ESTIMATED COST ALLOCATION BY PROJECT AND REVENUE
OVER TIME
Table C- 1............................................................ Estimated Cost per Unit by Project( Residential Development) Table C- 2.......................... Estimated Cost per 1, 000 Sq. Ft. by Project( Commercial & Industrial Development) Table C- 3 ................................................................................ Total Development Impact Fee Revenue Estimate Table C- 4................................................................ Development Impact Fee Revenue Estimate— Single- Family Table C- 5................................................................. Development Impact Fee Revenue Estimate- Multi- Family Table C- 6.................................................................. Development Impact Fee Revenue Estimate- Commercial Table C- 7...................................................................... Development Impact Fee Revenue Estimate— Industrial Table C- 8............................................................................................. Developer Advances and Agency Funding LWA<<ARs, Pz.
S Assuciafes Irv
1801011 S/ AFCA Mossdale Nexus 5[ udy UPDATE- Pu61ic OraJt 2022 0512 491
Table C- 1
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Estimated Cost Per Unit by Project( Residential Development) Area/ Project Singie- Family Multi-Family Allocated Cost Share Single& Average Allocated Acreage Acreage Cost Share Percentage Multi-Family Units Cost per Unit Reference TableA- 1 TableA- 1 Table7 TableA- 2
A B C= A*$ 21, 462)+ D= C/$ 88, 606, 858) E F= C/ E
B"$ 20, 084)
City of Lathrop
Central Lathrop 745. 1 38. 8 $ 16, 770,424 18. 9% 5, 581 3, 005 Mossdale Landing 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Mossdale Landing East 0. 0 3. 1 62, 391 0. 1% 50 1, 248 Mossdale Landing South 29. 4 5. 5 740,749 0. 8% 283 2, 617 South Lathrop 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Lathrop Gateway 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Lathrop Crossroads 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Historic/ East Lathrop 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Sharpe Depot 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Subtotal City of Lathrop 774.5 47.4 $ 17, 573, 564 19. 8% 5,914 2,972 City of Manteca
Railroad Industrial 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Center Point South OA 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Telles& Wilson 33. 4 0. 0 717, 191 0. 8% 294 2, 439
Villa Ticino West 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Vosemite Greens 11. 0 0. 0 235, 265 0. 3% 99 2, 376
Kiper 11. 0 0. 0 235, 651 03% 115 2, 049
Alma Apartments 0. 0 103 206, 824 0. 2% 268 772
Vosemite/ Fishback 15. 3 0. 0 327, 787 0.4% 102 3, 214
Family Entertainment Zone 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Embarcadero 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Airport/ Daniels 0. 0 18. 7 375, 680 0. 4% 295 1, 273
HWY 120 0. 0 0. 0 SO 0. 0% 0 0
Oakwood Trails 141. 5 0. 0 $ 3, 036, 619 3. 4% 676 4, 492 Denall 94. 5 O. 0 S" i'28, i47 2. 356 315 G, 34
Sundance 47.4 0. 0 $ 1, 017, 608 1. 1% 289 3, 521
The Trails of Manteca 264. 7 0. 0 $ 5, 680,742 6. 4% 1, 268 4, 480 Cerri 111. 2 0. 0 $ 2, 387,415 2. 7% 495 4, 823
Terra Ranch 22. 3 9. 8 674, 973 0. 8% 302 2, 235
Wackerly 11. 6 0. 0 249, 172 0. 3% 60 4, 153
Lewis Estates 8. 9 0. 0 191, 612 0. 2% 54 3, 548
Oleander 20. 5 0. 0 439, 277 0. 5% 116 3, 787
Subtotol City of Manteco 793. 3 38. 8 $ 17, 803, 964 20. 1° 4, 748 3, 750 City of Stockton
Weston Ranch 40.4 52. 9 $ 1, 929, 892 2. 2% 1, 380 1, 399 South Airport 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Subtotal City of Stockton 40.4 52.9 $ 1, 929, 892 2Z% 1, 380 1, 399 San Joaquin County
Oakwood Shores 16. 7 0. 0 358,499 0. 4% 107 3, 350
Future Lathrop Annex 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Future Manteca Annex 141. 1 0. 0 $ 3, 028, 506 3. 4% 833 3, 636 Future Stockton Annex 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Subtotal5an Joaquin County 157. 8 0.0 $ 3, 387,005 3. 8% 940 3, 603 Prepared by LWA 1801101 ULOP Mossdale Regional Fee Mode12022 0512 492
Table C- 2
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Estimated Cost Per 1, 000 Sq. Ft. by Project( Commercial& Industrial Development) Area/ Project Commercial Industrial Total Cost Share Average Allocated Acreage Acreage Allocated Percentage 3000' s Square feet Cost per 1, 000 Sq.
Reference TableA- 1 TableA- 1 Table7 TableA- 2
A B C=( A'$ 21462+ D=( C/$ 88, 606, 858) E F= C/ E
B`$ 20084)
City of Lathrop
Central Lathrop 286. 4 0. 0 $ 5, 814, 901 6. 6% 3 1, 771, 475 Mossdale Landing 5. 7 0. 0 116, 366 0. 1% 0 1, 771, 435 Mossdale Landing East 29. 9 0. 0 606,810 0. 7°/o 0 1, 771, 501 Mossdale LandingSouth 16. 2 0. 0 329, 014 0. 4% 0 1, 771, 466 South Lathrop 8. 8 175.0 $ 2, 963, 021 3. 3% 3 1, 018, 304 Lathrop Gateway 117. 7 1813 $ 5, 273, 104 6. 0% 4 1, 238,364 Lathrop Crossroads 2. 5 52. 9 892, 008 1. 0°/ o 1 1, 404, 914 Historic/ EastLathrop 28. 9 98. 7 $ 2, 157, 363 2. 4% 2 1, 126, 284 Sharpe Depot 0. 0 216. 5 $ 3, 444, 357 3. 9% 3 991, 176 Subtotal City of Lathrop 496.1 724. 4 $ 21, 596, 943 24. 4% 17 1, 265,216 City of Manteca
Railroad Industrial 0. 0 100.4 $ 1, 597,418 1. 8% 1 2, 312, 752 Center Point South 0. 0 0.4 5, 983 0. 0% 0 60, 503
Telles& Wilson 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
VillaTicinoWest 0. 0 230. 1 $ 3, 660, 209 4. 1% 4 915,052 Yosemite Greens 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Kiper 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Alma Apartments 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Yosemite/ Fishback 5. 0 0. 0 101, 858 0. 1% 0 1, 476, 209 Family Entertainment Zone 125. 7 0.0 $ 2, 553,020 2. 9% 2 1, 476, 229 Embarcadero 0. 0 34. 1 542, 199 0. 6°/o 0 1, 156, 371
Airport/ Daniels 47.3 0. 0 961, 057 1. 1% 1 1, 476, 233 HWY 120 1233 26. 2 $ 2, 920, 113 3. 3% 2 1, 420, 122
Oakwood Trails 44. 9 0. 0 911, 131 1. 0% 0 2, 209, 232
Cenali 1Z 0. 0 525, 7E8 0. 3° 0 1, 47G, 26G
Sundance 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0°/o 0 0
The Trails of Manteca 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Cerri 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Terra Ranch 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Wackerly 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Lewis Estates 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Oleander 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Subtotal City of Manteca 358.5 391. 2 $ 13, 503, 777 15. 2% 10 51, 305, 161 City of Stockton
Weston Ranch 126. 6 0. 0 $ 2, 570, 054 2. 9% 1 2, 036, 590 South Airport 0. 0 213. 8 $ 3, 400,382 3. 8% 4 867, 279 Subtotal City of Stockton 126. 6 213. 8 $ 5, 970, 437 6. 7% 5 2,903, 868 San Joaquin County
Oakwood Shores 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 5 0
Future Lathrop Annex 23. 9 0. 0 486, 316 0. 5% 0 0
FutureMantecaAnnex 27. 8 137. 1 $ 2, 745, 198 3. 1% 38 73, 034 Future Stockton Annex 177.8 0. 0 $ 3, 609, 763 4. 1% 38 96, 036 Subtotal San loaquin County 229. 5 137.1 6, 841, 277 7. 7% 80 85, 341 Prepared by LWA 1801101 ULOP Mossdale Regional Fee Mode12022 0512 493
Table C- 3
Mossdale Trad Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Total Development Impact Fee Revenue Estimate
Revenue by Land Use
Year Single- Family Multi- Family Commercial Industrial Total Fee Revenue Table C- 4 Table C- 5 Table C- 6 Table C- 7
2016 0 0 0 0 0
2017 0 0 0 0 0
2018 0 0 0 0 0
2019 0 0 0 0 0
2020 0 0 0 303, 502 303, 502
2021 2, 485, 413 $ 183, 567 163, 774 2, 526, 478 5, 359, 232 2022 5, 690, 433 $ 372, 055 $ 2, 017, 116 2, 043, 801 10, 123, 404 2023 3, 069, 552 $ 405, 073 $ 1, 714, 059 2, 348, 958 7, 537, 641 2024 1, 703, 064 $ 268, 000 $ 1, 273, 890 2, 129, 444 5, 374, 398 2025 2, 054, 116 $ 311, 783 $ 1, 402, 940 2, 186, 772 5, 955, 610 2026 1, 895, 298 $ 377, 056 $ 1, 367, 707 1, 415, 579 5, 055, 639 2027 1, 409, 182 $ 303, 348 $ 1, 428, 018 1, 089, 457 4, 230, 005 2028 1, 329, 348 $ 43, 582 $ 1, 380, 907 1, 089, 107 3, 842, 944 2029 1, 329, 777 $ 43, 381 $ 1, 466, 601 723, 410 3, 563, 170 2030 1, 363, 687 $ 38, 561 $ 1, 683, 497 419, 622 3, 505, 367 2031 1, 363, 687 $ 38, 561 $ 1, 550, 062 419, 622 3, 371, 932 2032 1, 363, 473 $ 118, 897 916, 848 419, 622 2, 818, 839 2033 1, 027, 165 $ 80, 336 $ 1, 035, 642 1, 243, 912 3, 387, 055 2034 1, 025, 877 $ 80, 336 $ 1, 035, 825 1, 199, 850 3, 341, 888 2035 578, 827 $ 80, 336 985, 038 1, 143, 063 2, 787, 263 2036 398, 332 $ 80, 336 907, 507 1, 143, 540 2, 529, 715 2037 393, 332 8C, 336 639, 864 750, 499 1, 8 9, 032
2038 398, 332 $ 33, 138 492, 438 321, 477 1, 245, 385
2039 398, 332 0 491, 767 321, 477 1, 211, 576
2040 1, 546, 609 0 279, 623 321, 477 2, 147, 709
2041 1, 209, 658 0 298, 488 321, 477 1, 829, 622
2042 1, 209, 658 0 298, 488 321, 477 1, 829, 622
2043 1, 209, 658 0 305, 189 320, 840 1, 835, 687
2044 1, 209, 658 0 259, 702 0 1, 469, 360
2045 1, 209, 658 0 259, 702 0 1, 469, 360
2046 1, 209, 658 0 259, 702 0 1, 469, 360
2047 1, 209, 658 0 241, 629 0 1, 451, 287
2048 1, 209, 658 0 220, 917 0 1, 430, 574
2049 1, 209, 658 0 $ 220, 917 0 1, 430, 574
2050 0 0 220, 917 0 220, 917
2051 0 0 206, 255 0 206, 255
2052 0 0 155, 346 0 155, 346
2053 0 0 $ 155, 346 0 155, 346
2054 0 0 $ 155, 346 0 155, 346
2055 0 0 145, 782 0 145, 782
2056 0 0 87, 684 0 87, 684
2057 0 0 38, 786 0 38, 786
2058 0 0 38, 786 0 38,786
2059 0 0 38, 786 0 38, 786
Total 41, 715, 755. 2 2, 938, 680. 2 25, 840, 892. 1 24, 554, 461. 3 95, 049, 790 Prepared by LWA 1801101 ULOP Mossdale Regional Fee Mode12022 0512 494
Table C- 4
Mossdale Trect Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Development Impact Fee Revenue Estimate- Single- Family Single- Family Acres By Jurisdiction
Unincorp
Year Lathrop Manteca Stockton County Total Fee Revenue
Table D13 Table D7 Table D70 Table D16 Table 8
Fee Rate/ Acre $ 21, 462
2016 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2017 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2018 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2019 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2020 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2021 61. 4 47. 7 6. 7 0. 0 115. 8 2, 485, 413
2022 179. 0 72. 7 13. 5 0. 0 265. 1 5, 690, 433
2023 23. 9 90. 0 13. 5 15. 7 143. 0 3, 069, 552
2024 0. 0 52. 4 11. 3 15. 7 79. 4 1, 703, 064
2025 3. 3 76. 8 0. 0 15. 7 95. 7 2, 054, 116
2026 3. 3 69. 4 0. 0 15. 7 88. 3 1, 895, 298
2027 3. 3 46. 7 0. 0 15. 7 65. 7 1, 409, 182
2028 3. 3 43. 0 0. 0 15. 7 61. 9 1, 329, 348
2029 3. 3 43. 0 0. 0 15. 7 62. 0 1, 329, 777
2030 3. 3 44. 6 0. 0 15. 7 63. 5 1, 363, 687
2031 3. 3 44. 6 0. 0 15. 7 63. 5 1, 363, 687
2032 3. 3 44. 6 0.0 15. 7 63. 5 1, 363, 473
2033 3. 3 44. 6 0. 0 0. 0 47. 9 1, 027, 165
2034 3. 2 44. 6 0. 0 0. 0 47. 8 1, 025, 877
2035 0. 0 27. 0 0. 0 0. 0 27. 0 578, 827
2036 0. 0 18. 6 0. 0 0. 0 18. 6 398, 332
2037 0. 0 18. 6 0. 0 C. 0 i5. 6 398„ i: S"L
2038 0. 0 18. 6 0. 0 0. 0 18. 6 398, 332
2039 0. 0 18. 6 0.0 0. 0 18. 6 398, 332
2040 56. 4 15. 7 0. 0 0. 0 72. 1 1, 546, 609
2041 56. 4 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 56. 4 1, 209, 658
2042 56. 4 0. 0 0.0 0. 0 56. 4 1, 209, 658
2043 56. 4 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 56.4 1, 209, 658
2044 56. 4 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 56. 4 1, 209, 658
2045 56. 4 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 56. 4 1, 209, 658
2046 56. 4 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 56. 4 1, 209, 658
2047 56. 4 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 56. 4 1, 209, 658
2048 56. 4 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 56. 4 1, 209, 658
2049 56. 4 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 56. 4 1, 209, 658
2050 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 d.a 0. 0 0
2051 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2052 0. 0 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2053 0. 0 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2054 0. 0 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2055 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0
2056 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2057 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0
2058 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0. 0 0
2059 0. 0 OA 0. 0 0.0 0. 0 0
Total 860. 6 881. 4 44. 9 156. 8 1, 943. 7 $ 41, 715, 755 Prepared by lWA 1801101 ULOP Mossdale Regional Fee Mode12022 0512 495
Table C- 5
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Development Impact Fee Revenue Estimate- Multi- Family
Multi- Family Acres By Jurisdiction
Unincorp
Year Lathrop Manteca Stockton County Total Fee Revenue
Table D13 Table D7 Table DIO Tab/ e D16 Table 8
Fee Rate/ Acre $ 20, 084
2016 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0
2017 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2018 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0
2019 0. 0 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0
2020 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0. 0 0
2021 1. 6 0. 0 7. 5 0.0 9. 1 183, 567
2022 8. 5 2. 6 7. 5 0.0 18. 5 372, 055
2023 12. 3 7. 9 0. 0 0.0 20. 2 405, 073
2024 5. 4 7. 9 0.0 0. 0 13. 3 268, 000
2025 5. 4 10. 1 0. 0 0. 0 15. 5 311, 783
2026 5. 4 5. 8 7. 5 0. 0 18. 8 377, 056
2027 5. 4 2. 2 7. 5 0. 0 15. 1 303, 348
2028 0. 0 2. 2 0. 0 0. 0 2. 2 43, 582
2029 0. 0 2. 2 0. 0 0. 0 2. 2 43, 381
2030 1. 9 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 1. 9 38, 561
2031 1. 9 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 1. 9 38, 561
2032 1. 9 0.0 4. 0 0. 0 5. 9 118, 897
2033 0. 0 0. 0 4. 0 0. 0 4. 0 80, 336
2034 0. 0 0. 0 4. 0 0. 0 4. 0 80, 336
2035 0. 0 0. 0 4. 0 0. 0 4.0 80, 336
2036 0. 0 0. 0 4. 0 0. 0 4.0 80, 336
ZO' s? 0. 0 0. 0 4. 0 O. G G 80, 336
2038 0. 0 0. 0 1. 7 0. 0 1. 7 33, 138
2039 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2040 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2041 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2042 0.0 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2043 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0
2044 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0
2045 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0
2046 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2047 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2048 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0. 0 0
2049 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0. 0 0
2050 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2051 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2052 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0.0 0. 0 0
2053 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2054 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2055 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2056 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2057 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2058 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2059 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
Total 49.9 40.8 55. 7 0.0 146. 3 2, 938, 680
Prepared by LWA 1801101 ULOP Mossdale Regional Fee Mode12022 0512 496
Table C- 6
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Development Impact Fee Revenue Estimate- Commercial
Commercial Acres By Jurisdiction
Unincorp
Year Lathrop Manteca Stockton County Total Fee Revenue
Table D13 Table D7 Table D70 Table D16 Table 8
Fee Rate/ Acre $ 20, 307
2016 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2017 0. 0 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2018 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0
2019 0.0 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2020 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2021 8. 1 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 8. 1 163, 774
2022 40. 1 12. 7 44. 6 1. 9 99. 3 2, 017, 116
2023 40. 1 16. 5 24. 0 3. 8 84. 4 1, 714, 059
2024 40. 1 16. 5 2. 3 3. 8 62. 7 1, 273, 890
2025 40. 1 20. 3 2. 3 6. 3 69. 1 1, 402, 940
2026 38. 4 20. 3 2. 3 6. 3 67. 4 1, 367, 707
2027 38. 4 21. 4 2. 3 8. 3 70. 3 1, 428, 018
2028 38. 4 19. 1 2. 3 8. 3 68. 0 1, 380, 907
2029 38. 4 23. 3 2. 3 8. 3 72. 2 1, 466, 601
2030 49. 1 23. 3 2. 3 8. 3 82. 9 1, 683, 497
2031 42. 5 23. 3 2. 3 8. 3 76. 3 1, 550, 062
2032 12. 4 22. 2 2. 3 8. 3 45. 2 916, 848
2033 12. 4 22. 2 2. 3 14. 1 51. 0 1, 035, 642
2034 12. 4 22. 2 2. 3 14. 1 51. 0 1, 035, 825
2035 12. 4 22. 2 2. 3 11. 6 48. 5 985, 038
2036 12. 4 18. 4 23 11. 6 44. 7 907, 507
2037 124 5. 2 2. 3 11. 6 31. 5 639, 864
2038 12. 4 3. 8 2. 3 5. 7 24. 3 492, 438
2039 12. 4 3. 8 2. 3 5. 7 24. 2 491, 767
2040 0. 0 3. 8 2. 3 7. 6 13. 8 279, 623
2041 0. 9 3. 8 2. 3 7. 6 14. 7 298, 488
2042 0. 9 3. 8 2. 3 7. 6 14. 7 298, 488
2043 0. 9 3. 8 2. 3 8. 0 15.0 305, 189
2044 0. 9 3. 8 2. 3 5. 7 12. 8 259, 702
2045 0. 9 3. 8 2. 3 5. 7 12. 8 259, 702
2046 0. 9 3. 8 2. 3 5. 7 12. 8 259, 702
2047 0. 9 3. 8 2. 3 4. 8 11. 9 241, 629
2048 0. 9 3. 8 2. 3 3. 8 10. 9 220, 917
2049 0.9 3. 8 2. 3 3. 8 10. 9 220, 917
2050 0.9 3. 8 2. 3 3. 8 10. 9 220, 917
2051 0. 0 3. 8 2. 5 3. 8 10. 2 206, 255
2052 0. 0 3. 8 0. 0 3. 8 7. 7 155, 346
2053 0. 0 3. 8 0. 0 3. 8 7. 7 155, 346
2054 0. 0 3. 8 0. 0 3. 8 7. 7 155, 346
2055 0. 0 3. 4 0. 0 3. 8 7. 2 145, 782
2056 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 4. 3 4. 3 87, 684
2057 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 1. 9 1. 9 38, 786
2058 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 1. 9 1. 9 38, 786
2059 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 1. 9 1. 9 38, 786
Total 522. 2 377.4 133. 2 239. 7 1, 272. 5 $ 25,840, 892 Prepared by LWA 1801101 ULOP Mossdole Regional Fee Mode12022 0512 497
Table C- 7
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Development Impact Fee Revenue Estimate- Industrial
Industrial Acres By Jurisdiction
Unincorp
Year Lathrop Manteca Stockton County Total Fee Revenue
Table D13 Table D7 Table DIO Table D16 Table 8
Fee Rate/ Acre $ 15, 907
2016 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0
2017 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0
2018 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0. 0 0
2019 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0. 0 0
2020 19. 1 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 19. 1 303, 502
2021 90. 8 68. 0 0. 0 0.0 158. 8 2, 526, 478
2022 64. 3 64. 2 0.0 0.0 128. 5 2, 043, 801
2023 64. 3 83. 4 0. 0 0. 0 147. 7 2, 348, 958
2024 64. 3 69. 6 0. 0 0.0 133. 9 2, 129, 444
2025 64. 3 73. 2 0. 0 0. 0 137. 5 2, 186, 772
2026 64. 3 24. 7 0. 0 0.0 89. 0 1, 415, 579
2027 64. 9 3. 6 0.0 0. 0 68. 5 1, 089, 457
2028 64. 9 3. 6 0. 0 0. 0 68. 5 1, 089, 107
2029 41. 9 3. 6 0.0 0. 0 45. 5 723, 410
2030 22. 8 3. 6 0. 0 0. 0 26. 4 419, 622
2031 22. 8 3. 6 0.0 0. 0 26. 4 419, 622
2032 22. 8 3. 6 0.0 0. 0 26. 4 419, 622
2033 22. 8 3. 6 23. 0 28. 9 78. 2 1, 243, 912
2034 22. 8 3. 6 20. 2 28. 9 75. 4 1, 199, 850
2035 22. 8 0. 0 20. 2 28. 9 71. 9 1, 143, 063
2036 22. 8 0. 0 20. 2 28. 9 71. 9 1, 143, 540
2037 0. O. 0 Z0. 2 . 9 49. 1 780, 499
2038 0. 0 0. 0 20. 2 0. 0 20. 2 321, 477
2039 0. 0 0. 0 20. 2 0.0 20. 2 321, 477
2040 0. 0 0. 0 20. 2 0. 0 20. 2 321, 477
2041 0. 0 0. 0 20. 2 0. 0 20. 2 321, 477
2042 0. 0 0. 0 20. 2 0. 0 20. 2 321, 477
2043 0. 0 0. 0 20. 2 0. 0 20. 2 320, 840
2044 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2045 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2046 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2047 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2048 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2049 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2050 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2051 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2052 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0
2053 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2054 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2055 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2056 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2057 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2058 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2059 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
Total 762. 5 411. 8 225. 0 144. 3 1, 543. 6 $ 24, 554, 462 Prepared by LWA 1801101 ULOP Mossdale Regionol fee Mode12022 0512 498
Table C- 8
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Developer Advances and Agency Funding
Funding Source Amount
Lathrop 1, 005, 305
Lathrop Gateway/ Lazares 3, 720
Manteca 962, 125
Others 476, 131
RD 17 126, 300
Richland 1, 349, 453
River Islands 15, 500
Saybrook 712, 480
SJ County 65, 703
Stockton 65, 703
Total 4, 782, 419
Source: City of Lathrop, City of Manteca, LWA
Note: For additional funding source details refer to the Mossdale Tract Program 2021 Annual Adequate Progress
Report Update for Urban Level of Protection dated June 25, 2021 and the Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection Advance Funding Credit and Reimbursement Policies and Procedures Study dated October 15, 2019.
Prepared by LWA 1801101 ULOP Mossdole Regionpl Fee Mode12022 0512 499
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
APPENDIX D - EXAMPLE GRO55 DEVELOPABLE ACREAGE CALCULATION For this example calculation, the Gross Developable Acreage ( GDA) for Lot 1—B on the attached Maps is calculated.
Map D- 1 shows the overall tentative map for the " Wheeler Ranch" project. Map D- 2 is an enlargement of Lot 1—B with an indication of acreage to be subtracted from the large lot map when determining GDA. Note:
For purposes of the fee calculation, the City may require the small lot final map to provide a calculation of G DA.
STEP 1
Goal: From the tentative map, determine the gross acreage for the large lot.
Solution: In this case, the gross acreage for the large lot by the unit is given in the land use table. Lot 1— B' s gross acreage is stated as 38. 3 acres. This includes the allocable portion of parks/ open space that is not indicated as its own unit, as well as major collectors and arterials.
STEP 2
Goal: Subtract all acreage in Major Roads, Parks, Open Space, and other property that will ultimately be publicly owned.
Solution: In this case, the densities indicated in the land use table, based on the note, exclude the allocable area of arterials and collector streets. If the density is divided by the number of units, the result is the acreage of the unit without allocable major roads.
Lot 1—B has 147 ( ots, and a density of 4. 1 units/ acre. 147/ 4. 1 = 35. 9 acres. Therefore, there were 2. 4 acres of major roads included in the unit acreage stated in the land use table ( 38. 3 acres- 35. 9 acres= 2. 4 acres).
Subtract all open space. Lot 1—B includes two park areas: one of 1. 3 acres and one of 0. 5 acres.
35. 9 acres- ( 1. 3 acres+ 0. 5 acres) = 34. 1 acres.
No additional ultimately publicly owned property is remaining in the Lot; therefore, the GDA for Lot 1—B is 34. 1 acres.
Furthermore, the GDA per unit is 0. 232. This is the " Project" acreage to be used for determining the Per Unit Fee Rate for each Levee Fee charged at Building Permit. lAR5Et wURZEt
A.ssneint ts. Ir.t D' 1801011 SIAFCA Mossdale Nexus Study VPDATE- Pu6lic Draf[ 2012 0512 500
1 1
y M4 r}
1 I i
rlMip „ I MYIMMlM MYINIlMNM7 I
y yMJyi y
Zi[ a
y
Y
y y y yin y Iy y yi ry
M YIMMIY F M Y Y MMI IM M IM MM Wk
LKC, S I i 1 1 lAi' iw` 9'.
r s q i''''
k 1 ' 7+7
l p l, a,
1\,'' 1'''''
b 1 d ,,„ ay lM y y y y i y,,y
4M MIMt M MI YMM A
I'
A ,
y
v a"`"
kCp,
1 aGap'
r ` G i ipi' y0,'A'' A'. A 1 1
a l s; ! l Q! u
I
1',
i d 4 1 '" Q 4 1 fb
p pE++ s4 m i A i':
4',Cq 1 3 q qJq 1'\ .
G C I tC IS"'#, A
H 1, .
At C I I F I i' pi: A' i4 9 1 4 Q 1 1 1 1 1+
A r
aC
1 l.,, 4„,,,' I' 1 1 4 3 i
iQ,q i C l? tCt a q'+'"
4 }',"' 3' ' G a G i' A''
s r I. S' y .
Ca a' Sq f`A' yt } T r ' 4 ' f' n k
f r 41 l a l'.
y,+ . 4 ap p' p;< I
a al ''` ` Q'' 4' r
a R '." a+'.;, Q,' i' +', 1 1 6 I i i a C i aa1 t#
yy y y
7p+ yfp pQEqy
qfiMMlMYIPlN MM+ 6
iRµlfi 1" IMFkFFM hFME
9 r 3 3 d. . ' p! r''''''
I x °, ` i kf H
I l '
x x x m' a a
oam
oom
oom
m
m
m
y S oa m
oa oo
y
oamoe
f: z i N oo os
r c
r oom e
o
sa me
samme
o, ,:
sa
sam
m
sam
sa
sa me
m
sa me0m
11 11
KASL
501
r s n
r N
1 ,
C . T
v
Qp V 6
CV1y
z t
V .
cV- y e i t opOs
a '- w d
Ej j
11 I Mrt+i R!' rc7. ch t I'. M c7Mc7 ` ' f
Va' I Zs - ' 1,.
a E _ , : . z .
t3 L
v
I £ 3 z - -- --_ ..._ _
r.____- - '__'_ ' I I Q
aa` , zcc
i
r' :t__--. 7 ; -+
n -
p -
h
O 9£ t -
N L r r
L£ l LOt - • api Z£ 4 p ' L l - ya
L£ lu j,
L£ t
vi Oi
LCt V
M
Q, , r w
r tf4 ' C Q
n _ . , z M
s - , , c c ( ,,
F -
n 8' I , c c - I tti II
Q
r _
t 1 Z£ l
Z£ 4,- f£t - , L£ tM- ,
L£ t ; n' Q' 1 n
L£ 4 Q
a I
r. - „, cc
d
c t - Q, y
I
1 l - , L£ t _
L£ 4 ' £ i L£ 4-
I
rs ti L 0
z a c t - - . cF g.
c o - - , c t - .
ccG - t t) 4-
S T LC[.- .. L£ t - - L£ t
r
u 1' .!£ l ; n
l -
L£ 4 V
Q L ati xr - I T Gs ; T,
L G Q t
c, { zs r, i - ; , fi- 8' naa
t e -
n
M Q
N - , tcr, . ts - , ,
c - - , c t
cs - M Q G)
cst
e - rn.t¢4 ^
a
Q .at€ , zE zs, v,cr - ,
r, cr - I
N
O „'-- L£ t 4 -
L£i -
t/ , zF ! , zc
zr
T R,c , c E ' ' ' C O
N
a c ,
L t
t
tT
o,c t -.,
ar
cEt
L
O
L£ t
N
as tO j ' - r,. tc
L
O [ >
L'
Z
T- .
t a _
t t - C • i
d
LQl Z£ k
T
L£ 4 ^ I Q
C a t - ;
n
iL£ t
iLa^i - 8 I a t t, 1
I M_ , t t i r "''
i I (' n tA tA
n` ' ' r
z r ` a! ^ J
T, cr - , c£ i -
1 •
asc -
N tA tA
O tn cA O
L£f
y' Q Q L
J`
l
f . z` . +
T
a , a 6 tst - ( 7 J J
T , r- m
X ' -. ,'
r -
r
F ! ^ _
cs ! , tct -
W ,'
I"
Ct M
R N t0;
C£ l
y
r. C£ 4
y , n
O , rt.. 5^ 88` SL , 8£ t
ao cD
S ! S Z9 Z9 . L9 - L£ t a ' y L£ 1 -
P . .`
1 [
D
W t4 ' ' '
w ^ *"....
t¢- n ,"'.,
p A
rr'i M L£ t t+ d£ l '
r._ r._ n_
L- , Ct
ti¢
n
F'L a
to ry _ '' , f St' ht
tp
f NM " M."- i SAU." I tD . G
y $ t I
V
tA.',.
w,,
V
t- ^ +, Ilf • MS,
L J 1
y
N Y
T
A i
p
tis ' gg , . `
3 .. ' •- < `' r ' `' , s `
t'`'..
502
ATTACHMENT C
AMENDED AGREEMENT FOR COLLECTION OF
SAN JOAQUIN AREA FLOOD CONTROL AGENCY
MOSSDALE TRACT AREA REGIONAL URBAN LEVEL OF
FLOOD PROTECTION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
This Agreement for Collection of San Joaquin Area Flood Control Agency Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban evel af Flood Protection Development impact Fee (" Agreement") is made and entered into on the date it is effective pursuant ta Section 12 by and among the foflowing parties:
a. City of Stockton, hereinafter referred to as " Stockton"; b. County of San Joaquin, hereinafter referred to as " County"; c. City of Lathrop, hereinafter referred to as "Lathrop;" d. City of Manteca, hereinafter referred to as " Manteca;' and, e. The San Joaquin Area Flood Control Agency, herein referred ta as SJAFCA.'"
A signatory fo this Agreement is referred to herein as a Pa ty, and collectively each Party is referred to as the Parties.
RECITALS
WHEREAS, in January of 2018, Stocktan, the County, the San Joaquin County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (" SJCFCWCD"), Lathrop, and Manfeca executed an Amended and Restated Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement (" JEPA") to reform the San Joaquin Area Flood Control Agency ("Agency") with a common goal of expanding the Agency ta allow a coordinated effort to reduce fload risk in the Mossdale Tract Area (the "Program").
BY Page I of 13
AMENDED Agreement for Collection of San Joaquin Area Flood Control Agency Development Impact Fee
503
WHEREAS, SJAFCA, through certain state legisiation and through the execution of the Amended and Restated Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement, has legal authority to prescribe, revise and collect fees as a candition of development of land ( JEPA Section 7. m) for the purpose of assisting in the financing of flood control facilities, including the authority ta make such fees applicable # o development of land within the County, Stockton, Lathrop, and Manteca ( collectively, " the Land Use Agencies").
WHEREAS, SJAFCA exercised this authority for the purpose of assisting in the financing of levee improvements and related flood risk reduction measures necessary to provide at least a 200-year level of flood protection to lands within the 200-year floodplain along the San Joaquin River in the Massdale Tract Area (" Program Area") and to thereby offset the increase in damageable property that is placed in the fevee protected floodplain as new development occurs in this area.
WHEREAS, SJAFCA prepared a Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection Development Impact Fee Nexus Study (" Nexus Study") clated November 8, 2018 that described and determined the applicable Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection Development Impact Fee (" D1F").
WHEREAS, SJAFCA has now prepared an updated Nexus Study, dated February 23, 2022, that again describes and determines an updated DIF.
WHEREAS, each of the Parties has adopted or will adopt the updated Nexus Study which creates an updated DIF far the Program Area.
WHEREAS, SJAFGA has requested that the Land Use Agencies, as a condition of issuance of a building permit for new development in the Program Area, as shawn an Figure 1 in the Nexus Study, that is within each of the Land Use Agency' s land use authority, collect and transmit to SJAFCA the updated DIF for the development project for which such building permit is ta be issued.
WHEREAS, the Land Use Agencies are willing and desire to collect the DIF and to transmit the DIF to SJAFCA, and the Land Use Agencies and SJAFCA desire ta set forth the standards applicab( e to the col{ection of the DIF. ns3s Page 2 of 13
AMENDED Agreement for Collection of San Ioaquin Area Flood Control Agency Development Impact Fee
504
COVENANTS
In consideration of the mutual promises and covenants herein contained, the Parties hereto agree as follows:
1. fncorporation of Recitals. The abave recitals are incorporated in this Agreement by reference.
2. Collection and Transmission of DIF. Commencing with the effective date of the updated DIF, the Land Use Agencies shall collect fihe updated DIF as a condition of issuance of a building permit for any building, far which a building permit is required, located in the Program Area. The Land Use Agencies shal( transmit to SJAFCA all amounts of the DIF that have been collected, minus the hold- back processing fee for the Land Use Agencies adopted pursuant to the Nexus Study. The methodology for computing the DIF, together with other procedural criteria, are specified in the Nexus Study.
3. Deposit of DIF. SJAFCA shall maintain a separate capital facilities account into which the Land Use Agencies shafl, at least quarterly, deposit the DIF funds collected by the Land Use Agencies. Any interest earned on the DIF while held by the Land Use Agency shall also be deposited by the Land Use Agency.
4. Periodic Update of the DIF. SJAFCA shall promptfy notify the Land Use Agencies of any necessary adjustments to the DIF to be made by the Parties from time to time.
5. Application of Fee Creditinn and Reimbursement Policies. The Parties agree that in order to have a fair application of this Agreement, the DIF and the funds it will generate within each Land Use Agency, it is necessary to agree to principles which will be applied by any Land Use Agency when certain conditions occur. In such cases, the Land Use Agencies agree to apply the principles contained in Exhibit B to Collection Agreement. The relevant conditions are as follows:
rm 8 Page 3 of 13
AMENDED Agreement for Collection of San Joaquin Area Flood Control Agency Development Impact Fee
505
a. The Land Use Aqencv has previously collected funds pursuant to a funding agreement with a developer in advance of when the fee would otherwise be due pursuant to the DIF Resolution and the funds are to be used to plan, design, and/ or construct a portion of the Program; or,
b. The Land Use AQency has entered into an agreement with a developer to plan, design and/ or construction a partion of the Program; or,
c. The Land Use Aqency itself has funded the planning, design and/ or construction a portion of the Program.
6. Refunds. In the event that a Land Use Agency collects the DIF or a portion of the DIF in error, the Land Use Agency will recalcu( ate the correct DIF amount, process a refund to the customer, if necessary, and natify SJAFCA of this action.
SJAFCA sha(I promptly refund any amount due to the Land Use Agency as a result of such error, or upon request of the Land Use Agency shall work with the Land Use Agency ta true- up amounts awing in conjunction with the Land Use Agency forwarding future DIFs. In the event that a Land Use Agency requests that SJAFCA process a refund due to a building permit expiring without construction taking place, SJAFCA shall promptly process such refund to the Land Use Agency minus any costs incurred by SJAFCA in processing such refund.
7. Pavment of DIF under Protest. Pursuant to Title 7, Division 1, Chapter 9 of the California Government Code, commencing with § 66020, any aggrieved landowner shall be entitled ta pay the applicable DIF to a Land Use Agency under protest. The protest procedures sef forth therein shall apply to the DIF paid under protest.
8. Appeal. SJAFCA' s Board of Directors shall hear all appeals for waiver or reductian in SJAFCA' s DIF. The Board of Directors may adopt such policies as it wishes for the processing of the appeal and shall have the sole authority to grant or deny the t ns3s Page 4 of 13
AMENDED Agreement for Collection of San Joaquin Area Flood Conirol Agency Development Impact Fee
506
appeal. Within 5 business days following the final action of its Board of Directors regarding an appeal, SJAFCA shall natify the affected and Use Agency in writing of its determination.
9. Compensation of Land Use Aqencies. In consideration for collecting the DIF and consistent with the hold- back provided for in Section 2, SJAFCA shall reimburse the Land Use Agencies for their cost of time and materials for calculating, reporting, collecting, and processing functions. Such costs shall include the time and materials expended by, but not limited to, employees of the relevant Community Services Department, the Auditor- Controller` s department, the Land Use Agencies' administrative office, and the information technology department. The Parties agree that a charge of 3% of the DIF is a reasonable estimate of the and Use Agencies' cost of time and materials for calculating, reporting, collecting, and processing of the DIF.
Each Land Use Agency and SJAFCA may agree to a different amaunt that reflects the Land Use Agency' s actual cost of collection by executing a fetter agreement without the need to amend this Agreemenf.
10. Relationship to Enhanced ( nfrastructure Financinq District.
The Parties acknawledge that as a separate action, the Land Use Agencies are also collaborating on the c eation of an enhanced infrastructure financing district (" EIFD") which will collect funds from a portion of property taxes paid in the Program Area to also fund, in addition to the DIF, levee improvements protecting the Program Area. For the EIFD, the Land Use Agencies have agreed that the County will contribute a larger share of EIFD payments for an initial period, in exchange for the County receiving prio ity repayment of some of those funds fram the DIF collected under this Agreement.
Attached hereto as Exhibit A are the key terms showing the mechanism of such priority repayment and each of the Land Use Entities agrees to such priority repayment.
11. Indemnification.
a. Except as provided in Section 11. b., SJAFCA agrees ta indemnify, hold harmless and defend the Land Use Agencies, # heir Board of Supervisors or City 7ns3 Page 5 of 13
AMENDED Agreemeni for Collection ofSan Joaquin Area Flood Control Agency Development Impact Fee
507
Council, officers, directors, agents and employees from and against any and all demands, liabilities, claims, actions, costs, damages, losses, litigation ar expenses including attorney' s fees) arising out af or in any way related to, directly or indirectly, any action taken by the Land Use Agencies to collect the DIF and/or their performance of the obligations of this Agreement. This indemnification shall extend and apply to any claim, demand, or litigation pertaining ta the lawfulness or validity of the SJAFCA DIF. b. Each Land Use Agency agrees to indemnify, hold harmless and defend SJAFCA, its Board of Director, afficers, agents and employees fram and against any and all demands, ( iabilities, claims, actions, costs, damages, losses, litigation or expenses ( including attorney' s fees) arising out of or in any way related to, directly ar indirectly, any criminal, reckless, or wrongful action taken by the Land Use Agency or its employees in the collection or processing of the DIF.
12. Notices. Notice ta be provided to any Party to this Agreement arising out of matters pertaining to this Agreement shall be addressed as follows:
For County and SJCFCWCD:
San Joaquin County Department of Public Works
ATTN: Public Warks Directar
P. O. Box 1810
Stockton, California 95201
For City of Lathrop:
City of Lathrop
ATTN: Teresa Vargas, City Clerk
390 Towne Centre Drive
Lathrop, CA 95330
For City of Ma teca:
City af Manteca
ATTN: City Clerk
53a Page 6 of 13
AMENDED Agreement for Collection of Ssn Joaquin A.rea Flood Control Agency Development Impact Fee
508
1001 W. Center Street
Manteca, CA 95337
For City of Stockton:
City of Sfockton Community Development Department
ATTN: Community Development Director
424 N. EI Dorado Street
Stockton, CA 95202
Any party may change the address to which subsequent notice and/ or other communications can be sent by giving written notice designating a change of address ta the other Parties, which shall be effective upon receipt.
13. Term. This Agreement shall be effective as to SJAFCA and any Land Use Agency, once SJAFCA and the Land Use Agency both execute this Agreement and also adopt the DIF, and shall be effective as fo each additional Land Use Agency once this Agreement is executed by that Land Use Agency and the DIF is adopted, and shall end when either (i) SJAFCA terminates the Agreement in accordance with Section 14, or( ii) all adopting Land Use Agencies have terminated the Agreement in accQrdance with Section 14.
14. Withdrawal from Agreement. Any and Use Agency that has executed this Agreement, or SJAFCA, may withdraw from fhis Agreement by giving the other Parties at least six ( 6) months written natice of withdrawal. In the event of withdrawal by a Land Use Agency, that Land Use Agency shall, within 10 days of effective withdrawal, cause to be deposited into SJAFGA' s separate capital facifities account all DIF funds collected prior to withdrawal.
15. Modifications. This Agreement contains the entire understanding of the Parties and no alteration, amendment, variation, or waiver of the terms of this Agreement shall be valid un(ess made in writing and signed by all Par ies. Waiver by any Party of any default, breach or condition precedent shall not be construed as a waiver of any other default, breach or condition precedent, or any other right hereunder. n,sssY Page 7 of 13
AMENDED Agreement for Collection af San Joaquin Area Flood Controt Agency Development Impact Fee
509
16. Governinq Laws and Jurisdiction. This Agreement shall be deemed to have been executed and to be performed within the State of California and shall be construed and governed by the internal laws of the State of California. Any legal proceedings arising out of or relating to this Agreement shalt be brought in the Superior Court of San Joaquin County, California.
17. Assiqnment: Binding on Successors. The rights and duties af the Parties may not be assigned or delegated without the written consent of all other Parties. Any attempt to assign or delegate such rights or duties in contravention of this Agreement shall be null and void. This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the successors of the Parties hereto, respectively. Any approved assignment or delegation shall be consistent with the terms of any contracts, resolutions, indemnities and other obligations of the Agency then in effect.
18. Interpretatian. This Agreement shall be deemed to have been prepared equally by all of the Parties, and the Agreement and its individual provisions shall not be construed or interpreted more favorably for one Party an the basis that another Party prepared it.
19. Entire A reement. This Agreement constitutes the entire contract befinreen the Parties regarding the collectian, deposit, and reporting of the DIF. Any prior agreements, regarding the subject matter of this Agreement are hereby terminated effective immediately upon full execution of this Agreement.
20. 5everabilitv. Should any parf, term or provision of this Agreement be decided by any court af competent jurisdiction to be illega! or in conflict with any law of the State of California, or otherwise be rendered unenforceable or ineffectual, the validity of the remaining pottions or provisions shall not be affected thereby.
21. Duplicate Countema ts. This Agreement may be executed in duplicate counterparts. The Agreement shall be deemed executed when it has been signed by SJAFCA and at least one of the Land Use Agencies.
Tns; B, Page 8 of 13
AMENDED Agreement for Coliection ofSan Joaquin Area Flood Control Agenoy Development Impact Fee
510
22. Interpretation. For purposes of this Agreement, references to" he" shall mean and include " she," references ta " him" shall mean and include " her," and references to " his° shall mean and include " hers."
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parfies hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed on the day and year first above- written.
COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN CITY OF STOCKTON,
a political subdivision af the State of California a municipal Corporation By: By:
Jerome Wilverding
County Administraror
ATf EST: ATTEST:
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Clerk of the City of Stockton of the County of San Joaquin,
State of California
By: By:
RACHEL DeBORD
Deputy Clerk
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: APPROVED AS TO FORM
By: By:
FR B CHMAN, C.E. T.E., CFM
Interim Director of Public Works
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Matthew Dacey
Deputy County Counsel
ITT7S38vt Page 9 of 13
AMENDED Agreement for Collection ofSan Joaquin Area Flood Control Agency Development Impact Fee
511
CITY OF LATHROP, CITY OF MANTECA,
a municipal Corporatian a municipaa Corparation
By: By:
Title: Title:
ATTEST: ATTEST:
Clerk of the City of Lathrop Clerk of the City of Manteca By: By:
APPR VED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FQRM:
By: By:
Title: Title:
SAN JOAQUIN AREA FLOOD CONTROL APPROVED AS TO FORM:
AGENCY
By: gy:
CHRIS ELIAS SCOTT L. SHAPIRO
Executive Director Agency Caunsel
nsss Page 10 of 13
AMENDED Agreement for Colleciion of San Joaquin Area Flood Contcot Agency Developrnent Impact Fee
512
EXHIBIT A
SAN JOAQUIN AREA FLOOD CONTROL AGENCY
MOSSDALE TRACT AREA REGIONAL URBAN LEVEL OF
FLOOD PROTECTION DEVEL PMENT IMPACT FEE
Key Terms Related to the Repayment of
EIFD Payments to Land Use Entities from Impact Fees
1. Development impact Fees " Impact Fees" collected after the initial Years ( ending in 2029), would be paid to each jurisdictian to help affset the general fund impacts associated with debt service requirements of the EIFD, subject first to priarity reimbursement of" County Addifional EIFD Contributions," as defined belaw. ( i. e., the lmpact Fees would be directly paid to the County until they have fully repaid the cumulative County Additianal EIFD Contributions. After that repayment, Impact Fees would be used to offset the agencies' impacts to their respective general funds from prior EIFD properEy tax allocations, the "Impact Fee Offset," as further described below}.
2. During the Initial Years, the following EIFD funding participation is proposed:
a) San Joaquin County proposed to contribute a total flat rate of 47% of property tax increment, comprised of its Initial Base Rate plus an additional 37% of property tax increment, with such additional amount defined as " County Additional EIFD Contribution".
b} Cities will each provide their respective Initial Base Rates.
3. Followin the Initial Years, the following EIFD Funding participation and other financial arrangements are proposed:
a} The Initial Base Rates would no longer apply and all agencies, including the County, would provide proportional EIFD contributions ( i. e., the same percentage rate of total tax increment) to meet the debt service needs of any debt issued and secured by EIFD revenues subject to the Maximum Rate 20%) of total property tax increment. The contributions provided after the Initial Years would be subject to the Maximum Rate are defined as the " Post Project Annual Contribution."
b) The cumulative Gounty Additional EIFD Contribution shall be repaid to the County using Impact Fees. County to receive 100% of( mpact Fees until the cumulative Additional County EIFD Contribution is repaid with interest compounded quarterly on at the annual County Pooled Treasury Rate for that quarter plus 200 basis points.
tm53av Page 11 of 13
AII NDED Agreement for Collection oFSan Joaquin Ares Flood Control Agency Development Impact Fee
513
c) Following retirement of the cumulative County Additional EIFD Contribution with interest from Impact Fees, the Impact Fee Offset wauld be implemented as follows. Ail Impact Fees received by SJAFCA after repayment to the County would be allocated and paid to the Cities and the County to offset prior general fund impacts of previous EIFD contributions. The proportionate share of the cumulative total of each participating agency' s Initial Contributions and Post Project Annuaf Contributians are defined as each agency' s ° Base EIFD Share." DIF revenues would be paid to each Agency based on its Base EIFD Share.
d) The duratian ( i. e., term) of Impact Fee Offset payments is yet to be determined. The term will be finalized during the process of updating the SJAFCA Massdale ULOP Program Impact Fee Nexus Study. As part of the lmpact Fee Update process, the Member Agencies will have an oppo tunity to weigh in on duration of the impact fee program.
538 Page 12 of l3
A.MEIdDED Agreement for Collection of San 7oaquin Area Flood Controi Agency Development Impact Fee
514
EXHIBIT B
FEE CREDITING PRINCIPLES
s'"' Page 13 of 13
AMENDED Agreement for Callection ofSan Joaquin Area Ftood Control Agency Development Impact Fee
515
EXHIBIT B
SAN. 10A4UIN AREA FLOOD CONTROL AGENCY
MOSSDAL. E TRACTAREA REGIONAL URBAN LEVEL. OF FLO D PROTECTION E t/( IG PA F FE CR EDIT [ 1 1fB- J-RsEitttEiV P PC-1- E UND RLYWG ASSUMPTtONS
The foltowing are the underlying assumptions that predicate the establishment of cred3ts and reimbursements:
All funding, in- kind setvices, or canstruction of facllities in furtherance of providing an Urban Level of Flood Protection fo Mossdale Tract Area," Prior Advance Funding," was provided in advance of the Reclamation District 17 interim Levee) mpact Fee( lnterim levee Fee) and San Joaquin Area Flood Control Agency( SJAFCA) Regiona) Levee Fee( Regiana) DiFa( collectively, the Levee Fee) on behalf of devetopment projects will be tdentified by the tables In a" Credit& Re[ mbursemenfi Analysis," to be prepared bySJAFCA.
Ali Prior Advance Funding of the Levee Fee will be p oportionately altocable to the individua( tract maps/ phases/ units/ villages in projects based upon a project' s gross developable acreage.
Development within a project is assumed to have an obligafion to fund levee improvements for al[ undeveloped gross developable acreage as of Aprll 7, 2017 in Lathrop and April 22, 2017 In Manteca, the effective dates ofthe[ nterim Fees adapted by Lathrop and Manteca.
Units within a proJect are assumed to have been prevfously absorbed if a permit for the unit has been applied for before January 8, 2024, the effective date of SJAFCA' s Regional Dl F.
The Levee Fee obligatian for a{ I remaining deveEopable acreage ln a project abso bed before January 8,
20. 9 are the ( nitia) Fee Rates as identified in the November 8, 2018, Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban Level of F( ood Pratection Levee impact Fee Nexus Study as adopted by SJAFCA Resolution - 18 on Novem6er 8, 2018( reference Table 1 ofthat Nexus 5tudy}.
The credit for Prior Advance Funding wil! be expressed in terms af fOAs and will be determined by taking the amount of prior advance funding and dividing it by the lnitial Fee Rates per GDA. The amount of GDA credit will be set by th(s methodotogy and wiil not be recalculated in the future by the escatating fee rate.
A[i permits that have previously been appiied for 6efore January 8, 2019, i. e., a6sorbed) are assumed to have been fully funded with credit from prior advance funding and no additiona{ Levee Fees will be required to be paid for these units.
t For multtple projects that are being developed by a common landowner, if one project is determined to have advance funded Levee ees in excess of its obilgation and is due a reimbursement, the relmbursement will be applled and added to the credit o the next project currently undecway with the consent of the landowner.
Prepard6ytWA Z
Oetobet22, 2018
516
CRED17( NG POLICY F R PftIC R ADVANCE FUNDING
The Crediting Policy will a[ low for the use of the accumulated credlt on a proportionate bas( s as the remainder of a project is developed. 7he basis for the proportionality wlll be# he ratio of Remaintng Credit Acreage to Tota) Remaining Acres to be developed.
RemaininQ Credit Acreage" wiil be defined as the credit accumulated by the pr3or advance funding less the amount of credit utilized by units that have been absorbed prior ta lanuary S, 2019.
Total Remaining Acres" to be developed will be defined as the difference between the total developable GOAs in a praject and the amount of acces absarbed before lanuary 9, 2019, or as subsequentiy revised by the Land Use Agency and the l,andowner.
Use of Prior A vance Funding Credit
As homes and/ or projects are constructed by permits applied for afterJanuary 9, 2D19, the lan lowner wili fund a partion of the Levee Fee based on the re[ative proportionality between the remalnder of a project not able to 6e funded from the RemaIning Credit Acreage and the Total Remaining Acres[ eft in the project after all prevtousfy a6sorbed units.
To implement this policy, the Land Use Agency wili calculate this remaining arnount of the Levee Fee due as the tndividual building permFts are issued for units to be constructed in 2he project. Collection of the Levee Fee can be deferred consistent with any adopted fee deferral program by the Land Use agency.
CREDfTIN6 POLICY FOR CONSTRUCTION OF FACILITIES
Any Developer constructed facilities will be constructed pursuant to an agreement entered into between the Land Use Agency and SJAFCA. The agreement will specify the maximum amaunt of credit that will be afFarded for the canstruction of the facility which will be the lesser of the estimated cost of the facfliLy which was the basis for the development fee program or the Developer' s actual c nstructlon cost(" Constructed i Facilities Funding Credit"}. Constructed Facilities Funding Credit wifl 6e documented and provided when a completed facility[ s accepted by the appropriate entity.
Use of Constructed Facitities Funding Credit
Use of Constructed aciltties Funding Credit will be consistent with the" Use of Advance Funding Credit" descrIbed abo e.
REIMBURSEMENT POL( CY FOR PRtOR ADVANCE FUNDING
For Development Projects due a reimbursement as a result ofi funding in excess of a Pro] ect' s evee Impact Fee Obiigation
The reimhursement policy will be consistent with the following underlying principles.
Reimbursements wilf be only be paid from( evee impact fees collected from other develapment projects.
No reimhursements shoufd be paid to a party advancing funds into the levee improvement pragram until afl levee improvement proJect casts are pa and the levee improvement program has been comp(eted and certlfled, unless otherwise determined by SIAFCA that payment ofsuch reimhursements is flnancially feasible and legalfy defensible by SJAFCA. r, a, deycw, 2 ; gcrobex22, zass
517
Ttte Board shoufd make decisions that consider the impact ta the Project and the servIces provided to S3AFCP, henefiiciaries at large,
The Board should make declsfons that consider the proportionality of the investment made into the levee improvement program.
Gkt- Baard- shotJd- coasider-.xh timing of_tepa meni_o£ ca.pitalxo hos investing- ip_theleue2 improvement program.
For land llse Agencies due a reimbursement as a result nf funding provided to advance the Levee Improvement Program in advance of lanuary 1, 2018
The reimbursement policy wtll be consistent with the foilowing underlying principles.
No reimbursements shou( d be pald from development fees to a land use agency that advanced funds into the levee improvement program untl( afl fevee improvement project costs are paid and fihe( evee improvement program has been completed and certifiied, unless otherwise determined by SJAFCAthat payment ofsuch reimbursements is flnancially feasib) e and legaily defensible by SJAFCA.
The Board should make decisions thafi consider the impact to the Project and the services prouided to SJAFCA beneficiaries at large.
The Board should tnake decisions that consider the proportionality of the investment mada into ehe evee impravement progra n.
The Board should consider the timing of repaymenfi of caplta) to those investing in tl e levee improvement program.
or Land Use Agencies due repayment pursuant to the tnterim Seed Money Funding Agr.eement dated June 12, 2018
Repayment wili be made consistent with Section 6 of that Agreement. t
a by w 3 Octobet 22, 2028
518
519
ITEM 5. 3
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
ITEM: PUBLIC HEARING ( PUBLISHED NOTICE) TO
CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE REGIONAL URBAN
LEVEL OF FLOOD PROTECTION DEVELOPMENT LEVEE
IMPACT FEE IN THE MOSSDALE TRACT AREA
RECOMMENDATION: City Council to Consider the Following:
1. Hold a public hearing; and
2. Adopt a Resolution Approving the Regional Urban
Level of Flood Protection Development Levee
Impact Fee in the Mossdale Tract Area
SUMMARY:
During the September 12, 2022 City Council meeting, staff will recommend that Council approve the San Joaquin Area Flood Control Agency' s Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection Development Impact Fee Update Nexus Study. If approved, City Council has taken the first step in implementing an updated San Joaquin Area Flood Control Agency ( SJAFCA) Mossdale Tract Area Regional Levee Impact Fee Program. The updated Nexus Study ( Attachment B") provides the basis for the proposed Regional Levee Impact Fee to ensure that new development pays its proportionate share of the levee improvement costs needed to provide Urban Level of Flood Protection ( ULOP) to the Mossdale Tract Area.
If Council approves the Nexus Study, the next step is to approve the Regional ULOP Development Impact Fee by resolution. Staff requests that City Council hold a public hearing, consider all information and public testimony and, if determined to be appropriate, adopt a resolution approving the Regional ULOP Development Impact Fee.
BACKGROUND:
During the September 12, 2022 City Council meeting, staff will recommend that Council approve the San Joaquin Area Flood Control Agency' s Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection Development Impact Fee Update Nexus Study. If approved, City Council has taken the first step in the process of implementing an updated San Joaquin Area Flood Control Agency ( SJAFCA) Mossdale Tract Area Regional Levee Impact Fee Program. The updated Nexus Study Attachment " B") provides the basis for the proposed Regional Levee Impact Fee to ensure that new development pays its proportionate share of the levee improvement costs needed to provide Urban Level of Flood Protection ( ULOP) to the Mossdale Tract Area.
520
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT PAGE 2
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
PUBLIC HEARING ( PUBLISHED NOTICE) TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE
REGIONAL ULOP PROTECTION DEVELOPMENT LEVEE IMPACT FEE IN THE
MOSSDALE TRACT AREA
If Council approves the Nexus Study, the next step is to approve the Regional ULOP Development Impact Fee by resolution. The Nexus Study presents a fee that is calculated on a Gross Developable Acreage ( GDA) basis versus a square footage basis. As such, the required AB 602 exemption findings are presented in the Nexus Study.
Tables 1 and 2 below summarize the proposed Regional ULOP Development Impact Fee rates compared to the current fee rates in effect today.
TABLE 1 — Proposed Rates for Adoption
Fiscal Year
20/ 21 Updated
Regional Regional Change
Fee Rates Fee Rates from
Land Use Per GDA) Per GDA) Current Rate
Single Family
Residential 19, 428 22, 106 14%
Multi- Family
Residential 17, 691 20, 686 17%
Commercial 18, 399 20, 916 14%
Industrial 15, 309 16, 384 7%
TABLE 2 - Demonstrative Rates on Per Unit Basis
Fiscal Year Change
20/ 21 Updated from
Regional Regional Current
Land Use Basis Fee Rates Fee Rates Rate
Single Family Per 3, 169 3, 770 19%
Residential [ 1] Unit
Multi- Family Residential Per 922 1, 095 19%
2] Unit
Commercial [ 3] Per 1, 442 1, 713 19%
1, 000
SF
Industrial [ 4] Per 1, 113 1, 053 5%
1, 000
SF
1] Current assumption is 6. 13 units per GDA. Proposed assumption is 5. 86 units per GDA. 2] Current assumption is 19. 19 units per GDA. Proposed assumption is 18. 89 units per GDA. 3] Current assumption is 12, 763 SF per acre. Proposed assumption is 12, 207 SF per acre. 4] Current assumption is 13, 756 SF per acre. Proposed assumption is 15, 553 SF per acre. 521
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT PAGE 3
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
PUBLIC HEARING ( PUBLISHED NOTICE) TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE
REGIONAL ULOP PROTECTION DEVELOPMENT LEVEE IMPACT FEE IN THE
MOSSDALE TRACT AREA
REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:
Approval of the Regional ULOP Development Impact Fee is the final step implementing an updated SJAFCA Mossdale Tract Regional Levee Impact Fee Program. The purpose of the update is to reflect changes and refinements in SJAFCA' s financing plan for 200- year ULOP levee improvements for the Mossdale Tract. Amendments to the SJAFCA Collection Agreement include the incorporation of terms related to the Mossdale Tract EIFD.
Staff recommends that City Council hold a public hearing, consider all information and public testimony and, if determined to be appropriate, adopt a resolution approving the Regional ULOP Development Impact Fee.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The creation of the Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection Development Impact Fee, as collected by the local land use agencies, is expected to generate approximately $ 71. 44 million to be used to partially fund the required improvements to Mossdale Tract Area Levee System. Complete funding for the required improvements will require additional funding sources as described in the 2021 Adequate Progress Report.
ATTACH M E NTS:
A. Resolution Approving the Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection Development Levee Impact Fee in the Mossdale Tract Area B. Updated Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection Development Levee Impact Fee dated, May 12, 2022
522
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT PAGE 4
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
PUBLIC HEARING ( PUBLISHED NOTICE) TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE
REGIONAL ULOP PROTECTION DEVELOPMENT LEVEE IMPACT FEE IN THE
MOSSDALE TRACT AREA
APPROVALS
9 i zoZZ
Brad T or Date
City Engineer
o
Cari Jam Date
Finance Dire t r
3 • ZoZZ
Michael King Date
Assistant Cit Manager
G I a- I -
Salvador Navarrete Date
City Attorney
q •• Zz
Ste en ). Salvatore Date
City Manager
523
RESOLUTION 22-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LATHROP
APPROVING THE REGIONAL URBAN LEVEL OF FLOOD PROTECTION
DEVELOPMENT LEVEE IMPACT FEE IN THE MOSSDALE TRACT AREA WHEREAS, the Mitigation Fee Act ( the " Act") ( California Government Code Section 66000 et seq.) authorizes a local agency to impose impact fees as a condition of approval of development projects to help defray the costs of public infrastructure and facilities that will be needed to serve the proposed development; and WHEREAS, the San Joaquin Area Flood Control Agency ( SJAFCA") has directed Larsen Wurzel & Associates, Inc. to prepare the Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection (" ULOP") Development Impact Fee Update dated May 12, 2022 ( Nexus Study"), and
WHEREAS, section 6602( a) of the Act, notice was published in the Manteca Bulletin on September 2nd and 8th, 2022, providing 10 days' notification of the time and place for a public hearing to consider and adopt the Regional ULOP Development Impact Fee Update. Notice of the hearing was also provided 14 days prior to the public hearing to those interested parties who requested, in writing, notice of meetings on new or increased fees or service charges; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on September 12, 2022 at a regularly scheduled meeting of the Lathrop City Council ( the Council") to hear and consider the adoption of the Regional ULOP Development Impact Fee; and WHEREAS, the Nexus Study presents a fee that is calculated on a Gross Developable Acreage ( GDA) basis versus a square footage basis. As such, the required AB 602 exemption findings are presented in the Nexus Study.
Tables 1 and 2 below summarize the proposed Regional ULOP Development Impact Fee rates compared to the current fee rates in effect today.
TABLE i — Proposed Rates for Adoption
Fiscal Year
20/ 21 Updated
Regional Regional Change
Fee Rates Fee Rates from
Land Use Per GDA) Per GDA) Current Rate
Single Family
Residential 19, 428 22, 106 14%
Multi- Family
Residential 17, 691 20, 686 17%
Commercial 18, 399 20, 916 14%
Industrial 15, 309 16, 384 7%
524
TABLE 2 - Demonstrative Rates on Per Unit Basis
Fiscal Year Change
20/ 21 Updated from
Regional Regional Current
Land Use Basis Fee Rates Fee Rates Rate
Single Family Per 3, 169 3, 770 19%
Residential [ 1] Unit
Multi- Family Residential Per 922 1, 095 19%
2] Unit
Commercial [ 3] Per 1, 442 1, 713 19%
1, 000
SF
Industrial [ 4] Per 1, 113 1, 053 5%
1, 000
SF
1] Current assumption is 6. 13 units per GDA. Proposed assumption is 5. 86 units per G DA.
2] Current assumption is 19. 19 units per GDA. Proposed assumption is 18. 89 units per GDA.
3] Current assumption is 12, 763 SF per acre. Proposed assumption is 12, 207 SF per acre.
4] Current assumption is 13, 756 SF per acre. Proposed assumption is 15, 553 SF per acre.
and,
WHEREAS, the development impact fee will fund levee improvements that meet ULDC standards and achieve 200- year ULOP while offsetting the increase in damageable property that will be placed in the levee- protected floodplain as new development occurs in the area, and that the fee is needed to implement Phase 4 levee improvements to the Mossdale Tract and repay funds advanced by the developers and local agencies to support early implementation of the improvements; and
WHEREAS, if Council approves the Nexus Study, staff requests that City Council hold a public hearing, consider all information and public testimony and, if determined to be appropriate, adopt a resolution approving the Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection Development Levee Impact Fee in the Mossdale Tract Area, included as Attachments " B" the September 12, 2022 City Manager' s Report, and the fees recommended therein.
525
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Lathrop as follows:
1. The Council hereby finds that the facts set forth in the recitals to this Resolution are true and correct and establish the factual basis for the Council' s adoption of this Resolution.
2. The Council based on substantial evidence in the administrative record of proceedings and pursuant to its independent review and consideration, hereby establishes the Regional Development Impact Fee for the Mossdale Tract Area, which is attached to the September 12, 2022 City Manager' s Report, included as Attachment B.
3. The Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection Development Impact Fee shall take effect 60 days after adoption of this Resolution. 526
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Lathrop this 12t" day of September 2022, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Sonny Dhaliwal, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Teresa Vargas, City Clerk Salvador Navarrete, City Attorney 527
lossda I e T rac t Area
Regional Urban Level of Flood
Protection Levee Impact Fee
PUBLIC D' AFT
NEXUS STCJDY UPDATE
Prepared for San Jocquin County Clh, o+ Lcthrop City of /' v",, nteca, and Gty of Stockbn Prepared by_ Lar> en Wurzel & Assoc ctes inc
Prepared on Behalf of The San Joaquin Area Flood Co trol . gency ; SJ FC..
May 12 202_2
www. larsenwurzel. com
528
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
RESOLUTION/ ORDINANCE PLACEHOLDER
LWA. ^ , ni,J E
1801011 LAFCA Mossdale Nexus 5[ uCy UPOATE- Public OroJt 2022 0512 529
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Summary................................................................................................................................................. 1 Overview................................................................................................................................................. 1 Background............................................................................................................................................. 1 Senate Bill 5 ( 2007) and ULOP Context............................................................................................ 1 Regional levee Fee Program............................................................................................................ 1 Updated Regional Levee Fee Program.................................................................................................... 2 Authorityand Procedures....................................................................................................................... 2 Assembly Bill No. 1600: Mitigation Fee Act..................................................................................... 2 Assembly Bill No. 602 ( 2021)............................................................................................................ 8 Procedural Requirements.............................................................................................................. 10 landUse Categories............................................................................................................................. 11 MossdaleTract Area Land Uses........................................................................................................... 11 PlannedNew Development........................................................................................................... 12 Capital Improvements and Projects........................................................................................................ 14 Capital Costs Allocable to Planned Development................................................................................ 14 Summary of Capital Improvements Funded by the Development Impact Fee................................... 14 RegionalLevee Fee Methodology........................................................................................................... 17 CostAllocation and Calculation........................................................................................................... 17 FeeProgram Implementation................................................................................................................. 26 Regional Levee Fee Collection ............................................................................................................. 26 FeeTriggers/ Applicability.................................................................................................................... 26 FeeCollection Deferral ........................................................................................................................ 26 Regional Levee Fee Program Boundary............................................................................................... 26 ExemptionsFrom the Fee.................................................................................................................... 27 Exceptions to the Exemptions....................................................................................................... 27 CoveragePeriod................................................................................................................................... 27 AdministrationCosts............................................................................................................................ 27 Variationsin Method........................................................................................................................... 28 Fee Credit/ Reimbursement for the Design and Construction of Facilities........................................ 28 Refunds and Appeals Process.............................................................................................................. 28 Annual Inflation Adjustment................................................................................................................ 29 Fee Program Administration................................................................................................................... 30 FeeCalculation..................................................................................................................................... 30 LandUse Categorization................................................................................................................ 30 Determining the Gross Developable Acreage ( GDA) of a New Development.............................. 30 CalculationSteps.................................................................................................................................. 35 Per Unit Fee Collection for Single- Family Residential Development................................................... 35 Fee Revenue Accounting...................................................................................................................... 35 t, t^ UPZE_
I 18010I151AFCAMossdaleNexusStudyUPOATE- PvblicOiof[ 2022051Z 530
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
Periodic Review and Cost Adjustment................................................................................................. 35 NexusFindings....................................................................................................................................... 37 Authority.............................................................................................................................................. 37 Summaryof Nexus Findings................................................................................................................. 37 Requirement 1: Purpose of Fee..................................................................................................... 37 Requirement 2: Use of the Fee ..................................................................................................... 37 Requirement 3: Relationship Between Use of Fees and Type of Development........................... 37 Requirement 4: Relationship Between Need for Facility and Type of Development................... 38 Requirement 5: Relationship Between Amount of Fees and Cost of Facility ............................... 38 Lnk n " UPLE1 801 011 51AFCAMo55daleNexusSt dyUPOAiE- PublicDiaft20220512 531
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Planned Development Summary........................................................................................................ 13 Table2: Cost Estimate Summary...................................................................................................................... 16 Table 3: Damageable Square Feet of Structure Per GDA................................................................................. 20 Table 4: Relative Structure Damage Per GDA................................................................................................... 21 Table 5: Relative Land Damage per GDA.......................................................................................................... 22 Table 6: Relative Property Damage Index......................................................................................................... 23 Table 7: Apportionment of Costs Per GDA....................................................................................................... 24 Table8: Development Fee Rate Summary ....................................................................................................... 25 Table 9: Example ADU Fee Calculations............................................................................................................ 34
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Regional Levee Fee Program Boundary Map........................................................................................ 4
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A— Planned Development Details
Appendix B— SJAFCA Project Expenditures Discount& Escalation to 2021 Dollars Appendix C— Estimated Cost Allocation BY Project and Revenue over time Appendix D— Example Gross Developable Acreage Calculation LWA` w: u t
1801011 SIAFCA MossCale Nexus Study UPOATE- Public 0/ aJt 2022 0517 532
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
2018 Nexus Study Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection Levee Impact Fee Final Nexus Study dated November 8, 2018
AB 1600 Assembly Bill 1600, Mitigation Fee Act
ADUs Accessory Dwelling Units
CFD Community Facilities District
DWR California Department of Water Resources
EAD Expected Annual Damage
EIFD Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
GDA gross developable acreage
JADUs Junior Accessory Dwelling Units
Local Agencies San Joaquin County, City of Lathrop, City of Manteca, and City of Stockton LFMA Local Flood Management Agency
LSRP Levee Seepage Repair Project
LWA Larsen Wurzel & Associates, Inc.
Nexus Study Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update dated May 12, 2022 ( Presented for Adoption) Regional Levee Fee Mossdale Tract Area Regional Levee Fee Program SB 5 Senate Bill 5 ( 2007)
SFR Single- Family Residential
SJAFCA San Joaquin Area Flood Control Agency
ULDC Urban Levee Design Criteria
ULOP Urban Level of Flood Protection
L V SOIO115JAFCA Mossdale Nexus Study UPDATE Public DraJt 2022 0513 533
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
SUMMARY
Overview
Larsen Wurzel & Associates, Inc. ( LWA) has prepared this Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update ( Nexus Study) for San Joaquin County, City of Lathrop, City of Manteca, and City of Stockton ( collectively the Local Agencies) in coordination with the San Joaquin Area Flood Control Agency ( SJAFCA). A series of levee improvements are needed to ensure that the levees surrounding the Mossdale Tract Area meet the California Department of Water Resources( DWR) Urban Levee Design Criteria ( ULDC), that the flood protection system can provide an Urban Level of Flood Protection ULOP), and the requirements of Senate Bill 5 ( 2007) ( SB 5) can be met. This Nexus Study provides the basis for the Mossdale Tract Area Regional Levee Fee Program( Regional Levee Fee) that ensures new development pays its proportionate share of the levee improvement costs needed to provide ULOP to the Mossdale Tract Area.
Background
Senate Bi115( 2007) and ULOP Context
SB 5 defines ULOP as the" level of protection that is necessary to withstand flooding that has a 1- in- 200 chance of occurring in any given year using criteria consistent with, or developed by, the California Department of Water Resources." This bill requires all cities and counties within the Sacramento- San Joaquin Valley, as defined in California Government Code § 65007( h), to make findings related to ULOP or the national Federal Emergency Management Agency( FEMA) standard of flood protection before:( 1) entering into a development agreement for any property that is located within a flood hazard zone; ( 2) approving a discretionary permit or other discretionary entitlement, or a ministerial permit that would result in the construction of a new residence, for a project that is located within a flood hazard zone; or( 3) approving a tentative map, or a parcel map for which a tentative map was not required, for any subdivision that is located within a flood hazard zone see California Government Code § 65865. 5, 65962, and 66474. 5).
Regional Levee Fee Program
The Regional Levee Fee was implemented in two steps. As described within the 2018 Adequate Progress Update prepared by LWA, the Local Agencies entered into an agreement designating SJAFCA as the Local Flood Management Agency( LFMA) responsible for planning, implementing, funding, and financing the Phase 4 levee improvements identified within the Adequate Progress Report. The Adequate Progress Report identifies several sources that would fund the Phase 4 improvements, one of which is a regional development impact fee. Before designating SJAFCA as the regional governing agency, the Cities of Lathrop and Manteca implemented interim development fee programs. In 2018, the SIAFCA structure was reorganized to include the Cities of Lathrop and Manteca and effectively becoming the regional governance entity. The Cities of Lathrop and Manteca transitioned their interim fee programs to a permanent program established and administered by SIAFCA, covering the entire Mossdale Tract Area.
LW, R w. iN«:
1 1801011 SJAFCA Mossdale Nexus SNdy UPDATE- Public Ora) t 2022 0512 534
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
Updated Regional Levee Fee Program
This Nexus Study is an update of the November 8, 2018, Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection Levee Impact Fee Final Nexus Study( 2018 Nexus Study) prepared by LWA, formally adopted by the SJAFCA Board by Resolution Number 18- 21 and effective January 8, 2019. This update reflects an updated program cost estimate that addresses climate change and updates to program funding from other sources.
This Nexus Study is being prepared as a regional fee with the intent that each of the Local Agencies individually adopt the Region Levee Fee and collect and remit the fees to SJAFCA.
Authority and Procedures
Assembly Bill No. 1600: Mitiqation Fee Act
This Nexus Study has been prepared to update the established Regional Levee Fee program in accordance with the provisions of the Mitigation Fee Act ( AB 1600) as codified in Government Code § 66000 et. seq.
AB 1600 sets forth the procedural requirements for establishing and collecting development impact fees.
These procedures require that " a reasonable relationship," or nexus, must exist between a governmental exaction and the purpose of the condition. This Nexus Study documents that reasonable relationship between the development impact fee to be levied on each land use category and the cost of the facility improvements.
Nexus Study requirements include:
1. Identifying the purpose of the fee.
2. Identifying how the fee is to be used.
3. Determining that a reasonable relationship exists between the fee' s use and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed.
4. Determining how a reasonable relationship exists between the need for the public facility and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed.
5. Demonstrating a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed.
AB 1600 Requirement 1: Purpose of Fee
The Regional Impact Fee will provide funding for 200-year levee improvements in compliance with SB 5 and DWR' s ULOP criteria to protect the Cities of Lathrop, Manteca, Stockton, and unincorporated portions of San Joaquin County within the Mossdale Tract Area as further described within this Nexus Study. All new planned development projects located within the area shown in Figure 1 that lie within the Mossdale Tract Area will be subject to this Regional Levee Fee as it is adopted by each Local Agency.
AB 1600 Requirement 2: Use of the Fee
Fee revenue will be used to implement Phase 4 levee improvements to the Mossdale Tract Area as well as to repay any funds advanced by developers and Local Agencies to support early implementation of the improvements ahead of Fee payments. The improvements funded by the Fee consist of levee improvements to be implemented by SJAFCA that ensure the levees meet ULDC standards. i Z Y1;. iPt_'t
Z 1801011 SJAFCA Mossdole Nexus SNdy UPDAiE- Public Oraf[ 1011 0511 535
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
The levee improvements required for enhanced flood protection to meet the ULDC standard and achieve ULOP, including, among various other items, the following work:
ULDC engineering analysis and identification of deficiencies Design and environmental evaluation of levee improvements to cure ULDC deficiencies Implementation of levee improvements to cure ULDC deficiencies As previously noted, this Nexus Study provides the required findings needed to impose a development impact fee pursuant to AB 1600. AB 1600 requires that the fee is to be calculated by spreading the costs among the anticipated future development in proportion to that development' s impact on the services provided. An Interim Levee Fee was imposed and collected by the Cities of Lathrop and Manteca as a condition of new development' s approval. Now that SJAFCA has been designated as the regional governance entity to administer, implement, fund, and finance the needed improvements, SJAFCA requests that each of the Local Agencies approve this updated Regional Levee Fee. SJAFCA also requests that the Local Agencies collect and remit the Fees to SJAFCA to complete the necessary work.
LWA='. wn, u E.
3 1801011 5/ AfCA Mossdole Nexus SNdy UPOATf- Pu61ic Oraff 2012 OS1Z 536
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
Figure 1: Regional Levee Fee Program Boundary Map
1 r,'.
1 s, ,
City of 5tociction,,,,.,,+
R•, n,, e,• r' \,,,,•.:—('
1 .,,,.+
r
L
1j
1 1
1 — 1
L
c.. I
City af,lattu np
l'
City ofi Manteca
JI.i
N ,'
1',
7,
Le end Manteca City Limit " f Lathrop Fee Area f Stockton Fee Area ts
200- Year Flood Plain
Lathrop City Limit -I I i``'
Manteca FeeArea ` 1' 5 4 Sanloaquin County Fee Area
5[ ockton Ciry Limii
R ' ," l f E.
Y 18010115JAFCAMossdaleNexusSNGyUPOATE- iublicOraJ[ Z0220512 537
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
AB 1600 Requirement 3: Relationship Between Use of Fees and Type of Development Development of Residential, Commercial, and Industrial land uses within the Mossdale Tract Area require improved flood control and flood protection services.
Flood risk has two aspects: the probability of flooding and the consequences that follow. An area could have a high probability of flooding, but minimal consequences because it is vacant and contains no infrastructure or people. In this case, flood risk would be considered low. Conversely, a highly urbanized community that has a moderate or low probability of flooding would be considered high risk because of the greater consequences of a flood in that location ( i. e., loss of life, livelihood, property, health, and human suffering).
Risk can be expressed and quantified in terms of Expected Annual Damage ( EAD). EAD is the product of the probability of flooding ( percent chance in any given year) and consequences ( dollars of damage as a result of flooding). Without mitigation, additional development increases the EAD by increasing developed property at risk. To protect life and property, it is important for the LFMA to maintain a high level of service ( in terms of maintaining low flood risk) within the Mossdale Tract Area as development increases. To maintain the current level of EAD and reduce the level flood of risk to offset increased EAD, the LFMA must improve the flood protection facilities as development occurs.
Each development project will add to the necessity of flood protection due to the increased EAD as a result of that development. Additionally, each development project will benefit from the levee infrastructure already in place at the time of development. For the new development described in this Nexus Study to occur in the Mossdale Tract Area, levee improvements that meet the requirements of the ULDC are necessary.
AB 1600 Requirement 4: Relationship Between Need for Facility and Type of Development As sated under AB 1600 Requirement 3, development of Residential, Commercial, and Industrial land uses within the Mossdale Tract Area require improved flood control and flood protection services to protect use and life. Each development project will add to the necessity of flood protection due to the increased EAD as a result ofthat development. For the new development described in this Nexus Study to occur in the Mossdale Tract Area, levee improvements that reduce the probability of flooding are necessary.
AB 1600 Requirement 5: Relationship Between Amount of Fees and Cost of Facility This study includes the following components:
1. A determination of the amount of planned development upon which the costs of the fee funded facilities will be allocated.
2. The identification of costs associated with each improvement, facility, or program funded by the fee.
3. The development of a standard metric by which to proportionately allocate the costs of the facilities between land use categories based upon a damage index that considers the relative impact to EAD.
4. A determination of the fee cost per acre for each land use category.
5. A determination of the estimated fees per unit by land use category.
6. A discussion of how the program will be administered by the land use agencies.
L k n,
u zE.
5 1801011 SIAFCA Mossdale Nexus 5[ udy UGDATE- Public Oih I022 0532 538
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public raft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
The Regional Levee Fee is calculated on a gross developable acreage( GDA) basis and will be collected on a per unit basis for all types of development. All development projects within the Mossdale Tract Area are subject to the fee. To determine costs associated with the Project and the planned development upon which to allocate the costs, a planning horizon of 30 years has been assumed. The calculation and collection of the fee is assumed to occur prior to the issuance of a building permit. The details of the calculation and collection of the fee are further described within the Fee Program Administration section ofthis Nexus Study. Subsequent to the adoption of the Regional Levee Fee and this Nexus Study by the Local Agencies, each agency will further define the administrative procedures for the efficient administration, collection, and remittance of Regional Levee Fees.
Table 5- 1 provides a
summary of the proposed initial per acre fee rates by land use category. Table S- 2 provides the estimated initial fees per unit by land use category.
L. Fk i" OF'' c.
6 1801011 S/ AFCA Mossdole Nexus SNdy UP ATE- Public OraJt 3022 0517 539
Table S- 1
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Summary of DIF Rates by Land Use Category
Land Use Initial Fee Rates[ 1]
Single- Family Residential 22, 106 Per GDA
Multi- Family Residential 20, 686 Per GDA
Commercial 20, 916 Per GDA
Industrial 16, 384 Per GDA
1] Per Gross Developable Acre( GDA). Initial Fee Rate for FY 2021/ 22 and 2022/ 23. Fee rates will increase each July 1 commencing luly 1, 2023.
Table S- 2
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee Provided for Demonstrative Estimated Fee Per Unit or 1, 000 Square Feet Purposes On/ y Land Use Estimated Fee Assumption
Single- Family Residential 3, 770 / Unit @ 5. 86 Units per GDA Multi- Family Residential 1, 095 / Unit @ 18. 89 Units per GDA Commercial 1, 713 / 1, 000 SF @ FAR of 12, 207 SF per Acre Industrial 1, 053 / 1, 000 SF @ FAR of 15, 553 SF per Acre Prepared by LWA 1801101 ULOP Mossdole Regional Fee Mode12022 0512 540
Mossdale Tract Area: Regiona) ULOP levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
Assembly Bill No. 602 ( 2021)
Level of Service Identification Requirements
This Nexus Study has also been prepared in accordance with the provisions of Assembly Bill 602 ( 2021) AB 602) as codified in Government Code § 65940. 1, 66016. 5, and 66019 and Health and Safety Code § 50466. 5. AB 602 sets forth additional procedural requirements for the preparation of a Nexus Study and the adoption of a development impact fee. As it relates to the identification of level of service the following must be identified and provided:
1. The existing level of service;
2. The new level of service; and
3. An explanation of why the new level of service is appropriate.
AB 602 Requirement 1: Existing Level of Service
Currently, the existing levees protecting the Mossdale Tract Area do not meet the updated DWR ULDC standards adopted in May 2012, and the existing levees are not currently certified to provide 200- year protection. As such, the flood protection system does not provide ULOP as defined by DWR guidelines, and the land use related impacts imposed by SB 5 are in effect. A report prepared by a team of Professional Engineers led by Peterson Brustad, Inc., dated March 22, 2016 and later supplemented on lune 18, 2021 to address Climate Change, outlined the deficiencies to the levee system and identified the needed improvements to meet DWR ULDC standards.
AB 602 Requirement 2: New Level of Service
The Regional Impact Fee, in combination with other funding sources being implemented by SJAFCA, will provide funding needed to improve the levee system compliant with DWR' s ULDC standards. As a result of these improvements, ULOP would be achieved, and the land use restrictions would be removed.
AB 602 Requirement 3: Explanation of why the New Level of Service is Appropriate As previously noted, SB 5 requires that all Cities and Counties within the Sacramento- San Joaquin Valley which includes the Mossdale Tract Area) make findings related to ULOP or the national FEMA standard of flood protection before: ( 1) entering into a development agreement for any property that is located within a flood hazard zone; ( 2) approving a discretionary permit or other discretionary entitlement, or a ministerial permit that would result in the construction of a new residence, for a project that is located within a flood hazard zone; or( 3) approving a tentative map, or a parcel map for which a tentative map was not required, for any subdivision that is located within a flood hazard zone. Essentially, without the ability to make these required findings, all new development and building permit issuances for residential development in the Mossdale Tract Area would halt. This would exacerbate the current housing shortage, result in declining property values overtime, and impact the economic vitality of the Mossdale Tract Area. As such, it has been determined that achieving ULOP in the Mossdale Tract Area is appropriate.
LWA, k ;,° U-- 8 1801011 SJAFCA Mosstlale Nexus 5[ uEy UPDATE- Pu61it D/ oft 20ZZ 0512 541
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
Housing Development Square Footage Basis Exemption Findings AB 602 requires that the calculation of the fee on a housing development project be proportionate to the square footage of the proposed units of the development. A nexus study is not required to comply with this requirement if all of the following exemption findings are made:
1. An explanation as to why square footage is not an appropriate metric to calculate fees imposed on housing development projects.
2. An explanation that an alternative basis of calculating the fee bears a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development.
3. The other policies in the fee structure support smaller developments, or otherwise ensure that smaller development are not charged disproportionate fees.
AB 602 Exemption Finding 1: Why Square Footage is Not an Appropriate Metric The Regional Levee Fee is to be charged on a GDA basis. The GDA metric is more appropriate than a square footage metric because it removes housing density from consideration with respect to the amount of fees charged for a development project. Because the immediate need for additional flood protection is driven in large part by the land use restrictions imposed by 5B 5, the demand or necessary amount of flood protection doesn' t vary with respect to the number of housing units. The restrictions on the issuance of permits for new residential dwelling units by SB 5 are imposed on any dwelling units regardless of size. Thus, there should be no functional relationship between total amount of fees collected per acre of development. Because, in general, smaller housing units tend to be developed in higher density ( more units and thus a greater total amount of square feet per acre) than larger housing units( fewer units and generally less total square footage per acre), the effective per unit cost of the Regional Levee Fee will be lower on smaller homes than for larger homes. Further, the total amount of Regional Levee Fees collected per acre for higher density housing( smaller homes) would be lower as compared to a fee that would be consistent on a per square foot basis. Thus, the fees are lower for smaller housing consistent with the intent of AB 602 to make smaller housing for affordable.
AB 602 Exemption Finding 2: An Alternative Basis That Bears a Reasonable Relationship The Regional Levee Fee is to be charged on a GDA basis. The GDA basis bears a reasonable relationship for the reasons discussed in the previous section. The immediate need for flood protection for residential development is primarily driven by the SB 5 restrictions which are not related to the size and density of development. As such, the GDA basis is more equitable as it is not functionally related to size and density of development. However, it still results in a lower effective fee rate per unit for smaller more dense development. Additionally, the methodology behind the calculation for the GDA basis, detailed in the Regional Levee Fee Methodology section, takes into consideration the estimated total building square feet and the resulting damageable square feet of structure per acre for each land use category. Therefore, the GDA basis still bears a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development.
L': F z c uNt.
g 1801011 SIAFCA M055da1e Nexus SNdy UPDATE- Pu61ic D/ a) t 10210512 542
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
AB 602 Exemption Finding 3: Avoidance of Disproportionate Fees on Smaller Developments The GDA basis used in this Nexus study does not impose disproportionate fees on smaller development as the total amount of Regional levee Fees charged is directly related to the total size of development project. As described above, more dense/ smaller development projects will have a lower effective per unit fee than larger less dense development projects. Further, for development projects that do not require a subdivision map, as described in the Fee Program Administration section, the calculation of the Regional Levee Fee provides consideration for new, smaller Single- Family development on Vacant land between 0. 15 acres and 5 acres by utilizing the assumed coverage ratio of a typical Single- Family home on a standard residential lot.
This calculation ensures that smaller residential developments are not charged a disproportional fee in comparison to larger typical Single- Family housing development.
Additionally, subsection ForAdditional Residential Development on Land with Existing Structures under the Fee Calculation section, addresses relatively new amendments to California law related to development of accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units.
Procedural Requirements
It is intended that the Local Agencies will individually adopt the Regional Levee Fee program pursuant to the procedural requirements of AB 1600 and AB 602. The procedures include the following:
Conduct a Noticed Public Hearing to Adopt the Nexus Study: Each Local Agency shall conduct a noticed Public Hearing, to adopt this Nexus Study, at which oral or written presentations can be made, this may be part of a regularly scheduled meeting or a special meeting. This public hearing shall be noticed at least 30 days prior in accordance with Government Code§ 66016. 5( a)( 7).
Conduct a Noticed Public Hearing to Adopt the Development Impact Fee: Each Local Agency shall conduct a noticed Public Hearing, to adopt the development fee associated with this Nexus Study, at which oral or written presentations can be made, as part of a regularly scheduled meeting. This public hearing shall be noticed by publication at least 10 days prior in accordance with Government Code 6062( a). In addition, notice ofthe time and place of the meeting, including a general explanation of the matter to be considered, and a statement that any data required by Government Code§ 66016( a) is available, shall be mailed at least 14 days prior to the meeting to any interested party who files a written request with the Local Agency for mailed notice of ineetings on new or increased fees or service charges.
Provide Public Information: The Local Agency shall provide public information, at least 10 days prior to the Public Hearing, including available public data indicating the amount of estimated costs required to provide the service for which the fee is to be levied.
Adopt a Resolution or Ordinance: AB 1600 requires that any action by a local agency to levy a new fee or service charge or to approve an increase in an existing fee or service charge shall be taken only by ordinance or resolution. Each of the Local Agency City Councils are expected to adopt the fee by resolution and the County Board of Supervisors is expected to implement the fee through an amendment to their Ordinance Code.
L A` ` `t zr_
10 1801011 SJAFCA Mossdale Nexvs SNdy UPOATE- Public OraJ[ 2022 0512 543
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
Note that Government Code§ 66017 states that fees adopted pursuant to the provisions of Government Code 66016 ( those outlined above) are effective no sooner than 60 days after final action on the adoption of the new fee or increase to an existing fee.
Land Use Categories
AB 1600 sets forth standards by which monetary exactions on development projects are measured. The need for a public facility must be reasonably related to the level of service required, which varies in proportion to a particular land use type.
The following is a list of the land use type categories utilized for the purpose of this Regional Levee Fee:
Single- Family Residential: Includes structures that are single- family dwellings and duplexes.
Condominiums, half-plexes, and rural homes are included in this category.
Multi- Family Residential: Includes structures that are occupied by three or more families living independently of each other, under one roof. This category includes triplexes, four- plexes, apartment complexes.
Commercial: Includes offices, retail facilities, hotels, motels, restaurants, service stations and car washes, medical and dental offices, banks, and any other development typically serving and open to the general public.
Industrial: Includes development occupied by manufacturing, warehouses, processing plants, heavy and light industry, lumber yards, storage, bulk plants, truck transfer terminals, and any other development typically serving the manufacturing, storage, or processing industries.
Any development on Agricultural and/ or Vacant land are not allocated costs due to the fact that only new urban development necessitates the need for the facilities funded by the fee as a result of increasing EAD.
Further details with respect to the specifics of each land use category is discussed within the Fee Program Implementation and Fee Program Administration sections of this Nexus Study.
Mossdale Tract Area Land Uses
A central principle to determining a development impact fee is to consider the amount of anticipated future growth over the time horizon of the proposed program. In this case, the scope of facilities needed to provide ULOP within the Mossdale Tract Area are not necessarily functionally related to the amount of planned or existing development. The new facilities will provide a benefit to existing development. As described within the Adequate Progress Report, this Regional Levee Fee program is one of several sources of funding needed to construct the improvements. The facilities funded by this fee need not be allocated to existing development as a separate funding mechanism will cover the benefit received and service provided to existing development.
This fee only applies to planned development within the Mossdale Tract Area that benefits from the facilities providing ULOP. For the purposes of determining the allocation base for the fee, planned development is all development that has been identified by the land use jurisdictions and is expected to obtain a building permit after the implementation of this fee program.
L A` u E.
11 1801011 S/ AFCA Mossdale Nexus SNdy UPDATE- Public OioJt 2022 0512 544
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
Planned New Development
Planned new development within Mossdale Tract Area was estimated based on extensive research and coordination with the Local Agencies and development interests. The details of the planned development estimate over the 30- year horizon of the fee program are documented in Appendix A. Additional details on the approach and methodology of data collection and synthesis, as well as a detailed summary of planned development byjurisdiction, development area, and land use type, can be found in the RD 178asin Financing P/ an Implementation Updated Development Absorption Projections Final Updated Technical Memorandum prepared by LWA, dated August 18, 2017 and as updated by LWA since 2017 based on actual development and input from the Local Agencies. Table 1 provides a summary of planned new development by land use that is subject to the fee for the duration of the fee program. This table provides the total GDA by land use category as well as the total number of Single- Family and Multi- Family units and thousands of building square feet for Commercial and Industrial development. The number of units and square footage is provided as a reference for an estimate of the Regional levee Fee cost per unit or thousand square feet. zE_
12 1803011 SIAFCA Mossdale Nexus SNdy UPOATE- Public Diaff 201I 0512 545
Table 1
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Planned Development Summary
Planned Development
Gross Developable Units or 1, 000
Land Use Acreage( GDA) Building Sq Ft Measure
Reference Table A- 1 Table A- 2
Single- Family Residential 1, 766 10, 356 Units
Multi- Family Residential 139 2, 626 Units
Commercial 1, 211 14, 779 1k Bldg Sq Ft
Industrial 1, 466 22, 809 1k Bldg Sq Ft
Total 4, 582
Prepared by LWA 13 1801101 ULOP Mossdale Regional Fee Mode12012 0511 546
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS AND PROJECTS
Capital Costs Allocable to Planned Development
As described above and within the 2016Adequate Progress and each subsequent Annual Adequate Progress Report Update, a series of improvements are needed to ensure that the levee system meets ULDC and provides ULOP were identified. A detailed cost estimate has been prepared by an engineering team and a financing plan has been developed in support of the 2021 Adequate Progress Report Update to demonstrate how the LFMA, SJAFCA, intends to generate the funds needed to implement the levee improvement program.
The LFMA plan for flood protection through the year 2029 consists of two components; ( 1) RD 17' s ongoing Levee Seepage Repair Project ( LSRP) and ( 2) SJAFCA' s Phase 4 Project that will achieve ULDC 200- year flood protection for the Mossdale Tract Area.
SJAFCA is implementing the Phase 4 Project in the following outlined steps:
1. ULDC engineering analysis and identification of deficiencies( completed March 22, 2016)
2. Design and environmental evaluation of levee improvements to cure ULDC deficiencies
3. Implementation of levee improvements to cure ULDC deficiencies The Regional Levee Fee will only be levied on Planned Development within the Mossdale Tract Area. This means that the portion of the costs allocable to existing development will not be raised through this fee program. As described in the 2021 Adequate Progress Report Update, the LFMA has identified various other funding sources including:
Net revenues from RD 17' s existing Special Assessment District; A new Overlay Assessment District;
A new Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District( EIFD); and, State and/ or Federal grant funding opportunities
Summary of Capital Improvements Funded by the Development Impact Fee The estimated costs for the Phase 4 Project and associated ULOP program implementation costs are shown in Table 2 in 2021 dollars. Appendix B provides the discount and escalation of total SJAFCA project expenditures found in the 2021 Adequate Progress Report Update. The net costs funded by this Regional Levee Fee, along with the near-term assumptions related to the specific costs and associated fee program revenues generated through 2029 are also shown on Table 2. The total cost of capital improvements, repayment of the County EIFD Loan, and EIFD reimbursements to the Local Agencies total approximately 332. 8 million in 2021 dollars. Based upon the financing plan detailed within the 2021 Adequate Progress Report Update, other sources of funding are estimated to contribute approximately$ 244. 2 million which will fund existing development' s portion of the costs of the Phase 4 Project. The remaining estimated
88. 6 million will be funded by Planned Development through this Regional Levee Fee program. This amount is used as the basis for calculating the Regional Levee Fee.
L.< t ^,; E``
14 1801011 SIAFCA Mossdale Nexus 5[ udV UPDATE- Pu6Uc Ofa) t 20110511 547
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
In the near term ( through 2029), as detailed within the 2021 Adequate Progress Report Update and summarized in Table 2, the Regional Levee Fee program is expected to generate approximately$ 76. 2 million and cover a portion of the upfront costs of the levee improvement program.
A detailed outline of the allocated costs to each development project is identified in Appendix A. An estimate of the revenues generated by the Regional Levee Fee over time are included in Appendix C. These estimates and associated analyses support the information contained in the 2021 Adequate Progress Report Update. r oezE_
15 1803011 SIAFCA Mossdale Nexus SNCy UPOATE- Pu61ic raft 2022 0512 548
Table 2
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Cost Estimate Summary& Near- Term Costs Covered by the Fee Item Estimated Cost [ 1]
Local Cost Funded by the Fee
SJAFCA Project Expenditures 235, 358, 352
County EIFD Loan Repayment 24, 486, 962
EIFD Reimbursement to Agencies 73, 000, 000
less) Assumed other Funding Sources [ 2] 244, 238, 456
Net Local Cost Funded by the Fee 88, 606, 858
Near Term Project Costs Funded by the Fee [ 3]
ULOP Program Planning& Implementation
Pre- Project Expenditures 3, 229, 308
Funding Program Implementation Costs [ 4] 1 554 259
Subtotal ULOP Program Planning& Implementation 4, 783, 568 Fix- In Place Project Soft Costs( Fee Funded) 71, 436, 826 Total Near Term Project Costs Funded by the Fee 76, 220, 394 Near Term Projected Fee Revenues
Developer Advances& Agency Funding [ 5] 4, 782, 419
Development Fee Program ( Fee Revenues) 71, 437, 974
Total Near Term Fee Program Revenues 76, 220, 394
Source: 2021 A equate Progress Up ate Report wit up ates y LWA as o Decem er 2021. 1] Costs and other revenues, reflect amounts received between 2014& 2029 stated in 2021 dollars based on a 3% escalation rate. Present value$.
2] Other funding sources include those described within the Adequate Progress Report including escalation) as follows:
Net revenues available from RD 17' s existing Mossdale Tract Assessment District A new SJAFCA Overlay Assessment District
A new SJAFCA Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District EIFD/ Overlay Assessment Bond Net Bond Proceeds
3] Reflects Project Costs assumed to be incurred through 2029 as detailed within the Adequate Project Report( Reference Table 4 Sources& Uses). Gross Nominal$ from APR. 4] Includes costs associated with development of other funding sources. Could include reimbursements to the Cities for bridge funding.
5 Reference Table C- 8.
Prepared by LWA Z 1801101 ULOP Mossdale Regional Fee Mode12022 0512 549
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
REGIONAL LEVEE FEE METHODOLOGY
In accordance with AB 1600, a calculation of development impact fees must be accompanied by an analysis with enough detail to justify that a thorough consideration was applied in the process of determining how the fees relate to the impacts from new development. Findings must ensure that a reasonable relationship exists between the proposed fees and the development upon which they will be levied. This section describes the methodology utilized in this report in accordance with the requirements of AB 1600.
The fee methodology utilized here includes the following steps:
1. Qualitatively determine and describe the land use categories utilized as the basis for the fee.
2. Quantify the projected growth within the benefiting area in each of the land use categories in terms of GDA.
3. Describe and estimate the capital improvement costs and their applicability to planned new development.
4. Estimate the total building footprint square feet in each land use category and the resulting damageable square feet of structure per acre for each land use category.
5. Use the estimated damageable square feet per acre, an assumed relative structure value per structure type, and the assumed flood damage percentage to estimate the average structure damage per acre per structure type.
6. Use an estimated relative land value per land use category and assumed flood damage percentage to estimate an average land damage per acre per land use category.
7. Use the estimated structure and land damages to determine an estimated total damage per acre per land use category.
8. Apply a loss of use and life safety factor to adjust the total damage per acre to determine an adjusted damage per acre per land use category.
9. Determine a relative Property Damage Index by relating the adjusted damage per acre for each land use category to that of the adjusted damage per acre for the Single- Family Residential land use category.
10. Utilize the Property Damage Index to determine the adjusted equivalent acreage which represents a weighted amount of planned development acreage by land use type within the Mossdale Tract Area.
11. Proportionately allocate the capital improvement costs to each land use category based upon the adjusted equivalent acreage.
12. Determine the cost per GDA by dividing the allocated costs by the GDA of each land use category.
13. Add to each cost per acre the costs of administration of the fee program to determine the fee amount per acre per land use category to be collected by the land use agencies.
Cost Allocation and Calculation
The purpose of allocating the capital improvements costs among the various land uses is to provide an equitable method of funding the required improvements. The key to the cost apportionment of capital improvements to different land use types is the assumption that the benefits derived from the facilities are w
ti a,
1801011 SIAFCA Mossdole Nexus SNdy UPDATE- Public D aJt 20110512 550
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
related to land use type and that such benefits can be stated in relative terms. Only by relating the benefit received from the facilities and the services they provide to land use types can a reasonable nexus, or relationship, be established for the apportionment of costs to that land use.
Since the nature of the improvements in this Nexus Study relate to establishing ULOP in the Mossdale Tract Area, the equivalency factor determined in Step 9 above and utilized here is the Property Damage Index. The Property Damage Index is a relative factor that relates the adjusted property damages by land use to the property damage of an acre of Single- Family development. The greaterthe index value, the greaterthe impact in terms of property damage and loss of use and life associated with a possible flood. An index value closer to zero would indicate lower damage costs and loss of use and life associated with a flood. Given these facts, utilizing the Property Damage Index as described above is a reasonable method to allocate costs proportionately based on land use.
The following describes the series of tables that calculate the Regional Levee Fee using the method described above:
Using the estimated total building square feet and the assumed average building stories, Table 3 determines the estimated building footprint square feet and the associated damageable square feet of structure per acre.
After calculating the damageable square feet of structure per acre for each land use category, the value is then multiplied by the relative structure value per square foot and the assumed flood damage percentage to find the average structure damage per acre, as shown in Table 4. The relative structure value and assumed flood damage percentage are based upon similar values utilized within the Reclamation District No. 17 Mossdale Tract Assessment Engineer' s Report prepared by Kjeldsen, Sinnock & Neudeck, Inc. dated May 15, 2008. Table 5 uses the relative land value per acre and assumed damage percentage to find the average land damage per acre. The relative land value per GDA is based upon recent land value research completed by LWA to determine equivalent land value estimates for land within the region. Information was obtained from various sources including recently completed appraisal prices for vacant land.
By summing the average structure and land damage values per acre determined in Table 4 and Table 5, a total damage per acre can be determined. The total damage is then adjusted by a loss of use and life safety factor, a factor determined by how many hours per day individuals occupy structures in each land use category. This factor is multiplied by the total damage per acre to determine an adjusted damage per acre. The adjusted damage per acre amount is then used to the find the Property Damage Index or equivalency factor, as illustrated in Table 6.
The Property Damage Index from Table 6 is used to determine an adjusted equivalent acreage. This amount is used to allocate the local cost to each land use category on a proportional adjusted equivalent acreage basis for each land use category. The allocated cost is then divided by the total GDA in each land use category to find the cost share per GDA. Finally, using the total local cost share and the total number of units/ 1, 000 building square feet in Table 7, a demonstrative average cost per unit and cost per 1, 000 building square feet can be determined.
L': R r vuF_
18 1801011 SIAFCA Mossdale Nexus SNdy UPDATE- Pu61ic OroJt 2022 0512 551
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
Table 8 shows the allocated costs per GDA of the fee and the additional administrative charge of 3% to determine the total fee amount on a per GDA basis for each land use type.
Appendix C shows the cost allocated on each project based on the Planned Development description in Appendix A.
L A
i u ti a,
u z.
19 1801011 SIAFCA Mossdale Nexus SNdy UPDATE- Public Dioff 2022 0512 552
Nti O
NNONO
Lv
v
L ¢
O O
v
C iQ j w
O ul
N Vl
vo
c O LL Ql 00
a
f0 +
r
Q'
v
LL
p
a
N
a
ri
r,
a
LL
N
O
a I
O
O u1N
u
j
OD y lD
O lD 1
C
p
I I rl !1
ai
0 0
d I .-
i Oi o0 I -=
L
u I 00 1 O
o
fn m '
w
Ql c- I I 001
p
W
O
ln r- I N
c- I c- I N 111 LL
LL
C
d
NLQ L L Y Q Q Vf I O O O
p .-- I O O O
yC i-- I N -
1 ii
nO
3n3m
a
vL
a
o ° c. i° o m
N n , u oo
L
N
v
OM 01 00 aI
N
a Q l0
M I 00 ll1
v
00 N N 00
U
Vf
m
a -- 1 c- 1 N l! 1
W
6Lu
i
o
0 V1 . u'
1NnO
y (,
7 i
v t+'1 lD I 00
CIL
J
a
O N
N
di
tY
7 c
J
t+
7 3 C7
NN
H VI @ .-- i
lD Ol c- I lD N `
l.0 [+'
1 i--I l0 00
O
O
Na
Q
n -+ N u1
o
o
C
y Q
ri ,-i ri
N6
y
d
iao
y
L
OOi
L
Q =
f9 f0
YV
a
N
N
NN
N
t0ro
vv
a
i
vi
i
c
o v . fO E E
eiD
v
o
E ao E ;
j
QQ
a
F0 J cn V H = i,
N
3awmava
21 553
Table 4
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Relative Structure Damage Per GDA
Relative Damageable Assumed Flood Average
Structure Value Sq Ft of Structure Damage Structure
Land Use Per Sq Ft [ 1] per GDA Percentage[ 1] Damage Per GDA Reference Table 3
A B C D= A* B* C
Single- Family 60. 00 9, 047 39% 213, 496
Multi- Family 60. 00 8, 501 39% 198, 928
Commercial 70. 00 12, 207 72% 618, 049
Industrial 50. 00 15, 553 79% 616, 927
Source: Reclamation District No. 17 Mossdale Tract Assessment Engineer' s Report 1) The RD 17 Area Engineer' s Report does not distinguish Single- Family from Multi- Family in the Residential land use category therefore the same relative structure value and flood damage percentage were utilized for both land uses.
Prepared by LWA 22 I801101 ULOP Mossdole Regionol Fee Mode11012 0512 554
Table 5
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Relative Land Damage Per GDA
Relative Land Assumed Flood
Value Per GDA Damage Average Land
Land Use 1] Percentage Damage Per GDA
A B C= A` B
Single- Family 134, 000 10% 13, 400
Multi- Family 134, 000 10% 13, 400
Commercial 260, 000 10% 26, 000
Industrial 137, 000 10% 13, 700
Prepared by LWA 23 1801101 ULOP Mossdale Regional Fee Mode12022 0512 555
NtiONONv
cOC
X
p^p Ln
0 C
i
C l0
l 01 I
NO
ri O O O o+
f9 C. p p
Cl
0 f0
W
vi
a E
LL
c
p
6 0
co
a
flo
to
H
i 0^0
00 O
o
a
1 l0 Ol
O Vl
Q
y £
Q
u o O
l0
l0
o
3 0
a L?
A V? L}
7 Q
CL
p
O
m .-- o0o o 0 0 o ni o 0 0 0 0 00
o Gl +'
cric ri r-i p
I
@
Y
J Y"
J
QU
fp l0 00 Ql I
v
u
m 00MO lD
0 a
a
L
l0 N
O
p
U
N -- 1 Kl
U
p
d N N lD lD
N
r
a v vr +
n
ot
ai i
i
0 p
J
t
v
OOOO
C, Q m
O 1
v i
f0
MM lD Kf
7 c-I c-I N c- 1 3 d
f0
a
N
J
N41
3 v
O
vi
X
Q l0 00 Ql I C
GJ
i Ql N
N v
f0 '
C
GO
y
v
V OlO Ol
C
C
i
L
a
Q !'/) 00 00 lD
000
ii Ql rl ti
t
O!
9 a3+ 00
N i-- I l0 l0 d, to
aD Q ra v} cn v} v N . f 9 0
7 fs f0 p -
O
v
G
v
a a.+ 6 `
o
i+ L µ--
V i--
1L
fl. L
0w
f0
L fB
O 41
v •
J
o
v *-'
Q a`,
o c -
a
3 H
O
C in U =
JdNaN a
24 556
Nr1 ONONai i 4 O O O M < Y M v
t^ 1p l0 lD
N
v
N
y
DO toO
h
O _ `; ' 1 - i - i -
i
tJ
O v. 'v t
t
0z
Q Q
p
p
u, aoo
a
omrn
a
o = - c m o o
y`
O N YN
V
ti ti
N
a
3 00
mti
d
to
N I I
lD o0OO
f w
O K1 Ol
M L ,
O O !
1 Vf Q N N
N cN
u
Q N
7O
Ql l0 01 00
v
L
v rn
m u o
r o0
0 N
p
O
N
D
rj
O
Vf
O 01 00
N
O
J 1y+/1 aooiT
Ql I L( 1 ("
1 tO
C
V ( Y1 i/}
NN Op
w
i/? t./} t/? /}
s
G1
O
N Q
o0 0° ,
V
i
a+ . 00
N 1
M
Ovi
NM I l0
O7
f6 Z v
N N ' 1 "
a
O
N
i
0 C
J
a
aCf0
M
y a+
m O 00 N
n ev r6 I . .-- O
y
a
V
3 i
U e- 1 - i .`
E
a . a a W
J
y
X
y
C1
C O u1
V
L
O Q1 Q1 1
d O.
p p
O
O O Oc
o
3 7
a
Q ca C C
a
c (U
O
a a °
1 N
n
o
o d a
m .- i '_
L
@
I r-I N 7
V fJ
H Ci r1 r-I .
Lw
a
Q
o
o
vC
H c N
O
C LL
y f0
N
N
i
00 G Q'
C a` 7 +'
a
I
a in u H `'
34TNaaN
a`
25 557
NtiOt NONN
1 a
O a„ n, H ti
i
o
I O ^
O
o
N ni !- i '- i -
i
v
O 4 `,', n. Yn. n. n.
v
0 m
a0
a
y ~
o
v
i
V
o
O
O C *''
N '
1 ai
N
0 y
j
a
o - i -+
0 aN = ~ p
O
3m
0O
ric
a
o
oo o
o
s
0 0 m .
mm
C
a <.
io o
L
UNNN c1
i
a
cn v v v
c
N
G1
OO
n
u
a.
L+
d . l0 l0 l0
N
m
Q
i/} t/ 1 t/} i/}
V LL
ii f6
C.
m
Up
Q iri
d
C
C!
C
a
R
a lN0
WOO
O L
v
O
m Q1
3 c7
s
a -+
o o ri
a+
L
m
Yh i/? (! t/
N
f0
C
V C. ~
O
3 iI
0! OC
Q C1
ro
u LL
@ +' H N
o
co
C. Vf c0 • N
d
y
v
v ',
H
in ( J
3JTaNav
a`
26 558
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
FEE PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
The Regional Levee Fee calculations presented in this Nexus Study are based on the best improvement cost estimates, administrative cost estimates, and land use information available at this time. If costs change significantly, if the type or amount of new projected development changes, or if other assumptions significantly change such as federal or state standards, this Nexus Study and the program should be updated accordingly.
Regional Levee Fee Collection
This Nexus Study is being prepared as a regional fee with the intent that each of the Local Agencies individually adopt the Region Levee Fee and collect and remit the fees to SJAFCA. It is expected that agreements will be entered into with the respective land use agencies in the Mossdale Tract Area to remit the Regional Levee Fee to SJAFCA to complete the Project. It is expected that subsequent to the adoption of this Nexus Study, each Local Agency will develop formal procedures needed for the efficient administration and collection of the fee.
These Administrative Procedures are expected to clarify any specific conditions that would trigger the collection of the Regional Levee Fee as well as clarify the specific conditions that may exempt a property from the Regional Levee Fee as further described in the subsection Exemptions From the Fee, below. The procedures will also specify how the Local Agency will ensure the appropriate imposition of the fee through a development condition as well as any specifics as to the calculation and collection of the fee. The procedures will allow for variations in the method of payment as described in this section.
Fee Triggers/ Applicability
The Fee will apply to all Planned Development in the Mossdale Tract Area that creates a flood protection impact. Planned Development is defined as all development that is required to obtain a building permit within the Mossdale Tract Area. Fee collection will take place prior to issuance of a building permit by the Local Agency.
Fee Collection Deferral
As stated above, Fee collection is to take place prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. Collection of the fee may be deferred beyond this point if the Local Agency has adopted an agency-wide fee deferral program applicable to all development projects. Any other deferral of Fee collection must be incorporated into a Local Agency' s conditions of approval of the proposed development and/ or into a development agreement or other contractual arrangement for the project. In all cases, Fee collection must take place before Final Inspection or Certificate of Occupancy as applicable.
Regional Levee Fee Program Boundary
The Regional Levee Fee calculations are based upon the total costs of the levee improvement program and estimated amount of development within the 200- year floodplain in the Mossdale Tract Area which encompasses the entire benefit area. By virtue of the cost allocation process, this Regional Levee Fee program L: r ^ urzE_
26 1801011 SIAFCA Mossdale Nexus 5[ udy UPOATE- Public Oiof[ 2022 0512 559
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
will generate a proportional amount of fee revenue from the share of Planned Development within each of the Local Agencies. Figure 1 illustrates the Regional Levee Fee Program Boundary.
Exemptions From the Fee
The following land uses and/ or development projects are exempt from the Regional Levee Fee:
1. A ricultural: Development projects on agricultural land including development of Rural Residential parcels greater than S Acres in size.
2. Pre- Existin Structures: Development projects that require a building permit and are not increasing the amount of new structure square footage are exempt from the fee if the project involves adding less than 300 new square feet. Projects adding more than 300 square feet are subject to the fee and the fee will be applicable to the additional square footage in excess of 300 new square feet.
3. Replacement due to Dama e: Development projects that are a replacement, in kind, because of damage ( such as fire damage or other natural disaster). Any additional square footage in excess of 300 new square feet will be subject to the fee ( reference No. 2 above).
4. Accessory Dwellin Units( ADUs): Development projects considered to be Accessory Dwelling Units by the permitting agency and are less than 750 square feet.
5. Structures Raised Above the 200- Year Floodplain Elevation: Development projects with structures raised above the 200-year flood elevation as determined by the Local Agencies or structures removed from the 200- year floodplain by flood control improvements that meet the design standards applicable to the federal- state flood control system as determined by the Local Agencies.
6. Open Space: Any development project that takes place on open space land.
7. Public A encv Owned Land ( including federal, state, and local agencies): Any development project located on land owned by a government agency and is to be used solely for public use.
Exceptions to the Exemptions
With written approval from the Local Agency havingjurisdiction, any or all portions of the proposed fees may be waived if it can be determined that a proposed project will not derive permanent benefit from the improvements for which the fees are collected ( i. e., it can be shown that the property does not benefit from the flood protection). Written fee waivers may be available on a case- by- case basis for certain temporary structures, such as a mobile temporary structure used for construction management purposes.
Coverage Period
The Regional Levee Fee is to be collected beginning the 61st day after the adoption of the Resolution approving the fee, as adopted by the SJAFCA Board of Directors and for 30-years thereafter, unless further amended or repealed.
Administration Costs
The estimated cost of administration for the Regional Levee Fee has been included in the fee rates shown in Table S- 1, Table S- 2 and Table 8. The proposed administrative fee is 3% of the cost of the fee. However, to A`` vu<<'-
2 1803011 SIAFCA Mossdale Nexus Sfudy UVDAiE- Public Or ft I022 0512 560
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
the extent each Local Agency has its own process for determining the administrative cost of the fee, this amount may be adjusted by each Local Agency accordingly. These administrative costs will cover the following:
The development and administration of the Regional Levee Fee Program.
Accounting costs associated with the Regional Levee Fee.
Annual review of the fee program costs, fees, and policies.
Annual reporting requirements associated with the fee program.
Any other ongoing and recurring administrative procedures associated with the program.
Variations in Method
The Local Agencies will allow for variations in the method of fee payment, including:
Use of any lawfully created Assessment District or Community Facilities District ( CFD) to finance fee payment;
Voluntary accelerated payment of the fee at the time of filing of any application for a tentative subdivision map, parcel map, or an earlier land use application, at the then- applicable rate; and, The collection of fees or other payments to fund improvements by the land use jurisdictions that are to be used by agreement to directly fund or reimburse the cost of the facilities funded by the fee.
The use of these alternative payment mechanisms and the collection of the Regional Levee Fee may vary among the Local Agencies, however, in any case, the alternative method of payment will be documented within an agreement or memorandum by the Local Agency.
Fee Credit/ Reimbursement for the Design and Construction of Facilities Developers may fund the planning, design, and construction of a portion of the facilities funded by the fee in exchange for credits against their individual project' s fee obligation. In the event that a developer agrees to advance fund fees or directly plan, design, construct, and/ or deliver facilities, a Local Agency will enter into a separate agreement with the developer specifying the level of fee credit, the process for receiving the credit, and the terms for utilizing the credit, in exchange for the planning, design, construction, and delivery of the facilities. In the event the value of the fee credit exceeds the Regional Levee Fee obligation and a reimbursement might be due, the agreement would also specify the specific terms upon which a reimbursement would be provided. Any fee credits and/ or reimbursements will be provided in a manner consistent with SJAFCA adopted fee crediting policies. No credit for the Regional Levee Fee or reimbursement will be provided to a developer before entering into a credit and/ or reimbursement agreement with the applicable Local Agency.
Refunds and Appeals Process
An applicant who has paid the Regional Levee Fee may request that such fee be refunded at any time prior to commencement of the development, although to do so would terminate any approved application or permit.
Refunds will be made according to the policies and procedures of the Local Agencies and SJAFCA, as they are L. h h
t' I Fi,
O 1801011 SIAFCA Mossdale Nexus Study UPOAiE- Gublic Oroft 2022 0512 561
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
developed, and may reflect deductions to compensate for handling and administrative costs incurred by the Local Agencies and SJAFCA in processing the fee calculation, collection, and refund request.
Appeals regarding the determination of the applicability and amount of the development fee are to be made in writing to the SJAFCA Executive Director. The Executive Director shall respond to the appeal request in writing within 30 days. The Executive Director' s determination may be appealed to the SJAFCA Board of Directors. Any determination by the Board of Directors shall be considered final.
Annual Inflation Adjustment
The Regional Fee shall be adjusted each succeeding July 15t, commencing July 1, 2023, to reflect inflationary costs. The base fee rate shown in this study shall increase annually by the ratio which the Engineering News Record' s Construction Cost Index( 20 Cities) for the most recent December bears to the December 2021 index.
L
irk ; RJk.' E,
29 1801011 SIAFCA Mossdale Nexus Study UFDAif- Gublic Oroff I022 0512 562
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
FEE PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION
The following describes the general procedures for the administration of the Regional Levee Fee. Each Local Agency' s staff may develop more detailed administrative procedures or implement more specific policies after the adoption of the program to more efficiently administer the program and provide needed clarification in certain circumstances.
Fee Calculation
To calculate the Regional Levee Fee the following information is required:
Land use category of the new development
The Gross Developable Acreage ( GDA) of the New Development as defined below The current fee rates
The following provides detailed information on each requirement.
Land Use Categorization
Each Local Agency' s respective building department will determine the correct Regional Levee Fee rate by classifying the proposed development into one of the following four land use categories:
Single- Family Residential
Multi- Family Residential
Commercial
Industrial
To classify the proposed development into one of the four land use categories, the agency will use the following information:
The land use type from each Local Agency' s zoning code that applies to the land upon which the development is proposed; and
The descriptions of the four land use categories in this report found in the Land Use Categories discussion on Page 11.
Determining the Gross Developable Acreage( GDAJ of a New Development A GDA of a New Development, for purposes of this fee calculation, is determined as described below:
For New Development of Vacant Land
In the case where a New Development is being constructed on vacant land or land that has not previously been developed:
wA r ., P 30 1801011 5/ AFCA Massdale Nexus 5[ udy UPDATE- Publit Ora/[ 20210511 563
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
Residential Land Uses
For Single- Family residential projects that consist of residential uses that require a Tentative and Final Map( i. e. more than 4 units), the GDA is the gross acreage of the large lot parcel or resulting parcels excluding major dedicated public land uses, such as major arterials, major collectors, drainage, utilities corridors, parks, schools, and other public facilities. An example calculation of GDA for this case is shown in Appendix D.
For all other Single- Family residential projects that have impacts to the Mossdale Tract Area facilities the GDA is determined as follows:
o For parcels up to 0. 15 acres, the GDA is the actual acreage of the parcel. o For parcels greater than 0. 15 acres but less than 5 acres, the acreage is based on an assumed coverage ratio of a typical Single- Family home on a standard residential lot.
The GDA will be calculated by multiplying the square footagel of the residential structure by three and expressing this square footage in terms of acres ( dividing by 43, 560 square feet per acre). However, in no case will this resulting amount exceed the actual acreage of the parcel.
For all Multi-Family residential projects, GDA is determined to be equivalent to the entire gross acreage of the parcel being developed.
Nonresidential Land Uses( Commercial and IndustrialJ
For Retail/ Office/ Industrial/ Commercial projects, GDA is determined by the actual acreage of the parcel where a structure being constructed less major dedicated public land uses, such as major arterials, major collectors, drainage, utilities corridors, parks, schools, and other public facilities.
For Development on Land with Existing or Pre- Existing Structures In the case of expansion in excess of 300 square feet of an existing structure or the construction of a new structure within two years after demolition of a previous structure, GDA will be calculated as follows:
Residential Land Uses
For a residential expansion project, if the project involves the addition of new square footage of 300 square feet or more, the GDA will be calculated by multiplying the square footage of the expansion in excess of 300 square feet by three then expressing this square footage in terms of acres ( dividing by 43, 560 square feet per acre.)
For residential replacement projects, if the project involves development of a new residential structure after the demolition of a pre- existing structure (regardless of the use of the pre- existing structure), and the new structure is larger than the demolished structure by more than 300 square feet, the GDA will be calculated by multiplying the net new square footage in excess of 300 square 1 Square Footage can be generally classified as all square footage of the structure excluding the square footage of garages, porches, decks, external entryways, awnings, carports, driveways, breezeways, out- buildings, carriage houses, sheds, and other similar nonhabitable portion of the structure.
LWA', u tin« zE.
31 1801011 S AFCA Mossdale Nexus SNdy UPOATE- Pu61ic Ora) t 2077 0512 564
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
feet by three then expressing this square footage in terms of acres( dividing by 43, 560 square feet per acre). The net new square footage in excess of 300 square feet will be determined by subtracting the documented previously existing structure square footage plus 300 square feet from the new structure square footage.
For a residential development project that involves development of a new residential structure, separate from the existing structure, please see the follow section, For Additional Residential Development on Land with Existing Structures.
Nonresidential Land Uses
For Retail/ Office/ Commercial or Industrial expansion projects, if the project involves the addition of new square footage of 300 square feet or more, the GDA will be calculated by calculating the total net new square footage in excess of 300 square feet and expressing this square footage in terms of acres ( dividing by 43, 560 square feet per acre).
For Retail/ Office/ Commercial or Industrial replacement projects, if the project involves development of a new nonresidential structure after the demolition of a pre- existing structure regardless of the use of the pre- existing structure) and the new structure is larger than the demolished structure by more than 300 square feet, the GDA will be calculated by calculating the total net new square footage in excess of 300 square feet and expressing this square footage in terms of acres( dividing by 43, 560 square feet per acre). The net new square footage in excess of 300 square feet will be determined by subtracting the documented habitable square footage of the previously existing structure from the new square footage.
For a Retail/ Office/ Commercial or Industrial project that involves development of a new nonresidential structure, separate from the existing structure, the GDA will be calculated by calculating the total net new square footage and expressing this square footage in terms of acres dividing by 43, 560 square feet per acre).
For Additional Residential Development on Land with Existing Structures This section addresses the impacts of amendments to California law, effective January 1, 2020, related to ADUs and junior accessory dwelling units ( JADUs) on Regional Impact Fee Program. Chapter 653, Statutes of 2019 ( Senate Bill 13, Section 3), Chapter 655, Statutes of 2019 ( Assembly Bill 68, Section 2), and Chapter 659 ( Assembly Bill 881, Section 1. 5 and 2. 5) build upon recent changes to ADU and JADU law ( Government Code Section 65852. 2, 65852. 22 and Health & Safety Code Section 17980. 12), collectively " ADU Law", and further address barriers to the development of ADUs and JADUs.
This section relies on the information provided in the State of California — Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency, Department of Housing and Community Development, Division of Housing Policy Development memorandum issued by Zachary Olmstead, Deputy Director, dated January 10, 2020, regarding Local Agency Accessory Dwelling Units. The State of California memorandum is attached hereto for reference.
The ADU Law impacts the Regional Levee Fee by requiring new exemptions or limitations based on the size of an ADU. The ADU Law requires that ADUs up to 750 square feet be exempt from impact fees and impact fees L: rrt ° iN1N E,
32 1801011 SIAFCA Mossdale Nexus SNdy UPDAiE- Pu61ic Ora)[ 2012 0511 565
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
for an ADU of 750 square feet or larger be proportional to the relationship of the ADU to the primary dwelling unit( Government Code § 65852. 2 ( f)(3)).
Residential Accessory Dwelling Units
For ADUs and JADUs less than 750 square feet, the Regional Levee Fee will not be collected.
For ADUs of 750 square feet or more, the Fee will be calculated proportionately in relation to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit. First the fee for the existing primary residence needs to be calculated, then the proportionate fee for the ADU will be calculated using this information.
Table 9 provides example ADU calculations based on the Single- Family Residential ( SFR) Fee rate per GDA calculated in this Nexus Study.
x ^ w, uNZE_
J J 1801011 SJAFCA Mossdale Nexus 5[ udy UVDATE- Public Dr ft 2022 0512 566
NhtiONONN0a
n
o
M
o
m ti
tf1
N
O fl, p N
tD O1
o
W
N
Vl
i/ CNaO0a
N N M O
O
C.
p
O ty
N rj
o
ll
O
y
W
N
L
t/?
er m
o
f
ti
ooN
O p O o0
V1
NO O `"" i M
N
W
N t/, 1,
i/?
N m o
y
o o
y
o
p1 0
1 O.
0 O
N
ti
W
N V)
N
Uj
LL4J LYN
m o
y
o
a
p
o
y
I O1
ZO
i O
OE N M v
a
W
vv
a
ov
a, f6
m v
v
J
F w '
1F
Y
a
o
a
m
u
Q
w
n
n
LL
p
6 o a°J, O O v
Oip
G1
u
o
ai
U
Q
u oi
c
u
LL
v cu'
i
y ca O + +' H 0 c a i O+ v w O v Q O c
uQ
m °' Q
v
N
p v
i`.r
oc
3 W
a '
Z
a
C
u' v'
v`li
Q cn
y
vi
o
c
a
3 L
W0WZ
vnNad
34 567
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
Calculation Steps
The following steps are required to calculate the development fee:
1. Determine the land use category based on the characteristics ofthe New Develop and the descriptions of the land use categories.
2. Determine the GDA of the New Development using the definition of GDA above.
3. Determine the total Regional Levee Fee by multiply the fee rate from step 1 and the GDA from step 2.
This is the fee applicable to the New Development.
Per Unit Fee Collection for Single- Family Residential Development The above steps describe the calculation of the Regional Levee Fee on a New Development basis. In the case where a New Development is for subdivision of Single- Family Residential units and the fee has been calculated for an entire subdivision, the fee may be collected at the issuance of each building permit (and deferred to Final Inspection) for each residential unit. In this case, each Local Agency will determine the per unit GDA by dividing the GDA of the entire subdivision by the number of Single- Family units in the subdivision. This resulting per unit GDA will be multiplied by the current fee rate at the time of payment to determine the per unit fee cost.
Fee Revenue Accounting
The revenues raised by payment of the Regional Levee Fee shall be placed in a separate fund established by the SJAFCA( the Regional Levee Fee Fund). Separate and special accounts may be established in the Regional Levee Fee Fund and used to account for collected revenues, along with any interest earnings. Each Local Agency will remit the collected funds to SJAFCA pursuant to the terms of the collection agreement executed between SJAFCA and the Local Agency.
Periodic Review and Cost Adjustment
SJAFCA will periodically review actual project costs and Regional Levee Fee collections to determine if any updates to the program are warranted. The periodic review will occur no less than every eight years. During these reviews, the following aspects will be analyzed:
Changes to the Improvements to be funded by the Regional Levee Fee program Changes in the cost to update or administer the Regional Levee Fee program Changes in annual financing costs
Changes in assumed land uses
Changes in other funding sources
Any changes to the Regional Levee Fee based on the periodic update will be presented to the Local Agency' s Board for approval before an increase of the fee will take effect. x ,^ u zE<
35 I801011 5/ AFCA Mossdole Nexus SNdy UPDATE- P blic Oraft 2022 OS1I 568
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional UIOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
Pursuant to Government Code§ 66001( d), the fifth fiscal year following the first deposit into the fee account or fund, and annually thereafter, each Local Agency is required to make all the following findings about that portion of the account or fund remaining unexpended:
Identify the purpose for which the fee is to be used.
Demonstrate a reasonable relationship between the fee and the purpose for which it is charged.
Identify all sources and amounts of funding anticipated to fulfill the Phase 4 improvements.
Designate the approximate dates that the funding referred to in the above paragraph is expected to be deposited in the appropriate account or fund.
SJAFCA must refund the unexpended or uncommitted revenue portion for which a need could not be demonstrated in the above findings unless the administrative costs exceed the amount of the refund.
LWA:. h , E_
3 6 18010ll SJAFCA Mossdale Nexus Study UPOATE- Vuhlic OraJt 1022 0512 569
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
NEXUS FINDINGS
Authority
This report has been prepared in support of the Regional Levee Fee in accordance with the procedural guidelines established in AB 1600, codified in California Government§ 66000 et. seq. This code section sets forth the procedural requirements for establishing and collecting development impact fees. The procedures require that a" reasonable relationship or nexus must exist between a governmental exaction and the purpose of the condition."
Specifically, each Local Agency imposing a fee must:
1. Identifying the purpose of the fee.
2. Identifying how the fee is to be used.
3. Determining that a reasonable relationship exists between the fee' s use and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed.
4. Determining how a reasonable relationship exists between the need for the public facility and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed.
5. Demonstrating a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed.
Summary of Nexus Findings
The Regional Levee Fee to be collected by each Local Agency is calculated based on applicability of planned new development to the capital improvement project and standardized acreage proportion of the land use category to the total cost of the improvement. With this approach, the following findings are made regarding the Regional Levee Fee.
Requirement 1: Purpose of Fee
The capital improvements funded by the Regional Levee Fee are necessary to serve new Residential, Commercial, and Industrial development as described in the 2016 Adequate Progress Report and each subsequent Annual Adequate Progress Report Update.
Requirement 2: Use ofthe Fee
The Regional Levee Fee will be used to design and construct levee improvements that meet ULDC standards to provide ULOP for the Mossdale Tract Area as further described in the 2016Adequate Progress Report and each subsequent Annual Adequate Progress Report Update approved by SJAFCA.
Requirement 3: Relationship Between Use of Fees and Type of Development Development of Residential, Commercial, and Industrial land uses within the Mossdale Tract Area will require improved flood control and flood protection services. This Regional Levee Fee, in conjunction with other funding sources, will fund the improved SJAFCA flood protection system that will provide ULOP. ti s^ i. e;' t_
J 18010115/ AFCAMossdaleNexusSNdyUPOATf- PublicOroJt20110511 570
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
Requirement 4: Relationship Between Need for Facility and Type of Development Each Residential, Commercial, and Industrial development project adds to the incremental need for flood protection because of the increase in damage that would occur as a result of an uncontrolled flood, and the increased burden that the damages will place on the Local Agencies and SJAFCA. For the new development described in this Nexus Study to occur within the Mossdale Tract Area, the level of flood control needs to be improved to provide ULOP to the Area.
Requirement 5: Relationship Between Amount of Fees and Cost of Facility The appropriate common use factor for allocating costs to each land use is the Relative Property Damage Index. Table 6 shows the respective Relative Property Damage Index for each land use.
SJAFCA, acting as LFMA has estimated the total cost of the required facilities. The allocation of the costs based on the acres adjusted by the Property Damage Index has been presented in Table 7. The result is the cost of the improvements attributed to each acre of Residential, Commercial, and Industrial development. This allocation demonstrates the relationship between the amount of fee and the cost of the portion of the facility attributed to the specific type of development upon which the fee is imposed. iEZE
3 Op 18010ll SIAFCA Mo55dole NeXuS 5[ udy UPOATE- Pu61ic Oroft 2022 0512 571
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
APPENDIX A - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DETAILS
Summary of Planned Development
1. Development that is expected to take place over the next 30-years is subject to the Fee. Development projections through 2060, as described in the RD 17 Basin Financing Plan Implementation Updated Deve/opment Absorption Projections Final Updated Technical Memorandum prepared by LWA, dated August 18, 2017, and as updated by LWA since 2017 based on actual development and input from the Local Agencies, have been utilized to determine the amount of development expected to take place over the next 30- years.
2. The Mossdale Tract Area includes over 6, 345 acres of highly developed agricultural lands that produce a variety of crops. The basin also includes urban areas within San Joaquin County, the Cities of Lathrop, Manteca, and Stockton, and the urbanizing areas between these cities ( as shown in Figure 1). The area subject to the Regional Levee Fee is expected to increase by approximately 1, 766 Single- Family GDA, 139 Multi- Family GDA, 1, 274 Commercial GDA, and 1, 543 Industrial GDA over the ensuing 30-Years Table Ai).
3. Growth in the City of Lathrop subject to the Regional Levee Fee is expected to amount to approximately 775 Single- Family GDA, 47 Multi- Family GDA, 496 Commercial GDA, and 724 Industrial GDA.
4. Growth in the City of Manteca subject to the Regional Levee Fee is expected to amount to approximately 793 Single- Family GDA, 39 Multi- Family GDA, 359 Commercial GDA, and 391 Industrial GDA.
5. Growth in the City of Stockton subject to the Regional Levee Fee is expected to amount to approximately 40 Single- Family GDA, 53 Multi- Family GDA, 127 Commercial GDA, and 214 Industrial GDA.
6. Growth within the currently unincorporated portions of San Joaquin County that would ultimately be annexed into one of the Cities that would be subject to the Regional Levee Fee is estimated as follows. As described further below, assumptions were made in order to estimate the amount of development that would occur outside of the current City limits.
a. City of Lathrop to annex 24 Commercial GDA.
b. City of Manteca to annex 141 Single- Family GDA, 28 Commercial GDA, and 137 Industrial GDA. c. City of Stockton to annex 178 Commercial GDA.
City of Lathrop
Active projects on vacant parcels identified by City staff include Central Lathrop Specific Plan, Crossroads/ Industrial, Gateway, South Lathrop Specific Plan, East Lathrop, Mossdale Landing, Mossdale Landing East, Mossdale Landing South, and Sharpe Depot. PDFs and excel files that analyze development potential, undeveloped properties, and land use were provided by City staff to summarize total developable acreage for each project. City of Lathrop staff identified the potential for future development outside of the current City limits. Specific development projects have not been identified.
City of Manteca
Active projects on vacant parcels identified by City staff include Airport/ Daniels, Alma Apartments, Center Point South, Cerri, Denali, Embarcadero, Family Entertainment Zone, HWY 120, Kiper, Lewis Estates, Oakwood Trails, Oleander, Railroad Industrial, Sundance, Telles& Wilson, Terra Ranch, The Trails of Manteca, Villa Ticino LW i n ^ NZE,
A- 1 1801011 SIAFCA Mossdole Nexvs SNdy UPDATE- Public Oraf[ 20I2 0512 572
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
West, Wackerly, Yosemite Greens, and Yosemite/ Fishback. Land use summaries were provided by City staff to summarize total developable acreage by project. City of Lathrop staff identified the potential for future development outside of the current City limits. Specific development projects have not been identified.
City of Stockton
Active projects on vacant parcels identified by City staff include the undeveloped portions of Weston Ranch and South Airport. City of Stockton staff identified the potential for future development outside of the current City limits. The City of Stockton is currently updating its General Plan and the General Plan will need to conform to the requirements of the Delta Plan. Specific development projects have not been identified.
Assumptions were made regarding the amount of development outside of the City limits and these assumptions have been reviewed by stakeholders working on the development ofAdequate Progress Reports.
It is expected that as the City of Stockton finalizes its General Plan update and additional information is obtained over time, future updates of this report will reflect new information.
LWA: h ^ , N_
A- 2 1801011 SIAFCA Massdole Nexus 5[ udy UVDAiE- Public Orof[ 2022 0512 573
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
Planned Development Details
Table A- 1.................................................................................................................... Total Developable Acreage Table A- 2............................................................................... Total Developable Dwelling Units and Square Feet LW` r,x r ueZE_
A- 3 1801011 SJAFCA Mossdole Nexus 5[ udy UGDATf- Public Omft 2022 0512 574
Table A- 1
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Total Oevelopable Acreage
Area/ Project Single- Family Multi- Family Commercial Industrial Total Acreage City of Lathrop
Central Lathrop 827. 9 40. 8 301. 4 0. 0 1, 170. 2
Mossdale Landing 0. 0 0. 0 6. 0 0. 0 6. 0
Mossdale Landing East 0. 0 3. 3 31. 5 0. 0 34. 7
Mossdale Landing South 32. 7 5. 8 17. 1 0. 0 55. 5
South lathrop 0. 0 0. 0 93 184.2 193. 5
Lathrop Gateway 0. 0 0. 0 123. 9 190. 8 314. 7
Lathrop Crossroads 0.0 0.0 2. 6 55. 7 583
Historic/ East Lathrop 0. 0 0.0 30. 5 103. 9 1343
Sharpe Depot 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 227. 9 227. 9
Subtotal City of Lothrop 860.6 49.9 5221 762. 5 2, 195. 1 City of Manteca
Railroad Industrial 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 105. 7 105. 7
Center Point South 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 4 0.4
Telles& Wilson 37. 1 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 37. 1
Villa Ticino West 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 242Z 242. 2
Yosemite Greens 12. 2 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 12. 2
Kiper 12. 2 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 12. 2
Alma Apartments 0. 0 10. 8 0. 0 0. 0 10. 8
Yosemite/ Fishback 17. 0 0. 0 53 0. 0 22. 3
Family Entertainment Zone 0. 0 0. 0 132. 3 0. 0 132. 3
Embarcadero 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 35. 9 35. 9
Airport/ Daniels 0. 0 19. 7 49.8 0. 0 69. 5
HWY 120 0. 0 0. 0 129.7 27. 6 1573
Oakwood Trails 157. 2 0. 0 47. 2 0. 0 204. 4
Denali 105. 0 0. 0 13. 0 0. 0 118. 0
Sundance 52. 7 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 52. 7
The Trails of Manteca 294. 1 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 294. 1
Cerri 123. 6 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 123. 6
Terra Ranch 24. 8 103 0. 0 0. 0 35. 1
Wackerly 12. 9 0. 0 0.0 0. 0 12. 9
Lewis Estates 9. 9 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 9. 9
Oleander 22. 7 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 22. 7
Subtotal City of Manteca 881. 4 40.8 377.4 411. 8 1, 711. 5 City of Stockton( 3]
Weston Ranch 44.9 55. 7 133. 2 0. 0 233. 8
South Airport 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 225. 0 225. 0
Subtotal City of Stockton 44.9 55.7 133.2 225. 0 458. 8 San Joaquin County
Oakwood Shores 18. 6 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 18. 6
Future Lathrop Annex 0.0 0. 0 25. 2 0. 0 25. 2
Future Manteca Annex 156. 8 0. 0 293 144. 3 330. 4
Future Stockton Annex 0. 0 0. 0 187. 1 0. 0 187. 1
Subtotal5an Joaquin County 175.4 0. 0 241. 6 144. 3 561. 2 Total Developable Land 1, 962. 3 146.3 1, 274. 4 1, 543.6 4, 926. 7 Gross Acreage to 6DA Adjustment Factor 90. 0% 95. 0% 95. 0% 95. 0% Total GDA 1, 766.0 139. 0 1, 210. 7 1, 466.5 4, 582. 2
Source: Final Update Technical Memorandum RD 17 Basin Financing Plan Implementation Updated Development Absorption Projections, August 18, 2017 prepared by LWA with data later updated hy LWA based on input from SIAFCA member agenry staff.
Prepared by LWA 1801101 ULOP Mossdale Regional Fee Model 2022 0512 575
Table A- 2
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Total Developable Dwelling Units and Square Feet
Units Square Feet
Area/ Project Single-Family Multi-Family Totals Commercial Industrial Totals City of Lathrop
CentralLathrop 4, 968 613 5, 581 3, 283 0 3, 283
Mossdale Landing 0 0 0 66 0 66
Mossdale Landing East 0 50 50 343 0 343
Mossdale Landing South 196 87 283 186 0 186
South Lathrop 0 0 0 101 2, 809 2, 910
Lathrop Gateway 0 0 0 1, 349 2, 909 4, 258
Lathrop Crossroads 0 0 0 29 606 635
Historic/ East Lathrop 0 0 0 332 1, 584 1, 915
Sharpe Depot 0 0 0 0 3, 475 3, 475
Subtotal City of Lathrop 5, 164 750 5, 914 5,687 11, 383 17,070 City of Manteca
Railroad Industrial 0 0 0 0 691 691
Center Point South 0 0 0 0 99 99
Telles& Wilson 294 0 294 0 0 0
Villa Ticino West 0 0 0 0 4, 000 4, 000
Yosemite Greens 99 0 99 0 0 0
Kiper 115 0 115 0 0 0
Alma Apartments 0 268 268 0 0 0
Yosemite/ Fishback 102 0 302 69 0 69
Family Entertainment Zone 0 0 0 1, 729 0 1, 729
Embarcadero 0 0 0 0 469 469
Airport/ Daniels 0 295 295 651 0 651
HWY 120 0 0 0 1, 696 361 2, 056
Oakwood Trails 676 0 676 412 0 412
Denali 315 0 315 170 0 170
Sundance 289 0 289 0 0 0
The Trails of Manteca 1, 268 0 1, 268 0 0 0
Cerri 495 0 495 0 0 0
Terra Ranch 102 200 302 0 0 0
Wackerly 60 0 60 0 0 0
Lewis Estates 54 0 54 0 0 0
Oleander 116 0 116 0 0 0
Subtotal City of Manteco 3,985 763 4, 748 4, 727 5,619 10, 346 City of Stockton( 3]
Weston Ranch 267 1, 113 1, 380 1, 262 0 1, 262
South Airport 0 0 0 0 3, 921 3, 921
Subtotal City of Siockton 167 1, 113 1, 380 1, 262 3,921 5, 183 San Joaquin County
Oakwood Shores 107 0 107 0 0 0
Future Lathrop Annex 0 0 0 275 0 275
Future Manteca Annex 833 0 833 383 1, 886 2, 268
Future Stockton Annex 0 0 0 2, 446 0 2, 446
Subtotal San loaquin County 940 0 940 3, 103 1, 886 4, 989 Total 10, 356 2, 626 12, 982 14, 779 22, 809 37, 588
Source: Final Update Technical Memorandum RD 17 Basin Finan ing Plan Implementation Updated Development Absorption Projec[ ions, August 18, 2017 prepared by LWA with da[ a later updated by LWA based on input from SIAFCA member agency staff.
Prepared by lWA 1801101 ULOP Mossdale Regionol Fee Mode12022 0512 576
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Oraft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
APPENDIX B - SJAFCA PROJECT EXPENDITURES DISCOUNT & ESCALATION TO 2021 DOLLARS
Table B- 1.................................................... SJAFCA Project Expenditures Discount& Escalation to 2021 Dollars Table B- 2 .......................................................................................:........ County EIFD Loan Repayment Schedule Table B- 3...................................................................................................... EIFD Revenue Repayment Schedule L
L n
Ar' J
L
O' 1 18010115/ AFCAMossdaleNexusSNdyUPDAiE- P blicOraJ[ 20220512 577
Table B- 1
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
SJAFCA Project Expenditures Discount& Escalation
Total SJAFCA Project Discount/ Escalation to
Year Expenditures 2021 Dollars
2014 719, 212 884, 540
2015 719, 212 858, 776
2016 789, 704 915, 483
2017 1, 001, 181 1, 126, 838
2018 61, 170 66, 842
2019 215, 845 228, 990
2020 296, 015 304, 896
2021 927, 295 927, 295
2022 6, 109, 023 5, 931, 091
2023 4, 578, 590 4, 315, 760
2024 44, 531, 401 40, 752, 540
2025 51, 401, 717 45, 669, 760
2026 53, 939, 064 46, 528, 310
2027 51, 538, 640 43, 162, 800
2028 46, 749, 904 38, 011, 950
2029 7, 185, 728 5, 672, 480
Total 270, 763, 701 235, 358, 352
Source: 2020 Adequate Progress Report Update
Note:
Escalation Formula: FVzoz= P vea * ( 1+ 0. 03)^( 2021- Year) Discount Formula: PVzozi= FVvea * ( 1 + 0. 03)^-( Year- 2021) Prepared by LWA 1801101 ULOP Mossdole Regional Fee Mode12022 0512 578
Table B- 2
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
County EIfD Loan Repayment Schedule
Development Fee Revenue Allocation
Beginning Annual Additional
County loan Interest County EIFD Annual DIF Revenue Dedicated Remaining Ending County Year Balance Accrued[ 2] Contribution[ 3] Revenue[ 3] to Repayment Fee Revenue Loan Balance Reference Table C- 3
xoie o. 00 So. 00 So. 00 So. 00 So. 00 So. 00 So. 00
ioi o. 00 So. 00 So. 00 So. 00 o. 00 So. 00 So. 00
zois So. 00 So. 00 o. 00 o. 00 So. 00 So. 00 So. 00
2019 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00
2020 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 303, 501. 88 0. 00 303, 501. 88 0. 00 2021 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 $ 5, 359, 232. 26 50. 00 $ 5, 359, 232. 26 0. 00 2022 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 $ 10, 123, 403. 80 0. 00 $ 10, 123, 403. 80 0. 00 2023 0. 00 0. 00 $ 670, 974. 51 $ 7, 537, 641. 36 0. 00 $ 7, 537, 64136 670, 974.51 2024 $ 670,974. 51 $ 20, 129. 24 $ 1, 488, 921. 27 $ 5, 374, 398. 44 0. 00 $ 5, 374, 398.44 $ 2, 180,025. 01 2025 $ 2, 180, 025. 01 $ 65, 400. 75 $ 2, 151, 985. 02 $ 5, 955, 610.47 0. 00 $ 5, 955, 610.47 $ 4, 397,410.78 2026 $ 4, 397, 410.78 $ 131, 922. 32 $ 2, 917, 456. 83 $ 5, 055, 639.42 0. 00 $ 5, 055, 639.42 $ 7, 446, 789. 93 2027 $ 7, 446,789. 93 $ 223, 403. 70 $ 3, 644,078. 03 $ 4, 230,005. 31 0. 00 $ 4, 230, 00531 $ 11, 314, 271. 65 2028 $ 11, 314, 271. 65 $ 339,428. 15 $ 4, 379, 119. 24 $ 3, 842, 944.41 0. 00 $ 3, 842, 944. 41 $ 16, 032, 819. 04 2029 $ 16, 032, 819. 04 $ 480,984. 57 $ 5, 078, 149. 92 $ 3, 563, 169. 61 0. 00 $ 3, 563, 169. 61 521, 591, 953. 54 2030 $ 21, 591, 953. 54 5647, 758. 61 0. 00 $ 3, 505, 366. 94 $ 3, 505, 366. 94 0. 00 $ 18, 734, 345. 21 I031 $ 18, 734,345. 21 $ 562, 03036 0. 00 $ 3, 371, 931. 57 $ 3, 371, 931. 57 0. 00 $ 15, 924, 443. 99 2032 $ 15, 924, 443. 99 $ 477, 73332 0. 00 $ 2, 818, 838. 81 $ 2, 818,838. 81 0. 00 $ 13, 583, 338. 50 2033 $ 13, 583,338. 50 $ 407, 500. 15 0. 00 $ 3, 387, 055. 15 $ 3, 387,055. 15 0. 00 $ 10, 603, 783. 50 2034 $ 10, 603,783. 50 $ 318, 113. 51 0. 00 $ 3, 341, 888. 34 $ 3, 341, 888. 34 0. 00 $ 7, 580, 008. 66 2035 $ 7, 580,008. 66 $ 227,400. 26 0. 00 $ 2, 787, 263. 21 $ 2, 787, 263. 21 0. 00 $ 5, 020, 145. 71 2036 $ 5, 020, 145. 71 $ 150, 604. 37 0. 00 $ 2, 529, 715. 08 $ 2, 529,715.08 0. 00 $ 2, 641,035. 00 2037 $ 2, 641,035. 00 $ 79, 231. 05 0. 00 $ 1, 899, 031. 64 $ 1, 899, 031. 64 0. 00 821, 234. 42 2038 $ 821,234.42 $ 24, 637. 03 0. 00 $ 1, 245, 384.98 845, 871. 45 399, 513.53 0. 00 2039 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 $ 1, 211, 576. 38 0. 00 $ 1, 211, 57638 0. 00 2040 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 $ 2, 147, 708. 83 0. 00 $ 2, 147, 708. 83 0. 00 2041 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 $ 1, 829, 622. 39 0. 00 $ 1, 829, 62239 0. 00 2042 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 $ 1, 829, 622. 39 0. 00 $ 1, 829, 62239 0. 00 2043 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 $ 1, 835, 687. 33 0. 00 $ 1, 835, 68733 0. 00 2044 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 $ 1, 469, 360. 01 0. 00 $ 1, 469, 360.01 0. 00 2045 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 $ 1, 469, 360. 01 0. 00 $ 1, 469, 360.01 0. 00 2046 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 $ 1, 469, 360. 01 0. 00 $ 1, 469, 360.01 0. 00 zoa o. 00 So. 00 So. 00 Sl, asi, zs. on So. 00 Sl, asi, za. oa 50. 00 2048 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 $ 1, 430, 574. 20 0. 00 $ 1, 430,574. 20 0. 00 2049 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 $ 1, 430, 574. 20 0. 00 $ 1, 430, 574. 20 0. 00 2050 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 220, 916. 65 0. 00 220, 916. 65 0. 00 2051 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 206, 255Z1 50. 00 206,255. 21 0. 00 2052 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 155, 346. 30 0. 00 155, 34630 0. 00 2053 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 155, 34630 0. 00 155, 34630 0. 00 2054 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 155, 34630 0. 00 155, 34630 0. 00 zoss So. 00 So. 00 So. 00 Slas, si.sa So. 00 ias, si.aa o. 00 2056 0. 00 0. 00 50. 00 87, 68435 0. 00 87, 684. 35 0. 00 2057 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 38, 785. 81 50. 00 38, 785. 81 0. 00 zoss So. 00 So. 00 So. 00 S3a, as. ai a. 00 3s, ss. si So. 00 zose o. 00 o. 00 o. o0 53a, ss. si So. 00 53s, ss. si o. 00 2060 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00
Total 4, 156, 27738 $ 20, 330, 684. 81 $ 95, 049, 789. 84 $ 24, 486,962. 19 $ 70, 562, 827.64 Source: LWA, EPS
1] Represents the additional EIFD allocation above the base County allocation of 10 percent eligible for repayment. 2] Assumed 3 percent annual interest rate reflective of 2 percent plus the annual County treasury yield( estimated at 1%) applied to the prior year ending balance. 3] Represents development impact fee revenue for all development within the Mossdale Tract boundaries as estimated by LWA in[ luded in Appendix A.
Prepared bY LWA 1801101 ULOV Mossdale Negional Fee Mode12022 OS32 579
Table B- 3
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
EIFD Revenue Repayment Schedule
Estimated EIFD Revenue Contribution Estimated Repayment Calculation Fiscal Year Total EIFD Beginning fee Revenue for
Ending Lathrop Manteca Stockton County Revenue Balance Repayment[ 1] Ending Balance Reference Table B- 2
zozi So So So So So So So So
zo2i So So So So So So So So
2023 58, 543 19, 577 2, 200 $ 850, 840 $ 931, 161 0 0 $ 931, 161 2024 110, 211 53, 516 4, 488 $ 1, 888, 050 $ 2, 056, 266 931, 161 0 $ 2, 987, 426 2025 152, 452 80, 855 6, 118 $ 2, 728, 859 $ 2, 968, 284 2, 987, 426 0 $ 5, 955, 710 2026 198, 704 $ 117, 093 7, 268 $ 3, 699, 528 $ 4, 022, 593 5, 955, 710 0 $ 9, 978, 303 2027 246, 620 $ 145, 464 9, 059 $ 4, 620, 931 $ 5, 022, 074 9, 978, 303 0 $ 15, 000, 377 2028 298, 458 $ 170, 849 10, 983 $ 5, 553, 012 $ 6, 033, 302 $ 15, 000, 377 0 $ 21, 033, 679 2029 348, 069 $ 196, 197 12, 358 $ 6, 439, 429 $ 6, 996, 052 $ 21, 033, 679 0 $ 28, 029, 731 2030 515, 760 $ 581, 368 $ 179, 175 $ 2, 020, 721 $ 3, 297, 024 $ 28, 029, 731 0 $ 31, 326, 755 2031 588, 890 $ 655, 415 $ 198, 377 $ 2, 294, 279 $ 3, 736, 961 $ 31, 326, 755 0 $ 35, 063, 716 2032 639, 365 $ 733, 207 $ 218, 281 $ 2, 537, 438 $ 4, 128, 290 $ 35, 063, 716 0 $ 39, 192, 007 2033 505, 615 $ 594, 970 $ 178, 211 $ 2, 044, 214 $ 3, 323, 010 $ 39, 192, 007 0 $ 42, 515, 017 2034 544, 651 $ 658, 355 $ 207, 001 $ 2, 257, 967 $ 3, 667, 974 $ 42, 515, 017 0 $ 46, 182, 991 2035 584, 910 $ 724, 777 $ 235, 997 $ 2, 479, 601 $ 4, 025, 284 $ 46, 182, 991 0 $ 50, 208, 275 2036 624, 668 $ 782, 732 $ 266, 334 $ 2, 690, 088 $ 4, 363, 823 $ 50, 208, 275 0 $ 54, 572, 098 2037 665, 961 $ 836, 682 $ 298, 069 $ 2, 900, 689 $ 4, 701, 401 $ 54, 572, 098 0 $ 59, 273, 499 2038 702, 717 $ 884, 456 $ 331, 256 $ 3, 098, 381 $ 5, 016, 811 $ 59, 273, 499 399, 514 $ 63, 890, 796 2039 740, 754 $ 927, 405 $ 363, 415 $ 3, 275, 850 $ 5, 307, 424 $ 63, 890, 796 $ 1, 211, 576 $ 67, 986, 644 2040 780, 116 $ 972, 006 $ 395, 157 $ 3, 457, 937 $ 5, 605, 216 $ 67, 986, 644 $ 2, 147, 709 $ 71, 444, 151 2041 831, 445 $ 1, 016, 848 $ 429, 041 $ 3, 665, 782 $ 5, 943, 116 $ 71, 444, 151 $ 1, 829, 622 $ 75, 557, 644 2042 885, 329 $ 1, 054, 788 $ 464, 390 $ 3, 870, 920 $ 6, 275, 427 $ 75, 557, 644 $ 1, 829, 622 $ 80, 003, 449 2043 941, 373 $ 1, 093, 960 $ 501, 264 $ 4, 084, 087 $ 6, 620, 684 $ 80, 003, 449 $ 1, 835, 687 $ 84, 788, 445 2044 473, 522 $ 537, 350 $ 255, 713 $ 2, 039, 708 $ 3, 306, 292 $ 84, 788, 445 $ 1, 469, 360 $ 86, 625, 378 2045 502, 232 $ 557, 130 $ 268, 914 $ 2, 140, 446 $ 3, 468, 722 $ 86, 625, 378 $ 1, 469, 360 $ 88, 624, 740 2046 532, 085 $ 577, 553 282, 578 $ 2, 244, 928 $ 3, 637, 143 $ 88, 624, 740 $ 1, 469, 360 $ 90, 792, 524 2047 563, 122 $ 598, 639 $ 296, 719 $ 2, 353, 288 $ 3, 811, 769 $ 90, 792, 524 $ 1, 451, 287 $ 93, 153, 005 2048 595, 390 $ 620, 410 $ 311, 130 $ 2, 464, 763 $ 3, 991, 692 $ 93, 153, 005 $ 1, 430, 574 $ 95, 714, 123 2049 628, 932 $ 642, 887 $ 325, 804 $ 2, 579, 411 $ 4, 177, 035 $ 95, 714, 123 $ 1, 430, 574 $ 98, 460, 584 2050 663, 797 $ 666, 094 $ 340, 979 $ 2, 698, 256 $ 4, 369, 126 $ 98, 460, 584 220, 917 $ 102, 608, 794 2051 700, 034 $ 690, 055 $ 356, 671 $ 2, 821, 445 $ 4, 568, 205 $ 102, 608, 794 206, 255 $ 106, 970, 743 2052 737, 375 $ 714, 792 $ 373, 069 $ 2, 948, 810 $ 4, 774, 046 $ 106, 970, 743 155, 346 $ 111, 589, 444 2053 776, 17Z $ 740, 332 $ 388, 644 $ 3, 079, 107 $ 4, 984, 254 $ 111, 589, 444 155, 346 $ 116, 418, 351 2054 816, 479 $ 766, 700 $ 404, 716 $ 3, 214, 103 $ 5, 201, 998 $ 116, 418, 351 155, 346 $ 121, 465, 003 2055 858, 353 $ 793, 923 $ 421, 304 $ 3, 353, 963 $ 5, 427, 542 $ 121, 465, 003 145, 782 $ 126, 746, 764 2056 901, 850 $ 821, 828 $ 438, 422 $ 3, 498, 578 $ 5, 660, 678 $ 126, 746, 764 87, 684 $ 132, 319, 758 2057 947, 030 $ 848, 508 $ 456, 208 $ 3, 645, 921 $ 5, 897, 668 $ 132, 319, 758 38, 786 $ 138, 178, 640 2058 993, 956 $ 875, 989 $ 473, 836 $ 3, 795, 567 $ 6, 139, 348 $ 138, 178, 640 38, 786 $ 144, 279, 202 2059 1, 042, 691 $ 904, 294 $ 492, 011 $ 3, 950, 446 $ 6, 389, 442 $ 144, 279, 202 38, 786 $ 150, 629, 858 2060[ 2] $ 1, 093, 301 $ 933, 448 $ 510, 750 $ 4, 110, 737 $ 6, 648, 236 $ 150, 629, 858 0 $ 157, 278, 095 Total 23, 790, 934 $ 24, 590, 453 $ 10, 715, 910 $ 117, 398, 078 $ 176, 495, 375 19, 217, 281 Source: EPS
1] Repayment of general EIFD Revenue Contributions by agencies will only begin once repayment of the County EIFD Loan amount has been satisfied.
Prepared 6y LWA OS/ 11/ 22 P I780f000 SJAFCA MossdaleN8010U Regional DIFIMode1sV801101 ULOP Mossdale Regional Fee Mode12022 0572 580
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
APPENDIX C - ESTIMATED COST ALLOCATION BY PROJECT AND REVENUE
OVER TIME
Table C- 1............................................................ Estimated Cost per Unit by Project( Residential Development) Table C- 2 .......................... Estimated Cost per 1, 000 Sq. Ft. by Project( Commercial & Industrial Development) Table C- 3 ................................................................................ Total Development Impact Fee Revenue Estimate Table C- 4................................................................ Development Impact Fee Revenue Estimate— Single- Family Table C- 5................................................................. Development Impact Fee Revenue Estimate- Multi- Family Table C- 6.................................................................. Development Impact Fee Revenue Estimate- Commercial Table C- 7...................................................................... Development Impact Fee Revenue Estimate— Industrial Table C- 8............................................................................................. Developer Advances and Agency Funding L'. r 2 ^ w" IJNZE.
C- 1 I801011 SIAFCA MoSsdale Nexus StudV UPDATE- Pu61ic Or h 2022 OS1I 581
Table C- 1
Mossdale Trect Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Estimated Cost Per Unit by Project( Residential Development) Area/ Project Single- Family Multi- Family Allocated Cost Share Single& Average Allocated Acreage Acreage Cost Share Percentage Multi-Family Units Cost per Unit Reference Tahle A- 1 Table AQ Table 7 Table A- 2
A B C=( A"$ 21, 462+ D=( C/$ 88, 606, 858) E F-C/ E
B"$ 20, 084)
City of Lathrop
Central Lathrop 745. 1 38. 8 $ 16, 770, 424 18. 9% 5, 581 3, 005 Mossdale Landing 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Mossdale Landing East 0. 0 3. 1 62, 391 0. 1% 50 1, 248 Mossdale Landing South 29. 4 5. 5 740, 749 0. 8% 283 2, 617 South LaYhrop 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Lathrop Gateway 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Lathrop Crossroads 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Historic/ East Lathrop 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Sharpe Depot 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Subtotal City of Lathrop 774.5 47.4 $ 17, 573, 564 19. 8% 5,914 2,972 City of Manteca
Railroad Industrial 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Center Point South 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Telles& Wilson 33. 4 0. 0 717,191 0. 8% 294 2, 439
Villa Ticino West 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Yosemite Greens 11. 0 0. 0 235, 265 0. 3% 99 2, 376
Kiper 11. 0 0. 0 235, 651 0. 3% 115 2, 049
Alma Apartments 0. 0 103 206, 824 OZ% 268 772
Yosemite/ Fishback 15. 3 0. 0 327, 787 0. 4% 102 3, 214 Family Entertainment Zone 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Embarcadero 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Airport/ Daniels 0. 0 18. 7 375, 680 0.4% 295 1, 273
HWY 120 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Oakwood Trails 141. 5 0. 0 $ 3, 036, 619 3. 4% 676 4, 492 Denali 94. 5 0. 0 $ 2, 028, 147 23% 315 6, 439
Sundance 47.4 0. 0 $ 1, 017, 608 1. 1% 289 3, 521
The Trails of Manteca 264. 7 0. 0 $ 5, 680, 742 6. 4% 1, 268 4,480 Cerri 111. 2 0. 0 $ 2, 387, 415 2. 7% 495 4, 823
Terra Ranch 223 9. 8 674, 973 0. 8% 302 2, 235
Wackerly 11. 6 0. 0 249, 172 0. 3%a 60 4, 153
Lewis Estates 8. 9 0. 0 191, 612 0. 2% 54 3, 548
Oleander 20. 5 0. 0 439, 277 0. 5% 116 3, 787
Subtotol City of Monteco 793. 3 38. 8 $ 17, 803, 964 20. 1% 4, 748 3, 750 City of Stockton
Weston Ranch 40.4 52.9 $ 1, 929, 892 2. 2% 1, 380 1, 399 South Airport 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Subtotal City of Stockton 40. 4 52. 9 $ 1, 929, 892 2. 2% 1, 380 51, 399 San Joaquin County
Oakwood Shores 16. 7 0. 0 358,499 0.4% 107 3, 350
Future Lathrop Annex 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 50
Future Manteca Annex 141. 1 0. 0 $ 3, 028, 506 3. 4% 833 3, 636 Future Stockton Annex 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
SubtotalSanJoaquinCounty 157. 8 0. 0 $ 3, 387, 005 3. 8% 940 3, 603 Prepared by LWA I801101 ULOP Mossdale Regional Fee Mode12022 0512 582
Table C- 2
Mossdale Trect Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Estimated Cost Per 1, 000 Sq. Ft. by Project( Commercial& Industrial Development) Area/ Project Commercial Industrial Total Cost Share Average Allocated Acreage Acreage Allocated Percentage 3000' s Square feet Cost per 1, 000 Sq.
Referenre Table A- 1 Table A- 1 Table 7 Table A- 2
A B C= A`$ 21462+ D= C/ 588, 606, 858) E f= C/ E
B' S20084)
City of Lathrop
Central Lathrop 286.4 0. 0 $ 5, 814, 901 6. 6% 3 1, 771, 475 Mossdale Landing 5. 7 0. 0 116,366 0. 1% 0 1, 771, 435
Mossdale Landing East 29. 9 0. 0 606,810 0. 7% 0 1, 771, 501 Mossdale Landing South 16. 2 0. 0 329,014 0. 4% 0 1, 771, 466 South Lathrop 8. 8 175. 0 $ 2, 963,021 3. 3% 3 1, 018, 304 Lathrop Gateway 117.7 181. 3 $ 5, 273,104 6. 0% 4 1, 238, 364 Lathrop Crossroads 2. 5 52. 9 892,008 1. 0% 1 1, 404, 914 Historic/ East Lathrop 28. 9 98. 7 $ 2, 157, 363 2. 4% 2 1, 126,284 Sharpe Depot 0. 0 216. 5 $ 3, 444, 357 3. 9% 3 991, 176 Subtotal City of Laihrop 496. 1 724.4 $ 21, 596,943 24. 4% 17 1, 265, 216 City of Manteca
Railroad Industrial 0. 0 100.4 $ 1, 597,418 1. 8% 1 2, 312, 752 Center Point South 0. 0 0. 4 5, 983 0. 0°/a 0 60, 503
Telles& Wilson 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Villa Ticino West 0. 0 230. 1 $ 3, 660, 209 4. 1% 4 915, 052 Yosemite Greens 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Kiper 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Alma Apartments 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Yosemite/ Fishback 5. 0 0. 0 101, 858 0. 1% 0 1, 476, 209 FamilyEntertainmentZone 125. 7 0. 0 $ 2, 553,020 2. 9% 2 1, 476, 229 Embarcadero 0. 0 34. 1 542, 199 0. 6% 0 1, 156, 371
Airport/ Daniels 47. 3 0. 0 961, 057 1. 1% 1 1, 476, 233 HWY 120 1233 26. 2 $ 2, 920, 113 3. 3% 2 1, 420, 122
Oakwood Trails 44. 9 0. 0 911, 131 1. 0% 0 2, 209,232
Denali 12. 4 0. 0 250, 788 0. 3% 0 1, 476, 265
Sundance 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
The Trails of Manteca 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Cerri 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Terra Ranch 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Wackerly 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Lewis Estates 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Oleander 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 0 0
Subtotal City of Manteca 358.5 3911 $ 13, 503, 777 15. 2% 10 1, 305,161 City of Stockton
Weston Ranch 126. 6 0. 0 $ 2, 570, 054 2. 9% 1 2, 036, 590 South Airport 0. 0 213. 8 $ 3, 400, 382 3. 8% 4 867,279 Subtotal City of Stotkton 126. 6 213. 8 $ 5, 970, 437 6. 7° 5 2,903, 868 San Joaquin County
Oakwood Shores 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0% 5 0
Future Lathrop Annex 23. 9 0. 0 486,316 0. 5°/a 0 0
Future Manteca Annex 27. 8 137. 1 $ 2, 745, 198 3. 1% 38 73, 034 Future Stockton Annex 177. 8 0. 0 $ 3, 609,763 4. 1% 38 96, 036 Subtotal5an loaquin County 229. 5 137.1 6, 841,277 7. 7% 80 85, 341 Prepared by lWA 1801101 ULOP Mossdale Regional Fee Mode12022 0512 583
Table C- 3
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impad Fee
Total Development Impact Fee Revenue Estimate
Revenue by Land Use
Year Single- Family Multi- Family Commercial Industrial Total Fee Revenue Table C- 4 Table C- 5 Table C- 6 Table C- 7
2016 0 0 0 0 0
2017 0 0 0 0 0
2018 0 0 0 0 0
2019 0 0 0 0 0
2020 0 0 0 303, 502 303, 502
2021 2, 485, 413 $ 183, 567 163, 774 2, 526, 478 5, 359, 232 2022 5, 690, 433 $ 372, 055 $ 2, 017, 116 2, 043, 801 10, 123, 404 2023 3, 069, 552 $ 405, 073 $ 1, 714, 059 2, 348, 958 7, 537, 641 2024 1, 703, 064 $ 268, 000 $ 1, 273, 890 2, 129, 444 5, 374, 398 2025 2, 054, 116 $ 311, 783 $ 1, 402, 940 2, 186, 772 5, 955, 610 2026 1, 895, 298 $ 377, 056 $ 1, 367, 707 1, 415, 579 5, 055, 639 2027 1, 409, 182 $ 303, 348 $ 1, 428, 018 1, 089, 457 4, 230, 005 2028 1, 329, 348 $ 43, 582 $ 1, 380, 907 1, 089, 107 3, 842, 944 2029 1, 329, 777 $ 43, 381 $ 1, 466, 601 723, 410 3, 563, 170 2030 1, 363, 687 $ 38, 561 $ 1, 683, 497 419, 622 3, 505, 367 2031 1, 363, 687 $ 38, 561 $ 1, 550, 062 419, 622 3, 371, 932 2032 1, 363, 473 $ 118, 897 916, 848 419, 622 2, 818, 839 2033 1, 027, 165 $ 80, 336 $ 1, 035, 642 1, 243, 912 3, 387, 055 2034 1, 025, 877 $ 80, 336 $ 1, 035, 825 1, 199, 850 3, 341, 888 2035 578, 827 $ 80, 336 985, 038 1, 143, 063 2, 787, 263 2036 398, 332 $ 80, 336 $ 907, 507 1, 143, 540 2, 529, 715 2037 398, 332 $ 80, 336 639, 864 780, 499 1, 899, 032
2038 398, 332 $ 33, 138 $ 492, 438 321, 477 1, 245, 385 2039 398, 332 0 491, 767 321, 477 1, 211, 576
2040 1, 546, 609 0 279, 623 321, 477 2, 147, 709
2041 1, 209, 658 0 298, 488 321, 477 1, 829, 622
2042 1, 209, 658 0 298, 488 321, 477 1, 829, 622
2043 1, 209, 658 0 305, 189 320, 840 1, 835, 687
2044 5 1, 209, 658 0 259, 702 0 1, 469, 360
2045 1, 209, 658 0 259, 702 0 1, 469, 360
2046 1, 209, 658 0 259, 702 0 1, 469, 360
2047 1, 209, 658 0 $ 241, 629 0 1, 451, 287
2048 1, 209, 658 0 $ 220, 917 0 1, 430, 574
2049 1, 209, 658 0 220, 917 0 1, 430, 574
2050 0 0 220, 917 0 220, 917
2051 0 0 206, 255 0 206, 255
2052 0 0 155, 346 0 155, 346
2053 0 0 155, 346 0 155, 346
2054 0 0 $ 155, 346 0 155, 346
2055 0 0 145, 782 0 145, 782
2056 0 0 87, 684 0 87, 684
2057 0 0 38, 786 0 38, 786
2058 0 0 38, 786 0 38, 786
2059 0 0 38, 786 0 38, 786
Total 41, 715, 755. 2 2,938, 680. 2 25, 840, 892. 1 24, 554, 461. 3 95, 049, 790 Prepared by LWA I801101 ULOP Mossdale Regional Fee Mode12022 0512 584
Table C- 4
Mossdale Trect Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Development Impact Fee Revenue Estimate- Single- Family Single- Family Acres By Jurisdiction
Unincorp
Year Lathrop Manteca Stockton County Total Fee Revenue
Table D13 Table D7 Table DIO Table D16 Table 8
Fee Rate/ Acre $ 21, 462
2016 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2017 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2018 0. 0 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2019 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2020 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2021 61. 4 47. 7 6. 7 0. 0 115. 8 2, 485, 413
2022 179. 0 72. 7 13. 5 0. 0 265. 1 5, 690, 433
2023 23. 9 90. 0 13. 5 15. 7 143. 0 3, 069, 552
2024 0. 0 52. 4 11. 3 15. 7 79. 4 1, 703, 064
2025 3. 3 76. 8 0. 0 15. 7 95. 7 2, 054, 116
2026 3. 3 69. 4 0. 0 15. 7 88. 3 1, 895, 298
2027 3. 3 46. 7 0. 0 15. 7 65. 7 1, 409, 182
2028 3. 3 43. 0 0. 0 15. 7 61. 9 1, 329, 348
2029 3. 3 43. 0 0. 0 15. 7 62. 0 1, 329, 777
2030 3. 3 44. 6 0. 0 15. 7 63. 5 1, 363, 687
2031 3. 3 44. 6 0. 0 15. 7 63. 5 1, 363, 687
2032 3. 3 44. 6 0. 0 15. 7 63. 5 1, 363, 473
2033 3. 3 44. 6 0. 0 0. 0 47. 9 1, 027, 165
2034 3. 2 44. 6 0. 0 0. 0 47. 8 1, 025, 877
2035 0. 0 27. 0 0. 0 0. 0 27. 0 578, 827
2036 0. 0 18. 6 0. 0 0. 0 18. 6 398, 332
2037 0. 0 18. 6 0. 0 0. 0 18. 6 398, 332
2038 0. 0 18. 6 0. 0 0. 0 18. 6 398, 332
2039 0. 0 18. 6 0. 0 0. 0 18. 6 398, 332
2040 56. 4 15. 7 0. 0 0. 0 72. 1 1, 546, 609
2041 56. 4 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 56. 4 1, 209, 658
2042 56. 4 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 56. 4 1, 209, 658
2043 56. 4 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 56. 4 1, 209, 658
2044 56. 4 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 56. 4 1, 209, 658
2045 56. 4 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 56. 4 1, 209, 658
2046 56. 4 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 56. 4 1, 209, 658
2047 56. 4 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 56. 4 1, 209, 658
2048 56. 4 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 56. 4 1, 209, 658
2049 56. 4 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 56. 4 1, 209, 658
2050 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2051 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2052 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2053 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2054 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2055 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2056 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0. 0 0
2057 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2058 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2059 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
Total 860. 6 881. 4 44.9 156. 8 1, 943. 7 $ 41, 715, 755 Prepared by LWA 1801101 ULOP Mossdale Regional Fee Mode12022 0512 585
Table C- 5
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Development Impact Fee Revenue Estimate- Multi- Family
Multi- Family Acres By Jurisdiction
Unincorp
Year Lathrop Manteca Stockton County Total Fee Revenue
Table D13 Table D7 Table DIO Table D16 Table 8
Fee Rate/ Acre $ 20, 084
2016 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2017 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2018 0. 0 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2019 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2020 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2021 1. 6 0. 0 7. 5 0. 0 9. 1 183, 567
2022 8. 5 2. 6 7. 5 0. 0 18. 5 372, 055
2023 12. 3 7. 9 0. 0 0. 0 20. 2 405, 073
2024 5. 4 7. 9 0. 0 0. 0 13. 3 268, 000
2025 5. 4 10. 1 0. 0 0. 0 15. 5 311, 783
2026 5. 4 5. 8 7. 5 0. 0 18. 8 377, 056
2027 5. 4 2. 2 7. 5 0. 0 15. 1 303, 348
2028 0. 0 2. 2 0. 0 0. 0 2. 2 43, 582
2029 0. 0 2. 2 0. 0 0. 0 2. 2 43, 381
2030 1. 9 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 1. 9 38, 561
2031 1. 9 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 1. 9 38, 561
2032 1. 9 0. 0 4. 0 0. 0 5. 9 118, 897
2033 0. 0 0. 0 4. 0 0. 0 4. 0 80, 336
2034 0. 0 0. 0 4.0 0. 0 4.0 80, 336
2035 0. 0 0. 0 4.0 0. 0 4. 0 80, 336
2036 0. 0 0.0 4. 0 0. 0 4. 0 80, 336
2037 0. 0 0. 0 4. 0 0. 0 4.0 80, 336
2038 0. 0 0. 0 1. 7 0. 0 1. 7 33, 138
2039 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2040 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2041 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2042 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2043 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2044 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0. 0 0
2045 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2046 0. 0 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2047 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2048 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2049 0. 0 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0
2050 0. 0 0.0 0.0 0. 0 0.0 0
2051 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2052 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0.0 0
2053 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0
2054 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0
2055 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2056 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0
2057 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2058 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0
2059 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
Total 49. 9 40. 8 55. 7 0. 0 1463 2, 938, 680
Prepared by LWA 1801101 ULOP Mossdale Regional Fee Mode12022 0512 586
Table C- 6
Mossdale Trect Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Development Impact Fee Revenue Estimate- Commercial
Commercial Acres By lurisdiction
Unincorp
Vear Lathrop Manteca Stockton County Total Fee Revenue
Table D13 Table D7 Table D10 Table D16 Table 8
Fee Rate/ Acre $ 20,307
2016 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2017 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2018 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2019 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2020 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2021 8. 1 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 8. 1 163, 774
2022 40. 1 12. 7 44. 6 1. 9 99. 3 2, 017, 116
2023 40. 1 16. 5 24. 0 3. 8 84. 4 1, 714, 059
2024 40. 1 16. 5 2. 3 3. 8 62. 7 1, 273, 890
2025 40. 1 20. 3 23 6. 3 69. 1 1, 402, 940
2026 38. 4 20. 3 23 6. 3 67. 4 1, 367, 707
2027 38. 4 21. 4 2. 3 8. 3 70. 3 1, 428, 018
2028 38. 4 19. 1 2. 3 8. 3 68. 0 1, 380, 907
2029 38. 4 23. 3 2. 3 8. 3 72. 2 1, 466, 601
2030 49. 1 23. 3 2. 3 8. 3 82. 9 1, 683, 497
2031 42. 5 23. 3 2. 3 8. 3 76. 3 1, 550, 062
2032 12. 4 22. 2 2. 3 8. 3 45. 2 916, 848
2033 12.4 22. 2 2. 3 14. 1 51. 0 1, 035, 642
2034 12. 4 22. 2 2. 3 14. 1 51. 0 1, 035, 825
2035 12. 4 22. 2 2. 3 11. 6 48. 5 985, 038
2036 12.4 18. 4 2. 3 11. 6 44.7 907, 507
2037 12. 4 5. 2 2. 3 11. 6 31. 5 639, 864
2038 12.4 3. 8 2. 3 5. 7 24. 3 492, 438
2039 12. 4 3. 8 2. 3 5. 7 24. 2 491, 767
2040 0. 0 3. 8 2. 3 7. 6 13. 8 279, 623
2041 0. 9 3. 8 2. 3 7. 6 14. 7 298, 488
2042 0. 9 3. 8 2. 3 7. 6 14. 7 298, 488
2043 0. 9 3. 8 2. 3 8. 0 15. 0 305, 189
2044 0. 9 3. 8 2. 3 5. 7 12. 8 259, 702
2045 0. 9 3. 8 2. 3 5. 7 12. 8 259, 702
2046 0. 9 3. 8 2. 3 5. 7 12. 8 259, 702
2047 0. 9 3. 8 2. 3 4. 8 11. 9 241, 629
2048 0. 9 3. 8 2. 3 3. 8 10. 9 220, 917
2049 0. 9 3. 8 2. 3 3. 8 10. 9 220, 917
2050 0. 9 3. 8 2. 3 3. 8 10. 9 220, 917
2051 0. 0 3. 8 2. 5 3. 8 10. 2 206, 255
2052 0. 0 3. 8 0. 0 3. 8 7. 7 155, 346
2053 0. 0 3. 8 0. 0 3. 8 7. 7 155, 346
2054 0. 0 3. 8 0. 0 3. 8 7. 7 155, 346
2055 0. 0 3. 4 0. 0 3. 8 7. 2 145, 782
2056 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 4. 3 4. 3 87, 684
2057 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 1. 9 1. 9 38, 786
2058 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 1. 9 1. 9 38, 786
2059 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 1. 9 1. 9 38, 786
Total 522. 2 377. 4 133. 2 239. 7 1, 172. 5 $ 15, 840, 891 Prepared by LWA 1801101 ULOP Mossdale Regional Fee Mode12022 0512 587
Table C- 7
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Development Impact Fee Revenue Estimate- Industrial
Industrial Acres By Jurisdiction
Unincorp
Year Lathrop Manteca Stockton County Total Fee Revenue
Table D13 Table D7 Table DIO Table D16 Table 8
Fee Rate/ Acre $ 15, 907
2016 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2017 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2018 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0
2019 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2020 19. 1 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 19. 1 303, 502
2021 90. 8 68. 0 0. 0 0. 0 158. 8 2, 526, 478
2022 64. 3 64. 2 0. 0 0. 0 128. 5 2, 043, 801
2023 64. 3 83. 4 0. 0 0. 0 147. 7 2, 348, 958
2024 64. 3 69. 6 0. 0 0. 0 133. 9 2, 129, 444
2025 64. 3 73. 2 0. 0 0. 0 137. 5 2, 186, 772
2026 64. 3 24. 7 0. 0 0. 0 89. 0 1, 415, 579
2027 64. 9 3. 6 0. 0 0. 0 68. 5 1, 089, 457
2028 64. 9 3. 6 0. 0 0. 0 68. 5 1, 089, 107
2029 41. 9 3. 6 0. 0 0. 0 45. 5 723, 410
2030 22. 8 3. 6 0. 0 0. 0 26. 4 419, 622
2031 22. 8 3. 6 0. 0 0. 0 26. 4 419, 622
2032 22. 8 3. 6 0. 0 0. 0 26. 4 419, 622
2033 22. 8 3. 6 23. 0 28. 9 78. 2 1, 243, 912
2034 22. 8 3. 6 20. 2 28. 9 75. 4 1, 199, 850
2035 22. 8 0. 0 20. 2 28. 9 71. 9 1, 143, 063
2036 22. 8 0. 0 20. 2 28. 9 71. 9 1, 143, 540
2037 0. 0 0. 0 20. 2 28. 9 49. 1 780, 499
2038 0. 0 0. 0 20. 2 0. 0 20. 2 321, 477
2039 0. 0 0. 0 20. 2 0. 0 20. 2 321, 477
2040 0. 0 0. 0 20. 2 0. 0 20. 2 321, 477
2041 0. 0 0. 0 20. 2 0. 0 20. 2 321, 477
2042 0. 0 0. 0 20. 2 0. 0 20. 2 321, 477
2043 0. 0 0. 0 20. 2 0. 0 20. 2 320, 840
2044 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2045 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2046 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2047 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2048 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2049 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2050 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2051 0. 0 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2052 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2053 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2054 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2055 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0.0 0
2056 0. 0 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2057 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2058 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
2059 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
Total 762. 5 411. 8 225. 0 144. 3 1, 543. 6 $ 24,554, 462 Prepared by LWA 1801101 ULOP Mossdole Regionol Fee Mode12022 0512 588
Table C- 8
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Developer Advances and Agency Funding
Funding Source Amount
Lathrop 1, 005, 305
Lathrop Gateway/ Lazares 3, 720
Manteca 962, 125
Others 476, 131
RD 17 126, 300
Richland 1, 349, 453
River Islands 15, 500
Saybrook 712, 480
SJ County 65, 703
Stockton 65, 703
Total 4, 782,419
Source: City of Lathrop, City of Manteca, LWA
Note: For additional funding source details refer to the Mossdale Tract Program 2021 Annual Adequate Progress
Report Update for Urban Level of Protection dated June 25, 2021 and the Mossdale Tract Area Regional Urban Level of Flood Protection Advance Funding Credit and Reimbursement Policies and Procedures Study dated October 15, 2019.
Prepared by LWA 1801101 ULOP Mossdale Regional Fee Mode12022 0512 589
Mossdale Tract Area: Regional ULOP Levee Impact Fee
Public Draft Nexus Study
May 12, 2022
APPENDIX D - EXAMPLE GRO55 DEVELOPABLE ACREAGE CALCULATION For this example calculation, the Gross Developable Acreage ( GDA) for Lot 1—B on the attached Maps is calculated.
Map D- 1 shows the overall tentative map for the " Wheeler Ranch" project. Map D- 2 is an enlargement of Lot 1—B with an indication of acreage to be subtracted from the large lot map when determining GDA. Note:
For purposes of the fee calculation, the City may require the small lot final map to provide a calculation of G DA.
STEP 1
Goal: From the tentative map, determine the gross acreage for the large lot.
Solution: In this case, the gross acreage for the large lot by the unit is given in the land use table. Lot 1— B' s gross acreage is stated as 38. 3 acres. This includes the allocable portion of parks/ open space that is not indicated as its own unit, as well as major collectors and arterials.
STEP 2
Goal: Subtract all acreage in Major Roads, Parks, Open Space, and other property that will ultimately be publicly owned.
Solution: In this case, the densities indicated in the land use table, based on the note, exclude the allocable area of arterials and collector streets. If the density is divided by the number of units, the result is the acreage of the unit without allocable major roads.
Lot 1—B has 147 lots, and a density of 4. 1 units/ acre. 147/ 4. 1 = 35. 9 acres. Therefore, there were 2. 4 acres of major roads included in the unit acreage stated in the land use table ( 38. 3 acres- 35. 9 acres= 2. 4 acres).
Subtract all open space. Lot 1—B includes two park areas: one of 1. 3 acres and one of 0. 5 acres.
35. 9 acres-( 1. 3 acres+ 0. 5 acres)= 34. 1 acres.
No additional ultimately publicly owned property is remaining in the Lot; therefore, the GDA for Lot 1—B is 34. 1 acres.
Furthermore, the GDA per unit is 0. 232. This is the " Project" acreage to be used for determining the Per Unit Fee Rate for each Levee Fee charged at Building Permit.
LVI/A. , J z_
0- 1 1801011 SIAFCA Mossdale Nexus 5[ udy UPOATE- Public Orh 2022 0512 590
MAP D- 1 TENTATIVE MAP
c, a
M ,...
a,.
KK_ _ _ L - -=-= WHEELER RANCH
e
YUBA COUNTY APRIL, 2003
I
I...
I e . .
vx ...
rFr_ a
p-', ' 7° F k
w
p'= r e.
m .,,.,
T 1 hE MtP_.
PPANt. SRC•
9 lEP F+ FOPEii( Y wn '. 9„
Y
PMK2.) NL^{
F wvun x. mc
MN 142l6M10 '.... . k.. I^= ,
I' LLA W Y
f
4• R"•• E,' F '
tvswa. rs wvrn . m m.. wmn e
i a'.
iI ' . i
K
E I'tI w.
mn
er mu.
y.
k
Yp." ''..
s
wnuoi¢.
rtnrau+ n
xE.
I
I
N.
q`
mar. wnw[.
xmmmauns
nae
k \
W
i R. a
xan[ a. arFvva
a' f
wrmunma nrsnwrweuc narvm mc 1 y @O 4
e[*» ws s
j n
o% ca oR.
T' PARK2. SAC. OO PAqK2sAC ' ` Y . ol. wr+ uwn! arweuc mmoman Y«
4 0
n•
o.,„
1' 1'+ w
a on,
P.; .,
eF I- P" F=' w... o. W. ao.. aKrw
es k, --^
x r.
a ,,. ..
k, r, » d,. w..... ., u, d.. e ar,. w.
i s / A- s .,. s. 6 k F R. r
ii\ I p`F f ,
Y
k
T
rtaanoE x. c cr¢ eea
4.• F
r Y
W BE I
svmen x. a. xea
x..,....,.... s
i 7
pE, 4 k.' w
4 F p p
f .
i/
c
OPENSPACETRNL `
ea SYST£ MS 11. 3 A. G rq' n r. 2 A
uwo. wnm
u
u
I
vr o
e
iw»
x. u
2AfiKc m
f.
sznc.
o eN r c'
sc; r+ ooisrre
ry •
d,' 9 1 1 1 d., '..
5 i i
w e,,,.
I z
v ,
t
k i
ppP Fa d iNAI 3 SilM: PARK 3 C
aaz
oe rmoNi - r,+
F
i PECREA ION 1 I i .. g"__ " kll
otl AVNi428W PM RLCW r
J $ i 1H) :
I
a i "' I ;' I
B
nb F F F P
b
o oW. I I,
vx e e.we :. ki.. F.'.. .° P
s .,
C" - .„ i' I
I I r'
PPRN
Y ,.,• i. l n .,'
rs ..
a • _'
e
s '. p k
es ., ...
a -.
t2nG.
I IV ^ F. e..
l%. Nil n
u.,\ .
I
i I'
MN 1L9D0. f08 F
s
i
PM BOJ u I m ah IJA Y 3
swaI_'_
i 9i, i°
a
xt J` ig
F 9 3 j 9 1
k•'.•-
6 SCOMMEflCIAL \ l
pM _-_ 12. 6AL. \\.
h, P n• P. n. F.. F,. _ Y. 1 RC.
i{' f 1. q
rkw' d ' s" A Y 7 a^
y. "
k. w . e 4, v .
i i . . m
L—
h 3 i
g k . Pe " A . n...
i
V
j
r`
a.. As. kn a ',. p, ',."•
FLUMRS RRBOGA
s- ----
nra. wwu tuut ou wn.,. ' '
a w. se w POr10
I\
T o n n ru nrt. uw Hs w r n w.rra c mr
y
IANDUSETABLE
w. Tw.,,....
c k. n . wv, mww
j„
dc.,`_
e
z
E--
U. o
t
F- 9
3s u:
a cxa 9r` 3e± a? G
f
r'':' I ''
IM1_^
as F
a , *
r,,_ t-- 1—.
p
W
w': r_ Qr _ " _.
a a,,,.
LOCATION MAP
L.....
L""'
Lq g,+--
or...
iw
L9R"'
o.
W
En l
w
s^:1ISY
w. u.. rc= wac
r" i
c a.v.--
h :_
c-as--
1 "` L' SS"^` 1 "'
L".""'
T
i
A
s
vmr. iva. POUNDi100Uf R 110UlA BOIR B
i.. i. a..... i,...,, mc. i. 0
591
x }, . j 4 1
4. n
O r, " " _ , , CV
1 C2i-- T
j d' .,
R
c' a
t
ts6'_-
aV
z „
Cv r""-
r?
I CV ' CV
7,£: I
C.
L , r ."`, ri v c
Q i
ZS. N "' 7 ; f u
r.tD I 4J` v Sb..` 4 ni +
a'/ N
V V/
I I 1 c" I
S^ I L7 I
CJ C' 3.- S" I.- C:•' CJ . C7"` S F
i
W
ti
U
zst,- ,_,_ , .. ,_ ,. _' z... : ,.
t i Z t
r
5':-^' L
p .....
07 j' N .., , L£ 1 - ` - - — - "` - — - — - I - - —.' - - -- ' I } -
W .. --- __....---
f
iLFi i r" z€'t - -. L£ C . - i,: t _ .., Y i ^ --.. - i Q N
Y. W Z t ' cri . ac oa ' n
n
i i y, '
r
C4t - , Z,sc ,
I . ,.'.._ _ .
LS'' l r, z.. ti,d, - ,
a z ' ri- , E. ( ' n as M
C , 1 - ,
zs. t- ,,
r._
rs , Lc e -
Yt - ,,
t 4 -
00 C (
ca II
Q iri ,," u, csx d
Z£ t Lf. - oiLit - L£ 4t.- o inrnt3' PL l
r
c, o}} t , i
C+£ a tf9
ZEt
Z£ t_ 7i, if1 - ,-
r
L£ t- f
o we+ t I L£t -
r
I L
i i
n
cv' .- " n' n
i L C n . .._ t t - t t ...
Q 1 - a s , cm, rs - ; , cr rn ,;` e v
a = , ZF'S ' s I % . t--
p
Ft L ' ' f. r - _
G7 LEt «-. ' .. i44' I ' L£ t, 7C7 w Q G l
L
i—_... Cy... C, 1
t i
Z£ i , Z£ 4 -
p L£ 1 Lrt
L£ 4 - V V
r
r
4 rn, n
L£ b-; r t ,
ru ry`, ,
o rn
C4l
M Q
c+j`
4 LCi - rrI t s LFL
n. LCI ,,
p . L£ k
CA
u'tam 67 Q Q
r " '"' x i
A L"
L€ t - ZCI„ " Lil ,-. L£' 1
L£
n, n m_ LLl -
c
C t ;
iy; n
i 4' t
V _ rG '` _ —` z s ,, i o - , ' i, ti , r, z -
N r ca
TP—.
µ
ZS. —._ _ Lilwif .
O CCI 1. 4' 4 . `
il3iLc l +
I rl , m' , t' t - v ( ,--
T _—
i- tn
L x a, _— _ =
a_. "" , L£ LL' t - Q . zs- '"" g i
L€ i a zft . .-. 1 ( [£ t . s .
M ;
ici-r , c
C41 J
a{ .
s N
L 1
L£ -
W - - .
s
r
t,
LFI riy
L
L£ l
A p . i . , p„__ —_.
Zil . C. r
O A O
J
f
r, v c0 .
j
ii L L
tzt i - ,
f , 2ia zs'° ' ctt - J J
4 a
m _
t5 iFl ' Q 1 C fy, L£: -
X f, L,._ Ft t ., ' !
ao . ; u)' n9 cO ,..
M
W '
y `
n
tri -- '1 '"
r= . rs rc,, co
t"st
r,,
tYi
l
C7 lL , 89 rL 6£ 4 " tr.'--
Li: . Lft - I , s-_ r _' A ;. y
SS ! S Z4 , lSl j
L9 I; n$'
W
M
te9",_
1 r}
r.,
r`', ^ i L£ i ', L4't
H
i - n_ r., r-._ r r-_-
i
r
w c e- - a , si _
S . - - -- — ta
A e i"S C' .( ry'L . b/
u7 "
r;: X o „.
coya"? cmA F';,,.. c t, ep -
ry
1 1
5 ti/
V .. E^ J
V . + 1" ry ¢^. ! - .
f--` .. a" ,+.
i
4,
N _
1 ` , :"
t
n r ~- ;_,
Q cv '
cq
r -
A/
t36
4 r,§ 9 9 i . `' " " . a u7
7 Q 1 ' r , ,,,,,. i 1 ' P'' y 4'. Cti
5 . s
a . ..
592
593
ITEM 5. 4
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
ITEM: GRAND . 7URY REPORT RESPONSE
RECOMMENDATION: Accept Grand ury Report On Cybersecurity and Direct the City Attorney to Submit a Letter to the
Presiding ) udge of the San 7oaquin County Superior
Court Responding to the Findings and
Recommendations of the Grand 7ury Report.
SUMMARY
In the attached 2021/ 2022 San Joaquin County Grand Jury Report, The Grand Jury recommends the Lathrop City Council respond to the following findings and recommendations detailed below.
BACKGROUND
POSSIBLE RESPONSES TO GRAND JURY FINDINGS:
California Penal Code Section 933. 05 requires City Council issue a response in writing to the Presiding Judge of the San Joaquin County Superior Court indicating whether the Council:
Option 1. Agrees; or
Option 2. Disagrees wholly or partially with the findings of the Grand ) ury.
POSSIBLE RESPONSES TO GRAND 7URY RECOMMENDATIONS:
California Penal Code Section 933. 05 also requires City Council to respond to all recommendations contained in the Grand Jury report with one of the following:
Option 1. The recommendations have been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action.
Option 2. The recommendations have not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a timeframe for implementation.
Option 3. The recommendations require further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. 594
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT PAGE 2
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
GRAND JURY REPORT RESPONSE
Option 4. The recommendations will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor.
GRAND URY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS WITH PROPOSED
RESPONSES:
Grand Jury Finding F3. 1: The City of Lathrop does not employ multi- factor authentication universally, leaving City systems more vulnerable to the activities of bad actors."
Grand Jury Recommendation R3. 1: By November 1, 2022, the Lathrop City Council, in conjunction with the City' s IT department, develop, adopt and implement a procedure for universal multi- factor authentication for access to City data."
Proposed Council Response: The City of Lathrop City Council agrees with Grand Jury Finding F3. 1 and Recommendation R3. 1 and multi- factor authentication security has been implemented and in effect since June of 2022.
Grand 7ury Finding F3. 2: The City of Lathrop provides an unsecured public Wi- Fi network. Misuse of this unsecured network could expose the City to liability risks." Grand Jury Recommendation R3. 2: By November 1, 2022, the Lathrop City Council, in conjunction with the City' s IT department, provide a secure public Wi- Fi network."
Proposed Council Response: The City of Lathrop City Council disagrees with Grand Jury Finding F3. 2 and Recommend R3. 2 because by definition, publicly available Wi- Fi is inherently unsecured", although this designation is a misnomer because it eludes to an idea that publicly available Wi- Fi can either be secured or unsecured, and that unsecured is less safe" or more ' risky" than secured. Neither are the case. An " unsecured network" only means that such Wi- Fi is publicly available for anyone to use. Wi- Fi networks, either secured or unsecured, cannot merge end- users between those networks. Secured and unsecured networks, and the end- users utilizing either, remain completely isolated from one another; it would be unfeasible for someone with access to only an unsecured Wi- Fi network to also have the ability to gain access to a separate, secured Wi- Fi network.
The commonly perpetuated idea of " risk" associated with the use of an unsecured Wi- Fi network incorrectly shapes such " risk" as something that happens upon an end- user regardless of their use of the unsecured Wi- Fi network, when in reality, risk can develop and potentially increases the more limited an end- user' s understanding of how their digital presence on the internet affects their vulnerability and security. End- users should be encouraged to utilize personal checks and balances to verify the Wi- Fi networks they choose to connect to are verifiable and reputable, that their presence on the internet is not made easily 595
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT PAGE 3
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
GRAND JURY REPORT RESPONSE
available to be tracked by others, and that they are visiting legitimate websites, in order to further maintain security of their personal data and information.
Publicly available Wi- Fi is a critical asset to cities around the country. Publicly available Wi- Fi provides the public the opportunity to connect to critical and important information equitably and provides a consistent source of access to such information, promoting economic inclusion within the community. The City of Lathrop currently hosts an unsecured public Wi- Fi network entitled City of Lathrop Guest Cloud 1" and end- users who connect to this network to access the internet must agree to the terms and conditions of its use, and which the public is only able to remain connected to for time increments of thirty ( 30) minute, between 7am and 7pm, seven ( 7) days per week.
Grand 7ury Finding F3. 3: The City of Lathrop does not have an approved Business Continuity Plan, rendering the City relatively unprepared to restore essential services in a disruptive event."
Grand 7ury Recommendation R3. 3: By January 1, 2023, the Lathrop City Council, in conjunction with the City' s IT department, develop, adopt and implement a Business Continuity Plan."
Proposed Council Response: The City of Lathrop has an unwritten Business Continuity Plan but not a written one. The City of Lathrop City Council agrees with Grand ] ury Finding F3. 3 and Recommendation R3. 3 and documentation is anticipated to be complete by ) anuary of 2023.
Grand 7ury Finding F3. 4: The City of Lathrop does not have a formal internal policy or procedure to address ransomware attacks. This absence of policy could cause confusion, delay and greater loss of security in the event of such an attack." Grand 7ury Recommendation R3. 4: By November 1, 2022, the Lathrop City Council, in conjunction with the City' s IT department, develop, adopt and implement a formal internal policy and procedure for a ransomware attack." Proposed Council Response: The City of Lathrop has an unwritten, internal procedure to address ransomware attacks and, in addition to such, has hired a consultant whom will assist the City in development and implementation of a formal written policy for procedures to address ransomware attacks. The City of Lathrop City Council agrees with Grand ] ury Finding F3. 4 and Recommendation R3. 4 and anticipates documentation will be complete by January of 2023.
Grand Jury Finding F3. 5: " The City of Lathrop does not have an insurance policy covering financial losses from a cyberattack, possibly exposing City financial resources."
596
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT PAGE 4
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
GRAND JURY REPORT RESPONSE
Grand 7ury Recommendation R3. 5: " By January 1, 2023, the Lathrop City Council, in conjunction with the City' s IT department, obtain an insurance policy to mitigate fiscal impact resulting from cyberattack or other critical information system loss."
Proposed Council Response: The City of Lathrop City Council partially agrees with Grand Jury Finding 3. 5 and Recommendation 3. 5 and would like to further clarify that staff confirmed that the City of Lathrop does in fact have Cybersecurity insurance coverage, and is currently in discussions with Risk Management to enhance said coverage.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends City Council accept the Grand Jury Report and direct the City Attorney to submit responses to the Presiding Judge of the San Joaquin County Superior Court to the findings and the recommendations outlined in the Grand Jury Report.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None, except for staff time to prepare this report.
ATTACH M ENTS:
A. Grand Jury Final Report, Case No. 0321
B. Draft Letter to San Joaquin County Superior Court Presiding Judge in response to Grand Jury Final Report Case # 0321
597
CITY MANAGER' S REPORT PAGE 6
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
GRAND JURY REPORT RESPONSE
APPROVALS:
Z
andes Date
Chief Information Officer
o " 3/ — ZO -zZ
Salvador Navarrete Date
City Attorney
o •ZZ
Ste en J. Salvatore Date
City Manager
598
Attachment A
2021- 2022 San loaquin Coun#y Grand 1ury
dRw
San loaquin County and Its Seven Cities:
Cybersecurity: Local Defense Against a Global Threat
Case# 0321
Summary
We hear reports on a daiiy basis of cyberattacks occurring around the world. These attacks are becaming increasingly sophisticated, disruptive and expensive. Attacks on overnment agencies can disrupt essential services, crippling communities. Agencies smal! and large are equaily vulnerable. There is an ever- growing demand for stolen data in an underground market.
Comprornise of information has proven to be a serious threat on the cyber battleground, both domestically and internationally. Bad actars hack intelligence, rnedia and essential service systems.
Other disasters such as floods, fires, storms ar prolonged power outages can interrupt essential services if providers' informatian systems are not adequately secure. According to one expert witness interviewed by the 2021- 2422 Grand Jury," World War Ifl will be fought in cyberspace, not on the battlefield."
Grand Jury members are net technical experts but sought to understand the cybersecurity landscape and local governments' management of their cybersecurity risks and vu nerabilities. In this investigation of information security of San Jaaquin County and its seven cities, the 2d21- 2022 Grand Jury made a " point in time" assessment of each entity' s fnformation Systems Department ISD}, focusing primart y on cybersecurity. The Grand Jury considered nine elements of any ISQ and, through research of relevant literature and input from industry experts, established an expected standard for each of those elements. Tfie Grand Jury then evaluated each of the agencies with respect to those expectations.
The Grand Jury concluded that San Joaquin County( SJC) has mature and robust security policies and systems. The County' s security architecture provided a model in evaluating each city' s systems.
The Grand 1ury determined that Escalon, Lodi and Stockton met a ! ay person' s expectations for tybersecurity but were latking either a formal Business Continuity Plan( BCP or Disaster 599
Preparedness Plan{ DPP. Lathrop, Manteca and' fracy were found to have adequate security systems in place but Eatk documented plans far both Business Cantinuity and Disaster Preparedness. Ripan was found to-need impravement in meeting severaf of the Grand 1ury' s expectations, with lack of personnei being their greatest chalienge.
The Grand Jury recommends that the County and affetted cities:
devetop, adopt and implement a Business Continuity Plan; develop, adopt and implement an IT Disaster Preparedness Plan; remedy speci c cybersecuriry risks found in this investigation; and the City of Ripon undergo a data system security review by an expert third party to assess the City' s lT systems and protocols.
1' he Grand Jury recognizes that cybersecur'rty is a dynamic process, a cantinually moving target which needs constant monitoring and updating.
Gtossary
Access: The ability and means to communicate with or otherwise interact with a system; to use system resources ta manage infarmation; to gain knawledge of the information the system contains; to cantral system campanents and functions.
Actor, bad actar, t6reat actor or attacker: An individual, group, organizatian or government that attempts ar executes an attack.
Attack: An intentiona) attempt to gain unauthorized access to sysEem services, resources ar information; an attempt to compromise system integrity.
Authentication: The pracess ofverifying the identity or other attributes af an entity( user, process or device}.
Authorization: A process of determining, 6y evaluating applicable access contral infarmation, whether a subject is allowed to have the specified types of access to a particular resource.
BCP: Business Continuity Plan. A document that sets forth procednres for the continued perfarmance of core capabilitics, critica! operatians and user services during any disruption or patential disruptian.
CCISDA: California County Information Services Directors Association. This is the official organization ofthe county IT directors and chief information afficers throughout the state of California. CCISDA represents a1158 California counties in the area of information technology in county government.
CIO: Chief lnformation Officer.
Computer Aided Dispatch Systems: Used by dispatchers, call- takcrs, and 91 t operators to prioritize and record incident catls, identify the status and Iocations of responders in the field and effectively dispatch respanders.
Co fidentiality: A property of informatian that is not disclased to users, processes or devices unless they have been authorized to access the informatian. i
Cyber event ar incident: An occurrence that actually or potentially results in adverse cansequences to an information system or the information that ihe system processes, stores or traasmits and that may reyuire a response action to mitigate the consequences. An occurrence that constitutes a violation or imminent threat of vialation t fsecurity goiicies, security pracedures or aeceptable use policies.
2 600
Cybersecurity: ' The activity, process, ability, capability or state whereby information and comrttunications systems and tf e information cantained therein are protected from and/ or defended against damage, unauthoriud use, modification or exploitation.
DPP: Disaster Preparedness Plar. A document that sets forth policies and procedures for restoration of information systems after a criticaE incident or event from ar y source. The plan addresses interim restoration of information operations in the short and medium term and ful! restoration of all capabilities in the longer term.
Data integrity: The property that data is complete, intact and trusted and has not been modifed or destroyed in an unauthorized or accidentai manner.
Data security policy: A rule or set af rules that govems the acceptable use of an organization' s information and services to a level of acceptable risk and the means for protecting the organization' s information assets.
Encryption: The process of converting data into a form that cannot be easily understood by unauthorized people or agents.
Firewall: A capability to limit nehvork traffic between networks and/ or information systems. A hardware! software device, or a software program, that limits network traffic according to a set of n.sles af what access is and is not allawed ar authorized.
Hacker: An unauthorized aser who attempts to or gains access to an information system.
ISD: Information Systems Department.
IT: Information Technology.
KnowB4: A proprietary security awareness training platform. KnowB is used by agencies for simulated phishing activities and other email compromise tests, as well as for other IT security training needs.
Malware: Software that compromises the operation of a system by performing an unauthorized function or process.
Mobile device management tool: A security software tool designed to help organizations secure, manage and monitor mobile devices such as smartphones and tablets.
Multi-factor authentication: An electronic authentication mechanism in which a user is granted access to an application anly after presenting twa or more pieees of evidence{ factors or keys only the autl entic user knaws or possesses}.
Multi-layer security access: Multi-layer security refers to a system that uses numerous components to shield the IT infrastructure. It is a defense mechanism that mitigates, delays or prevents threats.
Network or cyber iafrastrueture: The information and communication systems and services composed of all hardware and software that process, store and communicate information; any combination of aU these elements.
Next- generation systems: Security systems consisting of hoth firewall and intrusion prevention systems built in, rather than as add- ons, along with the features of basic firewalls.
Phishing: A digital form of social engineering to deceive individuals into providing sensitive information.
Phishing test: A security training exercise designed to test users' vulnerability and reinforce vigilance.
Presidential Executive Orcier 14028: " Improving thc Nation' s Cybersecurity"( issued May 12, z021} requires agencies to enhance their cybersecurity system integriry. 3 601
Raasomware: A type of malicious saftware designed to black access to a computer system until a sum ofmoney is paid.
Ransomware att ck response plan: A set of predetermined and documented procedures to detect and respond to a cyber incident involving demand for ransom for recovery and restoration of data or systems.
Records Managernent System: The management of records for an organizatian throughout the records' life cycle.
Redundancy: Additional or alternative systems, sub- systems, assets or processes that maintain a degree of overall functionality in case of Ioss or failure of another system, su- system, asseE or process. Typicatiy applied to pr wer supplies and data backup systems.
Vuinerability: A characteristic or specific weakness that renders an organization or asset( such as information or an information system) open to expIoitation by a given threat or susceptible ta a given hazard.
Wi-Fi network: A family of wireless netwark protocols used for local area networking of devices and internet access, allawing nearby digital devices to exchange data by radio waves.
Background
The 2008- 2009 San Jaaquin County Grand Jury reported on infarmation technology security, finding that severa! Cvunty departments and two of the seven cities in the county met expectations for Information Technology(! 1'} security, while some County departments and ve cities did not.
Recommendations were made and generally accepted in agency responses. In terms of technolagy, 2008- 2Q09 was at ieast a generation a a. Gavernment agencies use and store vast amounts of sensitive data on their residents and their employees, including personal identificatian data, financial data, health data and legal data. Additiona{ ly, these agencies provide services essential to our day-to-day fives, including public safety( police and fire), public works, health 5ervites, water services and comrnunity development. The Grand lury recognizes that we are lay people, hardfy experts, in tFte field of IT. It was the intent of the 2021- 2022 Grand Jury to examine how tF e county and city governments with n San loaquin County are exercising due diligente to protect information, defend against future cyberattacks, maintain current disaster plans and provide ongoing training ta employees in these matters.
Reasan for Investigation
As stated in Presidential Executive Order 14028,"... the preventian, detection, assessment and remediation flf cyber incidents is a top priority and essential to national ecanornic security." 5an oaquin County has experiencecf ransomware and cybersecurity attacks firsthand. Schoo! disEricts, tnunicipalities and tounty agencies have been victimized in recent years. Given the rise in complexity of IT, the current sophistication of cybercrime, and the essential nature of government services provided, the 2021- 2022 Grand lury undertook an investigatio into the current state of secu ity and disaster preparedness of the IT systems of 5an loaquin County and the seven inca porated cities within the county.
4 602
Method of Investigation
The 2021- 2022 Grand Jury surveyed six San Joaquin County 1T department heads and the City Manager or City Administrator of each of the seven cities in the county; each responded to the survey. Subsequently, an agency IT department head or staff inember, an IT consultant or a city administrator was interviewed to clarify responses and to provide additional material when applicable. The Grand Jury also interviewed independent cybersecurity experts. The expert witnesses have collectively rrtore than 50 years' experience at diverse ievels of government ranging from county to state to national information systems and cybersecurity. IT executives from one school district were also interviewed. For this investigation, the Grand! ury interviewed 16 individuals and attended cybersecurity presentations.
The Grand Jury alsa reviewed numerous websites and newspaper and magazine articles relevant to this investigation. Additionally, the Grand Jury reviewed dacuments provided, including network diagrams, ransomware insurance policies and other items.
Materials Reviewed
2021- 2022 San Joaquin County Grand Jury surveys
B'sden, Joseph. Executive Order orr Improvrng the Natian' s Cybersecuriry. 12 May 2021.
Executive Ordec# 14028
California Joint Cyber Incident Response Guide. Califomia Office of Emergency Services Cyber Security Integration Center, 2 Aug. 2021
CyberAtockPreparedrress i Contra Costa County. Contra Costa County Civil Grand Jury, 2021. Report 2104
Digital Services and Innovation Strateg. San Joaquin County, 19 Nov. 2020 How to Develop a Ransomware Remediation Plan. Rubrik, 2021 Information Technolo Security. 20] 8- 2019 Santa Barbara County Grand Jury, 2019 Information Technology Security: Cities and San Joaquin Counry. 2008/2009 San Joaquin County Grand Jury, 2009. Report No. 03- 08
R nsomware Defensefor Dummies--2nd Edition. 2nd ed., Cisco Uinbrella, 2021 Websites Visited
Cybersecurity& Infrastructure Security Agency." CYBERSECURITY CISA." Cisa.gov, Cybersecurity and Infras#ructure Security Agency, 2019, www.cisa.gov/cybersecurity. Accessed 6 May 2022.
Federal Trade Commission, and Alvaro Puig." Cybersecurity Advice to Protect Your Connected Devices and Accounts." Sjgov. org, 24 Mar. 2022, www. sjgov. org/ department/ da/ consameralerts/ consumer- alerts/ 2022/ 03/ 24/ cybersecurity- advice- taproteet- your- connected- devices- andaccounts. Accessed 6 May 2022.
Kuykendall, By Kristal." Cybersecurity Experts Call for More Transparency and Immediate Resources for Schools -" The Journal, 17 Mar. 2022,
thejournal.com/Articies/2022/03/ 17/Cybersecurity-Experts-Call-For-More-Transparency-andImmediate- Resources- for- Schools.aspx?Page= 1. Accessed 6 May 2022. 5 603
Marcum Accounts Advisars. " What ts a SOC 2?" ' he SSAE 18 Reporting Standard- SQC 1 - SC1e 2- SOC 3 ( Formerly SSAE 16), 8 Jan. 2022, www. ssae 16. com faqi'what- is• a- soc- 2/.
Accessed 34 Apr. 2 22.
National Institute for Cybersecurity Careers ar d Studies. " Gybersecurity Glossary National Initiative for Cybersecurity Careers and Studies." Niccs. cisa.gov, niccs. cisa. govtaboutniccs/ cybersecurity- glossary. Accessed 6 May 2022.
Unisys. " Cyber Attacks-- What You Need to Know" Unisys, 2022, www. unisys. cam. Accessed 6 May 2022.
Discussions, F ndings anc! Recommendations
General Discussion
The Grand Jury recognizes cybersecurity is an extremely cornplicated topic. Specialized know(edge, experience and expertise are required for a t#eep understanding o#wttat is necessary far adequate policies, systems nd arthitecture. Lacking such specialized knowledge,#he Grand Jury researthed numerous sources, including recognlzed experts in this field to determine the following efements of any ISD and to define the foUowing expectations for adequate cybersecurity in taday' s environment.
Expectations
Organization: Each organization should have a detailed Organization Chart demonstrating the structure of its independent IT department. Cities lacking an independent IT department should have a chart showing where IT resides in their overali swcture.
Nehvork Diagram: Each organization should have a detailed netwark diagram indicating the relatianships between a1I IT architectural elements. Best- practice guidelines suggest that this diagram be confidential.
Data Confidentiatity: Each organizatian shauld have an organization- wide poticy determining data confidentiality and access corttrol. Policy for data access should be clearly defined and deskspecific or station- specific.
Data Security: Each organizatian shouid have next- generation systems and controls to ensure both physical and cyber security for a! I IT assets. Next- generation firewalls and endpoint management systems provide protection against ever-evolving means of cyberattack. Data shou ld be protected with daily or continuous backup and archival systems. Backups shvuld be pratected against corruption, external encryption andJor destructian. Agencies should require multi- factor authentication for access to network systems.
Business Conti»uity Plan ( BCP): Each organization should have a detailed, cunent, comprehensive pian for restoring services in the event of disruption from any source.
Disaster Preparec3ness Plan ( DPPj: Each organization should have a formal, detai( ed plan to prepare for various possible IT disruptions. This plan should be tested frequently and updated regularly.
Ransomware Poliey: Each organization shauld have an intemal ( con dential) doeumented policy for agency response to a ransomware attack.
6 604
Cyber Event Insurance: Each organization shou[ d have insurance coverage to help offset econamic losses from cyber events.
Ongoing Employee Training: Each organization should provide rigarous, frequent training and ongoing testing of al! employees as an integral part of its cybersecurity profile.
Survey Results:
The tabie belaw indicates whether an agency met( M), did not meet{ NN or was in the process of ineeting( IP) the nine defined expectations.
Or; N lwork Dau Daq 8LP DPP Rsnsomwin Cyb r TraMln
Clrrt Dis` ram GonfldendaMty Security poltey Inwranc
S1C M M M M M M NM M M
Escalon M M M M NM M M M M
lathrop M M M M NM M NM NM M
Lodi M M M M IP M M M M
Manteca M M M M M M 1P IP M
Ripon M M M M NM NM NM M M
Stockton M M M M M M NM M M
Trary M M ; M M IP IP NM M M
1. San Joaquin County--Discussion
In November 2020, San loaquin County released a three- year( 202Q- 2023) strategic plan for ensuring continuing security, efficacy, cost-effectiveness and best-servite autcomes to ali end- users of County services and systems. The plan dacurnent" San loaquin County Digi#al Services and Innovatian Strategy" established goals for County digital service systems. These gaals— Modernizing and Leveraging OurTechnotogy Enviranment— address objectives for a security postu re:
l. Acquire and implement cybersecurity technology to enable SJC ta develop indushy-leading capabilities to help mitigate and address cybersecurity risk.
2. Develop and mature security govemance and processes to meet or exceed industry standards, enhance security enforcement partnerships, and strengthen County practices.
3. Develop a robust security training program for the County workfarce, including enhanced training and development for the security workforce.
Excerpt from" San Joaquin Counry Digital Services and Innovation Strategy," November l9, 2420( page 6} San Joaquin County has met these objectives and continues to update and enhance these processes as the cybersecurity landscape continues to evolve.
7 605
San Joaguin County ISD oversees all County departments, making it one of the largest counry ISDs in Catifornia. San Joaquin Caunty ISD is an active participant in the CaGfornia County Information Systems Department Association( CCISDA). This association provides opportunities for counties to share information and experiences and offers guidance, such as standarc3s for best- practice policies.
Several large and specialized departments within the County have their wn IT departments and department cl iefs who report to thc County' s Chief Information Officer. Additionally, SJC has a dedicated Infocmatian Security Officer. All these IT executives form a eybersecurity gavernance cammittee which meets monthly, with subgroups meeting mare freyuently as needed.
County ISD and Human Resource Departments conduct Frequent and on- going employee training and testing using proprietary software. In addition to these County departments, several Indepencient Special Districts in SJC use County IT services through various memaranda afunderstanding.
The only element of the defined expectations nat met by SJC is having an internal documented policy for response to a ransamware attack.
San Joaquin County is a modef agency in the realm of information technology and maintenance of cybersecurity.
Fjndings
F1. 1 5an Jaaquin County does not have a farmal internal policy concerning payments or procedures in ransomware attacks. This absence of policy could cause confusion, delay and greater loss of security in the event of such an attack.
Fi. 2 San loaquin County has an exemplary profile regarding cybersecurity and shoufd serve as a madei for other government agencies within San loaquin County.
Recommenda# ions
Rl.i By Novernber 1, 2022, the San loaquin tounty Board of Supervisors, in canjunction with San loaqui County ISD, develop, adopt and implement a formal internal policy and procedure for response to a ransomware attack.
2. 0 City of Escalon—Discussion
The City of Escalon daes nat have an independent IT department but has a cantract agreement with Mid Valiey IT ta provide all IT services. In the City organization, IT functions report to the Finance and HR Directors. Each employee is given a level of access according to assigned responsibilities within their department. All employees receive information security training specific to their responsibilities as well as general security awareness Lraining. The IT cansultant emplays an aggressive multi-layered approach to mitiga#e security threats thraugh software and hardware pratection measures. Cr'rtica! or con dentia! data is stored in multiple cloud- based locatians and systems employing numeraus safeguards, including use af multi- factor authentication for access.
IT functions are protected with a standby generator and redundant backups in case of a system failure. The gene ator is# ested periodically for functionality. 8 606
The City of Escalon met all but one of the expectations for adequate tybersecurity. Escalon is by far the smallest city in San loaquin County, but by using a contracted IT service provider, Escalon is meeting its cybersecurity needs. The City of Escalon does not have a documented Business Continuity Plan.
indings
F2. 1 7he City of Escalon does not have a documented 8usiness Continuity Plan, leaving the City relatively unprepared to restore essential services in a disruptive event.
Recommendations
R2. i By January 1, 2Q23, the Escalon City Council, in conjunction with Mid Valley IT, develop, adopt and implement a Business Continuity Plan.
3.0 City of Lathrop—Discussion
The City af Lathrop met six of the expectations for the nine elements considered in this investigation. Lathrop' s IT organization includes a Director of Information Technology at#he cabinet leadership level, a policy strongly recommended by an tT expert fo maximum IT security. Including the Director of IT in frequent, regular meetings with other department heads all ws effective communlcation of IT security needs to all City departments.
Expectations for data confidentiality and data security were met. However, use of multi-factor authentication for system access was not universal at the time of this investigation, leaving Lathrop at higher risk of attack. lathrop provides an unsecured public Wi- Fi network, separate from the City' s secure business network and accessible to any user. Hackers or other bad actors could take advantage of the unsecured network, possibly resulting in compromise of log-in credentials from that network and possibly exposing the City to costly liability suits. Lathrop was in the process of developi g and approving a BCP and bPP plan at the time of this investigation. Similarly, the City was updating an internal policy for response to a ransomware attack. At the time of this investigation, Lathrop lacked insu ance against losses incurred in a cybersecurity incidenE.
Findings
F3. 1 The City f E. athrop does not employ multi-factor authentication universally, leaving City systems more vulnerabfe ta the activities of bad actors.
F3. 2 The City of I. athrop provides an unsecured public Wi- Fi network. Misuse of this unsecured network could expose the City to liability risks.
F3. 3 The City of Lathrop does not have an approved Business Continuity P1an, rendering the City relatively unprepared to restore essential services in a disruptive event. 9 607
F3.a The City of lathrop daes not have a farmal internal po#icy or procedure to address ransomware attacks. This absence of palicy could cause confusion, delay and greater loss af security in the event of such an attack.
F3. 5 The City of Lathrop daes not have an insurance policy covering financial losses from a cyberattack, possibly exposing City nancial resaurces.
Recomnnendatians
R3. 1 By November 1, 2022, the lathrop City Council, in conjunction with the City's IT department, develop, adopt and implement a procedure far universal multi- factor authentication for access to City data.
R3. 2 By November 1, 2022, the lathrop City Council in conjunction with the City' s IT department, provide a secure public Wi-Fi network.
R3. 3 By January 1, Z023, the Lathrop City Council, in conjunction with the City' s IT department, develop, adopt and impfement a Business Continuity Plan.
R3. 4 By November 1, 2022, the Lathrop City Council, in conjunction with the City' s IT department, develop, adopt and implement a formal internal policy and procedure for a ransomware attack.
R3. 5 By January 1, 2023, the Lathrop City Council, in conjunction with the City' s IT department, obtain an insurance policy to mitigate fiscal impact resu{ting from cyberattack ar other critical information system loss.
4. City of Lodi- Discussion
The City of ladi has a large IT division, respansible for all IT functions of the City. The division is responsible for the integrity of the City' s cyber infrastructure, maintenance and suppart of all hardware and saftware, and assuring secure access to a( I network resources. Lodi fell victim to a ransom attack in April 2019. That unfortunate event caused the City ta change its management of cybersecurity, significantly elevating the importance of vigilance by all City staff. Lodi has irnplernented a rabust cyber awareness training program for all City employees, incorpora#ing education in tactics used by bad actors bath inside and outside the City' s network. Monthly training s foNowed by testing in tapics covered. Citywide campa' rgns occur quarterly to test employee response to phishing and other email- based attacks. The IT division head reports directly to the Deputy City Manager and meets regularly with a11 City departmen# heads. The City of Lodi met ali expettations for cybersecurity except for having a completed, up-to- date Business Continuity Plan.
The City has contracted a business consulting firm to create a BCP, projected to be completed and implemented by the end af June 2022.
IA
608
Findings
F4. 1 The City of Lodi does not have an approved Business Continuity Plan, rendering the City relatively unprepared to restore essential services in a disruptive event.
F4. 2 The City of Lodi has implemented an excellent cyber awareness training program for all employees minimizing risk to damage fram cyberattack.
Recommendations
R4. 1 By January 1, 2023, the Lodi City Council, in conjunctio with the City' s IT division, develop, adopt and implement a Business Continuity Plan.
5.0 City of Man#eca—Discussion
The City of Manteca met seven of the nine expectations considered in this investigation. Manteca' s Informatian Technology department is independent in the City' s organization. The department director repo ts directly to the City Manager and meets weelcly with ather City department heads.
User level of access is determined by position, bacicground and other departmental factars. fmployees are trained on a regular basis. The training is mandatory for all employees. Hard d ives are encrypted, and a Mobile Device Management tool is used for tablets, laptops and phones.
Manteca' s ISD is currently updating its Information Technology Security Policy. This camprehensive policy has not been updated since 2 10. Manteca' s Department of Information Technology and Innovation is coilaborating with City administration and the City Attorney to update all policies relating to information technology security. Similarly, the City is in the process of bringing both hardware and software systems up to next-generation standards with new firewall, malware, user access, backup systems and applications in place. Employee training is executed through Know64, an industry-standard cybersecurity training program which includes phishing and other email comprom3se testing.
Regarding firewalls and swi#ches, roughly 6096 still operate off single rather than dual or redundant power supplies. Over the next five years, the tity is phasing eut older devfces as they reach end- oflife.
Findings
F5. 1 The City of Manteca has an Information Technolagy Security Policy which has not been updated since 2010, leaving the City relatively unprepared for a cyber event.
F5. 2 The City of Manteca lacks a policy and procedure for ransomware attacks. This absence of polity could cause confusion, delay, and greater loss of security in the even# of such an attack.
F5. 3 The City of Manteca has a significant number of security devites with single power supplies.
This lack of redundant power presents vulnerabiiity in major or pro onged power outages.
I1
609
Recommendations
R5. 1 By January 1, 2023, the Manteca City Council, in canjunction with the City' s ISD, develop, apprave and implement an updated I nformation Technology SecuritY PQ YR5. 2 By anuary 1, 2023, the Manteta City Council, in conjunction with the City' s ISO, develop, approve and impiement a confidential policy and procedure for response ta a ransomware attack.
RS. 3 By March 1, Z423, the Manteca City Council, in conjunction with the Gty' s ISR, devefop, approve and adopt an updated timeline to rep{ace singie- powe ed units with dual- powered or redundant-powered units in their network architecture.
6.4 City of Ripon—Discussion
7he City of Ripon has experienced turnaver and vacancies in the IT Department in the past year.
The Director of IT resigned in early 2021. Subsequently, anather tT Director was hired but resigned within three months.' The City has cantracted with a former IT employee as a temporary IT Director and is cu rently updating the job description for a permanent director of the IT funct ons.
The City' s arganization chart does not include an ! 1' department or department head. The anly iT positian shown is within the Police Department.
Data confidentiality is maintained through a three-tiered access structure. Management supervisors for each City department determfne who has access to appropriate information.
Sensitive data is held within a Computer Aided Dispatch Program or a Records Management System within the iT division ofthe Ripon Police Department. The sensitivity af data with ail vther City departments is determined by supervisors.
Findings
F5. 1 It is unclear in the City of Ripon' s Organization Chart where responsibiiities for IT and IT security lie, creating confusian over who is responsibfe to act in a disruptive event.
F6. 2 7fie City of Ripon has a rudimentary netwark diagram outlining the City' s router and firewall relationship with networks used, but the diagrarn lacks detaii, leaving unce tainty about data security.
F6. 3 Although the City of Ripon met expectations in the areas of data confidentiality and security, lack of iT staff and leadership leaves these areas vuinerable to cyberattack.
F6. 4 The City of Riport tacks a Business Cantinuity PEan, rendering the City relatively unprepared to restore essential servltes in a disruptive event.
F6. 5 The City of Ripon does nat have a Oisaster Preparedness Plan, leaving the City at risk for signifrcant delay and cost to restore IT systerns in the event of a disaster.
F6, 6 The City of Ripon tEaes not have a formal policy or procedure to address ansamware attacks. This absence of policy could cause canfusion, delay and greater loss of security in the event of an attack.
12 610
Recommendations
R6. 1 ByJanuary 1, 2023, the Ripon City Council develop and ma[ce public an updated City Organization chart showing details of the City' s { T functions, including all IT positions.
R6. 2 SyJanuary 1, 2023, the Ripon City Council develop and adopt a detailed Network Diagram to decrease security vulnerabilities.
R6. 3 By January I, 2023, the Ripon City Council obtain a third-party security review of the City' s IT department assets, positions, and policies and an evaluation of data confidentiality, security systems and protocols.
R6. 4 By lanuary 1, 2d23, the R€pon City Council develop, adopt and implement a formaf Business Continuity Plan.
Rfi. S By January 1, 2023, the Ripon City Counclf develop, adopt and implement a formal Disaster Preparedness Plan for IT functions.
R6. 6 By January 1, z423, the Ripon City Council develop, adopt and implement a formal internal policy and procedure for response ta a ransomware attack.
7. 0 City of Stockton—Discussion
The City of Stockton has a large IT department that oversees IT functions for all the City' s other departments. Data confidentiality and user access are determined departmentally, following uniform standards. tnformation is protected by many safeguards aiming not only to minimize risk of penetratian but also to detect any breach that might occu. Stockton has both a BCP and a DPP.
Stockton is ane of very few cities having license to use a cybersecurity tool integrating the City with the State of California' s OfFice of Emergency Services. Stockton' s IT Director meets weekly with other department heads, updating them on a!I matters related to cybersecurity.
Stockton met each of the cybersecurity expectations except for the presence of a documen#ed internal policy and pr cedure for respanse to a ransomware attack. However, the City does have a Cybersecurity Response Book detailing response procecEures for other cyber events. Employee security awareness training is required every six manths.
Findings
F7. 1 The City of Stockton does not have a formal internal policy concerning payments or procedures in ransomware attacks. This absence of policy could cause confusion, delay and greater loss of security in the event of an attack.
F7. 2 7he Ciry of Stackton has a large iT Department which places cybersecurity and disaster preparedness at a high priority, minimizing risk to the City' s information and service systems. 13 611
Recammendations
R7. 1 By November 1, 2Q22, the Stockton City Council, in conjunction with the City` s IT department, develop, adopt and implement a formal internal policy and procedure far response to a ransomwa e attack.
8.0 City of Tracy—Discussion
The City of Tracy met all expectations for cybersecurity or was in the process of ineeting them when surveyed. The City has an lnformation Technology Division, which is part af the Finance Department. This division supports all departments and functions of the City except water treatment. Data canfidentiality and security are guaranteed with industry-leading, next-generation firewails and network access cantrols. Data storage, backup and cybersecurity are manitared continuaNy. The ( T Manager meets every two weeks with all other City department heads to address IT issues, intluding cybersecurity.
Tracy does not require encryption of thumb drives used on City devices, a requirement that is considered a" best practice" by an expert witness.
7racy does not have either a formal Business Continuity Pian ar Disaster Preparedness Plan in place but is in the process af developing both. The BCP was scheduled to be complete in Aprii 2022.
Completion date for the DPP was not specified by the City.
F ndings
F8. 1 Lacking a requirerv ent for encryption af thumb drives used on City devices exposes the City of Tracy to potential data theft and contamination.
F8. 2 The City ofTracy lacks a compieted Business Continuity Plan, Tendering Tracy relatively unprepared to restore essential services in a disruptfve event.
F8. 3 The City of Tracy lacks a comp( eted Disaster Preparedness Pfan, leaving Tracy at risk for delay and cost to restore 1T systems in the event of a disaster.
Recommendations
R8. 1 By November 2, 20Z2, the Tracy City Council, in canjunctian with the IT division, develop, adopt and implement a policy requiring encryptio af thumb drives used on City devices.
R$. 2 By lanuary 1, 2023, the 7racy City Council, in conjunction with t e IT division, develop, adopt and implement a formal Business Continuity Plan.
R8. 3 By January 1, 2023, the Traty City Council provide the Grand 1ury with an updated formal Disaster Preparedness Plan.
I
612
Conclusion
San Joaquin County is well protected regarding cyhersecurity. The seven cities in the county vary with respect to Grand Jury expectations, most being well secured but( acking de ned p{ans for Business Continuity and IT Disaster Preparedness. Cybersecurity is an evolving concern and requires ongoing efforts by government entities to remain current and vigilant against risks ta their lnformatian Systems.
n this investigation the Grand Jury learned fram cybersecurity experts that# hree key elements lead ta maximum agency cybersecurity:
a dedicated informatian security position within each organization, a" seat at the tabie" with other agency department heads in regular meetings, and a rigorous employee educatian and training program in cybersecurity matters.
Disclaimers
Grand Jury reparts are based on dacumentary evidence and the testimony of swarn ar admonished witnesses, not on conjecture or opinion. However, the G and lury is precluded by law from disclasing suct evidence except upon the specific approva! of the Presiding Judge of the Superior Caurt, or another judge appointed by the Presiding ludge{ Penal Code Section 911. 924. 1( a} and 929}. Similarly, the Grand 1ury is precluded by law from disclasing the identity of witnesses except upon an orcfer of the court for narrowly defined purposes( Penal Code Sections 924. 2 and 429).
Respor se Requirements
California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933. 05 require that spetific responses ta all findings and recommendatians contained in this report be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the San loaquin County Superior Court within 90 days of receipt af the repart.
The San loaquin County Board of Supervisor5 and the City Councils of each city addressed shall respond to al1 findings anti recornmendations specific to their city.
Mail or hand deliver a hard capy of the respanse ta:
Honorable Michael D. Coughlan, Presiding ludge
San Joaquin County Superior Court
180 E Weber Ave, Suite 1306J
Stocktort, California 95202
Alsa, please email a copy of the response to Ms. Trisa Martinez, Staff Secretary tt the Grand 1ury, at Arandiury@sicourts. orR
t5
613
Attachment B
ty of L DRAFT
O ce ofthe CityAttorl2ey 390 Towne Centre Drive- Lathrop, CA 95330 Phone 209- 941- 7235 Fax 209- 941- 7233
www. ci.lathrop. ca. us
September 13, 2022
Honorable Michael D. Coughlan, Presiding Judge
San Joaquin County Superior Court
180 East Weber Avenue, Suite 1306J
Stockton, CA 95202
Re: Response to Grand Jury Final Report Case No. 0321 ( 2021/ 2022).
Report received by the City of Lathrop on June 15, 2022 Honorable Michael D. Coughlan,
Pursuant to Penal Code Section 933 and 933. 05, this letter is to inform you that on September 12, 2022 at a regularly scheduled City Council Meeting, the City Council of the City of Lathrop reviewed and approved the above referenced Grand Jury Final Report and directed me to write this letter of response on their behalf.
The 2021/ 2022 Grand Jury Final Report found that:
Grand Jury Finding F3. 1: " The City of Lathrop does not employ multifactor authentication universally, leaving City systems more vulnerable to the activities of bad actors."
Grand Jury Recommendation R3. 1: " By November 1, 2022, the Lathrop City Council, in conjunction with the City' s IT department, develop, adopt and implement a procedure for universal multi-factor authentication for access to City data."
City Council Response: The City of Lathrop City Council agrees with Grand Jury Finding F3. 1 and Recommendation R3. 1 and multi- factor authentication security has been implemented and in effect since June of 2022.
Grand Jury Finding F3. 2: " The City of Lathrop provides an unsecured public Wi- Fi network. Misuse of this unsecured network could expose the City to liability risks."