Program Budget By Income Source (Budget Page 2 of 4)
General Instructions:
For Categories 1 through 7, enter the costs that are directly incurred by the contracted program.
Allocate the cost for each line item in Categories 1 through 7 to the appropriate column that indicates the revenue source that is expected to fund the cost.
Costs placed in Column G, In-Kind Match, consists of services and/or supplies provided free of charge to your organization from an outside source (see instructions, page 2, In-Kind).
Row Row Title Label
1.a -1 .c Salaries & Benefits
2.a Staff Travel
2.b Volunteer Travel
2.c Training
3 Equipment Purchase
Exhibit B Instructions
American Rescue Plan (ARP)
Instructions
Entries carry over from page 1 (Total Salaries, Total
Payroll Taxes, and Total Benefits for each revenue
source and Total In-Kind).
Estimate the total number of miles to be reimbursed to
personnel for the contracted program . Multiply this by your organization's approved reimbursement rate per
mile. Include any other costs for lodging, parking,
meals, etc.
Estimate the total number of miles that will be
reimbursed to volunteers for the contracted program .
Multiply this by your organization's approved
reimbursement rate per mile. Include any other costs
for lodging, parking, meals, etc.
Calculate the cost for any training seminars,
conference fees, and staff development costs
expected to be incurred for the contracted program
during the contract period.
Enter the approximate cost of any equipment, including
any networkable equipment, needed for the contracted
program during the contract period. Any single or
individual item with a cost in excess of $500, including sales tax, delivery, and installation or any computing
devices regardless of cost, will need to be listed on
Budget Pg 4 - Schedule of Program/Site Supplies and
Equipment Purchases. Any equipment purchase
request for the contracted program must be approved
by FMAAA and, if applicable, the State of California. In accordance with federal purchasing rules , FMAAA
recommends that contractors obtain three quotes for
each piece of equipment purchased that is expected to
cost in excess of $500.
Page7of10 Revised Jan. 2022
Program Budget By Income Source (Budget Page 2 of 4) - Continued Row Row Title Label
4 Consultants
5 Meals
6 Program/Site
Supplies
7.a-7.m Other Costs
7.n-7.o Other Costs
8 Indirect Costs
--- Total Costs
Exhibit B Instructions
American Rescue Plan (ARP)
Instructions
Enter the cost of professional and consultant services
to be rendered by persons or organizations that are
members of a particular profession or possess a
special skill, i.e. , legal, audit, etc.
This line item applies only to Title 111 C nutrition
providers. This cost is only for meals purchased in
addition to those provided by the FMAAA that are to be
paid for by your organization
This cost category includes small cost items necessary
to operate the program, and does not include office
supplies. Examples for nutrition providers: Small
kitchen utensils, napkins; condiments for nutrition
providers. Example for medication management
providers: Pill boxes.
Any single or individual item with a cost in excess of
$100 will need to be listed on Budget Pg 4 - Schedule
of Program/Site Supplies and Equipment Purchases.
These line items include any other "direct" costs
attributable to the program.
Check with the FMAAA before making entries. These
line items are typically used for costs not listed in lines
7.a.-7 .m, such as Expendable Equipment. If lines 7.n7 .o are used, enter a description of the costs in the Category column.
Enter any indirect costs, and attach a narrative (see
page 2 of Instructions, Indirect Costs.)
The sum of Total Direct Costs and Total Costs.
Schedule of Funding Sources (Budget Page 3 of 4)
Row Row Title Instructions Label
1 FMAAA Grant The total amount of the FMAAA grant award for the contracted program from page 1 of the
contract. This should also equal the Total
Costs for Column A from page 2 of the
budget form .
2 DO NOT USE DO NOT USE - FOR FUTURE USE ONLY
3 Program Income: Enter Program Income that are expected to Current Year Program Income be received during the current year. 3 Program Income: Deferred Enter any Program Income that the FMAAA Program Income has approved for deferral (see page 2 of instructions, Deferred Program Income).
4.a - 4.d Matching Funds - Cash and See page 2 of instructions, Matching Funds In-Kind (List Source) and In-Kind. List all sources separately, i.e., City/County General Funds, United Way, etc.,
in appropriate column (Cash or In-Kind). If the
funding is from a source of mixed funds (e.g.
combination of both Federal and State funds),
please verify that no Federal funds are being
used. Any amounts shown in column C (InKind) that are not for volunteer services must have a full description of the formula used to
calculate the amount.
5.a - 5.d Non-Matching Funds [Federal List all Non-Matching fund sources separately Funds/Other Program Match] (see page 2 of instructions, Non-Matching - (List Source) Funds).
6 Total Costs Totals for Column B, Cash, and Column C,
In-Kind.
-- Total from Exhibit B, Page 2, Total of Column B, Cash, must agree with the Columns F and G Total of Column Fon page 2 of the budget.
Total of Column C, In-Kind, must agree with
the Total of Column G on Page 2 of the
budget.
Exhibit B Instructions
American Rescue Plan (ARP)
Schedule of Program Supplies and Equipment Purchases (Budget Page 4 of 4) Row Row Title Instructions Label
1 Purchases for Program/Site List any single or individual item that intends Supplies exceeding $100 per to be purchased with a cost in excess of $100 Individual or Single item. including any appropriate sales tax, shipping and installation costs, etc. Total amount
should not exceed the budgeted amount(s)
on Budget Pg 2 - Line 6 Program/Site
Supplies.
2 Purchases for Equipment List any single or individual item that intends Purchase exceeding $500 per to be purchased with a cost in excess of $500 Individual or Single item. including any appropriate sales tax, shipping and installation costs, etc. as well as any
computing devices regardless of cost. Total
amount must equal the budgeted amount(s)
on Budget Pg 2 - Line 3 Equipment
Purchase. Any equipment purchase request
for the contracted program must be approved
by FMAAA and, if applicable, the State of
California.
Exhibit B Instructions
American Rescue Plan (ARP)
Page10of10 Revised Jan. 2022
EXHIBIT C
ANNUAL SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES
PROGRAM: Elderly Nutrition Program Site Management
SERVICE PROVIDER: _C_i_,,._ty_o_f _R_e_ed_le__,,yc..___ _________ ___ _ CONTRACT NUMBER: 22-0171ARP --- - - - ---- ----- ---- - - SITE: _R_ee_d_l_e_,,_y_S_e_n_io_r_C_e_n_t_e_r _____ ____ __ _ Date of FMAAA Executive Director Signature on Page 2
CONTRACT EFFECTIVE: to June 30, 2024 - -------'------- - --- - - - - ---- GOAL: The goal of the Elderly Nutrition Program is to reduce hunger and food insecurity; promote health and well-being; promote socialization; and delay adverse health conditions of older individuals.
DEFINITION: Site Management is defined as 1) oversight and responsibility for the dayto-day operations of an Elderly Nutrition Program nutrition site with respect to meals; 2) oversight of and responsibility for Elderly Nutrition Program staff and volunteers, including provision of required program training ; 3) collection of required Elderly Nutrition Program data from program participants; 4) keeping records and preparing reports concerning meals ordered and served, nutrition volunteer hours, and donations; and 5) ensuring the Elderly Nutrition Program nutrition site meets all federal, state, and local regulations, including applicable licensing laws and ordinances related to food service operations and sanitation.
Meals are subject to allocation and reallocation at any time by the Agency on Aging based upon available funding and nutrition program participation. When allocations are imposed, any meals allocated but not served revert to the Agency on Aging for reallocation.
ARP Elderly Nutrition Program
Site Management
Exhibit C Rev. January 2022
EXHIBIT D
PROGRAM COST EFFICIENCY
ARP Program Cost Efficiency
Not Applicable -
Elderly Nutrition Program
Site Management
Exhibit D Rev. January 2022
EXHIBIT E
Program Narrative
The Agency on Aging sends Exhibit E in Microsoft Word format to service providers via e-mail.
Please e-mail the Microsoft Word version to [email protected], and return two completed sets of Exhibit E with the signed and completed contract documents, Please contact the Agency on Aging's administrative department at (559) 214-0299 to request hard copies of the blank exhibit if needed.
EXHIBIT E
PROGRAM NARRATIVE
1. AGENCY'S HISTORY OF SERVICE TO OLDER ADULTS
City of Reedley 11913
Organization Name
Type of Organization (Check One)
X City Government Non-Profit 501 ( c)(3)
County Government For-Profit
Joint Powers Authority (JPA) Other:
Year
Established
List programs/services your organization provides for older adults, and the number of ears our or anization has rovided the ro ram/service.
Program/Service
Daily/weekly/ monthly gleaners, billiards, crochet/ knitting, card games,puzzle table, bin o ice cream socials bunco movie afternoon s ecial lunches Health and wellness-free exercise class, tai-chi, walk in the park Yearly-Senior Prom, craft class, cooking demonstrations, day trips, resource fair,
2. SERVICE AREA
Where will the contracted program be provided?
Street Address City
# of
Years
4-15 year
4-10 year
Zip Code
100 N. East Ave Reedley 93654
Program Narrative Exhibit E - Page 1 Rev. January 2022
ARP Nutrition Site Management
EXHIBIT E
PROGRAM NARRATIVE
3. LANGUAGE TRANSLATION NEEDS & PROVISIONS
Enter an "X" in the boxes below to indicate who
speaks the language listed to the left.
Program Program Program
Participants Staff Volunteers
English X X X
Spanish X X
Hmong
Arabic
Armenian
Cantonese
Farsi (Persian)
Filipino (Pilipinoff agalog)
Hindi
Japanese X X
Khmer (Cambodian)
Khmu
Korean
Lao
Mandarin (Putonghua)
Mien (Yao)
Mixteco
Portuguese
Punjabi
Russian
Thai
Ukrainian
Urdu
Vietnamese
Other:
Program Narrative Exhibit E - Page 2 Rev. January 2022
ARP Nutrition Site Management
EXHIBIT E
PROGRAM NARRATIVE
What resources does your organization use, or have available to use, when inter retation is needed for a ro ram artici ant?
We have participants that speak Spanish and Japanese, Spanish is the only language that needs translation. Other ethnic groups speak English with no translation needed. There is also staff at the Community Center that speaks Our volunteers and City staff assists with translation. We have not had a situation where we needed outside interpreters.
4. CONFIDENTIALITY PROCEDURES
How does your organization protect the confidentiality of the program participant during verbal discussions? (For example, asking the program participant for their date of birth, phone number, and any other information that identifies the individual and is needed to comolete the client intake form) When a new participant comes in or calls for the first time to make a lunch reservation, the Coordinator makes every effort to complete all or most of the intake form at that time. If participant comes into the center the Coordinator or assigned staff/volunteer will complete the intake in privacy.
Staff and volunteer complete the Privacy and Information Security Awareness Training.
How does your organization protect confidential information obtained from program participants, such as client intake forms, from disclosure? The Phil Hudson room also known as the Senior room, has two private offices which are available for confidential discussions and issues.
Confidential information that we obtain is filed in a locked cabinet that only the Coordinator, assigned staff, volunteers with security clearance training and Director have keys to the files.
Program Narrative Exhibit E - Page 3 Rev. January 2022
ARP Nutrition Site Management
EXHIBIT E
PROGRAM NARRATIVE
Contracted Program: Title Ill C Nutrition Site Management
5. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Provide a brief description of how your organization provides the contracted program.
The Reedley Senior Center along with a group of dedicated volunteer provide the meal set-up, take temperatures (refrigerator and food), serve, take meal reservation, record donations, order the next day's meals, cleanup including washing the dishes.
What was the primary accomplishment achieved by the contracted program in the most recent year services were provided?
Our nutrition program provides our aging seniors a
well balanced meal.
Please describe another accomplishment achieved by the contracted program in the most recent year services were provided.
Seniors that have healthy meals help maintain health and independence and have socialization with other seniors at the center
6. CASE STUDY
Briefly describe how the contracted program successfully met the needs of a program participant in the most recent year services were provided. Do not use real names.
We had a senior that was invited to visit the senior center. We explained our lunch program and activities. Senior suffered a stroke and her left side is weak and is unable to use right hand. She came and joined the lunch program and has been coming since. She enjoys visiting with her friends. She is always one of the last to leave the center. She has said she does not want to miss anything we have going on . She is a Spanish speaking senior and feels right at home. The meal she has at the center is her main meal of the ri~y and says coming to the center is now a big part oLherli~ifP~ ----~ Program Narrative Exhibit E - Page 4 Rev. January 2022
ARP Nutrition Site Management
7. STAFFING
EXHIBIT E
PROGRAM NARRATIVE
Please provide the names and titles of all staff listed in the Personnel section of the contract budget (Exhibit 8).
Name Title
Jodi Botello Senior Citizen Coordinator
*Please provide the name and contact information for the person who has primary, hands-on involvement and oversight of the day-to-day operations of the contracted program.
Jodi Botello Senior Citizen Coordinator
Name Title
(559)637-4207 [email protected]
Telephone Number E-mail Address
*Attach the following documents to the "Documents Required to Execute Contract" checklist:
• The job description for this position ;
• The resume for the person occupying this position.
Program Narrative Exhibit E - Page 5 Rev. January 2022
ARP Nutrition Site Management
EXHIBIT E
PROGRAM NARRATIVE
8. SERVICE PROVIDER TIME FRAME
What days and hours will the Nutrition Site Management program be available? (Please note that these are not necessarily the same hours your organization/facility is open.)
Location Days Open Start Time Close Time
Reedley Community Center, M-T-W-Th-F 9:00 AM 12:00 PM
Senior Room
Month Enter Dates of Holidays Total Days Service
& Other Planned Closures to be Provided
July 2022 July 1, July 4, July 26, July 28 17
August 2022 August 25, August 30 21
September 2022 .. Seot. 5, Seot. 15, Seot. 23, Seot. 27 18 October 2022 Oct. 7, Oct. 20, Oct. 25, Oct. 31 17
November 2022 Nov. 11, Nov. 15, Nov. 24, Nov. 25, Nov. 29 17 December 2022 Dec. 13, Dec. 23, Dec. 26, Dec. 27 18
Januarv 2023 Jan. 2, Jan. 16, Jan. 26, Jan. 31 18
February 2023 Feb. 14, Feb. 20, Feb. 23, Feb. 28 16
March 2023 March 23, March 28 21
April 2023 April 4, April 7, April 20, Apri l 25 16
Mav 2023 May 25, May 29, May 30 20
11 lnP 'JO?~ June 22, June 27, June 16 19
Total Days of Contracted Service to 218 be Provided under this Agreement:
Program Narrative Exhibit E - Page 6 Rev. January 2022
ARP Nutrition Site Management
EXHIBIT E
PROGRAM NARRATIVE
9. PROGRAM EVALUATION/IMPROVEMENT
In reviewing the performance during the most recent year services were provided, identify areas that your organization could focus on for improvement of the contracted proQram.
After being closed since March 2020, staff will invite past clients ( older adults) to return to in-person lunches. This information will go out in the monthly newsletter, local paper, and on the City website. Visit independent living facilities.
How would participants of the contracted program benefit from these improvements? Participants attending the congregate meal program benefit from a well balanced nutritious meal, socialization and become aware of the activities and resources for our older adults which would diminish isolation and depression.
Describe the specific steps your organization will take to make these improvements durinQ the current fundinQ period .
The Senior Citizens Coordinator through monthly newsletter and the City website will encourage seniors to participate in our nutrition program.
Describe how you will know if your improvement efforts are successful, and how you will measure vour achievements.
Client intake forms will indicate the number of existing, returning and new client participants.
Program Narrative Exhibit E - Page 7 Rev . January 2022 ARP Nutrition Site Management
EXHIBIT E
PROGRAM NARRATIVE
10. OUTREACH ACTIVITIES/TARGETING PLAN (22 CCR§ 7310, WIG§ 9103) How does your organization reach older adults in greatest economic need (income level at or below the Federal Poverty Level) to inform them of the contracted program and welcome them to participate?
Social media, City website and monthly newsletter informs seniors on our nutrition program and center activities.
How does your organization reach older adults who are socially isolated (need caused by non-economic factors) to inform them of the contracted program and welcome them to participate?
Local paper and monthly newsletter informs seniors on our nutrition program and center activities. City website and social media.
How does your organization reach older adults who are of lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender orientation to inform them of the contracted program and welcome them to participate?
Our monthly newsletter which informs seniors of the nutrition program and center activities are mailed to area residents, local churches and organizations.
How does your organization reach older adults who are ethnic minorities, and particularly those with greatest economic and/or social need, to inform them of the contracted program and welcome them to participate?
We also promote the nutrition program with Spanish speaking volunteers through our weekly Gleaners program. Social media and monthly newsletter informs seniors on our nutrition program and center activities.
Program Narrative Exhibit E - Page 8 Rev. January 2022
ARP Nutrition Site Management
EXHIBIT E
PROGRAM NARRATIVE
How does your organization reach older adults who are Native Americans to inform them of the contracted program and welcome them to participate? Our monthly newsletter which informs senior of the nutrition program and center activities are mailed to area residents, local churches and organizations.
How does your organization reach older adults with limited English proficiency to inform them of the contracted program and welcome them to participate? We also promote the nutrition program with Spanish speaking participants and volunteers through our weekly Gleaners. The City has staff who translate for Spanish speakers, included in the monthly newsletter a Spanish flyer about the lunch program.
How does your organization reach older adults who live in rural areas to inform them of the contracted program and welcome them to participate? Local paper and monthly newsletter informs senior on our nutrition program and center activities. Social media and City website.
How does your organization reach older adults with severe disabilities (severe, chronic physical and/or mental impairment that is likely to continue indefinitely & results in substantial functional limitation in 3 or more major life activities) to inform them of the contracted program and welcome them to participate?
Outreach to local senior living communities with an invitation to our senior meal program and activities to promote center participation. Caregiver(s) are welcome to attend with their care patient(s). Free public transportation for older individuals and disables is offered within City of Reedley city limits.
How does your organization reach older adults with Alzheimer's disease or related disorders with neurological & organic brain disfunction, and the caregivers of these individuals, to inform them of the contracted program and welcome these older adults to participate?
Outreach to local senior living communities and long term care facilities with an invitation to out senior meal program and activities to promote center participation. Caregiver(s) are welcome to attend with their care patient(s).
Program Narrative Exhibit E - Page 9 Rev. January 2022
ARP Nutrition Site Management
EXHIBIT F
Service Provider Emergency Resource Info
The Agency on Aging sends Exhibit F in Microsoft Word format to service providers via e-mail.
Please e-mail the Word version to [email protected], and return two completed sets of Exhibit F with the signed and completed contract documents, Please contact the Agency on Aging's administrative department at (559) 214-0299 to request hard copies of the blank exhibit if needed.
EXHIBIT F
SERVICE PROVIDER EMERGENCY RESOURCE INFORMATION
Please complete for each location from which contracted services are offered.
Organization City of Reedley
Site Name Reedley Community Center
Street Address 100 N. East Ave
City/ST/Zip Reedley, CA. 93654
Primary Contact Sarah Reid
Job Title Director E-mail [email protected]'v
Office Phone (559)637-4203 Cell Phone (559)360-8657
Secondary Contact Jodi Botello
Job Title Senior Citizen Coordinator E-mail [email protected] Office Phone (559)637-4207 Cell Phone (559)994-5654
Please check all emergency services that could be provided from this site:
Emergency Power/Generator CB Radio
rx Emergency First Aid Ham Radio
X Cooking Facilities X Internet Access
X Distribution Site for Food & Water X Spanish Translation Counseling Services Sign Language Translation
Home/Neighborhood Cleanup Other Translation:
Yes No
Can this site provide temporary shelter space for 48 hours or more in the X event of an emergency?
Is this site able to help with assessing the needs of older individuals in the X neiQhborhood or community followinQ a disaster? Following a major disaster, can this site help transport older individuals to X disaster services?
Does this site have a dedicated vehicle that is lift-equipped? X Given the resources, can this site expand meal services following a X disaster to meet needs in the community? How many people can this facility provide emergency shelter for? 600 How many days can this facility function using its back-up power source? 0 How many gallons of water are stored on-site as an emergency supply? 0 Please list any additional services your site can provide in the event of a disaster:
Emergency services partnered with the American Red Cross.
Emergency Resource Information Exhibit F Rev. January 2022 Certificate of
Insurance
. . . SECRETMY OF &-ra· · , ~ The . .. . •1nl(MARCH FONG EU I . . . Ottgklal of This Document· .. . · .. CAU·fORNIA S ··. · · ··· . Is In . •· ..· .... ~i);iO•cr m[ATURCHtVES irarD.a.u·. .· Et_, ROOM •30 · = · ~ENTO · ,. . •. · . , ~ . (916) · ,(:A 95814 · . 445-4293 , -,.-•,:'_•; .
·I~.•! ':'
•' ~ 'I, .
; '-.. ,
-
·. ;~ · .. ··._.·· .. / .. · j ! •. _·. · 4
~ #\_·· .· ; ~L 'r¾i
__ , -ck_ !
~~-- 1 ' · .. ~
-L~
~ ~: ..
:wi - __ .·. .
,~r~ ·
~-
BEFORE THE BOARD 01P. StrPERVlSORS
oJ THE couNTY oF ,m:sNo, STA~ o, CALIF6RNIA.
IN THE MATTER Oh~ CONVASSING THE RE- • •, • ' • • c•, -~J . { j _}: : ;•: • .
TURNS OF THE ELECTION ON 'rHE PROl'OSITION ro INCORPORATE THE c±rl o:i REEDLEY AND .!!'OR ELECTION 01!' MUNIOIp AL OFFICERS OF SAID CI TY. i>u.rsuant to law the Board. of Supervis6;e of the County of Fresno met on Mo!lda.y, February 17, 1913, as the Boa.rd of canvaseere to canvass the votes polled at Reedley, in the County of Fresno, State of California, at an election held on the 14tp:
day of February, i913, for the purpose of cieteriliining whether ' . . . a certain portion of . the County of Freenb shouid be incorporat- . ~d under the nama of "City of R~adley," --
And it appearing from the affidavit of Lloyd E. Tiernan, filed herein, tm. t the order and notice of said . electi:on here:.. tofore ma.de by thie Board. was published ill the "Reedley Exponent," a riewepa.per printed and pubfiehed w1 thin the boundaries of ea.id :propo~ed 6orpcira.tfon for two weeks ne:x:t prec.eding aaid election, --
And the returns from the :i?recinot at which such election wae held having been received~ the ~oe.rd now proceed.a to open and ca:ri;a~e said votes an_d · doea, :find from said. ~eturrte tliat aai~ vote is as follows, to'"'.'w:it:
There · were oast "For Incorporatio.n" 310
Tllere were oaet "Against Incorl'o:ration" 88
' I
. f
r
t
1. t.
,i
i
·~ . .; : '
-,,._,_,...,_,., __ ~-.. ,-,.- ·-·. . ......... -.·-· :-....,· - --~.,......='"""""~· ., .... ,_ . .,., .. _ ... , .... _, __ . •· .... .. parallel· to the South Line of ea.:i. d Seo ti on 2'1, to a point in S~ction 35, R. 15 ~.~ R. 23 E., of M.D.B. & M., distant 660 feet west and 660 feet south from the South Quarter Section Corner of' Section 26, T. 15 S., R. 23 E. of M.D.B. & M.; thence north to the SE corner of Lot Numbered 26, of said Reed Colony; and thence •!
:f'
l
,.
, .;
j '
north on the east boundary line of Lota Numbered, 26, ~6, 24, 23, 22, l 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, and 14 of said Reed Colony, to the plaoe of beginning.
. .
And the :following persons :having received the highest number of votes ce.et, are hereoy declared to be duly elected to ttie re ... epeoti ve offices, to-wit:
J. J. Eymami, Frank Thomae, c. L. Dre.ft, o. D. Lyons and Wm.
Dyck being th·e five persons who received the highest number of votes cast for trustees, they are hereby declared. to be elected as such trustees.
F. s. Knauer received the highest number of votes cast for clerk and is hereby declared -tx, be elected as such clerk.
M. Deneen having received the highest number · of votes ca.st for Treasurer is hereby declared to be elected as such Treaeurer • It is further ordered that a ~ertified copy of thie canve.es and order be at once filed with the Secretary of State according to law.
;·--····- -,- ---~------------'~---::
~latte of Qr;altfo~ttht } . . Ql;ounty of •u•no •••
. . i, D. M. ·Barnwell, County Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the Superior Court in and /or said · Fresno County; do hereby· certi/ th ·1 · { b. ' . · · _ . Y .. e . orego "I! t_o e •.. lL .... full, true and correct cop;, ........ .. . of the original .. o.r.tte.r .. ~o.r ... l.l'.HHtr.Jl.9.~."~Jg_n __ .9.'-r .. j.,l:HL.~'.C.Uy .. o.f.. .R.e.e.ctley. ".. . ..... . ···-··-·· . - ·;-.: :-: .-:.:·::.::: ___ _ :-~ ----- -· now ::;Julfn r!yef~~-~·,··· ........... .. ........ . ... .......... ....... .
J/tc and of the whole of such original.
IN WirNEes WnEREOF, I have '1creunfo se t my
hand and_ affixed the Seal of fhe Superior Cou;t
this ....... 1.7 . .th .......... <!~y o/ ..... J:e .b.1 y __ 1913.
D. M . BARNWELL,
i
~I
-_:
J
Airport
~ irport Commission
DEPARTMENT DIVISIONS
Building
Maintenance
Community Services
Facilities Administration
Park Planning
Special Events
Recreation
Adult Sports
After School
Programs
Aq\,latics
Enrichments
Preschool
Seniors
Youth Sports
Community Services
Commission
CITY OF REEDLEY
Senior Citizens
Coordinator
Bargaining Unit: Unrepresented
Employees
Established Date: Apr 22, 2019
Revision Date: May 9, 2019
SALARY RANGE
$40,253.00 - $48,928.00 Annually
CLASS CONCEPT:
DEFINITION
Class Code:
Senior Citizens
Coordinator
Under general direction, to plan, organize, and direct a wide variety of recreational, cultural, informational, community service programs and activities to enhance the lives of senior citizens, focusing on the physical, social, economic, psychological, educational, recreational, and creative needs of the aging; and to provide staff support to the Community Services Director.
SUPERVISION
Exercises technical and functional supervision over lower level staff and volunteers.
EXAMPLES OF IMPORTANT AND ESSENTIAL DUTIES
(may include, but are not limited to, the following)
• Under general supervision, develops, plans, schedules, coordinates, and implements a wide range of programs that address the social, physical, and emotional needs of senior adults.
• Coordinates and directs special events to attract seniors and stimulate interest. • Organizes and directs volunteer participation by the seniors in the center and/or community.
• Monitors patron and participant behavior; resolves issues within scope of authority and training; enforces senior center rules and regulations; follows all safety rules and regulations to minimize risk of accidents and reports all safety conditions and security issues.
• Recruits, trains, supervises, coordinates, and evaluates volunteers in different activities which include the following but is not limited to: gleaners, monthly newsletter, exercise classes, recreation programs, senior trips, hot meals and luncheons. • Publicizes seniors' programs utilizing various available media including a monthly senior newsletter, weekly calendar, news releases, cable TV announcements, PSAs on local and county radio stations, flyers, posters, brochures, personal public contact, and presentations. Attend meetings and workshops to enhance knowledge and keep abreast of changes involving the aging.
• Identifies, locates, and provides information about existing services and benefits such as Older Americans Organization (OAO), Fresno-Madera Area Agency on Aging (FMAAA), Economic Opportunity Commission (EOC), low rent housing (HUD), Social Security, and others.
• Provides clients with information about appropriate community services and available programs.
• Provides aid in securing Meals on Wheels, etc.
• Organizes art and recreational activities, providing for creative expression or socialization.
• Plans and organizes trips and programs.
• Provides government agencies with necessary information, records, and reports. • Coordinates the development of new programs and reviews the effectiveness of current programs; develops and reviews surveys to determine interests of senior adults; recommends programs and identifies resources required to implement them. • Works cooperatively with community agencies, groups, and individuals in the performance of job duties; serves on, and provides staff assistance for, various committees regarding senior services.
• Represents Reedley Senior Citizens' Program at various meetings; coordinates public relations and community educational programs as related to senior citizen issues, activities, and concerns.
• Prepares monthly reports and other period progress reports as required; monitors and evaluates programs to assess whether they are meeting stated goals and objectives. • Prepares written statistical, financial, and narrative reports. • Works cooperatively with various groups and organizations; maintains effective relationships with the general public.
• Prepares budget for Senior Citizens Division for presentation to Community Services Director.
• Assumes responsibility for preparation of FMAAA Grant, fiscal, and other administrative reports; prepares and maintains financial and accounting records of senior operations and program activities.
• Monitors and generates reports for the lunch program, which includes but is not limited to: monthly reports, purchasing supplies, registration of participates, food temperatures, assisting with program inspections, training volunteers and serving food.
OTHER JOB RELATED DUTIES
• Performs related duties and responsibilities as assigned.
JOB RELATED AND ESSENTIAL QUALIFICATIONS
Knowledge of:
• Operational characteristics, services, and activities of a comprehensive senior citizen information program.
• Procedures , methods, and techniques of recreation program development, administration , and promotion.
• Modern office practices , methods, and computer equipment. @ Principles and procedures of record keeping and reporting. • Pertinent Federal, State, and local laws, codes, and regulations including administrative and departmental policies and procedures.
• First aid methods, practices, and safety precautions. • Principles and practices used in dealing with the public. • Principles and practices of data collection and report preparation. • Techniques used in public relations.
• Principles of budget preparation and control.
• Basic mathematical principles.
• Safe driving principles and practices.
Skill to:
• Operate modern office equipment including computer equipment. • Operate a motor vehicle safely.
• Plan, organize, and schedule specialized senior citizen activities and events. • Coordinate senior adult recreation program using independent judgment and personal initiative.
• Handle emergency situations and administer first aid when required. • Prepare and maintain accurate and complete records.
• Interact effectively and sensitively with individuals and groups from diverse backgrounds.
• Prepare and deliver effective oral presentations.
• Work independently in the absence of supervision.
• Prepare clear and concise reports.
• Interpret and apply the policies, procedures, laws, and regulations pertaining to assigned programs and functions.
• Respond to requests and inquiries for information regarding recreation and facility use policies and procedures.
• Independently compose correspondence and memoranda.
• Analyze situations carefully and adopt effective courses of action. • Exercise good judgment, flexibility, creativity, and sensitivity in response to changing situations and needs.
• Communicate clearly and concisely, both orally and in writing. • Establish, maintain, and foster positive and harmonious working relationships with those contacted in the course of work.
ExP-erience and Training Guidelines:
Any combination equivalent to experience and training that would provide the required knowledge, skills, and abilities would be qualifying. A typical way to obtain the knowledge, skills, and abilities would be:
ExP-erience:
• Two years of experience in organizing, coordinating, or scheduling senior citizen information and referral programs .
Training:
• Equivalent to a Bachelor's degree from an accredited college or university with major course work in recreation administration or a related field.
License or Certificate:
• Possession of, or ability to obtain, an appropriate, valid driver's license. • Possession of, or ability to obtain, CPR and first aid certification. • Possession of, or ability to obtain, the approved training for food handling from FMAAA.
SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS:
Essential duties require the following physical skills and work environment:
Physical Abilities:
The frequencies noted below are general and may change depending upon the specific physical activities necessary to complete assigned tasks. • Regularly_ reguired to: sit, use hands to finger, handle, or feel; talk and hear; lift, push, or pull up to 10 pounds.
• Freguently_ reguired to: stand, walk, and reach with hands and arms; lift, push, or pull up to 25 pounds.
• Occasionally_ reguired to: stoop, kneel, crouch, or crawl; lift, push, or pull up to 50 pounds with or without assistance.
Vision: See in the normal visual range with or without correction; vision sufficient to see up close, at a distance; color vision, peripheral vision; depth perception; ability to adjust focus.
Hearing: Hear in the normal audio range with or without correction.
Environment: May work in a busy and occasionally noisy environment. There may be a number of situations happening at the same time. The employee is required to supervise the lunch program, the participants, and the volunteers at the same time, to ensure that the environment is safe. The employee must be prepared to handle accidents and emergencies at any time.
The employee may experience smells associated with hygiene and food. .JODI BOTELLO
Dinuba, CA 93618 • {559) 994-5654 • Fin.k:[email protected] PROFESSIONAI., Sl IM:A,L<\RY
1 am a enthusiastic, compassionate, reliable and efficient Senior Citizens Coordinator "with 24 years1 hands on experience orchestrating events and activities for senior citizens. Demonstrated achiever ,vith strong communication skiHs~ exceptional prnble.m solving and strong decision making skills.
Additio:naHy= meeting and exceeding montltly budgets, exceptional skills in scheduling/planning events and programs. A demonstrated leader in all aspects~ \v01king as a team men1ber"' training/hiring new staff and volunteers. Pro-active, organized and able to learn ne\v skills quickly.
SKILLS
• Develop, create and maintain monthly activity
calendar and nevvsietter
• Develop flyers/invitations for special e .;;~ents
• Submit pictures of Community events=- parties:
• Ivfanage finances to ensure projects remain and other special occasions to ne1,vspaper/media vvithin bud.get; manage activity stock and supply • Organize senior activities= on and off campus, • Supervise department staff members and including theme parties, holiday ce1ebrntions, volunteers
• Transportation activity management;
Commercial Driver License-Class B ,vith
passenger endorsement
• Supervise catering (food and beverage) ev e11ts
and dining room staff
• Serve as Host of Ceremonies for shoi.v:s and
events
movies= gamer;,, exercise programs= etc
• Dementia training
• Activity planning skiUs
\V oru~ H ISTORY
Senior Citizen's Coordinator, 11/2019 to Current
City Of Reedley - Reedley~ CA
Plan, organize, develop,, and coordinate a comprehensi-:,.:--e program ofrecreational, social=· health"' ,vellness, and cultural ac:frvities for citizens. 5 5 years of age and older.
Campus Activity Coordinator, 05/2015 to 11/2019
Sierra View Homes Incorporated - Reedley, CA
• Plan, organize, develop~ and frnplement activity prograrm11u1g to it1dude spiritual, physicat inteUectual cognitive, cultural, and emotional elements of health and 1,vell11ess. • Research, contact and. schedule outside service and entertainers • Evaluate residents needs and interests through personal inten1ctions. and communications. ,vith residents,, family members and staff.
• Communicate and develop relationships ,v1th comrnunity and outside vend.ors to en11ance and develop activity programming.
• Develop and monitor bud.get for departmental spending and activity costs. • Research,,, organize, drive commercial vehicle to off campus senior activities, including grocery shopping.
• Develop, create and maintain nmnthiy activity calendar:, nevvsletter and flyers for special events Activity AssistantA\teHness Center Coordinator, 08/1996 to 0:5/2015 Sien:·a View· Homes Incorporated - Reedley, CA
• Facilitated special programs .such as music and memory activities. • Managed calendars~ prepared activity rooms and. documented resident attendance. • Hdped coordinate and facilitate e·vents=· providing thorough help for tasks. • CoUected and tracked infomrn.tion about pruticipatiou and outcomes of individual programs. • Developed wellness programs targeted on specific grnup:s and areas of ivellness. • Planned, developed, and directed 'l.Vater fitness programs. • Cultivated positive relationships with participants by interacting \Vith group during fitness classes.
Certified Nursing Assistant, 05/1993 to 08/ 1996
Golden Living Centers - Reedley, CA
• Helped patients effectively manage rnutine bathing, grooming and other hygiene needs. • Deliven~d. individualized patient care by recording vital signs., docwnenting observations~ administering treatments and e·valuating patient need.s. • Gathered dietary infonnatiou, assisted ·with feeding and monitored intake to help patients achieve nutritional objectives and support vvellness goals.
High School Diploma: 06/1992
Reedley High School - Reedley~ CA
• CPR,AED~ and First Aid Certified
EDUC.ATION
CERTIFICATIONS
• Commercial Driver License-Class B-P.assenger Endorsement • Basic Edu.cation Course for Activity Leaders-Certificate of Completion City of Reedley
July 2022
Mary L. Fast, Mayor
Robert Beck, Mayor Pro-Tempore
Anita Betancourt, Council Member
Ray Soleno, Council Member
Matthew Tuttle, Council Member
Community Services Commission
Stephen Penner, Chairperson
Darren Minami, Vice Chairperson
Maria Hernandez
Shirley Ito
Angelina Rodriguez
Maria Rodriguez
City of Reedley, Senior Services, 100 N. East Avenue, Reedley, CA 93654 Reedley Senior News
Phone: (559) 637-4207 email: [email protected] JUNE
MAGIC IS IN THE AIR!
Join us, June 7, 2022 at 1 :30pm for a Magic
Show & Milkshake! Close up magic provided
by Roy Oken. Milkshakes provided by Super
Burger. There is no cost to attend .• . ,
the magic show. $5 if you would like :.·\ -f ~\~;,·:
a milkshake. Please visit Reedley · ~-..'!,,'-•
Senior Center to sign up and
choose your favorite flavor
milkshake: Vanilla, Strawberry,
Chocolate, Pineapple, Banana,
Oreo. Limited Seating.
HOP ON THE BUS!
THURSDAY JUNE 30, 2022-Join us for some
fun at Forestiere Underground Gardens and
lunch at Sizzler! Take an hour long guided walking tour through Baldassare Forestiere's creation. See a hand-built network of underground rooms, courtyards, and passageways reminiscent of the ancient catacombs. After visiting the gardens, lunch at
Sizzler! Bus will
leave from Reedley
Senior Center at
9:00am. The cost is
$27. Includes seat
Independence Day Lunch
Join us Friday, July 1, 2022 at 11 :00am for a delicious barbeque hamburger lunch! This lunch is made possible by Sierra View Homes and Reedley Senior Commission Inc. This event will be held in the California Room at the Reedley com-
~~ JmkpMLlma dmJ
munity Center. Lunch
will be provided at no
cost. Please bring cash
if you would like to participate in a 50/50 raffle.
(Entertainment will be
announced later.) Limited seating, please call
(559) 637-4207. Deadline to sign up is Monday
June 20, 2022
Lunch Around the World
Once a month Reedley Senior Center will host a
special event where we serve a
catered lunch from various cultures. Our next "Around the World" lunch will be Thursday,
June 23, 2022 at 11 :30 am.
(Door opens at 11 :00am) We will
be visiting Armenia. Cost is $10.
Don't miss this tasty event! Deadline to sign up is
Monday, June 13, 2022.Limited Seating.
on bus and entrance ,rntt,mod,1111 • 1192186m
to the garden. (Lunch is not included in the cost.) Return of the Senior Lunch Program RSVP by Friday June 24, 2022. Staff is working with the Fresno Madera Agency Money due at registration to reserve your seat. on Aging to return the senior lunch program in the Call (559) 637-4207 for more information. Mask Reedley Senior Center. The plan is to have required on bus. Limited seating. lunches available in July/August. More information will be released once a date to reopen is determined.
JUNE 2022
Thank You!
A huge thank you to Reedley Lion's Club for
providing a delicious barbeque hamburger lunch
at our Memorial Day luncheon. Your kindness is
appreciated by all who attended .
Join us for a Senior Cooking Activity
Follow along with Jodi Botello, Senior Coordinator as she prepares Watermelon Feta Salad on Wednesday, June 15. 2022 at
1 :0Opm in the Senior Center. We will provide supplies to make the dish. Deadline
to sign up for cooking class
is Monday, June 13, 2022.
Cost $5. Call (559) 637-
4207 to sign up. Limited
seating.
Senior Cinema and Ice Cream Social
Great Grandfather a Happy Father's Day! Join
us Friday, June 17 at 9:00am for coffee and
breakfast burritos on the patio (weather permitting). Cost $5. Please RSVP with Jodi by Monday, June 13, 2022 (LIMITED SEATING)
HAVE YOU PLAYED BUNCO?
If you roll dice .... You can play!
It is easy, social, and a lot of
fun! Join us for Bunco on Tuesday, June 14, 2022 at 1 :00pm.
Call (559) 637-4207 to reserve
your spot. Invite a friend!
Gleaners Drive-Thru Program
Gleaners Drive-Thru Program is available every Wednesday at Reedley Community Center beginning at 8:30am until supplies last. People
without a vehicle may pick up items beginning
A monthly event where we screen a requested
movie/film and serve delicious ice cream and
theater style popcorn! Senior Cinema is Friday
June 24, 2022. FATHERHOOD is this month's ,.,
featured film. Please call (559) 637-4207 if you
at 9:00am. This program is for
Reedley residents who are 55
and greater. Pull up to the center
and we will place the items in
-.. your vehicle. Thank you to Savemart and participating packing houses for donating food items.
would like to attend. Movie begins at 1 :OOpm . Newsletter Donations Bring a friend!
BINGO AND PIZZA PARTY!
You're invited to Reedley Senior Center's BINGO AND PIZZA party! Join us , 13 i ;~·f r ··· Tuesday, June 28, 2022 at
· 1 -·- ~ - 10:30am for bingo. Following binP i I IZ z A N go is a pizza lunch. The cost for
@ 1@ ~ G lunch is $3. Please call (559) 637
e l - 0 -4207 by Monday June 27, 2022
to reserve your spot for bingo
and/or lunch .
Happy Father's Day!
Father's Day is Sunday,
June 19, 2022. Wishing every Father, Grandfather, and
On behalf of the Reedley Senior Commission,
Inc. , we would like to thank those who donate to
the Reedley Senior Newsletter. Many thanks,
LEONARD MCINTYRE for your donation. If you
would like to make a donation, you may send a
tax-deductible check to the attention of the Reedley Senior Commission, Inc. at P.O. Box 1940, Reedley, CA 93654. Again , on behalf of the
Reedley Senior Commission Inc., thank you for
your support and thoughtfulness. If you know
someone who would like to be added to our mailing list, please tell Jodi.
You may access the newsletter at:
http://www.reedley.com//departments/
community _services/senior_ citizens
REEDLEY SENIOR CENTER HAPPENINGS
JUNE 2022
Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday
2 9:00am-11 :00arn-Coffee 9:00am -11 :00am-Coffee
& Pastry Social & Pastry Social
1 0:00am-Senior Exercise 9:00am-Tai Chi
12:00pm-Men's Hobby Time
&
Women 's Hobby Time
6 7 8 9
9:00am-11 :00am-Coffee 9:00am-11 :00am-Coffee 9:00am-11 :00am-Coffee 9:00am-11 :00am-Coffee & Pastry Social & Pastry Social & Pastry Social & Pastry Social 1 0:00am-Senior Exercise 1 :30pm-Magic & Milkshakes 1 0:00am-Senior Exercise 9:00am-Tai Chi No cost to attend the magic show 12:00pm-Men's Hobby Time $5 for a milkshake &
Women's Hobby Time
13 14 15 16
9:00am-1 1 :00am-Coffee 9:00am-11 :00am-Coffee 9:00am-11 :00am-Coffee 9:00am- 11 :00arn-Coffee & Pastry Soci al & Pastry Social & Pastry Social & Pastry Social 1 0:00am-Senior Exercise 1 :00pm-Bunco 1 0:00am-Senior Exercise 9:00am-Tai Chi 1 :00pm-Senior Cooking
(Cost $5)
(No Hobby Time)
20 21 22 23
9:00am-11 :00am-Coffee 9:00am-11 :00am-Coffee 9:00am-11 :00am-Coffee 9:00am-Tai Chi & Pastry Social & Pastry Social & Pastry Socia l 11 :30am-Lunch Around the World 1 0:00am-Senior Exercise 10:00am-Senior Exercise Armenia (Cost $10) 12:00pm-Men's Hobby Time (Senior Center will not be open & for coffee and pastry time .)
Women 's Hobby Time
27 28 ~9 30
9:00am-11 :00am-Coffee 9:00am-11 :00am-Coffee 9:00am-11 :00am-Coffee 9:00am-Senior Outing to & Pastry Social & Pastry Social & Pastry Social Forestiere Underground Gardens 1 0:00am-Senior Exercise 10:30am-Bingo and Pizza Party 1 0:00am-Senior Exercise & Lunch at Sizzler-Cost $27 (Cost $3) 12:00pm-Men's Hobby Time 9:00am-Tai Chi
&
Women 's Hobby (Senior Center Closed .)
Friday
3 9:00am-11 :00am-Coftee
& Pastry Social
1 0:00am-Senior Exercise (video)
10 9:00am-11 :00am-Coffee
& Pastry Social
1 0:00am-Senior Exercise (video)
17 9:00am-Father's Day
Celebration with breakfast
burritos on the patio
(Cost $5)
1 0:00am-Senior Exercise (video)
24 9:00am-11 :00am-Coffee
& Pastry Social
10: 00am-Senior Exercise (video)
1 :00pm-Senior Cinema and
Ice Cream Social (Fatherhood)
CITY OF REEDLEY PRESENTS:
SENIOR COOKING ACTIVI ·--~
FOLLOW ALONG WITH SENIOR CITIZEN COORDINA;TOR,
JODI BOTELLO, AS SHE PREPARES WATERMELON FETA SALAD.
22 LUNCH
AROUND TNE
WORLD!
Thursday, June 23, 2022
11 :30am
Reedley Community Center
Cost $10
(Due at Registration)
ONCE A MONTH REEDLEY SENIOR CENTER WI LL HOST A
SPECIAL EVENT WHERE WE SERVE A CATERED LUNCH
FROM VARIOUS CUL TU RES.
THIS MONTH WE WILL BE VISITING ARMENIA.
This event is for Seniors who are 55 and greater.
Please RSVP by Monday June 13, 2022
(559) 637-4207-Limited seating.
JUNE
;a ;a -u ;a
m (D • (D
-I (D O (D
C 0.. . 0..
Q 0 C E L E E V w C s
- OJ - s M C I ;a (D O (D
z ':.< >< '<
(/) 0 ~ (/)
Q M B A I R ~ H u C w Q H X T rn ' • co (D ~ :::!. ;a CD O 0 < w .....
w Q E E K -R I I H 0 X u y R s 0 0) 0 CJ1 0 rn ~ 3
;o 3
T G s K p E C G V K R Q G K E rn w· 0 en C 5·
s s G C D s
m :::J
C w T R B R E N w (/)
-I :::J
m 0
J G M X u A T D H E R p G F C 0
D I A M s E D I R B w A K 0 M
A I N w y B D w X E p 0 M M 0
L w 0 M s G J A E M D M L A 0
J V R K 0 N 0 w A D I I T F R
A B V T 0 I X H L T D C R L G
X N M J y R C I M Q L I J B E
X M I N I S T E R p R I N G I I
:::0 C
K N D s 0 C N L A A z I V G K 1IB -U'crJZ
Q.(D. 0
(D 3 7J 7
N C A R E T R A G T u F
-x s K I':.< -· o -u ...... en -....
o z or s. • 0 co ;:::::;.:
co~ co 0
wco7J-....
CJ) 0 !l) 'Fl
BESTMAN BRlDE BRIDESMAID 1i 0.:
CAKE CHAMPAGNE CHURCH
COMMITMENT FLOWERGlRL GARTER
GROOM MlNlSTER RfNG
cas\nO 1t\~s
Day
Trips
Senior Getaways
Senior Prom
Duarte
Farm -t,-G'Y\YE ADul J's
City of Reedley
Senior Programs
100 N. East Avenue
Reedley, CA 93654
559-63 7-4207
Hobby Time
• Billiards
• Texas Hold-Em
• Knitting / Crocheting
• Puzzle 'T'able
• Bunco
• Cooking Class
• Craft Class
• Bingo & Pizza
:-,;;i. - f l ;_0 . • · ~ 'iff• , .. ~;,_ ~~ ~ --
:::':-~ ·,, ~·'1 '~ ~ #1.
~-~l --•4 - ~·-
Volunteer Opportunities
- .. , -·· " •We couldn't
provide all the
services we do
without our
volunteers. Did
you know that
volunleers lives
increase by seven years? There are a
variety of ways to assist us here at the
Senior Center. Give us a call, or just stop
by to find out how.
~
lftdO
~~
Congregate Lunch
Program
Meals taste so much better
when you can enjoy them in
the company of others! Join other
seniors for a nutritious lunch and good
time. This program is partially funded
by the Fresno-Madera Area Agency on
Aging.
Monthly Activities
• Lunch Around the World
• Senior Cooking ActiviLy
• Senior Cinema and Ice Cream
Social
• Bingo and Pizza Parly
Cafe Bistro
Enjoy a hot cup of coffee or tea and
some delicious pastries and breads.
Healthy Corner-Free Classes
• Senior Exercise
• Tai Chi
• Senior Walk
• Blood Pressure Check
• Presentations by Luis A. Guzman, M .D.
Gleaners
Fresh fruit and vegatables are distributed to
seniors every Wednesday by the volunteer
gleaners. Distribution is done on the patio at
the Community Center at 8:30 a.m. You must
be a Reedley resident, at least 55 years old and
must show ID.
I
" _,
..
,,
~ " I
SENIOR NUTRITION PROGRAM
REOPENING PLAN
,
'
June 2022
Reopening Plan for Reedley Senior Center
Nutrition Program
Authority and Responsibility
Identification and Evaluation of COVID-19 Hazards
Employee & volunteer participation
Employee and volunteer screening
Correction of COVID-19 Hazards
Control of COVID-19 Hazards
Physical Distancing
Face Coverings
Engineering controls
Cleaning and disinfecting
Shared tools, equipment and personal protective equipment (PPE) Hand washing and hand sanitizing
Personal protective equipment (PPE) used to control employees' exposure to COVID-19 Investigating and Responding to COVID-19 Cases
System for Communicating
Training and Instruction
Exclusion of COVID-19 Cases
Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Access
Return-to-Work Criteria
Programmatic Considerations
Vaccines
Temperature/ Symptom Screenings
Liability Waivers
Managing Emotions
Program Flexibilities
Program Enrollment Transitions
Home Delivered Meals (HDM) In-Home Assessments
Other program considerations
Programmatic Communication Plan
3 3
4 4
4 4
4 5
5 5
5 6
6 7
7 8
9 9
9 10
10 10
10 10
10 11
11 11
11 1
Appendix A: Identification of COVID-19 Hazards
Appendix B: COVID-19 Inspections
Appendix C: Investigating COVID-19 Cases
Appendix D: COVID-19 Training Roster
Additional Consideration #1: Multiple COVID-19 Infections and COVID-19 Outbreaks Investigation of workplace COVID-19 illness
COVID-19 investigation, review and hazard correction
Additional Consideration #3 - COVID-19 Prevention in Employer-Provided Transportation 13 14
16 19
20 20
20 20
2 COVID-19 Prevention Program {CPP) for Reedley
Senior Center Nutrition Program
This CPP is designed to control exposures to the SARS-CoV-2 virus that may occur in our workplace.
Date: 04/21/2022
Authority and Responsibility
Reedley Senior Coordinator has overall authority and responsibility for implementing the provisions of this CPP in our workplace. In addition, all managers and supervisors are responsible for implementing and maintaining the CPP in their assigned work areas and for ensuring employees receive answers to questions about the program in a language they understand.
All employees are responsible for using safe work practices, following all directives, policies and procedures, and assisting in maintaining a safe work environment.
Identification and Evaluation of COVID-19 Hazards
We will implement the following in our workplace:
• Conduct workplace-specific evaluations using the Appendix A: Identification ofCOVID-19 Hazards form.
• Implement the following process for screening employees for and responding to employees with COVID-19 symptoms:
o Employees must self-evaluate before reporting to work. Employees must report out sick and are required to stay home if they have any symptoms of illness, including COVI D-19 symptoms.
• Review applicable orders and general and industry-specific guidance from the State of California, Cal/OSHA, and the local health department related to COVID-19 hazards and prevention.
• Evaluate existing COVID-19 prevention controls in our workplace and the need for different or additional controls.
• Conduct periodic inspections using the Appendix B: COVID-19 Inspections form as needed to identify unhealthy conditions, work practices, and work procedures related to COVID-19 and to ensure compliance with our COVID-19 policies and procedures.
Employee & volunteer participation
Employees and their authorized employees' representatives are encouraged to participate in the identification and evaluation of COVID-19 hazards by: Staff and program participants are required to report any changes in symptom status to the Senior Coordinator. 3 Employee and volunteer screening
We screen our employees and volunteers by: Pre-work Self-Screening according to the CDPH guidelines.
Correction of COVID-19 Hazards
Unsafe or unhealthy work conditions, practices or procedures will be documented on the Appendix B: COVID-19 Inspections form, and corrected in a timely manner based on the severity of the hazards, as follows: Staff will continually monitor the implementation of the CPP. Any hazards will be immediately corrected by designated staff and/or volunteers. Reedley Senior Coordinator will conduct a follow up inspection.
Control of COVID-19 Hazards
Physical Distancing
Where possible, we ensure at least six feet of physical distancing at all times in our workplace by:
• Reducing the number of persons in an area at one time, including visitors as per CDPH and FCDPH Guidelines
• Physical arrangements of entry or exit areas, furniture arrangements, kitchen & prep areas, etc. • Maintaining distancing from clients when interacting with staff • When necessary, procedures for the restrictions of groupings to same households, people who request to be seated together, etc. will be implemented • Pre-registration system, participants will resume placing a reservation for lunches at least 24hrs in advance
Individuals will be kept as far apart as possible when there are situations where six feet of physical distancing cannot be achieved.
Face Coverings
We provide clean, undamaged face coverings and ensure they are properly worn where required by orders from the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) or local health department. When face coverings are not required, employers shall provide face coverings to employees upon request, regardless of vaccination status. Single-Use Disposable Face Coverings are accessible in every room next to other PPE items. Staff members have PPE items available upon request of volunteers and non-employee participants. Training will be provided on how to communicate new safety and maskwearing procedures to non-mask wearing participants.
Engineering controls
We implement the following measures for situations where we cannot maintain at least six feet between individuals: When 6 feet distance is not possible, we limit the number of participants in 4 the location.
Staff will implement a daily seating chart to keep track of participants location for the purpose of notification of possible Covid-19 exposure. At the time of check-in, volunteer or staff will log on the chart where the person is sitting.
We maximize, to the extent feasible, the quantity of outside air for our buildings with mechanical or natural ventilation systems by:
• Ventilation system will be properly maintained and adjusted in accordance with maintenance and operation procedures.
• Where possible, we will increase filtration efficiency to the highest level compatible with the existing ventilation system.
• If circumstances arise, the amount of outside air may be minimized due to hazards, such as heat and wildfire smoke.
Cleaning and disinfecting
We implement the following cleaning and disinfection measures for frequently touched surfaces:
• Designated employees and volunteers will be instructed in Site Cleaning Protocols. This includes personal hygiene protocols, regularly-scheduled cleaning of facility (increasing cleanliness due to number of participants), and emergency cleaning procedures if a Covid-19 case is reported. • Maintenance and Facility Staff will have adequate supplies and time for proper sanitation. • Specific Cleaning/Sanitizing Protocols will be designated to locations such as; Dining Room, Kitchen, Nutrition Station, Coffee Station, Multi-activity Rooms, Offices, etc. • Single-Use items will be implemented to reduce the need for continuous cleaning of multi-use items.
Should we have a COVID-19 case in our workplace, we will implement the following procedures: Staff members, volunteers, and participants will be asked to leave the facility until the hazard has been mitigated. Maintenance Staff, trained in Covid-19 cleaning protocols will disinfect the facility using:
Hillyard Lemon Disinfectant (#179) Maintenance Staff are trained in CalOSHA approved workplace policies and procedures.
Shared tools, equipment and personal protective equipment (PPE) PPE must not be shared, e.g., gloves, goggles and face shields.
Items that employees come in regular physical contact with, such as phones, headsets, desks, keyboards, writing materials, instruments and tools must also not be shared, to the extent feasible.
Where there must be sharing, the items will be disinfected between uses by; Employees trained in cleaning and sanitizing procedures using disinfectant wipes, sanitizing sprays, and foggers.
Sharing of vehicles will be minimized to the extent feasible, and high-touch points (for example, steering 5 wheel, door handles, seat belt buckles, armrests, shifter, etc.) will be disinfected between users. • Contribution box will be handled by designated staff only. Contributions will be placed in singleuse envelops before submitting into the box. • Condiments and utensils will be pre-packaged single-use. • Single-use gloves will be used while clearing used items and handling trash.
Employees or volunteers performing dishwashing activities in the meal site kitchen will be provided equipment to protect the eyes, nose, and mouth from contaminant splash using a combination of face coverings, protective glasses, and/or face shields. Disposable aprons and gloves will also be used.
Hand washing and hand sanitizing
In order to implement effective hand sanitizing procedures, we:
• Encourage and allow time for employee and volunteerhandwashing. • Provide an effective hand sanitizer - prohibiting hand sanitizers that contain methanol (i.e. methyl alcohol).
• All employees and volunteers are required to wash their hands for at least 20 seconds each time - frequency of handwashing will depend upon the type of activity - example activities include but are not limited to; food handling, managing frequently touched sign-in sheets, contribution box, or other activities that require touching multiple surfaces such as posting flyers. • Hand sanitizer will be made available at each entrance, registration location, and at easily accessible locations in each activity room.
Personal protective equipment (PPE) used to control employees' exposure to COVID-19
We evaluate the need and provide PPE (such as gloves, goggles, and face shields) as required by CCR Title 8, section 3380. When it comes to respiratory protection, we evaluate the need in accordance with CCR Title 8 section 5144 when the physical distancing requirements are not feasible or maintained. We provide and ensure use of eye protection and respiratory protection in accordance with section 5144 when employees are exposed to procedures that may aerosolize potentially infectious material such as saliva or respiratory tract fluids.
CDPH & Ca l/OSHA's COVID-19 Industry Guidance - Restaurants CDPH/ CalOSHA details on gloves, face coverings, and other personal protective equipment guidance relevant to our facility:
• If requiring self-screening at home, which is an appropriate alternative to providing it at the establishment, ensure that screening was performed prior to the worker leaving the home for their shift and follows CDC guidelines, as described in the Topics for Worker Training section above. • Encourage workers who are sick or exhibiting symptoms of COVID-19 to stay home. • Employers must provide and ensure workers use all required protective equipment, including face coverings and gloves where necessary.
• Employers should consider where disposable glove use may be helpful to supplement frequent 6 handwashing or use of hand sanitizer; examples are for workers who are screening others for symptoms or handling commonly touched items. Workers should wear gloves when handling items contaminated by body fluids.
• Dishwashers should use equipment to protect the eyes, nose, and mouth from contaminant splash using protective glasses, goggles, or a face shield in addition to a face covering. Dishwashers must be provided impermeable aprons and change frequently. Reusable protective equipment, such as shields and glasses, should be properly disinfected between uses. • Employers must ensure workers maintain six feet of distance from others whenever possible.
When it is not possible, the length and frequency of interaction should be kept to a minimum. Where job duties require regular interaction (e.g. wait staff), employers should offer a secondary barrier (i.e. face shields or safety goggles) for use by workers who wish to use one and permit workers to use their own if they prefer.
• Employers will take reasonable measures when required by State or County mandates, including public address announcements, posting signage in strategic and highly-visible locations, and in reservation confirmations, to remind the public that they must use face coverings whenever not eating or drinking (unless exempted per 8 the CDPH Face Covering Guidance), practice physical distancing, not touch their face, frequently wash their hands with soap and water for at least 20 seconds, and use hand sanitizer.
Investigating and Responding to COVID-19 Cases
This will be accomplished by using the Appendix C: Investigating COVID-19 Cases form. Employees, volunteers and participants who had potential COVID-19 exposure in our workplace will be:
• The Senior Coordinator will work closely with the City of Reedley Human Resource Department using the process in place to notify employees, volunteers and participants of possible exposures.
System for Communicating
Our goal is to ensure that we have effective two-way communication with our employees and volunteers in a form they can readily understand, and that it includes the following information:
• Employees and volunteers will report COVID-19 symptoms, possible hazards and close contact to their immediate supervisor
• That employees can report symptoms, hazards, and possible close contact without fear of reprisal.
• Our procedures or policies for employees with medical or other conditions that put them at increased risk of severe COVID-19 illness to request accommodations. • When employees have a situation where testing is not required by employer, and employee is wanting testing, locations options will be provided for them. Testing is covered through employee health plan. If testing is not covered through employee plan or if they do not have coverage, free testing can be acquired through the use of federal programs, or free testing locations such as Rite-Aid. Rapid-Test locations can be provided for employees who desire/require one - these sites usually have a fee.
7 • Information about COVID-19 hazards employees (including other employers and individuals in contact with our workplace) may be exposed to, what is being done to control those hazards, and our COVID-19 policies and procedures.
See section below regarding the Programmatic Communication Plan.
Training and Instruction
We will provide effective training and instruction that includes:
• Our COVID-19 policies and procedures to protect employees from COVID-19 hazards, and how to participate in the identification and evaluation of COVID-19 hazards. • Information regarding COVID-19-related benefits to which the employee may be entitled under applicable federal, state, or local laws.
• The fact that:
o COVID-19 is an infectious disease that can be spread through the air. o COVID-19 may be transmitted when a person touches a contaminated object and then touches their eyes, nose, or mouth.
o An infectious person may have no symptoms.
• Methods of physical distancing of at least six feet and the importance of combining physical distancing with the wearing of face coverings.
• The fact that particles containing the virus can travel more than six feet, especially indoors, so physical distancing must be combined with other controls, including face coverings and hand hygiene, to be effective.
• The importance of frequent hand washing with soap and water for at least 20 seconds and using hand sanitizer when employees do not have immediate access to a sink or hand washing facility, and that hand sanitizer does not work if the hands are soiled. • Proper use of face coverings and the fact that face coverings are not respiratory protective equipment - face coverings are intended to primarily protect other individuals from the wearer of the face covering.
• The policy for providing respirators, and the right of employees who are not fully vaccinated to request a respirator for voluntary use.
• COVID-19 and not coming to work if the employee has COVID-19 symptoms (e.g. CDC Symptoms of COVID-19).
• How to access COVID-19 testing and vaccination upon request. • The conditions under which face coverings must be worn at the workplace when required by State or County mandates.
• The importance of informing program participants not to come to the meal site, if they have any COVID-19 symptoms or have been exposed to a person known to be positive for COVID-19.
Appendix D: COVID-19 Training Roster will be used to document this training.
Exclusion of COVID-19 Cases
8 Where we have a COVID-19 case in our workplace, we will limit transmission by:
• Follow all State and County guidelines.
• Providing employees at the time of exclusion with information on available benefits. • See CC Title 8 section 9 for exceptions.
Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Access
It is our policy to:
• Report information about COVID-19 cases and outbreaks at our workplace to the local health department whenever required by law, and provide any related information requested by the local health department.
• Report immediately to Cal/OSHA any COVID-19-related serious illnesses or death, as defined under CCR Title 8 section 330(h), of an employee occurring in our place of employment or in connection with any employment.
• Maintain records of the steps taken to implement our written COVID-19 Prevention Program in accordance with CCR Title 8 section 3203(b).
• Make our written COVID-19 Prevention Program available at the workplace to employees, authorized employee representatives, and to representatives of Cal/OSHA immediately upon request.
• Use the Appendix C: Investigating COVID-19 Cases form to keep a record of and track all COVID-19 cases. The information will be made available to employees, authorized employee representatives, or as otherwise required by law, with personal identifying information removed.
Return-to-Work Criteria
• COVID-19 cases with COVID-19 symptoms will not return to work until all the following have occurred:
o At least 24 hour? have passed since a fever of 100.4 degrees Fahrenheit or higher has resolved without the use of fever-reducing medications, and o COVID-19 symptoms have improved, and
o At least 10 days have passed since COVID-19 symptoms first appeared or whatever timeframe is recommended through State and County guidelines. • COVID-19 cases who tested positive but never developed COVID-19 symptoms will not return to work until a minimum of 10 days have passed since the date of specimen collection of their first positive COVID-19 test or whatever timeframe is recommended through State and County guidelines.
• A negative COVID-19 test will not be required for an employee to return to work once the conditions above have been met.
• If an order to isolate, quarantine, or exclude an employee is issued by a local or state health official, the employee will not return to work until the period of isolation or quarantine is 9 completed or the order is lifted.
Programmatic Considerations
Vaccines
Regarding COVID-19 vaccinations, the City of Reedley requires the following • Staff is not required to be vaccinated.
• Employees are allowed to self-attest their status. All employees and visitors to City facilities, regardless of vaccination status are required to wear masks when indoors if required through State or County mandates.
Temperature/ Symptom Screenings
Upon entering the Reedley Senior Center, employees, volunteers, and participants must self-check for Covid-19 systems before entering the building. Staff utilize COVID-19 screening form provided by the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) or local health department to self-evaluate on a daily basis.
Liability Waivers
The City of Reedley utilizes an approved COVID-19 liability waiver for participation in programs and facility rental.
Managing Emotions
• Provide opportunities for open discussion with staff, volunteers, and participants.
Encourage staff to have a positive demeanor while engaging with participants. • Phone call and flyer invitations were made to previous participants. Staff continues to participate in outreach events.
• Provide opportunity for open discussion and staff-led mediation to diffuse situations of conflict or ill-will. When situations arise, staff will refer to the Reedley's Senior Center Code of Conduct.
Program Flexibilities
• When applicable, drive-through or virtual options will be made available. • Program flexibilities will continue until no longer beneficial to participants. • Continuous communication with staff, volunteers, and program participants on changes to program limitations.
Program Enrollment Transitions
• Continue to use the Congregate Meal Intake Form to enroll participants in the Nutrition Program. Seniors who are not able to return to the meal-site will be referred to the EOC 10 Homebound Meal Program.
• Continue to provide information on program hours, transportation to and from the Reedley Senior Center and information on other supplemental food resources.
Home Delivered Meals (HOM) In-Home Assessments
• Pre-COIVD participants will be reassessed to determine continued eligibility of home delivered meals. New program participants will be assessed for eligibility following FMAAA guidelines and program availability. Assessments will continue based on FMAAA requirements, i.e. quarterly/annually.
o Employee conducting home assessment will follow COVID-19 workplace policies, before, during, or after entry into client homes.
Other program considerations
• Continuing with only table service style meal service (no cafeteria style). • Allowing adequate time between programs for proper set up and sanitation. • Current program considerations will not impact current staffing levels. • The City of Reedley will backfill volunteer support with assigned *Welfare to Work* program participants.
• Staff will make as needed adjustments to programing and volunteer recruitment.
Programmatic Communication Plan
• Communicating with existing/previous clients, volunteers, staff, and the community at large about changes to program and facility policies and procedures. • Onsite, how will you share information about protocols or policies? o Verbal communication.
• How will you communicate about changes?
o Staff will communicate new rules or protocols to participants, employees and volunteers through updated signage, phone calls to participants, posting updates on City website and social media pages.
o Informing participants to prepare for possible COVID case, exposure, or outbreak through signage posted in accessible areas.
Sarah Reid, Community Services Director
Reedley Senior Center
100 N. East Ave.
Reedley, CA 93654
X
Community Services Director Date
11 Appendix A: Identification of COVID-19 Hazards
All persons, regardless of symptoms or negative COVID-19 test results, will be considered potentially infectious. Particular attention will be paid to areas where people may congregate or come in contact with one another, regardless of whether employees are performing an assigned work task or not. For example: meetings, entrances, bathrooms, hallways, aisles, walkways, elevators, break or eating areas, cool-down areas, and waiting areas.
Evaluation of potential workplace exposure will be to all persons at the workplace or who may enter the workplace, including coworkers, employees of other entities, members of the public, customers or clients, and independent contractors. We will consider how employees and other persons enter, leave, and travel through the workplace, in addition to addressing fixed work locations.
Person conducting the evaluation: [enter name(s)]
Date: [enter date]
Name(s) of employee and authorized employee representative that participated: [enter name(s)] Interaction, area, activity, Places and times Potential for COVID-19 Existing and/or additional work task, process, equipment exposures and employees COVID-19 prevention and material that potentially affected, including members of controls, including exposes employees to COVID- the public and employees of barriers, partitions and 19 hazards other employers ventilation
12 Appendix B: COVID-19 Inspections
Date: [enter date]
Name of person conducting the inspection: [enter names] Work location evaluated: [enter information]
Exposure Controls Status
Engineering
Barriers/partitions
Ventilation (amount of fresh air and
filtration maximized)
Additional room air filtration
Daily Facility Sanitation Fogging
[add any additional controls your workplace
is using]
Administrative
Physical distancing
Person Assigned Date
to Correct Corrected
13 Surface cleaning and disinfection
(frequently enough and adequate
supplies)
Hand washing facilities (adequate
numbers and supplies)
Disinfecting and hand sanitizing
solutions being used according to
manufacturer instructions
[add any additional controls
your workplace is using]
[add any additional controls
your workplace is using]
PPE (not shared, available and being worn)
Face coverings (cleaned sufficiently often)
Gloves
Face shields/goggles
Respiratory protection
[add any additional controls
your workplace is using]
14 Appendix C: Investigating COVID-19 Cases
All personal identifying information of COVID-19 cases or symptoms will be kept confidential. All COVID19 testing or related medical services provided by us will be provided in a manner that ensures the confidentiality of employees, volunteers, participants with the exception of unredacted information on COVID-19 cases that will be provided immediately upon request to the local health department, CDPH, Cal/OSHA, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), or as otherwise required by law.
All employees' medical records will also be kept confidential and not disclosed or reported w ithout the employee's express written consent to any person within or outside the workplace, unless disclosure is required or permitted by the law.
Date: [enter date]
Name of person conducting the investigation: [enter name(s)] Employee (or non- Occupation (if nonemployee*) name: employee, why they were in the workplace):
Location where Date investigation was
employee worked (or initiated:
non-employee was
present in the
workplace):
Date and time the Date of the positive or
COVID-19 case was last negative test and/or
present in the diagnosis:
workplace:
4 Note that some exceptions apply. See CCR Title 81 Division 1, Chapter 4 for details. 15 Date the case first had Information received
one or more COVID-19 regarding COVID-19 test
symptoms: results and onset of
symptoms (attach
documentation):
Results of the evaluation
of the COVID-19 case
and all locations at the
workplace that may have
been visited by the
COVID-19 case during
the high-risk exposure
period, and who may
have been exposed
(attach additional
information):
Notice given (within one business day, in a way that does not reveal any personal identifying information of the COVID-19 case) of the potential COVID-19 exposure to:
All employees (or nonemployees) who may
have had COVID-19 close
contact and their
authorized
representatives.
Date:
Names of employees
that were notified:
Independent contractors Date:
and other employers
16 present at the workplace Names of individuals
during the high-risk that were notified:
exposure period.
What were the workplace What could be done
conditions that could to reduce exposure to
have contributed to the COVID-19?
risk of COVID-19
exposure?
Was loca I hea Ith
department notified? Date:
*Should an employer be made aware of a non-employee infection source COVID-19 status. 17 Appendix D: COVID-19 Training Roster
Date: [enter date]
Person that conducted the training: [enter name(s)]
Employee Name Signature
18 Additional Consideration #1: Multiple COVID-19 Infections and COVID19 Outbreaks Investigation of workplace COVID-19 illness
We will immediately investigate and determine possible workplace-related factors that contributed to the COVID-19 outbreak in accordance with our CPP Investigating and Responding to COVID-19 Cases.
COVID-19 investigation, review and hazard correction
In addition to our CPP Identification and Evaluation of COVID-19 Hazards and Correction of COVID-19 Hazards, we will immediately perform a review of potentially relevant COVID-19 policies, procedures, and controls and implement changes as needed to prevent further spread of COVID-19.
Note that CDP H's resources on Responding to COVID-19 in the Workplace for Em ployers has valuable additional
Additional Consideration #3 - COVID-19 Prevention in EmployerProvided Transportation The City of Reedley does not provide transportation to and from the lunch program. 19 DATE:
TITLE:
SUBMITTED:
APPROVED:
REEDLEY CITY COUNCIL
~ Consent
D Regular Item
D Workshop
D Closed Session
D Public Hearing
ITEM NO: __ (p_ June 28, 2022
ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2022-065 APPROVING AND ACCEPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023 CLAIMS FOR MEASURE C LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUNDS
FROM THE FRESNO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
Marilu S. Morales, P.E~
City Engineer
Nicole R. Zieba
City Manager
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2022-065 approving and accepting the City of Reedley annual claims for Measure C Extension Local Agency Pass-Through Transportation Funds for Fiscal Year (FY) 2022-2023 and authorizing the City Engineer to sign and submit each subprogram claim to the Fresno County Transportation Authority.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
At its June 8, 2022, board meeting the Fresno County Transportation Authority (FCTA) approved the City of Reedley apportionment for the FY 2022-2023 Measure C Extension anticipated revenues as shown in the attached certification and claim forms for each of the eligible subprograms under the Measure C Extension.
The City of Reedley's apportionment for FY 2022-2023 is $899,111 based upon a formula calculation using the City's 2022 population estimates per the California Department of Finance and the 2020 road miles per Caltrans Maintained Public Road Data Report. Distributions of the FY 2022-2023 Measure C Extension funds collected by FCT A will be made to the City in monthly payments based on the percentage set forth on the form for each subprogram . The City will use funds from the street maintenance, flexible funding, and ADA compliance programs as matching funds for various projects. The street maintenance funds will also be used by the City to perform various maintenance projects including slurry seals, overlays, etc. Due to the City's population being under 25,000 this year, the City's allocation for pedestrian/trail and bicycle facilities is being redistributed to flexible funding as outlined in the Measure C guidelines.
Also, in accordance with this claim, the City is certifying that these funds will not be used to substitute for property tax funds and that generally acceptable accounting principles will be followed to manage and spend these funds on eligible transportation projects and programs. Furthermore, with the acceptance of this claim , the City commits to submit the prior fiscal years Measure C Extension expenditures, FY 2021 - 2022, to the Fresno County Transportation Authority no later than November 15, 2022.
FISCAL IMPACT
The City's allocation for FY 2022-2023 is an estimated $899, 111 . These funds will be allocated to the City of Reedley per the following listed subprograms:
Street Maintenance
ADA Compliance
Flexible Funding
$395,637
$ 13,847
$489,628
All values shown above were taken directly from the documents provided by the FCT A.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution No. 2022-065
2. Local Transportation Program Certifications and Claim Forms a. Street Maintenance Subprogram
b. ADA Compliance Subprogram
c. Flexible Funding Subprogram
3. FCTA Resolution and Apportionment Calculations
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-065
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REEDLEY APPROVING AND ACCEPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023 CLAIMS
FOR MEASURE C LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUNDS FROM THE
FRESNO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Reedley has received information and a staff report from the City Engineer regarding the Measure C Extension Local Transportation Program Funds; and
WHEREAS, The Fresno County Transportation Authority is the administrator of the Retail Transactions and Use Tax (1/2 percent) Funds collected pursuant to the Fresno County Transportation Improvement Act as provided by Part 1.6 (commencing with Section 7251) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code and Public Utilities Code Sections 142000, et seq.; and
WHEREAS, California Public Utilities Code Section 142257 provides that the 2006 Measure C Extension Expenditure Plan , which was approved prior to and provided the basis for the ballot measure considered by the voters at the November 7, 2006 election, shall specify the amount and the formula by which the retail transactions and use tax shall be allocated to each city and the County for Local Transportation Purposes determined to be priority projects by local governments to which funds are allocated; and WHEREAS, the 2006 Measure C Extension Expenditure Plan creates a number of transportation programs to be funded by participating jurisdictions with Measure C funds passed-through from the Authority to the City of Reedley when submitting eligible project claims; and
WHEREAS, the City of Reedley's 2022 population was determined at 24,982 per the California Department of Finance; and
WHEREAS, the City of Reedley is exempt from restricting a portion of its FY 2022- 2023 allocation solely for the use of Pedestrian/Trail and Bicycle Facilities Subprograms based on the 25,000 population threshold; and
WHEREAS, the City of Reedley intends to complete and submit the reporting requirements for the prior fiscal years Measure C Extension expenditures no later than November 15, 2022; and
WHEREAS, the City of Reedley certifies that these funds will not be used to substitute for property tax funds and that generally accepted accounting principles will be followed to assure this and to identify the projects for which the funds are spent; and WHEREAS, the City of Reedley's allocation based on population and road miles is represented as $899,111 or 2.15% of the expected Measure C sales tax revenues for FY 2022-2023; and
WHEREAS, the City of Reedley has been apportioned the amounts indicated for each of the subprograms below:
1. Street Maintenance
2. ADA Compliance
3. Flexible Funding
$395,637
$ 13,847
$ 489,628; and
WHEREAS, the City of Reedley anticipates receipt of said subprogram amounts upon proper submittal of the certification and claims forms; and WHEREAS, the City Council on June 28, 2022 at a public meeting received a written staff report, invited public comment, and independently deliberated; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Reedley, using their independent judgment, hereby approves and accepts the apportionments for each of the five subprograms listed above based on the following :
1. The above recitals are true and correct.
2. The City Council finds that the Measure C allocations will provide a benefit to the surface transportation system of the City.
3. The City Council authorizes the City Engineer to sign the claim forms on behalf of the City.
4. This resolution is effective immediately upon adoption.
This foregoing resolution is hereby approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Reedley held on 28th day of June, 2022, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN :
ABSENT:
ATTEST: Mary L. Fast, Mayor
Ruthie Greenwood , City Clerk
Resolution No. 2022-065
MEASURE C EXTENSION
LOCAL TRANSPORTATION PASS THROUGH REVENUES
CERTIFICATION AND CLAIM FOR FY2022-23
TO: Fresno County Transportation Authority
FROM: City of Reedley
Local Agency Name
Address:845 G Street, Reedley, CA 93654
Telephone: (559) 637-4200 FAX: (559) 637-2257
Contact: Lori Oken, Finance Director
Email Address: [email protected]
1. Applicable Funding Program: (Check One)
Regional Public Transit Program Local Transportation Program • Fresno Area Express ~ Street Maintenance
• Clovis Transit • ADA Compliance
• FCRTA • Flexible Funding
• PTIS/Transit Consolidation • Pedestrian/Trails Urban
• ADA/Seniors/Paratransit • Pedestrian/Trails Rural
• Farmworker Van Pools • Bicycle Facilities
• Car/Van Pools Regional Transportation Program
• New Technology Reserve • Fresno Airports
Alternative Transportation Program
• Rail Consolidation Subprogram
Environmental Enhancement Program
• School Bus Replacement
• Transit Oriented Infrastructure for
In-Fill
Administrative/Planning Program
• Fresno COG
2. The City of Reedley ("claimant") is an eligible claimant of funds for local transportation purposes pursuant to Local Agency Name
California Public Utilities Code Section 142257.
3. The Fresno County Transportation Authority has adopted a Resolution of Apportionment for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 setting 2.34% of $16,882,882 (or $395,637) for the Subprogram or Category of funds checked above and available to the claimant. On behalf of claimant, I hereby request release of the funds to claimant in accordance with :
(a) Monthly payments consistent with adopted percentage, based on actual receipts (b) Compliance with Steps A and B of the Strategic Implementation Plan (SIP) - Local Agency Pass-Through Funding programs and Other Revenue Program Funding
4. On behalf of claimant, I hereby certify as follows :
(a) That the Subprogram or Category of funds checked above are not being used to substitute for property tax funds which claimant had previously used for local transportation purposes. Such substitution of property tax funds is prohibited by California Public Utilities Code Section 142257. (b) That claimant has segregated property tax revenues from claimant's other general fund revenues used to support the Subprogram or Category of funds checked above so that verification of non-substitution can be proved through audit QI that the non-substitution of funds shall apply to claimant's entire general fund . (c) That claimant shall account for Subprogram or Category of funds checked above and received pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 142257. Claimant shall maintain current records in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall separately record expenditures for each type of eligible purpose.
Claimant shall make such records available to the Authority for inspection or audit at any time.
5. Claimant understands that should financial or compliance audit exceptions be found , the Fresno County Transportation Authority will take immediate steps to resolve the exceptions in accordance with its adopted procedures.
Authorized Signature:
Title: City Engineer
Date:
ATTACHMENT: Evidence of Formal Action for Approval and Submittal Approved by: Fresno County Transportation Authority Board on : _________ _ Measure C Extension Strntegic Implementation Plan - Appendix D
MEASURE C EXTENSION
LOCAL TRANSPORTATION PASS THROUGH REVENUES
CERTIFICATION AND CLAIM FOR FY2022-23
TO:
FROM:
Fresno County Transportation Authority
City of Reedley
Local Agency Name
Address:845 G Street Reedley, CA 93654
Telephone: (559) 637-4200 FAX: (559) 637-2257
Contact: Lori Oken, Finance Director
Email Address: [email protected]
1. Applicable Funding Program: (Check One)
Regional Public Transit Program Local Transportation Program • Fresno Area Express • Street Maintenance
• Clovis Transit C8l ADA Compliance
• FCRTA • Flexible Funding
• PTIS/Transit Consolidation • Pedestrian/Trails Urban
• ADA/Seniors/Paratransit • Pedestrian/Trails Rural
• Farmworker Van Pools • Bicycle Facilities
• Car/Van Pools Regional Transportation Program
• New Technology Reserve • Fresno Airports
Alternative Transportation Program
• Rail Consolidation Subprogram
Environmental Enhancement Program
• School Bus Replacement
• Transit Oriented Infrastructure for
In-Fill
Administrative/Planning Program
• Fresno COG
2. The City of Reedley ("claimant") is an eligible claimant of funds for local transportation purposes pursuant to Local Agency Name
California Public Utilities Code Section 142257.
3. The Fresno County Transportation Authority has adopted a Resolution of Apportionment for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 setting 2.34% of $590,901 ( or $13,847) for the Subprogram or Category of funds checked above and available to the claimant. On behalf of claimant, I hereby request release of the funds to claimant in accordance with:
(a) Monthly payments consistent with adopted percentage, based on actual receipts (b) Compliance with Steps A and B of the Strategic Implementation Plan (SIP) - Local Agency Pass-Through Funding programs and Other Revenue Program Funding
4. On behalf of claimant, I hereby certify as follows:
(a) That the Subprogram or Category of funds checked above are not being used to substitute for property tax funds which claimant had previously used for local transportation purposes. Such substitution of property tax funds is prohibited by California Public Utilities Code Section 142257. (b) That claimant has segregated property tax revenues from claimant's other general fund revenues used to support the Subprogram or Category of funds checked above so that verification of non-substitution can be proved through audit QI that the non-substitution of funds shall apply to claimant's entire general fund . (c) That claimant shall account for Subprogram or Category of funds checked above and received pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 142257. Claimant shall maintain current records in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall separately record expenditures for each type of eligible purpose.
Claimant shall make such records available to the Authority for inspection or audit at any time.
5. Claimant understands that should financial or compliance audit exceptions be found, the Fresno County Transportation Authority will take immediate steps to resolve the exceptions in accordance with its adopted procedures.
Authorized Signature:
Title: City Engineer
Date:
ATTACHMENT: Evidence of Formal Action for Approval and Submittal Approved by: Fresno County Transportation Authority Board on : _________ _ Measure C Extension Strategic Implementation Plan - Appendix D
MEASURE C EXTENSION
LOCAL TRANSPORTATION PASS THROUGH REVENUES
CERTIFICATION AND CLAIM FOR FY2022-23
TO:
FROM:
Fresno County Transportation Authority
City of Reedley
Local Agency Name
Address:845 G Street, Reedley, CA 93654
Telephone: (559) 637-4200 FAX: (559) 637-2257
Contact: Lori Oken , Finance Director
Email Address: [email protected]
1. Applicable Funding Program: (Check One)
Regional Public Transit Program Local Transportation Program • Fresno Area Express • Street Maintenance
• Clovis Transit • ADA Compliance
• FCRT A C8l Flexible Funding
• PTIS/Transit Consolidation • Pedestrian/Trails Urban
• ADNSeniors/Paratransit • Pedestrian/Trails Rural
• Farmworker Van Pools • Bicycle Facilities
• Car/Van Pools Regional Transportation Program
• New Technology Reserve • Fresno Airports
Alternative Transportation Program
• Rail Consolidation Subprogram
Environmental Enhancement Program
• School Bus Replacement
• Transit Oriented Infrastructure for
In-Fill
Administrative/Planning Program
• Fresno COG
2. The City of Reedley ("claimant") is an eligible claimant of funds for local transportation purposes pursuant to Local Agency Name
California Public Utilities Code Section 142257.
3. The Fresno County Transportation Authority has adopted a Resolution of Apportionment for Fiscal Year 2022-23 setting 2.88% of $16,9n627 (or $489,628) for the Subprogram or Category of funds checked above and available to the claimant. On behalf of claimant, I hereby request release of the funds to claimant in accordance with :
(a) Monthly payments consistent with adopted percentage, based on actual receipts (b) Compliance with Steps A and B of the Strategic Implementation Plan (SIP) - Local Agency Pass-Through Funding programs and Other Revenue Program Funding
4. On behalf of claimant, I hereby certify as follows :
(a) That the Subprogram or Category of funds checked above are not being used to substitute for property tax funds which claimant had previously used for local transportation purposes. Such substitution of property tax funds is prohibited by California Public Utilities Code Section 142257. (b) That claimant has segregated property tax revenues from claimant's other general fund revenues used to support the Subprogram or Category of funds checked above so that verification of non-substitution can be proved through audit Q[ that the non-substitution of funds shall apply to claimant's entire general fund . (c) That claimant shall account for Subprogram or Category of funds checked above and received pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 142257. Claimant shall maintain current records in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall separately record expenditures for each type of eligible purpose.
Claimant shall make such records available to the Authority for inspection or audit at any time.
5. Claimant understands that should financial or compliance audit exceptions be found, the Fresno County Transportation Authority will take immediate steps to resolve the exceptions in accordance with its adopted procedures.
Authorized Signature:
Title: City Engineer
Date:
ATTACHMENT: Evidence of Formal Action for Approval and Submittal Approved by: Fresno County Transportation Authority Board on : ____ _____ _ Measure C Extension Strategic Implementation Plan - Appendix D
BEFORE THE
FRESNO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY BOARD
RESOLUTION NO 2022-06
In the Matter of: )
FRESNO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION )
IMPROVEMENT ACT )
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES )
CODE SECTION 142257 )
)
)
RETAIL TRANSACTIONS AND USE
TAX FUNDS FOR EXTENSION
LOCAL TRANSPORTATION
PURPOSES PASS-THROUGH
PROJECTS AND PROGRAMS FOR
FY 2022-23
WHEREAS, the Fresno County Transportation Authority is the administrator of the Retail Transactions and Use Tax (1/2 cent) Funds collected pursuant to the Fresno County Transpmiation Improvement Act as provided by Paii 1.6 ( commencing with Section 7251) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code and Public Utilities Code Sections 142000, et seq. ,
WHEREAS, California Public Utilities Code Section 142257 provides that the 2006 Measure C Extension Expenditure Plan, which was approved prior to and provided the basis for the ballot measure considered by the voters at the November 7, 2006, election, shall specify the amount and the formula by which the retail transactions and use tax shall be allocated to each participating jurisdiction for Measure C Extension Program and Project Funds Local Transportation Purposes determined to be priority projects by local governments to which funds are allocated, and
WHEREAS, the 2006 Measure C Extension Expenditure Plan creates a number of transportation programs to be funded by paiiicipating jurisdictions with Measure C funds passed through from the Authority to the jurisdiction submitting eligible project claims, and WHEREAS, these various programs have differing requirements, exemptions, and formulas for calculating pass-through funding levels, and WHEREAS, the progran1s and subprograms identified below are eligible for passthrough funding, Regional Public Transit Program
Public Transit Agencies
Public Transpmiation Infrastructure Study (PTIS)
ADA/Seniors/Paratransit
Ag-worker/CarN an Pools
Local Transportation Program
Local Allocation
Pedestrian/Trails
Bicycle Facilities
and
Regional Transp01iation Program
Fresno Airpo11s
Administration/Planning Program
Council of Fresno County Governments
WHEREAS, the program requirements and exemptions for these programs may change from time to time as local jurisdiction population changes or mandated programs are satisfied, and
WHEREAS, in an eff01i to fully explain the various program provisions, the Authority, together with the Fresno Council of Governments, created and will update as needed the Measure C Extension Strategic Implementation Plan which among other things discusses each pass-through program in detail and provides the basis for calculating passthrough funding levels for each program in the 2022-23 fiscal year, and WHEREAS, the Authority procedures for administration of funds for local transportation purposes as identified in the Measure C Extension Administrative Code calls for an annual Resolution of App01iionment to detennine the percentage and amount of funds to be available within the fo1ihcoming fiscal year, and
WHEREAS, the attached schedule of apportionment for FY 2022-23 is based upon the Measure C Extension Strategic Implementation Plan.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Fresno County Transportation Authority hereby approves the attached schedule of apportionment for FY 2022-23 as indicated in the Measure C Extension Strategic Implementation Plan, which schedule is hereby made a part of this resolution, and approves the allocations, to be distributed as they are received and in accordance with claims submitted by eligible claimants.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Fresno County Auditor-Controller/TreasurerTax Collector cause the revised Resolution of App01iionment to be paid in the manner and time directed by the Executive Director of the Fresno County Transpo1iation Authority.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was passed and adopted by the Fresno County Transpo1iation Authority Board this 8th day of June 2022.
AYES: q )Mendes, Ashbeck, Beltran, Brandau, Castro, Sihota, Soria NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
VACANT:
( )
( )
0 )Dyer
(I )
c· SIGNED: c__ __ _.';/-/~_..,L--f__, o/-i.-.._/4,
ATTEST:
I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true
copy of a resolution of the Fresno County
Transportation Authority duly adopted at a
regular meeting thereof held on June 8, 2022.
SIGNED: _...,__~_,,___--~----t,«--/----
Mike Leonardo, Executive Director
Fresno County Transportation Authority
/cld/reso/PassTlm1-Allocation-2022-06
Ernest ''Buddy" Mend&'; Chairman
Fresno County Transportation Authority
Table 1
Measure C Sales Tax Revenue
2022/23
Approved by the FCT A Board 06/08/22
Sales Tax Estimate
Program Services and Supplies
Net Distributed Sales Tax Estimate
Funding Allocation Programs
Regional Public Transit Program
Public Transit Agencies
Fresno Area Express (FAX)
Clovis Transit
Fresno County Rural Transit Agency (FCRTA)
Public Transportation Infrastructure Study (PTIS)
ADA/ Seniors / Paratransit
Farmworker/ Car I Van Pools
Farmworker Van Pools
CarNan Pools
New Technology Reserve
Local Transportation Program
Local Allocation
Pedestrian/Trails
Urban (Fresno/Clovis)
Rural
Bicycle Facilities
Regional Transportation Program
Urban
Rural
Airports
Alternative Transportation Program
Grade Separation
Environmental Enhancement
School Bus Replacement
Transit Oriented Infrastructure for In-Fill
Administration/Planning Program
Fresno County Transportation Authority (FCTA)
Fresno Council of Governments (FCOG)
Total
Percent
13.70%
1.97%
3.99%
0.29%
0.79%
0.58%
0.58%
2.10%
30.60%
2.15%
0.95%
0.90%
14.70%
14.70%
1.00%
6.00%
2.30%
1.20%
1.00%
0.50%
100.00%
$111 ,132,338
$786 ,704
$110,345,634
Allocation
15,117,352
2,173,808
4,402,791
320,002
871 ,731
640,005
640,005
2,317,258
33,765,764
2,372,431
1,048,284
993,111
16,220,808
16,220,808
1,103,456
6,620,738
2,537 ,950
1,324,148
1,103,456
551 ,728
110,345,634
RESOLUTliON OIF ALJLOCATTION 2022-06
LOCAL TRANSPORTATKON SUB PROGRAM JFY2022-2023 ALLOCATIONS T alb~e 2
FRESNO COUNTY TRANSPORTAnON AUTHORITY
MEASURE C FUND APPORTIONMENT
loca~ Ai~ocationi SIUlb Program
FY2022/23
6/8/2022 Approved by FCTA Board
Street ADA
Maintenance Compliance
Clo\Jis 1,759,765 10.42% 61,592 10.42%
Coalinga 286,642 1.70% 10,032 1.70%
Firebaugh 185,210 1.10% 6,482 1.10%
Fowler 152,307 0.90% 5,331 0.90%
Fresno 7,515,965 44.52% 263.059 44.52%
Huron 133,507 0.79% 4,673 0.79%
Kerman 279,538 1.66% 9,784 1.66%
Kingsburg 229,014 1.36% 8,015 1.36%
Mendota 213,419 1.26% 7,470 1.26%
Orange Co1ie 179,571 1.06% 6,285 1.06%
Parlier 241,864 1.43% 8,465 1.43%
Reedley 395,637 2.34% 13,847 2.34%
San Joaquin 101,073 0.60% 3,538 0.60%
Sanger 416.913 2.47% 14,592 2.47%
Selma 391 ,992 2.32% 13,720 2.32%
County of Fresno 4,400,470 26.06% 154,016 26.06%
TOTAL 16,882,882 590,901
Flexible Ped/Trails
Funding Urban
1,698,173 10.01% 414,117 17.46%
351,041 2.07% 0 0.00%
216,295 1.27% 0 0.00%
177,273 1.04% 0 0.00%
7,252,906 42.73% 1,820,552 76.74%
155,353 0.92% 0 0.00%
341,537 2.01% 0 0.00%
275,352 1.62% 0 0.00%
259,111 1.53% 0 0.00%
214,168 1.26% 0 0.00%
295,440 1.74% 0 0.00%
489,628 2.88% 0 0.00%
113,288 0.67% 0 0.00%
402,321 2.37% 0 0.00%
484,292 2.85% 0 0.00%
4,246,454 25.02% 137,762 5.81%
16,972,627 2,372,431
Ped/Trails Bicycle
Rural Facilities Total
0 0.00% 105,577 12.31% 4, 039,223
0 0.00% 0 647,715
0 0.00% 0 0.00% 407,987
0 0.00% 0 0.00% 334,910
0 0.00% 461,020 53.74% 17,313,501
0 0.00% 0 0.00% 293,532
0 0.00% 0 0.00% 630,859
0 0.00% 0 0.00% 512,380
0 0.00% 0 0.00% 480,000
0 0.00% 0 0.00% 400,023
0 0.00% 0 0.00%
0 0.00% 0 0.00% 899,111
0 0.00% 0 0.00% 217,898
91,072 18.1 1% 22,656 2.64% 947,554
0 0.00% 0 0.00% 890,003
411 ,785 81 .89% 268.639 31.31% 9,619,125
502,857 857.892 38,179,590
38,179,590
RE§OlLUTION OF ALLOCAT[ON 2022-06
JLOCAJL TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM SUB PROGRAM FY2022-2023 CAJLCUJLA'HONS Table 3
FRESNO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
MEASURE C FUND APPORTIONMENT CALCULATIONS
Local Allocation Sub Program
FY2022/23 6/8/2022 Approved by the FCTA Board
~on ~020
Population Road 1.75% of Local Alloc
Miles Formula Above Local Allocation Street Maint. Total Redistribute Redistribute 48.25% of Local Alloc 75% 25% Perceni Percent Minimum Program 50% of Allocable to Ped/Trails Bic. Fac. ADA Flexible Ped/Trails Ped/Trails Bicycle $100,000 Min Local Allocation Program Compliance Funding Urban Rural Facilities Total Clovis !~~1GD . 0.091718114 0.014591477 10.63% 100,000 3,419,529 3,519,529 1,759,765 4,039,223 0 0 61,592 1,698,173 414,117 0 105,577 4,039,223 Coalinga - :1;·~· ::r, 0.012813762 0.001900153 '147% 100,000 473,284 573,284 286,642 647,715 59,818 14,613 10,032 351,041 0 0 0 647,715 Firebaugh .. :;,i 0. 006258919 0.002148148 0.84% 100,000 270,420 370,420 185,210 407,987 29,218 8,349 6,482 216,295 0 0 0 407,987 Fowler 0.005136778 0. 001224425 0.64% 100,000 204,613 304,613 152,307 334,910 23,980 6,317 5,331 177,273 0 0 0 334,910 Fresno ~,13.GGO ,/C,~ 0.403214083 0.061003976 46.42% 100,000 14,931,929 15,031,929 7,515,965 17,313,501 0 0 263,059 7,252.906 1,820,552 0 461,020 17,313,501 Huron ! -;;-u ' 0. 004576079 0.000616194 0.52% 100,000 167,013 267,013 133,507 293,532 21,362 5,157 4,673 155,353 0 0 0 293,532 Kerman \':•~/' 50.i'' 0.012340579 0.001931626 1.43% 100,000 459,076 559,076 279,538 630,859 57,609 14,174 9,784 341,537 0 0 0 630,859 Kingsburg 1i: ...... "' 'r 0.009275274 0. 001855408 1.11% 100,000 358,027 458,027 229,014 512,380 43,299 11,054 8,015 275,352 0 0 0 512,380 Mendota ,..j 1(' 0.009226324 0.000934719 1.02% 100,000 326,838 426,838 213,419 480,000 43,071 10,091 7,470 259,111 0 0 0 480,000 Orange Cove 0. 007043601 0.001012834 0.81% 100,000 259,141 359,141 179,571 400,023 32,881 8,001 6,285 214,168 0 0 0 400,023 Parlier ·· ·,:-f ? I , 0.010751931 0.001177784 1.19% 100,000 383,728 483,728 241,864 545,769 50,193 11 ,848 8.465 295.440 Reedley : .. 92 .. 0.018528298 0.002962661 2.15% 100,000 691 ,2i3 791 ,273 395,637 899,1 11 86,495 21,343 13,847 489,628 0 0 0 899111 an Joaquin , , •~": ~· 1 'JC 0.002698922 0.00047665 0.32% 100,000 102,145 202,145 101 ,073 217,898 12,599 3,154 3,538 113,288 0 0 0 217,898 Sanger ~'. ~; .. 0.01950878 0. 003305076 2.28% 100,000 ,.. 733,826 833,826 416,913 947,554 0 0 14,592 402,321 0 91 ,072 22,656 947.554 Selma 0.018187131 0.003077179 2.13% 100,000 683,983 783,983 391,992 890,003 84,902 21,1 18 13,720 484,292 0 0 0 890,003 Couniy of Fresno · :fl.07"' .; J02 0.118721427 0.151781692 27.05% 100,000 8,700,939 8,800,939 4,400,470 9,619,125 0 0 154,016 4,246,454 137,762 411,785 268,639 9,619,125 TOTAL 1,011 ,237 6.592.9 0.750000 0.250000 V 100.00% 1,600,000 32,165,764 33,765,764 16,882,882 38,179,590 545.427 135,219 590,901 16,972,627 2,372,431 502,857 857,892 38,179,590
REEDLEY CITY COUNCIL
DATE: June 28, 2022
D Consent
D Regular Item
D Workshop
D Closed Session
1:8:l Public Hearing
ITEM NO: _7~-
TITLE: ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2022-060 ADOPTING THE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT
FEE NEXUS STUDY AND THE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE UPDATE
APPLICABLE TO NEW DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY OF REEDLEY AND
PROVIDING FOR THE ENACTMENT, PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE
THEREOF
SUBMITTED: Paul A. Melikian, Assistant City Manager
Rodney L. Horton, Community Development Director {JJkAPPROVED: Nicole R. Zieba, City Manager¥=
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council 1) Open the public hearing; 2) receive testimonial and documentary evidence; and 3) Adopt Resolution No. 2022-060 adopting the proposed updates to Development Impact Fees, which will take effect 60 days from adoption.
BACKGROUND
On May 24, 2022, the City Council received a presentation by staff and Michael Baker International regarding the status of the Development Impact Fee update study. The Update of Development Impact Fees for the City of Reedley (DIF Study) is completed and attached for City Council review as Attachment A. The current DIF study and schedule being used by the City was last updated and adopted in 2015. The DIF Study has been available for public review on the city's website. Additionally, this public hearing was noticed in accordance with State law as it pertains to increasing fees.
Development Impact Fees are due at the time certificate(s) of occupancy are issued and are used to fund capital improvement projects and equipment that are needed to accommodate the new development. The intent of Development Impact Fees is to ensure that new development pays its fair share for impacts imposed on the City's public facilities.
The attached DIF Study provides the analyses, documentation, and necessary findings and for the adoption of updated impact fees in the following facility categories:
• Police Facilities
• Fire Protection Facilities
• General Government Facilities
• Park and Recreation Facilities
• Transportation
• Storm Drainage
• Wastewater
• Water Facilities
In April 2021 , the City retained Michael Baker International (consultant) to prepare a DIF Study to analyze the cost of public facilities to accommodate new development in the city and to calculate impact fees for new development in accordance with State law. The DI F Study (Attachment A) identifies the relationship between new development in Reedley and the cost of public facilities to serve forecasted growth through the year 2035. In addition, the study provides estimates of the cost of facilities necessary for the anticipated growth and calculates the updated DI F by land use type that would generate revenues equal to these costs. The DI F Study is a result of over one year of staff and consultant efforts to present accurate data, methodology and analyses.
The DI F Study includes the proposed DI F schedules for new development in Expansion Area outside the current city limits, the Infill Area, and the City Center area. The Infill and City Center are areas delineated and established by the Fee Reduction Incentive Program (Resolution No. 2019-009). The fees in the Infill and City Center areas are reductions of 25 and 50 percent, respectively, of the proposed fees in the Expansion Area as stipulated in Resolution 2019-009. The fee reductions are justified by the reduced public facilities and associated costs needed to provide service to new development in the fee reduction areas compared to areas outside the city limits.
The methods used and the calculations performed by the consultant follow the Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code § 66000, et seq) and reflect the impact fees that are justified by the current level of service for public facilities and the cost to maintain the levels of services in proportion to the impact from new development as required by State law.
The consultant conducted a thorough fee comparison of impact charged in surrounding cities. The results of that comparison are included in the DIF Study. The proposed total fee for the City of Reedley (the total fee for a single-family home in the Expansion Area) is below the average of the seven cities in the comparison. As noted in the DIF Study, a comparison of similar impact fees charged by cities in the region reflects a wide variance of fees dependent on other alternative funding mechanisms that a particular city may use to fund needed public facilities, differences in service standards, or DIF calculation methods. As part of the adoption of the new DIF fees, staff also propose that DIF fees automatically have the Consumer Price Index adjusted on an annual basis to keep up with the current cost of infrastructure.
FISCAL IMPACT
The proposed development impact fees are estimated to provide approximately $75 million in total fee revenues for the identified public improvements between 2022 and 2035. This estimate is based on assumptions of population growth, development activity and adoption of maximum fee levels. Actual revenues will depend on development activity and some improvements will be provided directly as part of a project when stipulated in a development agreement. The cost of preparing annual and five-year impact fee reports and future updates, as required by State law, will be funded by the General Fund.
Subject to annual City Council approval, fees will be adjusted in future years based on the inflation factor which is the Annual All Urban Consumer Price Index (CPI) for the San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward, CA area. This is the same CPI index that is used by many other City fees.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. May 24, 2022 DIF Workshop Slides
2. Resolution No. 2022-060
3. Exhibit 'A' DI F Nexus Study
RESOLUTION NO.: 2022-60
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REEDLEY
ADOPTING THE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE NEXUS STUDY AND THE
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE UPDATE APPLICABLE TO NEW
DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY OF REEDLEY AND PROVIDING FOR THE ENACTMENT, PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE THEREOF.
WHEREAS, with the adoption of Ordinance 94-014 on June 28, 1994, the City Council established development impact fees in accordance with applicable law including without limitation Government Code 66000, et. Seq, (the Mitigation Fee Act), and authorized the imposition of development impact fees in amounts to set by subsequent City Council resolutions; and,
WHEREAS, the development impact fee amounts have previously been set by Resolution No. 94-104, Resolution No. 2005-009, Resolution No. 2005-030, and Resolution No. 2015-022, respectively; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Reedley commissioned Michael Baker International to perform a review of the current development impact fees of the City of Reedley and to study the possible revision of those fees to mitigate the impact of new land development on the following public facilities:
a) Law Enforcement
b) Fire Protection
c) General Government
d) Parks and Recreation
e) Transportation
f) Water
g) Wastewater
h) Storm Drainage; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to regulate the use and development of land so as to assure that new development bears a proportionate share of the cost of capital expenditures necessary to provide for public facilities that serve such development; and, WHEREAS, the City of Reedley has analyzed the impacts of development on capital facilities associated with providing the public facilities identified above; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to maintain an acceptable level of service for the present and future residents and businesses of the City of Reedley; and WHEREAS, a reasonable nexus and relationship exists between new development and the public facilities needed to maintain the existing level of public services for existing and future residences and businesses in the City of Reedley pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act. The nexus is demonstrated in the Development Impact Fee Nexus Study ("Study") prepared by Michael Baker International, dated May 31, 2022, (attached hereto as Exhibit "A") which identifies the estimated number of facilities, services and equipment needed in order to provide timely, sufficient, and reasonable services within the City of Reedley; and
WHEREAS, in order to comply with the mandates of the Mitigation Fee Act, and demonstrate with particularity the nexus and relationship between new development and the need for public facilities to maintain existing service levels, the City expended funds for the conduct of the Study; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held and conducted a properly noticed public hearing on June 28, 2022 to consider the establishment of the proposed updated development impact fees; and
WHEREAS, no significant environmental impacts would result from the adoption of the updated impact fees, and no mitigation measures are required; and WHEREAS, the proposed Resolution promotes public health, safety and general welfare; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Reedley finds and determines that the Study complies with California Government Code §66001 by establishing the basis for the imposition of the updated fees on new development. This finding is based on the fact that the Study:
a) Identifies the purpose of the fee;
b) Identifies the use to which the fee will be put;
c) Shows a reasonable relationship between the use of the fee and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed;
d) Demonstrates a reasonable relationship between the need for the public facilities and the type of development projects on which the fee is imposed; and
e) Demonstrates a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facilities or portion of the public facilities attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Reedley using their independent judgement hereby resolves as follows:
I: Adopt the Development Impact Fee nexus study and accompanying fee assessment in accordance with Government Code Sec. 66001 (d). 2 II: If any section, sub-section, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the Resolution. City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted the Resolution and each section, sub-section, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, sub-sections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions to be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
Ill: All fees shall be subject to automatic Consumer Price Index adjustment prior to June 30th of every year.
IV: This Resolution shall take effect and be enforced sixty (60) days from after the date of its adoption.
The foregoing Resolution is hereby passed, adopted, and approved by the City Council of the City of Reedley on this 28th day of June, 2022, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Mary L. Fast, Mayor
ATTEST:
Ruthie Greenwood, City Clerk
Attachment: Exhibit A Development Impact Fee Nexus Study 3 Michael Baker
INTERNATIONAL
We Make a Difference
i
INTERNAT
~ I ONAL
Update of Development Impact Fees
For the City of Reedley
City of Reedley
Update of Development Impact Fees
City Council Workshop May 24, 2022
What are Impact Fees?
• Impact Fees provide a method for new development to pay its "fair share" of the cost of public improvements and public facilities • The City may impose impact fees as a legitimate exercise of the police powers granted by the California Constitution to protect public health and safety
• Impact fees may not fund services or maintenance activities I We ;"-'lake a Difference 2
6/14/2022
1 --INTERNATIONAL What are Im act Fees?
• California Government Code Section 66000 et seq. and must follow these basic principles:
• The fee must be reasonably related to the impact created by the new development
• New development may only be required to pay its fair share of the cost of the facilities it needs
• The fees collected must be used to build the needed facilities or to purchase equipment
We Make a Difference 3
--INTERNATIONAL
What Impact Fees are NOT
• Taxes
• Special assessments
• User fees
• Permit fees
• Plan check fees
• Fees to cover ongoing
operations and maintenance
• Arbitrary
We Make a Difference 4
NO
'
6/14/2022
2 ~ Some History
• In June 1994, the City adopted Ordinance No. 94-014 which established the development impact fee program
• DIF Fees last updated/amended in 2015
• Established 25% fee reduction for development in the "City Center" • In 2019, City Center fee reduction was increased to 50% and a new 25% incentive for Infill Area development
• In 2020, DIF fees were established for Accessory Dwelling Units • Fees have not been adjusted for inflation or cost of construction increases since 2015
We Make a Difference 5
mmmmmm
INTERNATIONAL
We Make a Difference 6
City Center
& I nfi II
Development
6/14/2022
3 INTERNAT
~ I ONAL
Why a DIF Report?
• Also known as a "Nexus Study"
• Formally calculates relationship between new development and the cost of new/additional public facilities to serve projected growth • It provides the necessary documentation for the City to adopt updated impact mitigation fees
• Ensures fee program is compliant with all applicable State law • AB 602 (2021) requires updated DIF studies at least every 8 years 6/14/2022
We Make a Difference 7 6/14/2022
INTERNAT
~ I ONAL
Facilities
• Public Protection: Police and Fire
• Parks and Recreation
• General Government (City) Buildings
• Transportation
• Storm Drainage
• Water
• Wastewater
1 We Make a Difference 8
4 6/14/2022
INTERNAT
~ IONAL
Projected Growth
Net Annual
2021 2035 Growth Rate
Population 26,087 32,900 6,813 1.67%
Total Employment 7,010 8,300 1,290 1.20%
Total Occupied Housing 6,990 8,823 1,833 1.68%
We Make a Difference 9
INTERNAT
~ IONAL
Facility Needs for New Development
Projected Revenues
from Proposed General Fund &
Impact Fees Other Sources
Facility Category "Fair Share" Taxes, Rates, Grants Program Total Police Protection $230,600 $1,200,000 $1,430,600
Fire Protection $2,021,770 $700,000 $2,721,770
General Government $132,694 $517,306 $650,000
Parks and Recreation $12,506,046 $0 $12,506,046
Transportation $10,127,932 $32,071,785 $42,199,717
Water $5,360,081 $16,646,170 $22,006,252
Wastewater $5,013,780 $33,639,415 $38,653,194
Storm Drainage $39,477,161 $36,722,092 $76,199,253
Total $74,870,063 $121,496,769 $196,366,832
We Make a Difference 10
5 6/14/2022
-INTERNATIONAL
Summary of Proposed & Current Fees
Expansion Area
Proposed Current Percent
Residential, per unit Fees Fees Increase
Single-Family $21,843 $16,479 33%
Multi-family $17,569 $10,986 60%
Accessory Dwelling Units $5,461 $4,120 33%
Non-residential, per 1,000 square feet of floor area
Commercial/Retail $9,586 $7,215 33%
lndustrial/Wa rehouse $5,175 $3,712 39%
Public/Institutional $3,149 $1,166 170%
We Make a Difference 11
1 -INTERNAT IONAL
Summary of Proposed & Current Fees
Infill Area
Proposed Current Percent
Residential, per unit Fees Fees Increase
Single-Family $16,382 $12,359 33%
Multi-family $13,177 $8,240 60%
Accessory Dwelling Units $4,099 $0 N/A
Non-residential, per 1,000 square feet of floor area
Commercial/Retail $7,189 $5,001 44%
lndustria I/Warehouse $3,881 $2,571 51%
Pub I ic/1 nstitutiona I $2,362 $875 170%
I We Make a Difference 12
6 6/14/2022
INTERNATIONAL
~
Summary of Proposed & Current Fees
Cit~ Center
Proposed Current Percent
Residential, per unit Fees Fees Increase
Single-Family $10,921 $8,239 33%
Multi-family $8,784 $5,493 60%
Accessory Dwelling Units $2,733 $0 N/A
Non-residential, per 1,000 square feet of floor area
Commercial/Retail $4,793 $3,322 44%
Industrial/Warehouse $2,583 $1,706 52%
Public/Institutional $1,574 $0 N/A
We Make a Difference 13
~ INTERNATIONAL
Fee Comparison
Total City Impact Fresno County Total Non-City
Fees School RTMF APCD Fee Fees lmeact Fees Total All Fees Clovis $36,935 $8,160 $2,118 $180 $3,357 $13,815 $50,750 Fresno, City of $29,204 $8,160 $2,118 $180 $3,357 $13,815 $43,019 Sanger $21,504 $8,160 $2,118 $180 $3,357 $13,815 $35,319 Selma $19,784 $8,160 $2,118 $180 $3,357 $13,815 $33,599 Fowler $15,000 $8,160 $2,118 $180 $3,357 $13,815 $28,815 Kingsburg $13,563 $8,160 $2,118 $180 $3,357 $13,815 $27,378 Dinuba $24,919 $8,160 lli6 $180 lli6 $180 $25,099
Average Fee: $22,987 $8,160 $2,118 $180 $3,357 $13,815 $36,802 Reedley Fees
Current $16,479 $8,160 $2,118 $180 $3,357 $13,815 $30,294 Proposed $21,843 $8,160 $2,118 $180 $3,357 $13,815 $35,658 I We 1\t!ake a Difference 14
7 INTERNAT
~ I ONAL
Inflationary Adjustments
Unlike other City fees, DI Fs have not been adjusted annually for inflation Example for Single Family Residential Rate:
• 2015 - $16,479 (Current fee)
• If fees had been adjusted by an average 2.5% annually:
• 2022 - $19,588 (Hypothetical)
• The proposed fee of $21,843 would only have been $2,255 or 11 .5% higher instead of $5,364 or 32.5% increase
Conclusion
To keep pace with cost of construction, staff recommends reviewing DIF with all other City fees on an annual basis
We Make a Difference 15
Michael Baker
INTERNATIONAL
We Make a Difference
Next Steps
June 28, 2022
Public Hearing & Adoption of Fees
New fees go into effect 30 days later
6/14/2022
8 RESOLUTION NO. 2022-060
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REEDLEY
ADOPTING THE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE NEXUS STUDY AND
THE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE UPDATE APPLICABLE TO NEW
DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY OF REEDLEY AND PROVIDING FOR
THE ENACTMENT, PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE THEREOF
WHEREAS, with the adoption of Ordinance 94-014 on June 28, 1994, the City Council established development impact fees in accordance with applicable law including without limitation Government Code 66000, et. Seq, (the Mitigation Fee Act), and authorized the imposition of development impact fees in amounts to set by subsequent City Council resolutions; and,
WHEREAS, the development impact fee amounts have previously been set by Resolution No. 94-104, Resolution No. 2005-009, Resolution No. 2005-030, and Resolution No. 2015-022, respectively; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Reedley commissioned Michael Baker International to perform a review of the current development impact fees of the City of Reedley and to study the possible revision of those fees to mitigate the impact of new land development on the following public facilities:
a) Law Enforcement
b) Fire Protection
c) General Government
d) Parks and Recreation
e) Transportation
f) Water
g) Wastewater
h) Storm Drainage; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to regulate the use and development of land so as to assure that new development bears a proportionate share of the cost of capital expenditures necessary to provide for public facilities that serve such development; and, WHEREAS, the City of Reedley has analyzed the impacts of development on capital facilities associated with providing the public facilities identified above; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to maintain an acceptable level of service for the present and future residents and businesses of the City of Reedley; and WHEREAS, a reasonable nexus and relationship exists between new development and the public facilities needed to maintain the existing level of public services for existing and future residences and businesses in the City of Reedley pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act. The nexus is demonstrated in the Development Impact Fee Nexus Study ("Study") prepared by Michael Baker International, dated May 31, 2022, (attached hereto as Exhibit "A") which identifies the estimated number of facilities, services and equipment needed in order to provide timely, sufficient, and reasonable services within the City of Reedley; and
WHEREAS, in order to comply with the mandates of the Mitigation Fee Act, and demonstrate with particularity the nexus and relationship between new development and the need for public facilities to maintain existing service levels, the City expended funds for the conduct of the Study; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held and conducted a properly noticed public hearing on June 28, 2022 to consider the establishment of the proposed updated development impact fees; and WHEREAS, no significant environmental impacts would result from the adoption of the updated impact fees, and no mitigation measures are required; and WHEREAS, the proposed Resolution promotes public health, safety and general welfare; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Reedley finds and determines that the Study complies with California Government Code §66001 by establishing the basis for the imposition of the updated fees on new development. This finding is based on the fact that the Study:
a) Identifies the purpose of the fee;
b) Identifies the use to which the fee will be put;
c) Shows a reasonable relationship between the use of the fee and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed;
d) Demonstrates a reasonable relationship between the need for the public facilities and the type of development projects on which the fee is imposed; and e) Demonstrates a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facilities or portion of the public facilities attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Reedley using their independent judgement hereby resolves as follows:
I: At least once every five years as required by Government Code Sec. 66001(d), the Council shall review the basis for the impact fees to determine whether the fees are still reasonably related to the needs of new development.
II: If any section, sub-section, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the Resolution. City Council 2 hereby declares that it would have adopted the Resolution and each section, sub-section, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions to be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
III: Subject to annual City Council approval, fees may be adjusted in future years based on the inflation factor which is the Annual All Urban Consumer Price Index (CPI) for the San FranciscoOakland-Hayward, CA area.
IV: This Resolution shall take effect and be enforced sixty ( 60) days from after the date of its adoption.
The foregoing Resolution is hereby passed, adopted, and approved by the City Council of the City of Reedley on this 28th day of June, 2022, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Mary L. Fast, Mayor
ATTEST:
Ruthie Greenwood, City Clerk
Attachment: Exhibit A Development Impact Fee Nexus Study 3 Update of Development Impact Fees
For the City of Reedley
.. :-~· ..• :.· • ,·;.•.,·· •• · .•• · ... ·.···.·• .· .. :.·.·.··.···.··.· ...... . >::·,· . ' '
....... ,: _';". ..... ;
,,.\·,:;
;g
[!]~...,,._-, BAKERINTL.COM
Michael Baker
INTERNATIONA
729 PROSPECT PARK D11\IE
SUITE220
RANCHO CORDOVA, CA 95670
Final Repon: June 2822
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents ................................................................................................................... i list of Tables ........................................................................................................................ iii Executive Summary ............................................................................................................... 1 Background and Study Objectives ................................................................................................... 1 Population Forecasts ...................................................................................................................... 1 Fee Reduction Incentive Program .................................................................................................... 2 Fee Schedules and Revenues ........................................................................................................... 2 Funds Needed to Complement Fee Program .................................................................................... 6 Fee Comparisons ............................................................................................................................ 7 Additional Considerations ............................................................................................................... 9
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................... 10 Public Facilities Financing in California .......................................................................................... 10 Mitigation Fee Act and Required Findings ...................................................................................... 10 Water and Wastewater Capacity Charges ...................................................................................... 11 Organization of the Report ........................................................................................................... 12 Facility Standards, Level of Service, and Deficiencies ..................................................................... 13
2. Growth Projections ..................................................................................................... 15 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 15 Population, Housing, and Employment Estimates .......................................................................... 15 Occupancy Rates .......................................................................................................................... 16 Land Use Categories ..................................................................................................................... 17 Service Population ........................................................................................................................ 18
3. law Enforcement Facilities ......................................................................................... 19 Police Facilities Service Population ................................................................................................ 19 Existing Law Enforcement Facilities ............................................................................................... 19 Law Enforcement Facilities, Standards, and Unit Costs ................................................................... 19 Use of Fee Revenues ..................................................................................................................... 21 Law Enforcement Facilities Fee Schedules ..................................................................................... 21
4. Fire Protection Facilities ............................................................................................. 23 Fire Facilities Service Population ................................................................................................... 23 Existing Fire Protection Assets ....................................................................................................... 23 City of Reedley
June 2022
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Fire Facilities for New Development and Use of Fee Revenues ....................................................... 25 Fire Facilities Fee Schedules .......................................................................................................... 25
5. General Government Facilities and Equipment ............................................................ 27 General Government Facilities Service Population ......................................................................... 27 Current General Government Facilities and Standards ................................................................... 27 Planned General Government Facilities ......................................................................................... 28 Use of Fee Revenues ..................................................................................................................... 28 General Government Fee Schedules .............................................................................................. 28
6. Parks and Recreation Facilities ................................................................................... 30 Parks Service Population ............................................................................................................... 30 Current Park and Recreation Facilities ........................................................................................... 30 Park Standards and Unit Costs ...................................................................................................... 32 Recreation Facilities ...................................................................................................................... 34 Parks and Recreation Facilities for New Development ................................................................... 34 Use of Fee Revenues ..................................................................................................................... 35 Park Facilities Fee Schedules ......................................................................................................... 35
7. Transportation Facilities ............................................................................................. 37 Traffic Demand from New Development ....................................................................................... 37 Roadway Standards and Level of Service ....................................................................................... 37 Transportation Improvements for New Development .................................................................... 37 Transportation Fee Schedules ....................................................................................................... 44 Improvements Serving Specific Development Projects ................................................................... 45
8. Water Facilities .......................................................................................................... 46 Water Supply and Demand ........................................................................................................... 46 Water System lmprovements ........................................................................................................ 46 Projected Water Demand ............................................................................................................. 47 Water Facilities Cost per Equivalent Dwelling Unit.. ....................................................................... 49 Water Facilities Fee Schedules ...................................................................................................... 49 Use of Water Facilities Fee Revenues ............................................................................................ 50
9. Wastewater Facilities ................................................................................................. 51 Wastewater Improvement Costs for New Development ................................................................ 51 Wastewater Generation ............................................................................................................... 51 Wastewater Improvements Cost Allocation ................................................................................... 53 City of Reedley
June 2022
ii
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Wastewater Cost Per EDU ............................................................................................................. 53 Wastewater Facilities Fee Schedules ............................................................................................. 53
10. Storm Drainage Facilities ............................................................................................ 56 Planned Drainage Improvements .................................................................................................. 56 Drainage Impacts of New Development ........................................................................................ 56 Drainage System Cost Allocation ................................................................................................... 59 Drainage System Costs Per Impervious Acre .................................................................................. 59 Storm Drainage Fee Schedules ...................................................................................................... 59 Improvements Serving Specific Development Projects ................................................................... 61 Drainage Fee Credit for Low Impact Development ......................................................................... 61
11. Implementation ......................................................................................................... 63 Impact Fee Program Adoption Process .......................................................................................... 63 Programming Revenues and Projects with the Capital Improvement Plan ...................................... 63 Funds Needed to Complement Impact Fee Program ...................................................................... 63 Inflation Adjustment ..................................................................................................................... 63 Combining Fees ............................................................................................................................ 64 Compliance Requirements ............................................................................................................ 64 Appendix A: Transportation Capital Improvement Projects ............................................................ 67 Appendix B: Unit Costs for Street Improvements ........................................................................... 69 Appendix C: Water System Improvements .................................................................................... 71 Appendix D: Wastewater System Improvements ........................................................................... 73 Appendix E: Storm Drainage System Improvements ...................................................................... 74
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1: Population, Employment, and Housing Projections to 2035 .................................... 2 Table 1.2: Summary of Proposed Development Impact Fees-Expansion Area ........................ 3 Table 1.3: Summary of Proposed Development Impact Fees-Infill Area ................................. 3 Table 1.4: Summary of Proposed Development Impact Fees-City Center ............................... 4 Table 1.5: Summary of Current Development Impact Fees ...................................................... 4 Table 1.6: Proposed and Current Fee Summary ...................................................................... 6 Table 1.7: Projected Impact Fee Revenues .............................................................................. 7 Table 1.8: Comparison of Impact Fees in Selected Cities1 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 8 Table 2.1: Population, Employment, and Housing Projections to 2035 .................................. 16 City of Reedley
June 2022
iii
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table 2.2: Occupancy Assumptions ...................................................................................... 16 Table 3.1: Police Service Population ..................................................................................... 19 Table 3.2: law Enforcement Facilities Current Standards ...................................................... 19 Table 3.3: Cost of Additional Police Space., Equipment., and Vehicles at Current Standards .... 20 Table 3.4: Police Vehicles and Personal Equipment Costs for New Development ................... 20 Table 3.5: Total Cost Per Capita ........................................................................................... 20 Table 3.6: Proposed Police Facilities Impact Fees-Expansion Area ....................................... 21 Table 3.7: Proposed Police Facilities Impact Fees-Infill Area ............................................... 21 Table 3.8: Proposed Police Facilities Impact Fees-City Center .............................................. 22 Table 4.1: Fire Protection Service Population ........................................................................ 23 Table 4.2: Fire Facilities ....................................................................................................... 23 Table 4.3: Fire Protection Vehicles and Current Value ........................................................... 24 Table 4.4: Personal Equipment Costs for New Development to 2035 ..................................... 24 Table 4.5: Per Capita Costs for New Development to 2035 .................................................... 25 Table 4.6: Proposed Fire Protection Impact Fees-Expansion Area ....................................... 26 Table 4.7: Proposed Fire Protection Impact Fees-Infill Area ................................................ 26 Table 4.8: Proposed Fire Protection Impact Fee-City Center ................................................ 26 Table 5.1: General Government Service Population .............................................................. 27 Table 5.2: General Government Facilities Current Values and Cost per Capita ....................... 27 Table 5.3: General Government Planned Facilities and Cost per Capita ................................. 28 Table 5.4: Proposed General Government Impact Fees-Expansion Area .............................. 28 Table 5.5: Proposed General Government Impact Fees-Infill Area ....................................... 29 Table 5.6: Proposed General Government Impact Fees-City Center ..................................... 29 Table 6.1: Park and Recreation Service Population ............................................................... 30 Table 6.2: Current Parks Facility Inventory ........................................................................... 31 Table 6.3: Current Parks level of Service .............................................................................. 32 Table 6.4: Reedley Sports Park Cost Estimate ....................................................................... 33 Table 6.5: Recreation Facilities ............................................................................................. 34 Table 6.6: Parks Cost per Capita-2035 ................................................................................ 34 Table 6. 7: Proposed Park and Recreation Fees-Expansion Area .......................................... 35 Table 6.8: Proposed Park and Recreation Fees-Infill Area ................................................... 35 Table 6.9: Proposed Park and Recreation Fees-City Center ................................................. 36 City of Reedley
June 2022
iv
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table 7.1: Vehicle Miles Traveled by Existing and New Development to 2035 ....................... 39 Table 7.2: Circulation Element Improvements ...................................................................... 40 Table 7.3: Intersection Mitigation Improvements ................................................................. 43 Table 7.4: Transportation Improvements Summary .............................................................. 43 Table 7.5: Bike Paths ........................................................................................................... 44 Table 7.6: Transportation Cost per VMT ............................................................................... 44 Table 7.7: Proposed Transportation Impact Fee-Expansion Area ........................................ 44 Table 7.8: Proposed Transportation Impact Fee-Infill Area ................................................. 44 Table 7.9: Proposed Transportation Impact Fee-City Center ............................................... 45 Table 8.1: Water System Improvements Summary ............................................................... 47 Table 8.2: Projected Water Demand to 2035 ........................................................................ 48 Table 8.3: Allocation of Water Improvement Costs to Existing and New Development .......... 49 Table 8.4: Water Facilities Cost per EDU ............................................................................... 49 Table 8.5: Proposed Water Facilities Impact Fees-Expansion Area ...................................... 50 Table 8.6: Proposed Water Facilities Impact Fees-Infill Area ............................................... 50 Table 8.7: Proposed Water Facilities Impact Fees-City Center ............................................. 50 Table 9.1: Wastewater System Improvements Summary ...................................................... 51 Table 9.2: Projected Wastewater Generation 2035 .............................................................. 52 Table 9.3: Allocation of Wastewater Improvements Cost to Existing and New Development. 53 Table 9.4: Wastewater Facilities Cost per EDU ..................................................................... 53 Table 9.5: Proposed Wastewater Facilities Impact Fees-Expansion Area ............................. 54 Table 9.6: Proposed Wastewater Facilities Impact Fees-Infill Area ..................................... 54 Table 9.7: Proposed Wastewater Facilities Impact Fees-City Center .................................... 54 Table 10.1: Storm Drainage System Improvements for Existing and New Development ........ 56 Table 10.2: Land Use Areas and Units of Development-2035 .............................................. 57 Table 10.3: Impervious Acreage in Land Use ........................................................................ 58 Table 10.4: Drainage System Cost Allocation ........................................................................ 59 Table 10.5: Drainage Costs per Impervious Acre ................................................................... 59 Table 10.6: Proposed Drainage System Fees for Example Projects-Expansion Area ............. 60 Table 10.7: Proposed Drainage System Fees for Example Projects-Infill Area ...................... 60 Table 10.8: Proposed Drainage System Fees for Example Projects-City Center .................... 61 City of Reedley
June 2022
V
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report presents an analysis of the cost of public facilities to accommodate new development in the City of Reedley. This report documents the justifiable impact fee that may be imposed on new development in accordance with state law in the following facility categories:
• Law Enforcement
• Fire Protection
• General Government
• Parks and Recreation
• Transportation
• Water
• Wastewater
• Storm Drainage
BACKGROUND AND STUDY OBJECTIVES
This study documents the relationship between new development in Reedley and the cost of public facilities to serve projected growth in the current city limits and in the sphere of influence (SOI). The study also estimates the cost of facilities necessary for growth and calculates the updated public facilities impact fees by land use type that would generate revenues equal to these costs. The estimates of public facilities required to serve growth assume that new development will provide facilities that, at a minimum, will ensure the City will maintain its current level of service standards for these facilities.
As do most municipalities in California, the City of Reedley requires new development to pay fees to fund the facilities necessary to provide City services required by the new development. For the past several decades, since the passage of Proposition 13 and other state fiscal measures which have reduced local revenues, most local revenue sources, such as property tax and sales tax, are used primarily for operations and maintenance and have not been a reliable source for capital funding . Federal and state assistance has not replaced the decline in local revenue sources. These funding shortfalls have been a significant contributing factor in declining facility standards (i .e., the ratio of facility capacity to service population) , which has accelerated the rate of physical deterioration, increased operating costs, and reduced the efficiency of existing facilities and departments. Given these funding difficulties and in the face of continued growth, most California cities and counties have adopted impact fee programs to provide the necessary funding for the capital facilities needed to serve growth.
In California, cities and counties rely on their authority to levy public facilities fees under the police powers granted by the California Constitution pursuant to the procedures of the Mitigation Fee Act, contained in Government Code Section 66000 et seq. and Government Code Section 66013 for water and wastewater capacity fees . This report provides the necessary documentation for the City of Reedley to adopt updated impact mitigation fees.
POPULATION FORECASTS
For this study, population projections for Reedley were done for the current city limit (referred to as the Infill Area) and the approved 2030 General Plan SOI identified in this study as the "Expansion Area ." This study analyzes population growth to the year 2035 and determines the facilities needed to accommodate the projected growth to the year 2035. Table 1.1 shows the estimated existing population, housing, and employment (number of people who are employed in jobs City of Reedley
June 2022
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
located in Reedley as opposed to the city residents who are employed) and projected growth by 2035 based on an annual population growth rate of 1 .67 percent.
Table 1.1: Population, Employment, and Housing Projections to 2035 2021 2035 Growth Annual Rate
Population 1 26,087 32,900 6,813 1.67%
Employment2
Retail 870 990 120
Office 410 510 100
Service 4,030 4,840 810
Industrial, Manufacturing 1,400 1,640 240
Government 220 240 20
Agriculture 80 80 Q
Total Employment 7,010 8,300 1,290 1.2%
Housing 1
Single-Family Units 4,972 6,300 1,328
Multi-Family Units 1,766 2,270 504
Mobile Homes 253 253 Q
Total Occupied Houses 6,990 8,823 1,833
1 Current population and housing from California Department of Finance, 1/1/2021. 2 Current and projected employment from the Fresno Council of Government's 2019-2050 Growth Forecast for Reedley, 2020 & 2035.
FEE REDUCTION INCENTIVE PROGRAM
The City 's current impact Fee Reduction Incentive Program (adopted by Resolution 2020-102) provides that the fees charged to permits in the Infill Area (primarily the city limits) would be reduced by 25 percent fees from the fees charged in all areas outside the defined Infill Area (the Expansion Area). The proposed Expansion Area (or Base) fees are shown in Table 1.2. The proposed Infill Area fees in Table 1.3 are 7 5 percent of the proposed Expansion Area fees . The Fee Reduction Incentive also provides for a 50 percent reduction in fees within the City Center area . Therefore, the proposed City Center fees, shown in Table 1.4, are 50 percent of the Expansion Area fees. As proposed, the fees comply with the fee reduction program.
FEE SCHEDULES AND REVENUES
Tables 1.2, 1.3, and 1.4 summarize the proposed schedule of impact fees for the Expansion Area , the Infill Area, and City Center, respectively, for each facility category and each land use category based on the analysis in this report. The current impact fees are listed in Table 1.5. Table
1.6 shows the proposed fees side-by-side with the current fees with the proposed percentage increase or decrease.
City of Reedley
June 2022
2 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
Table 1.2: Summary of Proposed Development Impact Fees-Expansion Area Single- Multi- Accessory
Family Family Unit
Fee per Dwelling Unit
Law Enforcement $123.01 $118.15 $30.75
Fire Protection $1 ,078.59 $1,036.01 $269.65
General Government $70.79 $68.00 $17.70
Parks and Recreation $6,671 .77 $6,408.41 $1 ,667.94
Transportation $5,552.58 $3,028.68 $1,388.15
Water $2,508.23 $2,407.90 $627.06
Wastewater $2,393.21 $2,297.48 $598.30
Storm Drainage $3,444.75 $2,204.64 $861.19
Total Impact Fees $21,842.93 $17,569.28 $5,460.73
Table 1.3: Summary of Proposed Development Impact Fees-Infill Area Law Enforcement
Fire Protection
General Government
Parks and Recreation
Transportation
Water
Wastewater
Storm Drainage
Total Impact Fees
City of Reedley
June 2022
Single- Multi- Accessory
Family Familt Unit
Fee per Dwelling Unit
$92.26 $88.62 $23.07
$808.94 $777.01 $202.24
$53.09 $50.99 $13.27
$5,003.84 $4,806.32 $1,250.96
$4,164.44 $2,271 .51 $1,041.11
$1,881.17 $1,805.92 $470.29
$1,794.91 $1,723.11 $448.73
$2,583.56 $1,653.48 $645.89
$16,382.20 $13,176.97 $4,099.35
3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Commercial/ Industrial/ Public/
Retail Warehouse Institutional
Fee per 1,000 Sq. Ft.
$28.28 $7.77 $4.35
$247.96 $68.12 $38.15
$16.27 $4.47 $2.50
$1,533.81 $421.38 $235.97
$2,422.94 $1,443.67 $1,413.38
$2,257.40 $777.55 $200.66
$1,388.06 $1,100.88 $909 .42
$1,691.06 $1,351.40 $344.48
$9,585.79 $5,175.24 $3,148.91
Commercial/ Industrial/ Public/
Retail Warehouse Institutional
Fee r2er 1,000 Sg. Ft.
$21.22 $5.83 $3.26
$185.97 $51.09 $28.61
$12.20 $3.35 $1.88
$1,150.35 $316.03 $176.98
$1,817.21 $1,082.75 $1 ,060.04
$1,693.05 $583.16 $150.49
$1,041.05 $825.66 $682.07
$1,268.29 $1,013.55 $258.36
$7,189.34 $3,881.43 $2,361.68
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
Table 1.4: Summary of Proposed Development Impact Fees-City Center Single- Multi- Accessory
Family Family Unit
Fee 2_er Dwelling_ Unit
Law Enforcement $61 .52 $59.09 $15.38
Fire Protection $539.30 $518.01 $134.82
General Government $35.38 $33.98 $8.84
Parks and Rec reation $3,335.91 $3,204.23 $833.98
Transportation $2,776.29 $1,514.34 $696.60
Water $1,254.11 $1 ,203.95 $313.53
Wastewater $1,196.61 $1,148.74 $299.15
Storm Drainage $1,722.38 $1,102.32 $430.59
Total lm~act Fees $10,921.49 $8,784.66 $2,732.90
Table 1.5: Summary of Current Development Impact Fees
Ex~ansion Area/Base Fees (Outside of Infill Area)
Single- Multi- Accessory
Facility Category Family Family Unit
Fee per Dwelling_ Unit
Fire Protection
Law Enforcement
Park and Recreation
General Government
Transportation
Storm Drainage
Wastewater
Water
Total Impact Fee
City of Reedley
June 2022
$999.00
$120.00
$1 ,299.00
$94.00
$5,066.00
$4,396.00
$2,521.00
$1,984.00
$16,479
$666.00 $249.75
$80.00 $30.00
$866.00 $324.75
$63.00 $23.50
$3,377.00 $1,266.50
$2,931.00 $1,099.00
$1,680.00 $630.25
$1,323.00 $496.00
$10,986 $4,120
4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Commercial/ Industrial/ Public/
Retail Warehouse Institutional
Fee 12_er 1,000 Sg. Ft.
$14.16 $3.89 $2.18
$123.98 $34.06 $19.07
$8.15 $2.24 $1.25
$766.91 $210.69 $117.99
$1,211.47 $721.84 $706.69
$1,128.70 $388.78 $100.33
$694.03 $550.44 $454.71
$845.53 $675.70 $172.24
$4,792.94 $2,587.63 $1,574.46
Commercial/ Industrial/ Public/
Retail Warehouse Institutional
Fee per 1,000 Square Feet of Building Floor
$437.00
$52.00
$569.00
$41 .00
$2,218.00
$1,925.00
$1,104.00
$869.00
$7,215
Area
$225.00 $71.00
$27.00 $8.00
$293.00 $92.00
$21.00 $7.00
$ l, 141.00 $359.00
$990.00 $311.00
$568.00 $178.00
$447.00 $140.00
$3,712 $1,166
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
Infill Area (75 percent of Base Fee Schedule)
Facility Category
SingleFamil_y Multifamily Accessory
Unit
Fee per Dwelling Unit
Fire Protection $7 49 .25 $499.50 N/A
Law Enforcement $90.00 $60.00 N/A
Park and Recreation $97 4.25 $649.50 N/A
General Government $70.50 $47.25 N/A
Transportation $3,799.50 $2,532.75 N/A
Storm Drainage $3,297.00 $2,198.25 N/A
Wastewater $1,890.75 $1,260.00 N/A
Water $1,488.00 $992.50 N/A
Total Impact Fee $12,359 $8,240 $0
Fees effective April 14, 2020, City of Reedley
Table 1.5: Summary of Current Development Impact Fees { continued) City Center Area (50 percent of Base Fee Schedule)
Single- Multi- Accessory
Facility Category
Fire Protection
Law Enforcement
Park and Recreation
General Government
Transportation
Storm Drainage
Wastewater
Water
Total Impact Fee
City of Reedley
June 2022
Family Family Unit
Fee per Dwelling Unit
$499.50 $333.00 N/A
$60.00 $40.00 N/A
$649.25 $433.00 N/A
$47.00 $31.50 N/A
$2,533.00 $1 ,688.50 N/A
$2,198.00 $1,465.50 N/A
$1 ,260.50 $840.00 N/A
$992.00 $661.50 N/A
$8,239 $5,493 $0
5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Commercial/ Industrial/ Public/
Retail Warehouse Institutional
Fee per 1,000 Square Feet of Building Floor Area
$330.00 $169.00 $54.00
$39 .00 $20.25 $6.00
$427.00 $220.00 $69 .00
$30.00 $16.00 $5.00
$1 ,253.00 $642.00 $269 .00
$1,442.00 $7 43.00 $233.00
$828.00 $426.00 $134.00
$652.00 $335.00 $105.00
$5,001 $2,571 $875
Commercial/ Industrial/ Public/
Retail Warehouse Institutional
Fee per 1,000 Square Feet of Building Floor Area
$220.00
$14.00
$285.00
$20.00
$835.00
$961.00
$552.00
$435.00
$3,322
$113.00 N/A
$4.00 N/A
$147.00 N/A
$11.00 N/A
$428.00 N/A
$495.00 N/A
$284.00 N/A
$224.00 N/A
$1,706 $0
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
Table 1.6: Proposed and Current Fee Summary
Expansion Area
Residential, per unit Proposed Fees
Single-Family $21,843
Multi-family $17,569
Accessory Dwelling Units $5,461
Nonresidential, per 1,000 square feet of floor area
Commercial/Retail $9,586
Industrial/Warehouse $5,175
Public/Institutional $3,149
Infill Area
Residential, per unit Proposed Fees
Single-Family $16,382
Multi-family $13,177
Accessory Dwelling Units $4,099
Nonresidential, per 1,000 square feet of floor area
Commercial/Retail $7,189
Industrial/Warehouse $3,881
Public/Institutional $2,362
City Center
Current Fees
$16,479
$ l 0,986
$4,120
$7,215
$3,712
$1,166
Current Fees
$12,359
$8,240
$0
$5,001
$2,571
$875
Residential, per unit Proposed Fees Current Fees
Single-Family $ l 0,921.49 $8,239
Multi-family $8,784.66 $5,493
Accessory Dwelling Units $2,732.90 $0
Nonresidential, per 1,000 square feet of floor area
Commercial/Retail $4,792.94 $3,322
Industrial/Warehouse $2,587.63 $1 ,706
Public/Institutional $1,574.46 $0
FUNDS NEEDED TO COMPLEMENT FEE PROGRAM
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Percent
Increase
33%
60%
33%
33%
39%
170%
Percent
Increase
33%
60%
N/A
44%
51%
170%
Percent
Increase
33%
60%
N/A
44%
52%
N/A
Government Code Section 66000 prohibits using impact fees to remedy an existing facility deficiency. Impact fees imposed on new development may pay for two forms of capital improvements:
1. Additional facilities needed to accommodate growth and maintain the current standard of service, or
2. Facilities that provide an increase in the level of service if existing development also pays for its fair share of facilities needed to raise the level of service .
The analysis contained in this report indicates that existing deficiencies have been identified in the Water, Wastewater, and Storm Drainage categories. Since these deficiencies existed before new development has occurred and new development did not cause the deficiencies, the correction of the deficiencies is not the responsibility of new development-the deficiencies would continue City of Reedley
June 2022
6 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
to exist without the new development. In the Transportation category, existing development would gain a partial benefit from the road improvements included in the City 's capital improvement program . Existing development is obligated to pay for its proportionate fair share of the required improvements from sources other than the impac t fee revenues. These fund s may come from grants, taxes, water and sewer rates, and assessments imposed on current residents.
In the Police and Fire Protec tion categories, the City will contribute Measure B and public safety sales tax revenues to partially offset the impact fees.
The level of funding required from existing development is listed under General Fund/Other Sources in Table 1.7. If the entire fee program as presented herein is adopted , the total amount the City and its current residents would need to contribute is approximately $196.4 million from sources other than fee revenues to provide fa c ilities to existing residents at the same level of service proposed for new development.
Table 1. 7: Projected Impact Fee Revenues
Projected Revenues
from Proposed
Impact Fees = Costs
Facility Category to New Development
Police Protection $230,600
Fire Protection $2,021 ,770
General Government $132,694
Parks and Recreation $12,506,046
Transportation $10,127,932
Water $5,360,081
Wastewater $5,013,780
Storm Drainage $39,477,161
Total $74,870,063
FEE COMPARISONS
General Fund/Other
Sources
$1,200,000
$700,000
$517,306
$0
$32,071 ,785
$16,646, 170
$33,639,415
$36,722,092
$121,496,769
Program Total
$1,430,600
$2,721 ,770
$650,000
$12,506,046
$42,199,717
$22,006,252
$38,653,194
$76,199,253
$196,366,832
The proposed impact fees for similar facilities from selected cities in the region are compared to Reedley's current fee schedule in Table 1.8. The fees listed are applicable to detached singlefamily homes in a typical subdivision (assumes 2,000 sq. ft. home where a fee per square foot is applied).
City of Reedley
June 2022
7 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Table 1.8: Comparison of Impact Fees in Selected Cities1 Revision/ Total City
Effective Fire Storm General Impact
Date Poeulation Police Protection Parks Streets Drainage Sewer Govt. Water Fees Clovis2 9/10/ 20 18 121,834 $100 $ l,0 l 4 $3,43 1 $7,554 $ l 0,494 $7,500 N/A $6,842 $36,935 Fresno, City of2 7 / l / 2020 546,770 $61 8 $1 ,893 $4,027 $8,539 $9,208 $2,11 9 N/A $2,800 $29,204 Dinuba 7 /l /2019 26,517 $1 ,196 $1 ,570 $5,242 $10,688 N/A $2,884 N/A $3,341 $24,919 Sanger 7/15/202 1 27,353 $1 ,538 $1,586 $2,490 $1,993 $5,475 $6,800 N/A $1 ,622 $21,504 Selma3 4/ 6/20 15 24,487 $533 $53 1 $7,377 $1,894 $5,998 $770 $2,682 N/A $19,784 Fowler l / 1 / 2020 6,601 $669 $863 $2,390 N/A $5,195 $2,99 1 $208 $2,684 $15,000 Kingsburg l 0/8/2019 13,084 $1,022 $1,022 $2,907 llill $1,680 l1_ill $2,498 lLZZ_Q $13,563 Average Fee: $8 11 $1,211 $3,981 $5,364 $6,342 $3,458 $1,796 $3, 177 $22,987* Reedley Fees
Current (Base Fee) 26,087 (202 1) $120 $999 $1,299 $5,066 $4,396 $2,521 $94 $1 ,984 $16,479 Proposed (Expansion Area) 32,900 (2035) $123 $1 ,079 $6,672 $5,553 $3,445 $2,393 $7 1 $2,508 $2 1,843 * Average of total fees, not total of the average fees
1Survey of AB 1600 fee as adopted by eac h agency for single-family detached unit. Fees reported for comparable cities are for facil ities similar to the Reedley faci lity categories . 2 The cities of Clovis and Fresno charge the Fresno County Flood Control District drainage area fees. The amounts indicated are the average of the fees for the R- 1 40% impervious zones within the drainage benefit areas . 3Selma Parks includes $209 for Open Space acquisition; General Government includes Public Use Facilities; domestic water is provided by Cal-Am Water, whic h does not charge c apacity fees. Selma fees were updated in 2022 by the ENR-CCI.
Table 1.8: Comparison of Impact Fees in Selected Cities (continued) School Total Non- Total All Fees
District RTMF APCD Fee County City Fees
Clovis $8,160 $2,118 $180 $3,357 $13,815 $50,750
Fresno, City of $8,160 $2,118 $180 $3,357 $13,815 $43,019 Sanger $8,160 $2,118 $180 $3,357 $13,815 $35,319
Selma $8,160 $2, 11 8 $180 $3,357 $13,8 15 $33,599
Fowler6 $8,160 $2,11 8 $180 $3,357 $13,815 $28,815
Kingsburg $8,160 $2,118 $180 $3,357 $13,815 $27,378
Dinuba $8,160 N/A lUill N/A $180 $25,099
Average Fee: $8,160 $2,11 8 $180 $3,357 $13,815 $36,802 Reedley Fees
Current (Base Fee) $8,160 $2,11 8 $180 $3,357 $13,815 $30,294 Proposed (Expansion Area) $8,160 $2, 11 8 $180 $3,357 $13,815 $35,658 School Facility Mitigation Fees are based on Level l Statutory Ra te of $4.08 per sq . ft., assuming 2,000 sq. ft. home.
City of Reedley Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update June 2022 Final Report
8 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The fee comparison table is provided to give a general idea of fees c harged for similar facilities in nearby cities. Even though each local agency in California, to adopt impact fees, must follow the same general principles established by state law, as described in the Introduction of this report, fee comparisons, even among neighboring jurisdictions, tend to vary widely due to several factors:
• The methods used to calculate the impact fees and allocate the fees to types of development differ from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.
• The types of facilities that are c overed by impact fees vary . • Cities adopt different standards, or levels of service, for facilities and may use different methods to calculate those standards.
• Cities may not have kept up with public improvements over the years and therefore have created deficiencies between adopted or desired levels of service and the levels currently provided . This factor may work to reduce the impact fee, sinc e the c osts to remedy the existing deficiencies cannot be passed on to new development.
Furthermore, cities may allow alternatives to impact fees to finance public facilities . Assessment districts and Mello-Roos districts may be used for improvements that serve specific land development projects. District assessments and special taxes levied to provide public improvements sometimes replace impact fees that would otherwise be used for those improvements.
ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS
The City of Reedley, at its sole discretion , may reduce the rec ommended impact fees for one or more categories. However, the recommended fees are established based on the infrastructure required by new development. By reducing fees, it is inevitable that, over time, there will be a c ontinued reduction in the levels of servic e provided by the public facilities funded by the impact fees, unless other funds are used to replace the fee revenues.
Fee Updates
This impact fee study and the rec ommended fees assume a given level of development activity over the 2021-2035 study period . The development that occurs will likely result in different impacts and fee revenues than those projected in this study. For that reason, regular updates are recommended to adjust the growth impact fee to match the needs created by actual development.
Assembly Bill (AB) 602 requires that nexus studies shall be updated at least every eight years from the period beginning January 1, 2022.
City of Reedley
June 2022
9 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
1. INTRODUCTION
This report presents an analysis of the need and related cost of public facilities to accommodate new development in Reedley. This chapter explains the study approac h and summarizes results under the following sections:
• Public Facilities Financing in California
• Mitigation Fee Act and Required Findings
• Water and Wastewater Capacity Charges
• Organization of the Report
• Facility Standards, Level of Service, and Deficiencies
PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING IN CALIFORNIA
The changing fiscal landscape in California over the past three decades has steadily undercut the financial capacity of local governments to fund infrastructure needed for growth . Three dominant trends stand out:
• The passage of a string of tax limitation measures, starting with Proposition 13 in 1978 and continuing through the passage of Proposition 218 in 1996 • Declining popular support for bond measures to finance infrastructure for the next generation of residents and businesses
• Steep reductions in federal and state assistance
Faced with these trends, many cities and counties have had to shift the burden of funding infrastructure expansion from existing rate- and taxpayers to new development. This funding shift has been partly accomplished by the imposition of development impact fees, also known as public facility, capital facility, and mitigation fees . A key advantage of this approach in an era of voter approval requirements is that impact fees are not taxes and are thus exempt from the requirements of Proposition 218, needing only a majority vote of the legislative body for adoption.
Some fee programs address only a few specific facilities , such as traffic , fire, or storm drainage.
Other programs are c omprehensive, funding a variety of facility categories from parks and recreation improvements to expanding or refurbishing City office space to meet the needs of future growth.
In most local agencies that have implemented impact fee programs, new development pays close to the full cost required to maintain existing level of service standards as growth occurs. If local agencies do not c ollect the full amount, the effect is often a decline in fa c ility standards, though some communities are able to increase other revenue sources to c ompensate.
MITIGATION FEE ACT AND REQUIRED FINDINGS
Because of the growing use of impact fees after the passage of Proposition 13 and concern over inconsistencies in their application , the California State legislature passed the Mitigation Fee Act, starting with AB 1600 in 1988. The act, contained in California Government Code Section 66000 et City of Reedley
June 2022
10 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
1. INTRODUCTION
seq., establishes ground rules for the imposition and ongoing administration of impact fee programs. The act became law in April 1989 and requires local governments to document the following when adopting an impact fee:
l. Identify the purpose of the fee.
2. Identify the use of fee revenues.
3. Determine a reasonable relationship between the fee's use and the type of development paying the fee.
4. Determine a reasonable relationship between the need for the fee and the type of development paying the fee.
5. Determine a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee, the impacts caused by development, and the cost to mitigate the impacts.
AB 602 Findings
This bill (amending Government Code Sections 65490. l , 66016.5 and 66019) requires , on and after January 1, 2022, a local agency that conducts an impact fee nexus study to follow specific standards and practices, including, but not limited to:
( l) That prior to the adoption of an associated development fee, an impact fee nexus study be adopted;
(2) That the study identifies the existing level of service for each public facility, identify the proposed new level of service, and include an explanation of why the new level of service is necessary, and;
(3) If the study is adopted after July l , 2022, either calculate a fee levied or imposed on a housing development project proportionately to the square footage of the proposed units or make specified findings explaining why square footage is not an appropriate metric to calculate the fees.
This report complies with applicable California Government Code sections by providing the required documentation for the above findings and determinations that establish the basis for imposition of the recommended fees contained herein.
The fundamental premise of the Mitigation Fee Act is that the burden of the impact fees cannot total more than the actual cost of the public facility needed to serve the development paying the fee . Also, fee revenues can only be used for their intended purposes . In addition, the act has specific accounting and reporting requirements, both annually and after every five-year period, for the use of fee revenues . These requirements are covered in more detail in Chapter 11 of this report.
In addition, the impact fee revenues may not be used for staffing, operations, and maintenance of either existing or new facilities.
WATER AND WASTEWATER CAPACITY CHARGES
Pursuant to Government Code Section 66013, the City may impose a charge on new or upsized connections to the wastewater and water system for such connections' proportional share of existing and/or future wastewater and reclaimed water capacity needed for the new City of Reedley
June 2022
11 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
1. INTRODUCTION
connection(s), respectively. These charges may not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the water and sanitary sewer and service, unless a popular vote is conducted, and twothirds of the electors vote to charge more than the reasonable cost of the needed capacity.
ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT
Chapter 2 presents the population and employment assumptions used for the impact fee analysis.
Chapters 3 through 10 document the justified impact fee for each of the following facility categories:
• Law Enforcement • Transportation
• Fire Protection • Water
• General Government • Wastewater
• Parks and Recreation • Storm Drainage
Each chapter is generally organized identifying the following information to clearly document the requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act discussed above. • The chapter begins by identifying the purpose of the fee by stating the types of facilities that would be funded.
• The existing and future planned facilities inventory summarizes the investment of existing development in this type of facility to date and identifies future planned facilities, if any. • The service population refers to the type of development that requires the facility, whether ( 1) only residents, or (2) residents and businesses (measured by employment) . It also projects the service population growth or demand for facility capacity anticipated to occur over the planning horizon .
• The standards and unit costs establish a reasonable relationship between the need for the fee and the type of development paying the fee. This section also estimates the cost per capita for facilities to accommodate growth.
• The cost to accommodate growth establishes a reasonable relationship between the use of fee revenues and the type of development paying the fee. This section estimates the total facilities costs associated with new development over the planning horizon, equal to the revenues that would be collected through the impact fee. • The fee schedules establish a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the facility attributable to development paying the fee. Using a common factor for facility costs per capita, the fee schedule ensures that each development project pays its fair share of total facility costs.
Finally, Chapter 11 summarizes the fee implementation procedures and recommendations for the ongoing administration of the fee. The recommendations are provided to ensure compliance with the act and that fees are updated in the future for construction cost inflation, a change in the standards, or changes in development assumptions.
City of Reedley
June 2022
12 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
1. INTRODUCTION
FACILITY STANDARDS, LEVEL OF SERVICE, AND DEFICIENCIES
Throughout this report, the words "standard" and "level of service" are used (at times interchangeably) to describe the level of investment in public facilities that are needed to serve the community. A standard is defined as the adopted policy or benchmark that the City would like to achieve for any particular facility. For example, the floor area of fire station space per firefighter would be a standard. On the other hand, level of service refers to the actual level of benefit that the current population experiences. Level of service may be different from the standard for a given facility. When the existing level of service is less than the standard-in other words, when the facility is over capacity relative to the stated or policy standard-a deficiency exists for that facility . If the opposite is the case-if there is a surplus of capacity-the City may recoup a portion of its investment in that facility which is available to serve new development.
Frequently there is no stated policy standard for a given facility, in which case the existing level of service becomes the de facto "current standard," and the terms may be interchangeable.
New development alone cannot be asked to improve the level of service provided by those facilities that serve both new and existing development. Additionally, new development alone cannot correct an existing facility deficiency. Either way, facility standards cannot be increased compared to the existing level of service solely by imposing impact fees on new development.
By policy, the City of Reedley can adopt its own reasonable facility standards to reduce, maintain, or increase the existing facility standard. However, basing an impact fee on a standard that is higher than the existing level of service is fair to new development only if the City were to use alternative funds to increase the capacity in facilities that benefit existing development. This extra funding is needed to correct the existing deficiency.
This study uses three basic approaches for establishing facility standards:
• The existing level of service method uses a standard based on the ratio of existing facilities to the current service population. Under this approach, new development funds the expansion of facilities at the same level of service, or current standard, currently enjoyed by the service population (residents and workers) in existing development. Since the existing level of service is the same as the standard for the facility this approach will not reveal any facility deficiencies attributable to existing development. This method is used for Law Enforcement and Parks and Recreation
• The engineering standard approach is based on standards adopted by the City and/or standard engineering or planning criteria. The basic approach is to maintain the appropriate level of service as defined by accepted planning and engineering practice for infrastructure. Any costs related to existing deficiencies may not be passed on to new development but must be funded by other sources . This method typically results in existing deficiencies that must be funded outside of the impact fee program. This method is used for Transportation, Water, Wastewater, and Storm Drainage facilities . • The master plan method establishes the standard based on the ratio of all existing plus planned facilities to total future demand (current and future development) . This method is used when the local agency anticipates increasing its facility standards above the existing inventory standard and planned facilities are part of a system that benefits both existing and new development. This method also typically results in existing deficiencies that must be funded outside of the impact fee program. This method is used for Fire Protection, and General Government facilities.
City of Reedley
June 2022
13 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
1. INTRODUCTION
Use of these standards is not meant to label them as City policy. Indeed, many jurisdictions consider their existing levels of service to be deficient compared to the policies stated in their general plans. The City of Reedley may, as a policy decision, raise any facility standard and in doing so, possibly create a deficiency relative to the existing level of service.
City of Reedley
June 2022
14 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
2. GROWTH PROJECTIONS
INTRODUCTION
Estimates of existing development (number and type of housing) and projections of growth are used throughout the public facility fee chapters in this report. Current residential population and housing estimates are based on the latest California Department of Finance (DOF) county/city estimate dated January 2021. Current employment (jobs in the city as opposed to employed residents who live in the city but may work elsewhere) are from the Fresno Council of Government's 2019-2050 growth forecast for Reedley.
Forecasts of future population, housing, and employment growth may be found in a variety of sources. The City's 2030 General Plan uses a 3 percent annual growth rate, which, applied to the current population, would equal about 39,500 residents in 2035. Another source is the Fresno Council of Government (FCOG) 2019-2050 projections (revised April 4, 2021) for the Reedley sphere of influence (SOI) . The FCOG shows a projected population of 28,300 for Reedley by 2035.
This estimate is based on a 0.6 percent annual growth rate. Note that the FCOG starts at a 2019 population of 25,170, compared to the DOF's estimate of 25,873 for Reedley in 2019. The 0.6 percent FCOG growth rate is slightly lower than the average growth rate calculated by the DOF over the past 10 years (0.64 percent).
A mid-range rate between the General Plan rate of 3 percent and the DOF' s 10-year average rate (2011-2021) of 0.34 percent for Reedley is about 1.8 percent. This study assumes a slightly more conservative rate of 1.67 percent, whic h is reflected in the table below for the 2035 population and housing.
POPULATION, HOUSING, AND EMPLOYMENT ESTIMATES
The 2035 projections for occupied housing, population, and employment are in Table 2.1. Note that the net growth in Table 2.1 is based on a constant 1 .67 percent annual growth rate to 2035 and not on total buildout.
These population estimates are used as follows:
• Estimates of future growth are used to provide a rough estimate of the total amount of public facilities required to accommodate growth over the planning horizon. • Estimates of existing population and land development are used to determine current facility standards; for example, square feet of public buildings per capita or average daily trips per household to correlate with traffic level of service. • Future employment estimates are used to establish the level of service and facilities that are applicable to future nonresidential development.
City of Reedley
June 2022
15 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
1. INTR0DUCTI0N
Table 2.1: Population, Employment, and Housing Projections to 2035 Net
2021 2035 Growth
Population 1 26,087 32,900 6,813
Employment2
Retail 870 990 120
Office 410 510 100
Service 4,030 4,840 810
Industrial, Manufacturing 1,400 1,640 240
Government 220 240 20
Agriculture 80 80 Q
Total Employment 7,010 8,300 1,290
Housing3
Single-Family Units4 4,972 6,300 1,328
Multi-Family Unitss 1,766 2,270 504
Mobile Homes 253 253 Q
Total Occupied Units 6,990 8,832 1,833
Annual
Rate
1.67%
1.2%
1 Current population for Reedley is from the California Department of Finance (DOF) Estimate, Table E-5, as of 1/1/2021.
2 Current and projected employment from the Fresno Council of Government's 20 19-2050 Growth Forecast for Reedley, 2020 & 2035.
3 Source of current housing estimates is DOF Table E-5, occupied units, 1/1/2021 . 4 DOF, estimate of occupied detached and attached single-family dwelling units, 1/1/2021 . 5 DOF, estimates of occupied duplexes, townhomes, and apartments units, 1/1/2021 .
OCCUPANCY RATES
The use of occupancy rates ensures a reasonable relationship between the increase in service population and the amount of the fee. To do this, the fee must vary by the estimated service population generated by a specific development project. Developers pay the fee based on the number of additional housing units or building square feet, so the fee analysis must convert service population estimates to these measures of project size to derive a fee per unit of development.
This conversion is done with average occupancy factors by land use category, shown in Table 2.2.
Table 2.2: Occupancy Assumptions
Land Use
Residential
Single-Family
Multi-family
Mobile Home
Accessory Units
Nonresidential
Commercial
Industrial/Warehouse
Public/Institutional
City of Reedley
June 2022
Current Occupancy Rate, estimated
3.80 persons per dwelling unit
3.65 persons per dwelling unit
2.00 persons per dwelling unit
0.95 persons per dwelling unit
275 building square feet per worker
1,000 building square feet per worker
1,800 building square feet per worker
Employees
per 1,000 Sq.
Ft.
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
3.64 1.00
0.56 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
16 1. INTRODUCTION
LAND USE CATEGORIES
Measuring the impact of growth requires land use types for summarizing different categories of new development. The land use types used in this analysis are defined below. • Single-Family: Detached and attached {townhomes and condominiums) one-family dwelling units.
• Multi-Family: Dwelling units such as duplexes and condominiums {unless considered attached townhomes) , apartments, and dormitories.
• Mobile Homes: Includes manufactured housing units located in mobile home parks . • Accessory Units: Small self-contained dwelling units constructed on lots with an existing single-family home, detached or attached. In this report, accessory units will generate 25 percent of the demand of a single-family home.
• Office: Professional, financial, insurance, administrative space, and medical offices. • Commercial/Retail: All general and specialty commercial, retail, educational, food service, and hotel/motel development.
• Industrial: All manufacturing, fabrication, food processing, and motor vehicle repair. This category may also encompass business parks, research and development space, including "back offic e" uses, and ancillary employee-serving retail servic es. • Warehouse: Warehousing, truck yards, transfer terminals, storage, and distribution centers. • Public/Institutional: Government offices, public schools, hospitals.
Applying the Impact Fees to Development Projects Involving More Than One Land Use Some development projects may include more than one land use category, such as a mixed-use development with both residential and commercial uses. In these cases, the impact fee would be c alculated separately for each land use c ategory contained within the project.
The amount of impact fees payable should be evaluated prior to the issuance of a building permit and be based on the information in the permit application, including number and type of units, intended occupancy, and floor area per occ upancy. In a single-use struc ture, the total of the fees would be the sum of each of the products of the fee rate for each facility category multiplied by the number of units or the floor area in the structure. 1 For a mixed-use project, wherein more than one use will occupy a single permitted structure, an impac t fee calculation would apply the appropriate fee rate to each portion of the structure containing an identified use. For a commercial-residential structure, the applicable residential fee rates would be applied to each residential unit {the unit may be defined a s either a single-family or multi-family unit depending o n 1 The fee rates for no nresidential constructio n in this study is given per 1,000 square feet of floor area . In compliance with AB 602, the fees may be converted to a fee per square foot.
City of Reedley
June 2022
17 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
1. INTRODUCTION
the type of construction) and the applicable nonresidential rates would be applied to each square foot of nonresidential floor area .
SERVICE POPULATION
Different types of development use public facilities at different rates in relation to each other, depending on the services provided. In each subsequent chapter, a specific service population is identified for each facility type to reflect this. The service population is calculated by weighting one land use category against another based on each category 's demand for services.
Different service populations are used to estimate impacts for different types of fees . To measure existing development and future growth, this report uses:
• Citywide residents and workers for public facilities, such as City administration, fire, and police facilities .
• Dwelling units and building floor area to estimate trip generation for street improvements and to estimate impervious land area for storm drainage. • Water and wastewater use per dwelling unit and per building floor area .
The specific service population for each facility category is shown separately in each chapter of this report. When residents and workers are part of the same service population, it is reasonable to assume that one resident imposes greater demand on public services and associated facilities than one worker. Therefore, workers are factored for purposes of determining their relative demand and the demand that nonresidential development has on public facilities .
City of Reedley
June 2022
18 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
3. LAW ENFORCEMENT FACILITIES
This chapter summarizes the analysis of the need for law enforcement facilities, vehicles, and equipment to accommodate new development to the year 2035. The chapter documents a reasonable relationship between new development and the maximum justified impact fee for the funding of such facilities and vehicles .
POLICE FACILITIES SERVICE POPULATION
The Reedley Police Department serves both residents and workers in the city. Table 3.1 shows the estimated service population for 2021 and at buildout of the Infill and Expansion Areas. In calculating the service population, residents are weighted at 1.0 and workers are weighted at
0.24 to reflect lower per capita service demand. Nonresidential buildings are typically occupied less intensively than dwelling units are, so it is reasonable to assume that average per-worker demand on services is less than average per-resident demand.
Table 3.1: Police Service Population
Factored Service
Residents Workers Workers1 Population
Existing (2021) 26,087 7,010 1,682 27,769
New Development (2021-2035) 6,813 1,290 310 7,123
Total 2035 32,900 8,300 1,992 34,892
Weighting Factor 1.00 0.24
1 The resident-to-worker weighting factor is calculated by dividing a 40-hour workweek into 168 total hours in a week.
EXISTING LAW ENFORCEMENT FACILITIES
The Reedley Police Department headquarters are located at 843 G Street in a building shared by City administration and other departments. It is estimated that roughly half of the building is used by the Police Department.
LAW ENFORCEMENT FACILITIES, STANDARDS, AND UNIT COSTS
To achieve equity in the cost allocation for future capital improvements for law enforcement between the current population and new development, a per capita standard is developed for the current law enforcement facilities and vehicles. The standard is based on the size and current value of the station. Table 3.2 indicates the current level of service standard and the value per capita of the police facility.
Table 3.2: Law Enforcement Facilities Current Standards Police Offices at 843 G Street
Current Value
Value per Square Foot
Service Population 2021
Current Floor Area per Capita (9,877/27,769)
Current Value per Capita ($297.50 x 0.356)
Source: City of Reedley
City of Reedley
June 2022
19 9,877 sq. ft.
$2,938,385
$297.50
27,769
0.3557 sq. ft.
$105.82
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
3. LAW ENFORCEMENT
Police Office Space for 2035
The cost of additional police office space needed for growth to the year 2035 is c alculated in Table 3.3.
Table 3.3: Cost of Additional Police Space, Equipment, and Vehicles at Current Standards Future Service Population, 2035 34,892
Current Standard per Capita
Total Facilities Needed at Current Standard
Less Existing Space
Additional Needed Infill
Cost per Square Foot of New Construction
Cost of Additional Police Space
Additional Equipment and Vehicles (see Table 3.4)
Total Cost
Service Population Growth 2035
Cost per Capita in Infill Area
0.3557 sq. ft.
12,41 1 sq . ft.
(9,877)
2,534 sq . ft.
$400.00
$1 ,013,600
$417,000
$1,430,600
7,123
$200.84
The projected 2035 growth will require additional police officers and the police vehicles and personal equipment needed for these officers . The costs for these items are listed in Table 3.4.
Table 3.4: Police Vehicles and Personal Equipment Costs for New Development Current Officers (sworn positions) 38
Current Patrol Vehicles
Current Service Population
Current Standard of Officers per 1,000 Service
Population
Current Standard for Patrol Vehicles per Offic er
Vehicle and Equipment Needs
2035 Service Population
Additional officers needed for growth ( 1 .37 officers per 1,000 service pop.)
Additional Patrol Vehicles Needed for Growth (0.68 per
officer)
Cost of Equipment, total at $6,000 each
Patrol Vehicles, total at $51 ,000 each
26 27,769
1.37 0.68
7,123
10 7
$60,000
$357,000
$417,000
The total cost per capita for additional police space, equipment and vehicles is summarized in Table 3.5. The cost per capita is multiplied by the occupancy rates for residential and employees per square foot to determine the fee. The total cost in Table 3.5 has been reduced by a contribution of public safety sales tax and Measure B funds .
Table 3.5: Total Cost Per Capita
Polic e Facilities Cost for Growth
Personal Equipment and Police Vehicles
Total Cost
PSST and Measure B Funds
Service Population Growth at Buildout
Cost per New Resident or Worker
City of Reedley
June 2022
20 $1,013,600
$417,000
$1,430,600
($1 ,200,000)
$230,600
7,123
$32.37
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
3. LAW ENFORCEMENT
USE OF FEE REVENUES
The law enforcement facilities impact fee revenues may be used to contribute to the purchase of land and construction of a new police facility; purchase vehicles and equipment with a minimum five-year life span; or perform refurbishment within the parameters allowed by Government Code Section 66000 to provide space for police administrative functions. The fee revenues may also be used to reimburse developers for the cost of their construction of sheriff substations, or dedication of land for that purpose, subject to a reimbursement agreement with the City or as provided in a development agreement.
LAW ENFORCEMENT FACILITIES FEE SCHEDULES
Table 3.6 shows the police facilities impact fee for new development in the Expansion Area. The fee is based on cost per capita of additional police space, equipment, and vehicles multiplied by the occupancy factors for residential units and nonresidential buildings found in Table 2.2. Use of occupancy factors ensures that the fee rate is based on the relative impact generated by each development type in terms of demand for police services from the new service populations generated by residential and nonresidential development. The fee represents the amount required to fully fund all facilities needed to accommodate growth based on the existing standard.
Table 3.6: Proposed Police Facilities Impact Fees-Expansion Area Costs per Occupancy Proposed Current
Land Use Caeita Factor Fee Fee
Residential
Single Family $32.37 3.80 $123.01 $120.00
Multi-family $32.37 3.65 $118.15 $80.00
Accessory Unit $32.37 0.95 $30.75 $30.00
Nonresidential
Commercial/Retail $7.77 3.64 $28.28 $52.00
lndustrial/W arehouse $7.77 1.00 $7.77 $27.00
Public/Institutional $7.77 0.56 $4.35 $8.00
In accordance with the Fee Reduction Incentive Program, the fees in the Infill Area fees shown in Table 3.7 are reduced by 25 percent from the Expansion Area fees .
Table 3.7: Proposed Police Facilities Impact Fees-Infill Area Land Use
Residential
Single Family
Multi-family
Accessory Unit
Nonresidential
Commercial/Retail
Industrial/Warehouse
Public/Institutional
City of Reedley
June 2022
Cost per
Caeita
$24.28
$24.28
$24.28
$5.83
$5.83
$5.83
21 Occupancy Proposed Current
Factor Fee Fee
3.80 $92.26 $90
3.65 $88.62 $60
0.95 $23.07 N/A
3.64 $21.22 $39
1.00 $5.83 $20
0.56 $3.26 $6
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
3. LAW ENFORCEMENT
The impact fee is proposed for the Center City Area in Table 3.8 is 50 percent of the Expansion Area fee.
Table 3.8: Proposed Police Facilities Impact Fees-City Center Land Use
Residential
Single Family
Multi-family
Accessory Unit
Nonresidential
City of Reedley
June 2022
Commercial/Retail
Industrial/Warehouse
Public/Institutional
Cost per
Caeita
$16.19
$16.19
$16.19
$3.89
$3.89
$3.89
Occupancy
Factor
3.80 3.65
0.95 3.64
1.00 0.56
22 Proposed Current
Fee Fee
$61.52 $60
$59.09 $40
$15.38 N/A
$14.16 $14
$3.89 $4
$2.18 N/A
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
4. FIRE PROTECTION FACILITIES
This chapter summarizes the analysis of the need for fire facilities, firefighting vehicles, and personal protective equipment for additional firefighters to accommodate new development to the year 2035. The chapter documents a reasonable relationship between new development and the maximum justified impact fee for funding these facilities and equipment.
FIRE FACILITIES SERVICE POPULATION
The Reedley Fire Department provides fire protection and emergency medical services to the City of Reedley and other agencies in the region through mutual aid agreements. The residential and nonresidential fire service population within the current city limits is calculated in Table 4.1 in the same manner as for law enforcement, with the impact of the nonresidential population factored at 24 percent of the residential population .
Table 4.1: Fire Protection Service Population
Existing (2021)
New Development (2021-2035)
Total 2035
Weighting Factor
EXISTING FIRE PROTECTION ASSETS
Residents
26,087
6,813
32,900
1.00 Workers
7,010
1,290
8,300
0.24 Factored Service
Workers Population
1,682 27,769
310 7,123
1,992 34,892
The City of Reedley owns and operates the fire station facilities described in Table 4.2, which also shows the current standards for these facilities in terms of square feet of floor area and current value per capita .
Table 4.2: Fire Facilities
Facility
Fire Department Structures
Fire Station, 1060 D Street
Fire Department Storage Shed
Servic e Population (2021)
Standards per Capita
So urc e : City of Reedley
Per Capita
Standard
Floor Area
4,583 sq. ft.
360 sq. ft.
4,943 sq. ft.
27,769
0.18 sq . ft.
Current Value
$2,118,141
$32,919
$2,151 ,060
27,769
$77.46
Table 4.3 calculates the current investment per capita of all City-owned fire protection equipment. Firefighting vehicles and equipment are included in the facility c osts because they represent integral capital investments needed to provide fire protec tion services and have at least a five-year service life. Equipment values indic ated are replacement values.
City of Reedley
June 2022
23 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
4. FIRE PROTECTION
Table 4.3: Fire Protection Vehicles and Current Value
Vehicle Description
1999 Pierce Quantum Series 60
2003 Freightliner Westates Type 1
2005 Pierce Hawk Pumper
2005 Pierce Arrow Pumper
2015 Rosenbauer Cobra Aerial Ladder
2009 Ford F-550 Rescue Squad
2014 Ford F-150 Command Vehicle
2018 Ford F-150 Responder Vehicle
2018 Ford F-150
Current Service Population
Year
Acquired
1999
2012
2005
2005
2017
2009
2014
2019
2018
Replacement
Value
$550,000
$180,000
$431,013
$450,000
. $925,300
$265,239
$60,000
$53,500
$30,945
Total $2,945,997
27,769
Current Value per Capita $106.09
Source: City of Reedle y
The costs of personal protective gear for additional firefighters needed for growth are given in Table 4.4. The current personnel, both paid and volunteers , are considered in the staffing rates per 1,000 service population to determine new positions needed in the future.
Table 4.4: Personal Equipment Costs for New Development to 2035 Description
Protective Clothing & Equipment including
Communications2
Breathing Apparatus
Projected Growth in Service Population
No. of Cost per
Items 1 ltem2
11 $4,000
11 $5,000
Total
Cost per Capita for New Development
Current Firefighters (including chief, battalion chief, lieutenants, and voluntary paid-per-call) 42
Current Service Population (Residents+ Factored Workers) 27,769 Firefighters per 1,000 Service Population
Projected Growth in Service Population
Additional Positions Needed for Growth
Source: City of Reedley, 2021-22 Budget
1.512
7,123
11 1 Projected additional items based on firefighters needed for growth. 2 Cost per item estimate based on similar fire protection agencies.
Total Cost
of
Equipment
for Growth
$44,000
$55,000
$99,000
7,123
$13.90
The projected growth will require construction of a second fire station sometime before 2035. The total cost per capita for all required facilities, vehicles, and equipment is given in Table 4.5. This table includes the value of the current fire station and firefighting equipment, which are assets that can be charged to new development as a "buy-in " fee that recognizes the investment that existing residents and businesses have made in fire protection .
City of Reedley
June 2022
24 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
4. FIRE PROTECTION
Table 4.5: Per Capita Costs for New Development to 2035 Fire Facilities
Current Fire Protection Assets
Facilities
Planned Additional Fire Protection Assets
Turnout Room
Storage Facility
Second Station
New Apparatus
Subtotal New
Total
2035 Service Population
Facility Cost per Capita
Additional Personal Protective Equipment
per Capita
Firefighting Vehicles Cost per Capita
Total Cost per Capita for New Development
Service Population Growth - 2035
Total Cost for New Development
PSST and Measure B Funds applied to cost for
New Development
Net Total Cost for New Development
Net Cost per Capita
FIRE FACILITIES FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT AND USE OF FEE REVENUES $2,151 ,060
$45,000
$350,000
$5,500,000
$ l,l 00,000
$6,995,000
$9,146,060
34,892
$262. l 2
$13.90
$ l 06.09
$382.11
7,123
$2,721,770
($700,000)
$2,021,770
$283.84
The Fire Department is considering immediate and long-term needs for fire protection that rely, in part, on impact fees. The planning effort includes:
• A second fire station located to serve growth in the Expansion Area . • New firefighting vehicle and equipment for the second station. • A turnout room and storage facility for additional firefighters .
The fire protection impact fee revenues may be used to purchase land and/or to construct new facilities ; upgrade existing facilities; reimburse developers who construct fire protection facilities and/or purchase equipment that will also serve other development that will benefit from the improvements; purchase vehicles and equipment with a minimum five-year life span; and/or enhance the utility of existing facilities , and/or perform refurbishment within the parameters allowed by Government Code Section 66000.
FIRE FACILITIES FEE SCHEDULES
Tables 4.6, 4.7, and 4.8 show the fire protection facilities impact fees for new development in the Expansion Area , Infill Area , and City Center, respectively, based on the facilities cost per capita in Table 4.5. The fees represent the amount required to fully fund all facilities needed to accommodate growth based on the needs stated in the specific plans for future development.
Citywide residential and nonresidential development would pay the fee based on the fire protection service population occupancy rates shown.
City of Reedley
June 2022
25 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
4. FIRE PROTECTION
Table 4.6: Proposed Fire Protection Impact Fees-Expansion Area Cost per Occupancy Proposed Current
Land Use Caeita Factor Fee Fee
Residential
Single Family $283.84 3.80 $1,078.59 $999.00
Multi-family $283.84 3.65 $1,036.02 $666.00
Accessory Unit $283.84 0.95 $269.65 $249.75
Nonresidential
Commercial/Retail $68.12 3.64 $247.96 $437.00
Industrial $68.12 1.00 $68.12 $225.00
Public/Institutional $68.12 0.56 $38.15 $71 .00
Table 4.7: Proposed Fire Protection Impact Fees-Infill Area Cost per Occupancy Proposed Current
Land Use Capita Factor Fee Fee
Residential
Single Family $212.88 3.80 $808.94 $749.25
Multi-family $212.88 3.65 $777.01 $499.50
Accessory Unit $212.88 0.95 $202.24 N/A
Nonresidential
Commercial/Retail · $51.09 3.64 $185.97 $330.00
Industrial $51 .09 1.00 $51.09 $169.00
Public/Institutional $51 .09 0.56 $28.61 $54.00
Table 4.8: Proposed Fire Protection Impact Fee-City Center Cost per Occupancy Proposed Current
Land Use Capita Factor Fee Fee
Residential $141.92 3.80 $539 .30 $499.50
Single Family $141.92 3.65 $518.01 $333.00
Multi-family $141.92 0.95 $134.82 N/A
Accessory Unit
Nonresidential
Commercial/Retail $34.06 3.64 $123.98 $220.00
Industrial $34.06 1.00 $34.06 $113.00
Public/Institutional $34.06 0.56 $19.07 N/A
City of Reedley
June 2022
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
26 5. GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
This chapter summarizes the analysis of the need for general government facilities to accommodate new development. The chapter doc uments a reasonable relationship between new development and the maximum justified impact fee for funding such fac ilities and equipment.
GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITIES SERVICE POPULATION
The general government facilities serve both residents and workers in Reedley.
Table 5.1 shows the estimated service populations for 2021 and for buildout (government facilities will serve both the Infill and Expansion Areas) . In calculating the service population, residents are weighted at 1.0 and workers are weighted at 0.24 to reflect lower per capita service demand.
Nonresidential buildings are typically occupied less intensively than dwelling units are, so it is reasonable to assume that average per-worker demand on services is less than average perresident demand.
Table 5.1: General Government Service Population
Factored Service
Residents Workers Workers Population
Existing (2021) 26,087 7,010 1,682 27,769
New Development (2021-2035) 6,813 1,290 310 7,123
Total2035 32,900 8,300 1,992 34,892
Weighting Factor 1.00 0.24
CURRENT GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITIES AND STANDARDS
The City of Reedley owns and operates the facilities listed in Table 5.2.
To ensure equity between the level of existing facilities and the facilities for whic h new development should be responsible, a per capita facility standard is calculated in Table 5.2. Both the current and future service populations will benefit equally from the City 's current assets in government buildings, vehicles, and equipment.
Table 5.2: General Government Facilities Current Values and Cost per Capita City Offices, 845 G Street
Corporate Yard
Service Population (2021)
Standard per Capita
Sourc e : City o f Reedley Asset Inven tory
City of Reedley
June 2022
Per Capita Per Capita
Standard Standard Current Value
Floor Area per Sq. Ft.
9,877 sq . ft.
8,329 sq . ft.
18,206 sq . ft.
27,769
0.66 sq. ft.
Current Value
$2,938,385
$1 ,382,477
$4,320,862
27,769
$155.60
$297.50
$165.98
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
5. GENERAL GOVERNMENT
PLANNED GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITIES
Projected service population growth to the year 2035 will necessitate new or expanded offices for the City's administrative personnel. The City is considering plans for a new 2,000-square-foot City Hall annex estimated to cost approximately $500,000, which is well within the current facility floor area standard of 0.66 square feet per capita (4,700 square feet for 7,123 new service population).
The City also proposes to install electric vehicle charging stations at the Corporation Yard and in public parking lots. The $150,000 initial cost, shown in Table 5.3, will be applied to the impact fee, and will be supplemented by future grant funding.
Table 5.3: General Government Planned Facilities and Cost per Capita Planned New Facilities Costs
New City Hall Annex $500,000
EV Charging Stations $150,000
Total Cost of Planned New Facilities $750,000
Service Population Total at Buildout 34,892
Cost per Capita $18.63
USE OF FEE REVENUES
The general government impact fee revenues may be used to construct new facilities, purchase land for new facilities, upgrade existing facilities, purchase vehicles and equipment with a minimum five-year life span, enhance the utility of existing technology systems, and/or perform refurbishment within the parameters allowed by Government Code Section 66000.
GENERAL GOVERNMENT FEE SCHEDULES
Table 5.4 shows the proposed General Government facilities impact fee for new development in the Expansion Area based on the General Government cost per capita in Table 5.3. The fee represents the amount required to fully fund all facilities needed to accommodate growth based on the planned facilities standard. Citywide residential and nonresidential development would pay the fee based on the service population for the facilities. In accordance with the Fee Reduction Incentive Program, the proposed Infill Area fees in Table 5.5 are 75 percent of Expansion Area fees and the City Center fees in Table 5.6 are 50 percent of Expansion Area fees .
Table 5.4: Proposed General Government Impact Fees-Expansion Area City of Reedley
June 2022
Cost per Occupancy Proposed
Land Use Capita Factor Fee Current Fee
Residential
Single Family $28.66
Multi-family $18.63
Accessory Unit $18.63
Nonresidential
Commercial/Retail $4.47
Industrial $4.47
Public/Institutional $4.47
28 3.80 $70.79 $94.00
3.65 $68.00 $63.00
0.95 $17.70 $23.50
3.64 $16.27 $41.00
1.00 $4.47 $21.00
0.56 $2.50 $7.00
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
5. GENERAL GOVERN_MENT
Table 5.5: Proposed General Government Impact Fees-Infill Area Cost per Occupancy Proposed Current
Land Use1 Ca~ita Factor Fee Fee
Residential
Single Family $13.97 3.80 $53.09 $70.50
Multi-family $13.97 3.65 $50.99 $47.25
Accessory Unit $13.97 0.95 $13.27 N/A
Nonresidential
Commercial/Retail $3.35 3.64 $12.20 $30.00
Industrial $3.35 1.00 $3.35 $16.00
Institutional/ Other $3.35 0.56 $1.88 $5.00
Table 5.6: Proposed General Government Impact Fees-City Center Land Use1
Residential
Single Family
Multi-family
Accessory Unit
Nonresidential
Commercial/Retail
Industrial
Institutional/Other
City of Reedley
June 2022
Cost per
Ca~ita
$9.31
$9.31
$9.31
$2.24
$2.24
$2.24
Occupancy
Factor
3.80 3.65
0.95 3.64
1.00 0.56
29 Proposed Current
Fee Fee
$35.38 $47.00
$33.98 $31 .50
$8.84 N/A
$8.15 $20.00
$2.24 $11.00
$1 .25 N/A
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
6. PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES
This chapter summarizes the analysis of the need for parks to accommodate new development.
The chapter documents a reasonable relationship between new development and the maximum justified impact fee for funding such facilities.
PARKS SERVICE POPULATION
Reedley's park facilities serve both the city's residential and worker populations . The current service population and growth from 2021 to 2035 are shown in Table 6.1.
Table 6.1: Park and Recreation Service Population
Existing (2021)
New Development (2021-2035)
Total 2035
Weighting Factor
CURRENT PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES
Residents
26,087
6,813
32,900
1.00 Factored Service
Workers Workers Population
7,010 1,682 27,769
1,290 310 7,123
8,300 1,992 34,892
0.24 The Reedley park system includes a community center, a sports park, four community parks, three river parks, six neighborhood parks, a recreational trail, and a splash park. These parks, along with their usable acres and amenities, are listed in Table 6.2. This inventory includes only public parks within the city limits and does not include school playgrounds or school recreational facilities.
City of Reedley
June 2022
30 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
Table 6.2: Current Parks Facility Inventory
Location
Reedley Community Center
Community Parks
C.F. Mueller Park
Pioneer Park
Camacho Park
Citizens Park
Lions Club Community Park
Reedley Sports Park
Neighborhood Parks
River Parks
Smith's Ferry Park
Cricket Hollow Park
Reedley Beach Park
Reedley Parkway Trail
Total Developed Park Acres:
Undeveloped Parkland Acres:
Park Equivalent Acres: 1
Total All Park Acres:
Developed
Park
(acres)
0 0
0..
0)
C .E
E 'i
~
&II
1:
::,
0 u
&II
·c
C
a,
1-
"0
a,
~ 0)
::::i
1:
::,
0 u
0 .0
~ .:it.
&II
0 CCI
Included in Mueller Park
6.93 1.38
8.01 9.60
✓
✓
Included in Mueller Park
8.08 2.24
3.83 4.50
3.00 29 .50
77.07 70.66
35.33 112.40
&II
"O
-a;
u:::
0 CCI
"O
a,
~ 0)
::::i
✓
✓
0 a,
<
>-
0 ii:
a,
> ·;;:;
&II
0 0..
-
a,
u
0 a.
V)
C
a,
a.
0 e
0 0
-= &II
a,
A:::
0 a,
<
>-
0 ii:
&II
C
a,
:2
:c
u
&II
a,
::,
u
a,
.0
0 CCI
✓ ✓ ✓
✓
✓
✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓
~
ii:
a,
0 .c
&II
a,
&II
0 :::c
&II
a,
.c
u
C
a,
CCI
"O
C
0 &II
a,
::0
0 1-
u
·c
u
ii:
✓
✓
✓
✓
C
g
·s;
0 0..
-
&II
l
-a;
.c
V)
u
·c
u
ii:
✓
✓
a;
c
a,
u
C
.Q
0 a,
t;
a,
A:::
1 Undeveloped park acres are counted as 50 percent of developed acres to calculate "park equivalent acres" Source: City of Reedley
City of Reedley
June 2022
31 .c
0 0..
a,
u
>-
u
&ii
-
0)
C
32 0
~
✓
✓
6. PARKS AND RECREATION
.::,t.
0 0..
a,
0 .::,t.
~
✓
&II
C
0 :.::
0 0 t; CCI Q)
.::,t. .!!!
u ~ 0 a, C X V) w
✓
✓ ✓
✓
.::,t.
0 0..
0)
0 0
✓
✓
"O
0 0..
.c
&II
0 a.
~
C
a,
a.
0 -
"O
C
0 32
0 0..
"O
a,
a.
0 ~ a,-;;;-
a, u ~ "O O U C 0. 0 ::> ~ .......
0.30 0.82
1.7 4
40.16 4.16
3.04 2.38
18.06 70.66
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
6. PARKS AND RECREATION
PARK STANDARDS AND UNIT COSTS
This section discusses the standard used to determine the applicable impact fees for park and recreation facilities.
The existing park level of service shown in Table 6.3 is based on total developed parks and undeveloped park equivalent acreage.
Table 6.3: Current Parks Level of Service
Developed
Acres
Neighborhood Parks
Community Parks
River Parks
Reedley Sports Park
Subtotal Park Area
Recreational Trails
2.24 25.92
11 .33
8.08 47.57
29.50 77.07
Reedley City Parks, developed area
Undeveloped Park land at 50 percent
Total Park Area
Current Service Population (2021)
Current Park acres per 1,000 residents
General Plan Park Standard
Undeveloped
Acres
4.16 2.86
23.48 40.16
70.66 0.00
70.66 77.07 ac.
35.33 ac.
112.40 ac.
27,769
4.05 4.00
Park standards are typically stated in terms of acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. The existing park level of service for Reedley is 4.05 acres per 1,000 service population, which is the actual number of park equivalent acres of developed parks per l ,000 service population and not the standard stated in the General Plan, which is 4.00 acres per 1,000 residents.
Park Cost Estimate
The conceptual cost estimate for the 50-acre Reedley Sports Park Master Plan dated February 2016 was used to develop the park development cost per acre for this impact fee study. The planned amenities and costs for the Master Plan are listed in Table 6.4. These amenities are typical of those found in Reedley's existing parks. The improvements listed include all Master Plan phases except the completed 8-acre Phase l .
City of Reedley
June 2022
32 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
6. PARKS AND RECREATION
Table 6.4: Reedley Sports Park Cost Estimate
Item Cost Item Cost
Clearing and Grubbing
Demolition
$1 22,000 Site Furniture $163,000
Survey control and staking
Site preparation
Erosion Control/Environmental
SWPP
Grading
Storm Drain System
Catch basins
Area drains
RCP pipe
Connection
Trench drains
Sanitary Sewer System
Manholes
Connection to city service
Sanitary pipe
Connection to restrooms
$261 ,000
$993,000
$780,000
$400,000
Domestic Water System $220,000
Connection to city service
Connection to restrooms and concession
Piping/backflow /master
valve
Site Electrical $841 ,000
Connection to city service
Pedestrian path lighting
Parking lot lighting
Restroom/concession
lighting
Large picnic area lighting
Main transformer
Street lighting
Security lighting
A.C. Paving Parking Lots
Concrete Walks
Shade Structures/Picnic Areas
City of Reedley
June 2022
$1 ,252,000
$1 ,584,000
$80,000
Benches
Trash receptacles
Bike racks
BBQ grills
Bollards
Irrigation system
Water connection
Pump system
Central control system
Mainline
Lateral lines
Heads/sprays/drip irrigation
Planting
Turf planting
24" box trees
15 gal trees
Shrubs
Groundcover
Mulch
Header board
Tree wells
Playgrounds
Tot play equipment
School age play equipment
play surfacing
Concrete plaza area
Concrete band
Entry Sign
Restrooms Buildings
Subtotal
Cost Escalation, since 2016
Estimated Cost in 2021
Contingency ( 10 perc ent)
Total Cost
Park Area (acres)
Total Cost per Acre
ENR Construction Cost Index
2016:
2021 (August) :
Percent Chan e
$686,000
$930,000
$300,000
$50,000
$500,000
$9,162,000
21 %
$11,068,718
$1 ,106,872
$12,175,589
42.50 $286,484
10,331
12,481
21 %
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
33 6. PARKS AND RECREATION
RECREATION FACILITIES
In addition to parks, the City of Reedley Parks and Recreation Department operates the Community Center, listed in Table 6.5. The estimated current value of the Community Center is based on the current value of the facility reported in the City 's Asset Inventory. New development is responsible for matching the current value standard for the facility, with total cost for growth calculated in the table.
Table 6.5: Recreation Facilities
Reedley Community Center, Total Floor Area
Current Value
Community Center Value per Square Foot
Current Service Population (2021)
Current Recreation Facility Floor Area per Capita (21,006/27,7 69) Community Center Value per Capita ($193.29 x 0.7564)
21,006 sq . ft.
$4,060,310
$193.29
27,769
0.7564 sq . ft.
$146.20
7,123
$1,041,383
Service Population Growth to 2035
Total Cost for Growth for Recreation Facilities
Source: City of Reedley Asset Inventory
PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT
New development can be required to provide its proportionate share of park and recreation facilities required to maintain the existing level of service or to increase the level of service standard in terms of number of developed park acres per 1,000 residents. Table 6.6 calculates park and recreation cost per capita for new development based on the "applied standard " of 3 acres per 1,000 residents, the park improvements cost per acre calculated in Table 6.4, and the recreation facilities in Table 6.5. The 2030 General Plan Park Standard is 4 acres per 1,000 people, and in the context of section of 4.17 "Park Standards" "people" is taken to mean residents . The service population for parks includes factored workers since the park impact fee is charged to nonresidential as well as residential development. Therefore, applying a park standard of 3.00 acres per 1,000 service population more closely matches the park acreage required for growth when that growth includes employees.
Table 6.6: Parks Cost per Capita-2035
Park and Recreation Acquisition and Development Costs for Growth Applied Level of Service Standard per 1,000 Population
Service Population Growth to 2035
Park Acres Required for Growth
Estimated Park Development Cost per Acre
Estimated Park Acquisition Cost per Acre
Total Cost per Acre
Developed Park Cost for 2035 (new park acres required x park cost per acre)
Other Recreation Facilities Cost per Capita
Recreation Facility Total Cost for New Development (new residents x cost per capita)
Total Park and Recreation Cost for 2035 Service Population Total 2035 Service Population
Cost per Capita at Applied Standard
3.00 ac .
7,123
21 .37
$286,848
$250,000
$536,484
$11,464,663
$146.20
$1 ,041,383
$12,506,046
7,123
$1,755.73
City of Reedley
June 2022
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
34 6. PARKS AND RECREATION
USE OF FEE REVENUES
Park impact fee revenues may be used to contribute to the acquisition and development of new parkland, expansion of the Community Center, and construction of other recreation facilities at existing or new sites. Fee revenues may also be used to purchase and install park amenities to increase park user capacity and enhance functionality, such as playground equipment, hard courts, restrooms, turf, and ballfield and play area lighting to extend hours of use, and/or perform refurbishment within the parameters allowed by Government Code Section 66000.
PARK FACILITIES FEE SCHEDULES
Tables 6.7, 6.8, and 6.9 show the park and recreation impact fees for the Expansion, Infill Areas (75 percent of Expansion Area) , and City Center (50 percent of Expansion Area) , respectively, based on costs per capita in Table 6.6 . The fees represent the amount required to fully fund all park improvements needed to accommodate growth based on the park level of service of 3.00 acres per 1 ,000 service population.
Table 6. 7: Proposed Park and Recreation Fees-Expansion Area Cost per Occupancy
Land Use Capita Factor
Residential
Single Family $1 ,755.73 3.80
Multi-family $1 ,755.73 3.65
Accessory Unit $1 ,755.73 0.95
Nonresidential
Commercial/Retail $421 .38 3.64
Industrial/Warehouse $421.38 1.00
Public/Institutional $421.38 0.56
Table 6.8: Proposed Park and Recreation Fees-Infill Area Land Use
Residential
Single Family
Multi-family
Accessory Unit
Nonresidential
Commercial/Retail
lndustrial/W are house
Public/Institutional
City of Reedley
June 2022
Cost per Occupancy
Caeita Factor
$1 ,316.80 3.80
$1,316.80 3.65
0.95 $316.03
$316.03 3.64
$316.03 1.00
$316.80 0.56
35 Proposed Current
Fee Fee
$6,671.77 $1 ,299.00
$6,408.41 $866.00
$1,667.94 $324.75
$1,533.81 $569 .00
$421.38 $293.00
$235.97 $92.00
Proposed Current
Fee Fee
$5,003.84 $974.25
$4,806.32 $649.50
$1,250.96 N/A
$1,150.35 $427.00
$316.03 $220.00
$176.98 $69 .00
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
Table 6.9: Proposed Park and Recreation Fees-City Center Land Use
Residential
Single Family
Multi-family
Acc essory Unit
Nonresidential
Commercial/Retail
Industrial/Warehouse
Public/Institutional
City of Reedley
June 2022
Cost per Occupancy
Capita Factor
$877.87 3.80
$877.87 3.65
$877.87 0.95
$210.69 3.64
$210.69 1.00
$210.69 0.56
6. PARKS AND RECREATION
Current
Proposed Fee Fee
$3,335.91 $649.25
$3,204.23 $433.00
$833.98 N/A
$766.91 $285.00
$210.69 $147.00
$117.99 N/A
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
7. TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES
This chapter summarizes the analysis of the need for major street improvements, which include arterial roadway and intersection improvements identified in the Reedley General Plan Circulation Element, to accommodate new development to the year 2035 within the current city limits and the Expansion Area . The c hapter documents a reasonable relationship between new development and the impact fee for funding these facilities .
TRAFFIC DEMAND FROM NEW DEVELOPMENT
For this study, a traffic demand analysis was conducted for the projec ted 2035 growth. Table 7.1 shows the current and projected housing and nonresidential floor area and the projected vehicle miles traveled (VMT) , which are the key inputs to the trip generation analyses presented in showing the VMT in the Infill and Expansion Areas .
ROADWAY STANDARDS AND LEVEL OF SERVICE
A segment of a roadway 's level of service (LOS) is measured by its volume-to-capacity ratio (v/c).
A v/c of 1.00 or more is assigned LOS F, which indicates the segment has reached its capacity to handle traffic. A segment with LOS A has a v/c of 0.6 or better. A lower v/c typically means a lower time of travel over the segment of roadway. The Reedley General Plan applies LOS C as a performance threshold for roadway segments and intersections.
Under the conditions reported in the Transportation Impact Analysis Study prepared for the 2030 General Plan Draft EIR by Omni-Means in 2012, all roadway segments in Reedley, except for one, were operating at acceptable LOS C conditions or better. The segment along Manning Avenue between I Street and Buttonwillow Avenue was operating at an unacceptable LOS F. Two intersections were operating at LOS D during the morning peak hour: Manning Avenue at Reed Avenue and Manning Avenue at Frankwood Avenue . Since then , Manning Avenue has undergone widening and intersection improvements. With the completion of these improvements, no roadways or intersections should be currently operating at less than LOS C.
TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT
Improvements to the circulation system consisting of arterial roadway, intersection, and traffic signal projects needed to accommodate new development are identified in the Circulation Element. A list of these improvements, and cost estimates for roadway improvements expected to be needed by 2035, was completed for this impact fee update. These improvement projects are listed in Tables 7.2 and 7.3 and depicted in Figure 7.1. The unit construction costs used for the update are found in Appendix B and were taken, where available, from bid tabulations for city road improvement projects.
The cost estimates for the new roadways in Table 7.2 account for construction of frontage improvements by developers of adjacent undeveloped parcels. Estimates for the Expansion Area improvements include only the two inner lanes, the median , and bike lanes on arterial streets. The adjacent development would construct the outer travel lanes, c urb, gutter, sidewalk, and parkway improvements; these costs are not included in the cost estimates . Both lanes of the twolane collector streets are included in the c ost estimates with the understanding that developers would receive a credit against the impact fee for improvements constructed to serve their projects.
City of Reedley
June 2022
37 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
V,
?
0 0
Q
0 7. TRANSPORTATION
Note that potential redevelopment of adjac ent non-vacant property is a spec ia l c ase where the redevelopers would likely pay for the required frontage improvements.
Figure 7.1
2030 GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT
,/
/
City of Reedley
June 2022
Street Classes
1ajor Arterial
.... ArtBria l
Collector
Local Street
Private Street
1111 Future Arterial
0 ~A~ ,tj,
151 Future Collector
New
Roundabout
New Signal
E Adam~ A•,•e-nue
E Sumni!r Av-sn u-s
---+-----+- Railroad Tracks
Kings River
c=J Study Area
Sphere of Influence
Previous Sphere of Influence
c=J Cit>; Um its
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
7. TRANSPORTATION
Table 7.1: Vehicle Miles Traveled by Existing and New Development to 2035 Adjusted
Growth Adjusted Peak
Existing 2021- Peak Period Current New PeakDwelling 2035 Total 2035 Trip Trip Period Trips/DUE Total Period VMT Units or (Units or (units or Peak- Pass- Length Length Trips/DUE Factor Peak- from Total 2035 1,000 Sq. 1,000 1,000 sq. Period By Existing Growth Factor for for Period Growth PeakLand Use1 Ft. {2021} Sg. Ft.} ft.} Trie Rate Rate {miles} {miles} Existing Growth VMT 2021-2035 Period VMT Residential (in units)
Single-family 4,972 1,328 6,300 1.1 0 0.00 4.00 5.00 4.40 5.50 21,876 7,305 29,181 Multi-family 1,766 504 2,270 0.60 0.00 4.00 5.00 2.40 3.00 4,237 1,512 5,749 Mobile Home 253 Q 253 0.50 0.00 4.00 5.00 2.00 2.50 505 Q 505 6,990 1,833 8,823 26,618 8,817 35,435
Nonresidential (in thousand sq. ft. units)
Commerc ial 1,500 300 1,800 1.20 0.60 4.00 5.00 1.92 2.40 2,880 720 3,600 Industrial 1,350 150 1,500 1.90 0.85 4.00 5.00 1. 14 1.43 1,539 215 1,754 I nstitutiona I 620 200 820 2.80 0.90 4.00 5.00 1.12 1.40 694 280 974 3,470 650 4,120 5,11 3 1,215 6,328
31,73 1 10,032 41,763
Percentage of New Tries to Total Tries in 2035: 24%
City of Reedley
June 2022
39 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
Table 7.2: Circulation Element Improvements
General Plan Circulation
Element Improvements in
Ex~ansion Area
Major Arterials
East Manning Avenue
West Manning Avenue
South Avenue
South Buttonwillow Avenue
South Buttonwillow Avenue
South Buttonwillow Avenue
City of Reedley
June 2022
Descri~tion
Widen existing 2 lanes to 4
lanes with median and bike
lanes from 440 east of So .
Buttonwillow Avenue to So.
Englehart Ave.
Landscape existing median
from SOI (So. Lac Jae Ave .) to
city limits.
Widen existing 2 lanes to 4
lanes with median and bike
lanes from Reed Avenue to So .
Buttonwillow Ave.
Widen existing 2 lanes to 4
lanes with median and bike
lanes from South Avenue to 275
feet south of East Parlier Ave .
Add l travel lane with
median and 2 bike lanes to
segment from 27 5 feet south of
East Parlier Ave. to East Cypress
Ave.
Widen 2 lanes with median
and bike lanes from East
Cypress Ave . to 260 feet north
of East Manning Ave.
40 Segment
Length Estimated
(feet} Cost
4,825 $2,509,000
4,100 $451 ,000
7,500 $3,900,000
2,910 $1 ,513,200
1,080 $419,040
1,100 $572,000
]. TRANSPORTATION
Improvements
Constructed New
Right-of- by Adjacent Development
Way_ Develo~ment Fair Share
($1 ,273,800) $1 ,235,200
$0 $451 ,000
($1,557,600) $2,342,400
($768,240) $744,960
($142,569) $276,480
($145,200) $426,800
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
Table 7.2: Circulation Element Improvements (continued) General Plan Circulation
Element Improvements in
Exeansion Area
South Buttonwillow Avenue
South Buttonwillow Avenue
East Dinuba Avenue
East Dinuba Avenue
South Reed Avenue
South Frankwood Avenue
North Zumwalt Avenue
City of Reedley
June 2022
Descrietion
Add 1 travel lane with
median and bike lanes from 430
feet south of East Manning Ave
to Washington Ave.
Widen 2 lanes to 4 lanes with
median and bike lanes from 420
feet south of East Dinuba Ave
to East Huntsman Ave.
Widen existing 2-lane to 4-
lane arterial with bike lanes
from South Columbia Ave. to
Roundabout at South
Buttonw illow Ave.
Widen existing 2-lane to 4-
lane arterial w ith bike lanes
from Tobu Ave. to So. Englehart
Ave .
Widen existing 2-lane to 4-
lane with bike lanes north of
Floral Ave.
Widen existing 2-lane to 4-
lane with bike lanes from Floral
Ave . to East Davis Ave.
Widen existing 2-lane to 4-
lane with bike lanes from East
Dinuba to East Manning Ave .
41 Segment
Length Estimated
{feet} Cost
4,120 $1 ,330,760
2,000 $1 ,040,000
2,300 $906,200
3,500 $1 ,379,000
960 $378,240
1,810 $713,140
5,250 $2,068,500
7. TRANSPORTATION
Improvements
Constructed New
Right-of- by Adjacent Development
Way_ Develoement Fair Share
($460,284) $870,476
$0 $1 ,040,000
($99,000) $807,200
($185.724) $1,193,276
($253,440) $124,800
($477,840) $235,300
($324,720) $1, 743,780
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
Table 7.2: Circulation Element Improvements {continued} General Plan Circulation
Element Improvements in
Exeansion Area
North Avenue
North Avenue
North Avenue
North Zumwalt Avenue
City of Reedley
June 2022
Descrietion
New 2-lane from Kingswood
Pkwy. to existing west of Reed
Ave .
New 2-lane with bike lanes
from Buttonwillow Ave. to culde-sac at Silas Bartsch School.
New bike lanes along Silas
Bartsch School to Zumwalt Ave.
New 2-lane with bike lanes
from East Sumner Ave . to East
Manning Ave .
Total
42 Segment
Length
(feet}
2,500
1,300
1,300
7,900
Estimated
Cost
$752,778
$391,444
$169,000
$2,378,778
$20,872,080
7. TRANSPORTATION
Improvements
Constructed New
Right-of- by Adjacent Development
Way_ Develoement Fair Share
$420,000 $1 ,172,778
$364,000 $755,444
$145,600 $314,600
$2,212,000 $4,590,778
$3,141,600 {$5,688,408} $18,325,272
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
Table 7.3: Intersection Mitigation Improvements
Intersections
Parlier Avenue/Buttonwillow Avenue
Manning Avenue/Lac Jae Avenue
Manning Avenue/So. Zumwalt Avenue
Manning Avenue/No. Englehart Avenue
East Dinuba Avenue/So . Zumwalt Avenue
East Floral Avenue/So. Frankwood Avenue
Olsen Avenue/So . Frankwood Avenue
Allocation Summary
7. TRANSPORTATION
Improvements Estimated Cost
Install stop signs on the $10,000
Buttonwillow Avenue
approaches to make the
intersection all-way stop
controlled.
Widen the westbound $300,000
approach to provide for a
right turn
lane.
Signalization $300,000
Signalization $400,000
Signalization $400,000
Signalization $400,000
Roundabout $2,500,000
Total Intersection $4,310,000
The Circulation Element roadway and intersection costs from Tables 7.2 and 7.3 are summarized in Table 7.4. The Funded and Unfunded Capital Improvement Program (CIP) costs are from the 2021-2022 CIP and are listed in Appendix A. Since these improvements will benefit both existing and new residents and businesses, the cost is allocated to new development ("Development Share") and existing ("City Share") on a 24%/76% basis, since the percentage of 2035 VMT that is attributable to growth is 24 percent, as shown on Table 7.1 . The City Share of the cost must come from "Other Funding Sources," that is, sources other than the impact fee. The cost per VMT is calculated in Table 7.6, and the cost per VMT is multiplied by the VMT rates for each land use in the fee schedules.
Table 7.4: Transportation Improvements Summary
2035 Improvements
Funded and Unfunded CIP
Circulation Element
GP-EIR Mitigation
Measures/Intersections
Class I Bike paths
Total, All Improvement Costs
City of Reedley
June 2022
Total
Estimated
Cost
$14,374,445
$18,325,272
$4,310,000
$5,190,000
$42,199,717
43 City
Cost Share/Other
Allocation Development Funding
Growth/City Share Sources
0.24/0.76 $3,449,867 $10,924,578
0.24/0.76 $4,398,065 $13,927,207
0.24/0.76 $1 ,034,400 $3,275,600
0.24/0.76 $1 ,245,600 $3,944,400
$10,127,932 $32,071,785
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
Table 7.5: Bike Paths
Class I Bike Paths
Along River from North SOI to Reed Avenue
Sports Field\ Canal Loop Trail
Through Hospital and Right-of-Way from Parlier Avenue to Manning Avenue
From Reed Ave \ Parlier Ave to Connect to Class I by River Sourc e: Reedley Bic ycle and Pedestrian Mobility Pion, 2019 Table 7.6: Transportation Cost per VMT
Total Street Improvements, 2035 Growth
Other Funding Sources
Total Cost of New Development's Share
Total Peak-Period VMT from Growth
Cost per One Peak-Period Trip-Mile
TRANSPORTATION FEE SCHEDULES
7. TRANSPORTATION
Miles Cost Estimate
5.3 0.84
0.54 0.24
6.92 $42,199,717
($32,071,785)
$10,127,932
10,032
$1 ,009.56
$3,975,000
$630,000
$405,000
$180,000
$5,190,000
The proposed fee schedules for the Expansion Area, Infill Area , and the City Center are shown in Tables 7.7, 7.8, and 7.9, respectively. These fees will fund the roadway improvements needed to accommodate growth based on the General Plan Circulation Element.
Table 7.7: Proposed Transportation Impact Fee-Expansion Area Cost per VMT Proposed
Land Use Trip per Unit Fees Current Fees
Residential (in units)
Single Family $1 ,009.56 5.50 $5,552.58 $5,066.00
Multi-family $1,009.56 3.00 $3,028.68 $3,377.00
Accessory Unit $1 ,009 .56 1.38 $1,388.15 $1 ,266.50
Nonresidential (in thousand sq. ft. units)
Commercial/Retail $1 ,009.56 2.40 $2,422.94 $2,218.00
Industrial/Warehouse $1,009.56 1.43 $1,443.67 $1,141.00 Public/Institutional $1 ,009.56 1.40 $1,413.38 $359.00
The proposed impact fee for transportation in the Infill Area is 75 percent of the Expansion Area , which satisfies the Fee Reduction Incentive Program.
Table 7.8: Proposed Transportation Impact Fee-Infill Area Proposed
Cost per VMT Fees per Current
Land Use Tri~ ~er Unit Unit Fees
Residential (in units)
Single Family $757.17 5.50 $4,164.44 $3,799 .50
Multi-family $757.17 3.00 $2,271.51 $2,532.75
Accessory Unit $757.17 1.38 $1 ,044.89 N/A
Nonresidential (in thousand sq . ft. units)
Commercial/Retail $757. 17 2.40 $1,81 7.21 $1,253.00
Industrial/Warehouse $757.17 1.43 $1,082.75 $642.00
Public/Institutional $757.17 1.40 $1 ,060.04 $269.00
City of Reedley Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update June 2022 Final Report
44 7. TRANSPORTATION
The proposed impact fee for transportation in the City Center is 50 percent of the Expansion Area , which satisfies the Fee Reduction Incentive Program.
Table 7.9: Proposed Transportation Impact Fee-City Center Cost per VMT Proposed Current
Land Use1 Trie eer Unit Fees Fees
Residential (in units)
Single Family $504.78 5.50 $2,776.29 $2,533.00
Multi-family $504.78 3.00 $1 ,514.34 $1,688.50
Accessory Unit $504.78 1.38 $696.60 N/A
Nonresidential (in thousand sq. ft. units)
Commercial/Retail $504.78 2.40 $1,211.47 $835.00
Industrial/Warehouse $504.78 1.43 $721 .84 $428.00
Institutional/Other $504.78 1.40 $706.69 N/A
The land uses listed in Tables 7.7, 7.8, and 7.9 are the general land use categories used to determine the cost of circulation improvements per peak period trip in the Expansion and Infill Areas . It is valid to apply the cost per VMT calc ulated in Table 7.6 to any specific land use not listed in the tables and determine an appropriate fee for that land use using a trip generation schedule such as the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) manual of trip generation rates or another suitable schedule.
IMPROVEMENTS SERVING SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
The fees indicated in Tables 7.7, 7.8, and 7.9 cover only the roadway and intersections improvements listed in Tables 7.2 and 7.3. The transportation improvements necessary for the development of individual properties, to provide access to individual property, and to mitigate on- or off-site project-specific traffic impacts are not necessarily included in the improvements covered by the circulation impac t fee proposed in this chapter. Project-specific improvements not covered by the fee may include but are not limited to the following :
• Local, in-trac t, and backbone road improvements serving individual parcels. • Traffic signals and other modifications not included in Table 7.3 but required as a condition of project approval.
• Arterial roadways or any other transportation-related improvement required by a development agreement.
• Project-specific mitigations identified in a fina l project-level EIR.
Notwithstanding the above, a developer of a property may be required as a condition of approval to construct one or more or a portion of any of the street improvements covered by the fee . In suc h c ase, the value of c onstruc ted improvements that correspond to those listed in Tables
7.2 and 7.3 may be credited against the transportation impact fee at the City 's discretion .
City of Reedley
June 2022
45 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
8. WATER FACILITIES
8. WATER FACILITIES
This chapter pertains to the water supply, treatment, and distribution facilities needed to provide potable domestic water and to meet fire flow requirements for new development in Reedley. The City Public Works Division currently maintains domestic water wells, storage tanks, pump stations, and water mains serving the entire incorporated area.
WATER SUPPLY AND DEMAND
Reedley presently obtains all of its domestic water from groundwater aquifers. The City currently relies on seven active wells to supply its potable and fire service water needs.
The City's existing potable water system includes approximately 82 miles of pipelines, three existing elevated storage tanks, and seven operational wells , including the Sports Park Water Tower and associated well.
Land use data from the City's General Plan 2030 was used to forecast potable water demands that were reported in the 2014 Integrated Master Plan for Water, Sanitary Sewer and Storm Drainage Systems (Integrated Master Plan) . The average daily demand for water is expected to grow from approximately 4.65 million gallons per day (mgd) under baseline conditions (2020) to approximately 6.2 mgd by 2035. 1
WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
The Integrated Master Plan provided recommendations for water supply, storage, and distribution improvements to serve the current city limits (what plan terms as the Phase 1 area) and the SOI area (the Phase 2 area). The Integrated Master Plan predicated its recommendations on a population of 47,369 by 2030, based on projections in the 2010 Reedley Urban Water Management Plan . That level of growth is not expected to occur by 2030 (this study forecasts a population of 32,900 by 2035). The following improvements were determined to be needed to meet the demands of the population growth within the Infill Area (within the city limits) and development in the Phase 2 Expansion Area by 2035:
• Recommended water well improvements include new wells in Phase 1 and Phase 2. These well improvements would boost water production capacity by up to 4,000 gallons per minute.
• Water storage facilities include a new downtown elevated storage tank, which w ill add over 1 million gallons of storage capacity.
• Pipeline improvements include approximately 26,000 lineal feet to meet deficiencies in the existing developed area and 5,350 feet for growth in the Phase 1 area .
These improvements and their costs are summarized in Table 8.1 . 1 2020 Draft Reedley Urban Water Management Plan, MKN Assoc iates City of Reedley
June 2022
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
Table 8.1: Water System Improvements Summary
Improvements
Existing Development
Wells
Pipelines
Total Existing Deficiencies/Unfunded CIP Water
Phase l Growth
Wells
Storage Tanks
Pipelines
Total Phase l Water Improvements
Phase 2 Growth
Wells
Total Phase 2 Water Improvements
Total
Project Costs
2014 Dollars
$39,000
$6,457,000
$6,496,000
$2,555,000
$4,057,000
$1,431,000
$8,043,000
$2,555,000
$2,555,000
$17,094,000
8. WATER FACILITIES
2021 Costs1
$8,362,736
$10,354,293
$3,289,223
$22,006,252
1 Source: City of Reedley Integrated Master Plan (2014) , cost for buildout of the Phase 1 (current SOI} and Phase 2 (expanded SOI} improvements inflated to 2021 and City of Reedley Unfunded CIP for Fund 111--Water DIF
Cost Inflation Factor:
ENR Construction 20-City Cost Index: 2014 (February):
2021 (August) :
Inflation Factor:
PROJECTED WATER DEMAND
9,681
12,463
28.74%
The need for water facility improvements is based on growth in the demand for water by new development. This study forecasts water demand using a single-family household as the standard unit of demand. A typical single-family home in Reedley uses, on average, about 300 gallons per day. The water demands for other land uses are calculated in terms of the single-family equivalent dwelling unit (EDU). Table 8.2 present the projected water demands to the year 2035.
City of Reedley
June 2022
47 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
Table 8.2: Projected Water Demand to 2035
Existing
Residential, Growth
Units/ 2035, Units/ Total
Nonresidential Nonresidenti Total EDU EDU EDU EDU
Land Use I 1,000 sg, ft, al 1,000 sg. ft. Units Factor1 2021 Growth 2035 Residential (in units)
Single-family 4,972 1,328 6,300 l.00 4,972 1,328 6,300
Multi-family 1,766 504 2,270 0.96 1,695 484 2,179
Mobile Homes 253 0 253 0.53 134 0 134
Nonresidential (in thousand square feet, unless noted otherwise) Commercial 1,500 300 1,800 0.90 1,350 270 1,620
Industrial 1,350 150 1,500 0.31 419 47 466
Institutional (ac) 408 103 51 l 0.08 33 8 41
Open Space N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Losses N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Total 8,603 2,137 10,740
Growth Percentage of Total: 20%
1 EDU Factors: Residential, per unit/ Nonresidential, per 1,000 sq . ft, unless noted otherwise Water Demand Assumptions
Residential:
Single-family ( l EDU)
Multi-family
Mobile Home
Nonresidential :
Commercial/Retail
Industrial/Warehouse
Public/Education/Institutional
City of Reedley
June 2022
Current
304 gpd/du
292 gpd/du
160 gpd/du
275 gpd/1,000 sq . ft
95 gpd/1,000 sq. ft
225 gpd/acre
Assumed Per Ca12ita
Flow Rate
80 gpd/capita
80 gpd/capita
80 gpd/capita
48 Person 12er
Household
3.80 3.65
2.00 8. WATER FACILITIES
Estimated
Current
Gallons per Gallons
Day per Day
(average from
dry Growth Gallons
weather 2021- per Day
flow} 2035 {2035}
1,51 l ,488 403,712 1,915,200
515,280 147,136 662,416
40,736 Q 40,736
2,067,504 550,848 2,618,352
410,400 82,080 492,480
127,376 14,288 141,664
91 ,800 23,175 114,975
216,438 381 ,862 598,300
1,736,986 473,973 2,210,959
2,583,001 975,337 3,558,378
4,650,505 1,526,225 6,167,730
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
8. WATER FACILITIES
WATER FACILITIES COST PER EQUIVALENT DWELLING UNIT
The recommended water system improvement cost for existing development, Phase 1, and Phase 2 are listed in Table 8.3. The costs of the unfunded existing development are allocated entirely to the City for funding by other sources. The costs of the Phase 1 improvements are allocated between new development and existing development within the c ity limits using the 20 percent share of the cost attributable to growth by 2035. Phase 2 improvements will serve only development of the Expansion Area , so these are funded entirely by new development. The City cost represents the share of funding needed to construct improvements that benefit only existing development and correct the existing deficiencies of the system identified in the Integrated Master Plan .
Table 8.3: Allocation of Water Improvement Costs to Existing and New Development Estimated Cost
Project Allocation
Costs New New
Recommended Water System (2021 Development/ Development lm~rovements dollars} City Cost City Cost
Unfunded Existing $8,362,736 0.00/1 .00 $0 $8,362,736
Phase 1 Improvements $10,354,293 0.20/.80 $2,070,859 $8,283,434 Phase 2 Improvements $3,289,223 1.00/0.00 $3,289,223 .$Q Total Water System Improvements $22,006,252 $5,360,081 $16,646,170 The cost per EDU for the Expansion Area (Phase 2} Area and Infill Area (Phase 1) are calc ulated in Table 8.4. ,
Table 8.4: Water Facilities Cost per EDU
Water lmprovements-2035
EDU Growth (2021-Buildout of Phase 1 City Limits}
Water System Improvement Cost per EDU
WATER FACILITIES FEE SCHEDULES
$5,360,081
2,137
$2,508.23
The proposed water system impact fees are calculated in Tables 8.5, 8.6, and 8.7 for the Expansion Area , the Infill Area, and City Center, respectively, based on the cost per EDU in Table 8.4 and the EDU demand factors for the land use types.
City of Reedley
June 2022
49 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
8. WATER FACILITIES
Table 8.5: Proposed Water Facilities Impact Fees-Expansion Area Land Use1
Residential, per unit
Water
Demand
Factor
Cost per
EDU
Single Family 1 .00 $2,508.23
Multi-family 0.96 $2,508.23
Accessory Unit 0.25 $2,508.23
Proposed Water
System Fees, per
Unit or 1,000 sq.
ft.
$2,508.23
$2,407.90
$627.06
Current Water
Fees Outside of
Infill Area
$1 ,984.00
$1,323.00
$496.00
Nonresidential, per 1,000 sq. ft. of floor area, unless noted otherwise Commercial/Retail 0.90 $2,508.23 $2,257.40
Industrial/Warehouse 0.31 $2,508.23 $777.55
Public/Institutional, per acre 0.08 $2,508.23 $200.66
Table 8.6: Proposed Water Facilities Impact Fees-Infill Area Land Use1
Residential, per unit
Water
Demand
Factor
Cost per
EDU
Single Family 1 .00 $1,881 .17
Multi-family 0.96 $1 ,88 1.17
Accessory Unit 0.25 $1,881.17
Proposed Water
System Fees, per
Unit or 1,000 sq. ft.
$1,881.17
$1 ,805.92
$470.29
Nonresidential, per 1,000 sq. ft. of floor area, unless noted otherwise Commercial/Retail 0.90 $1 ,881.17
Industrial/Warehouse 0.31 $1,881.17
Public/Institutional, per acre 0.08 $1,881.17
Table 8. 7: Proposed Water Facilities Impact Fees-City Center Water
Demand
Land Use Factor
Residential, per unit
Single Family 1 .00
Multi-family 0.96
Accessory Unit 0.25
Nonresidential, per 1,000 sq. ft. of floor area
Commercial/Retail 0.90
Industrial/Warehouse 0.3 1
Public/Institutional, per acre 0.08
USE OF WATER FACILITIES FEE REVENUES
Cost per EDU
$1,254.11
$1 ,254.11
$1,254.11
$1,254.11
$1 ,254.1 1
$1,254.11
$1 ,693.05
$583.16
$150.49
Proposed Water
System Fees, per
Unit or 1,000 sq.
ff.1
$1,254.11
$1 ,203.95
$313.53
$1,128.70
$388.78
$100.33
$869.00
$447.00
$140.00
Current Water
Fees Infill Area
$1,488.00
$992.50
N/A
$652.00
$335.00
$105.00
Current Water
Fees in City
Center
$992.00
$661 .50
N/A
$435.00
$224.00
N/A
Water facilities fee revenues may be used for any of the improvements listed in Table 8.1 and as described in the Integrated Master Plan for Phase 1 and Phase 2, or for similar water supply, capacity expansion, or water service extension projects. All local water facilities , such as water mains that branch off of the major distribution pipes, w hich are needed to serve individual development projects, are the responsibility of the project developer. If, in order to serve a project, a developer must construct a portion of the improvements indicated in the Integrated Master Plan, the developer may be eligible for a credit or reimbursement from fee revenues at the City's discretion.
City of Reedley
June 2022
so
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
9. WASTEWATER FACILITIES
9. WASTEWATER FACILITIES
This chapter pertains to the collection and treatment facilities required to provide sanitary sewer service to new development in Reedley. This chapter identifies and allocates the cost of new or expanded facilities to the various land use types in accordance with their impact on the system. (URRENTWASTEWATER SYSTEM AND WASTEWATER FLOW
The City owns and maintains all wastewater collection pipelines, lift stations, and the wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) serving Reedley. The collection system includes four lift stations, with a fifth and sixth to be completed and come online by the end of the year, and 72 miles of pipelines.
The Integrated Master Plan estimated (in 2014) the average dry weather flow (ADWF) to the WWTP to be 2.5 million gallons per day (mgd). The Integrated Master Plan analyzed the existing conditions, the projected growth in Phase l ( current city limits), and Phase 2 growth in the SOI. The 2035 projected ADWF was estimated at approximately 3.1 mgd.
WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENT COSTS FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT
The Integrated Master Plan recommended the following improvements to lift stations and sewer pipelines:
• Lift Station: Add an additional 550 gallons per minute pump at the existing Reed Avenue lift station; construct a new 1.5 mgd capacity lift station for Phase 2 at Buttonwill0w Canal.
• Pipeline Upgrades: approximately 23,000 lineal feet for existing development; 13,240 lineal feet in Phase l .
Table 9.1: Wastewater System Improvements Summary
Improvements
Existing
Lift Stations
Pipelines
Total Existing/Unfunded (DIF) CIP Sewer
Phase l
Pipelines
Phase 2
Lift Stations
Total Phase Sewer Improvements:
Project Costs
2014 Dollars
$64,000
$19,024,000
$19,088,000
$8,803,000
$2,134,000
$30,025,000
Sourc e : City of Reedley Integrated Master Plan, 2014
1Cost Inflation Factor:
ENR Construction Cost Index 2014 (February):
2021 (August):
Inflation Factor:
WASTEWATER GENERATION
2021 Costs1
$24,573,261
$11 ,332,692
$2,747,241
$38,653,194
9,681
12,463
28.7%
Table 9.2 shows the estimated existing and projected wastewater generation and c alculates the existing and projected EDUs by land use by the year 2035 using the same land use projections as for the water system .
City of Reedley
June 2022
51 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
Table 9.2: Projected Wastewater Generation 2035
Growth
Existing 2035,
Residential Residential
Units/ Units/
Nonresidential Nonresidential Total EDU EDU
Land Use 1,000 Sq. Ft. 1000 Sq. Ft. Units Factor1 2021
Residential (in units)
Single-family 4,972 1,328 6,300 1.00 4,972
Multi-family 1,766 504 2,270 0.96 1,695
Mobile Homes 253 0 253 0.53 134
Nonresidential (in thousand square feet, unless noted otherwise) Commercial 1,500 300 1,800
Industrial 1,350 150 1,500
Institutional, acres 408 103 511
Total
1 Residential, EDU factor per unit; Nonresidential, per 1,000 sq. ft.
Sewer Generation Assumptions
0.58 870
0.46 621
0.38 153
8,445
Residential: Assumed r;2er Car;2ita Flow
Single-family ( 1 EDU)
Multi-family
Mobile Home
Nonresidential:
Current
274 gpd/du
263 gpd/du
144 gpd/du
Commercial/Retail 1 60 gpd/ 1,000 sf
Industrial/Warehouse 125 gpd/ 1,000 sf
Public/Education/Institutional 570 gpd/acre
Rate
72 gpd/capita
72 gpd/capita
72 gpd/capita
9. WASTEWATER FACILITIES
Estimated
Current
Gallons
per Day Gallons
(average per Day Gallons
dry Growth per Day
EDU EDU weather 2021- Phase 1
Growth 2035 flow} 2035 (2035}
1,328 6,300 1,362,328 363,872 1,726,200
484 2,179 464,430 132,616 597,046
0 134 36,716 Q 36,716
1,863,474 496,488 2,359,962
174 1,044 238,380 47,676 286,056
70 690 170,154 19,180 189,060
39 192 232,560 58,710 291,270
641,094 125,566 766,386
2,095 10,539 2,504,568 622,054 3,126,348
Phase 1 Growth as a Percentage of Total 20%
Persons er
Household
3.80 3.65
2.00 City of Reedley Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update June 2022 Final Report
52 9. WASTEWATER FACILITIES
WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENTS COST ALLOCATION
The recommended wastewater system improvement costs for existing development, Phase 1, and Phase 2 are listed in Table 9.3. The costs of the Phase 1 improvements are allocated between new development and existing development within the city limits using the 20 percent share of the cost attributable to growth in the Infill Area . Phase 2 improvements will serve only development of the Expansion Area . The City cost represents the share of funding needed to construct improvements that benefit existing development and correct the existing deficiencies of the system identified in the Integrated Master Plan; therefore, no costs for these improvements are allocated to new development.
Table 9.3: Allocation of Wastewater Improvements Cost to Existing and New Development Wastewater Svstem Improvements
Existing
Phase 1 Improvements
Phase 2 Improvements
Total Wastewater System
Improvements
WASTEWATER COST PER EDU
Estimated
Project Costs
(2021
dollars)
$24,573,261
$11 ,332,692
$2,747,241
$38,653,194
Cost Allocation
New
Development/
City
0.00/1.00
0.20/0.80
1.00/0.00
New
Development
Cost
$0
$2,266,538
$2,747,241
$5,013,780
City Cost
$24,573,261
$9,066,153
_$Q
$33,639,415
The cost per EDU for the Expansion Area (Phase 2) Area and Infill Area (Phase 1) are calculated in Table 9.4. The cost per EDU of wastewater system maintenance equipment is determined by dividing the current value of the equipment by the 2021 EDUs . A list of the wastewater system equipment is in Appendix D.
Table 9.4: Wastewater Facilities Cost per EDU
Total Wastewater Improvement Costs for New Development to 2035 $5,013,780 2,095
$2,393.21
EDU Growth:
Total Cost per EDU:
WASTEWATER FACILITIES FEE SCHEDULES
The proposed wastewater system impact fees are calculated in Tables 9.5, 9.6, and 9.7 for the Expansion Area , the Infill Area , and City Center, respectively, based on the cost per EDU in Table
9.4 and the EDU demand factors for the land use types.
City of Reedley
June 2022
53 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
9. WASTEWATER FACILITIES
Table 9.5: Proposed Wastewater Facilities Impact Fees-Expansion Area Land Use
Residential, per unit
Cost per
EDU
Wastewater
Demand
Factor
Single Family $2,393.21 1 .00
Multi-family $2,393.21 0.96
Accessory Unit $2,393.21 0.25
Proposed
Wastewater System
Fees, per Unit or
1,000 sq. ft.
$2,393.21
$2,297.48
$598.30
Nonresidential, per 1,000 sq. ft. of floor area, unless noted otherwise Commercial/Retail $2,393.21 0.58
Industrial/Warehouse $2,393.21 0.46
Institutional/ public per acre $2,393.21 0.38
Table 9.6: Proposed Wastewater Facilities Impact Fees-Infill Area $1,388.06
$1,100.88
$909.42
Wastewater
Cost per Demand
Land Use EDU Factor
Proposed
Wastewater
System Fees, per
Unit or 1,000 sq. ft.
Residential, per unit
Single Family $1,794.91 1.00 $1,794.91
Multi-family $1,794.91 0.96 $1,723.11
Accessory Unit $1,794.91 0.25 $448.73
Nonresidential, per 1,000 sq. ft. of floor area, unless noted otherwise Commercial/Retail $1,794.91 0.58 $1,041.05
Industrial/Warehouse $1,794.91 0.46 $825.66
Institutional/Public per acre $1,794.91 0.38 $682.07
Table 9. 7: Proposed Wastewater Facilities Impact Fees-City Center Proposed
Wastewater
Wastewater System Fees,
Demand per Unit or 1,000
Land Use Cost per EDU Factor sq. ft. 1
Residential, per unit
Single Family $1,196.61 1.00 $1,196.61
Multi-family $1, 196.61 0.96 $1,148.74
Accessory Unit $1,196.61 0.25 $299.15
Nonresidential, per 1,000 sq. ft. of floor area
Commercial/Retail $1,196.61 0.58 $694.03
lndustrial/W are house $1,196.61 0.46 $550.44
Public/Institutional $1,196.61 0.38 $454.71
Current
Wastewater
Fees
outside of
Infill Area
$2,521.00
$1,680.00
$630.25
$1,104.00
$568.00
$178.00
Current
Wastewater
Fees Infill
Area
$1,890.75
$1 ,260.00
N/A
$828.00
$426.00
$134.00
Current
City Center
Wastewater
Fees
$1 ,260.50
$840.00
N/A
$552.00
$284.00
N/A
City of Reedley
June 2022
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
54 9. WASTEWATER FACILITIES
Use of Wastewater Fee Revenues
Wastewater fee revenues may be used for any of the collection system improvements identified in the Integrated Master Plan . Wastewater c ollection system improvements, including backbone sewer lines and local pump stations that are needed to serve individual development projects, are the responsibility of the project developer. If, in order to serve a project, a developer must construct a portion of the trunk lines or any other of the improvements listed in the Integrated Master Plan, the developer may be eligible for a credit or reimbursement from fee revenues at the City 's discretion .
City of Reedley
June 2022
55 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
10. STORM DRAINAGE FACILITIES
10. STORM DRAINAGE FACILITIES
This chapter pertains to the stormwater drainage system needed to provide flood control for new development in Reedley. This chapter identifies and allocates the cost of new or expanded drainage facilities to the various land use types in proportion to their impact on the drainage system .
The Reedley drainage system is divided into 17 sub-basins, which discharge into 13 outfalls, including the Kings River, Alta Irrigation District, the agricultural canal system, and retention storage facilities located throughout the city. Major components of the city's storm drainage infrastructure include pipe networks, pump stations, and retention and detention storage facilities.
PLANNED DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
The Integrated Master Plan identified major drainage projects that are necessary to provide flood control in the existing developed areas of the city and in the Phase 1 Infill and Phase 2 Expansion Areas. Table 10.1 summarizes the estimated drainage improvements costs needed to serve growth to the year 2035. A list of the recommended drainage improvements for each phase is in Appendix E.
Table 10.1: Storm Drainage System Improvements for Existing and New Development Drainage Improvements
Existing Development
Basins
Pipelines
Total Existing
Phase 1 Growth
Basins
Pipelines
Total Phase 1 Drainage Improvements
Phase 2 Growth
Pipelines
Project Costs
2014 dollars
$1,648,000
$28,387,000
$30,035,000
$10,457,000
$12,332,000
$22,789,000
$6,366,000
Total Drainage Improvements
Source: City of Reedley Integrated Master Plan, 2014
1Cost Inflation Factor:
ENR Construction Cost Index 2014 (February) :
2021 (August):
Inflation Factor:
DRAINAGE IMPACTS OF NEW DEVELOPMENT
2021 Costs1
$38,666,068
$29,337,807
$8,195,378
$76,199,253
9,681
12,463
28.7%
The drainage system is impacted by increased runoff from the additional impervious area created by new development. The estimated increase in impervious acreage from the projected development in Phase 1 and Phase 2 by 2035 is presented in Table 10.2. These acreage totals are derived from the 2030 General Plan. Table 10.2 also estimates the residential units and nonresidential floor areas for each land use (consistent with the forecasts used in the Transportation, Water, and Wastewater chapters). Table 10.3 calculates the impervious acreages in the land uses.
City of Reedley
June 2022
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
10. STORM DRAINAGE FACILITIES
Table 10.2: Land Use Areas and Units of Development-2035 Currently
Developed Estimated New Dwelling Units and Floor Area
Acreage Developed Developed Density (1000 sq. ft.) within City Acreage Acres by Current Factors Net Land Limits by 2035 2035 Density for Use Total
Land Use (a) (b) (c)=(b)-(a) Factors Growth1 Factor2 Current Growth 2035 Residential_ (ln_ acres)
Suburban Residential 7 28 21 l .90 2.00 0.90 12 25 37
Low Density 959 2,280 1,321 8.62 6.00 0.60 4,960 1,303 6,263 Medium Density 27 65 38 12.50 11.50 0.50 200 76 276
High Density 156 36 l 205 20.00 18.00 0.40 1,565 441 2,006 Mobile Home 253 Q 253
l, 149 2,734 1,585 6,990 1,845 8,835
----~· -...-.---....-- ~i,;;,a,_> -· ··- ~ __ • ..._, ... .,_~,.•,~ .. -- .... ~--~-- .,,.._..,.-_ ···-----,.,, .,•-~.lr'-...~""rl-"··•·J2.0~.....,...,_~-•-·-.r Nonre_sjd(!nfial (in acres)
Central Downtown 40 40 0 0.22 0.60 230 0 230
Community 529 46 575 Commercial 92 100 8 0.22 0.60
Neighborhood 63 52 115 Commercial l l 20 9 0.22 0.60
Service Commercial 75 80 5 0.21 0.60 412 27 439
Office 16 20 4 0.22 0.60 92 23 115
Light Industrial 142 200 58 0.19 0.60 705 288 993
Heavy Industrial 54 54 0 0.19 0.60 268 0 268
Community Buffer 0 0 0 0.00 0.60 0 0 0
Open Space 96 188 92 0.00 0.60 0 0 0
Public/Institutional 408 ill 103 0.1 l 0.60 l.J.n. 296 1,469 934 1,213 279 3,472 732 4,204
Total Acreage: 2,083 3,947 1,864
So urc e: 2030 General Pla n
1 Average units per acre for residential; average floor area ratio for nonresidential. 2 Net Land Use Factor adjusts for non-development area such as streets, landscaping, and neighborhood open space.
City of Reedley
June 2022
57 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
Table 10.3: Impervious Acreage in Land Use
Estimated
Currently
Developed
Acreage
within City
Limits
Land Use (a)
Re~identf.91 (in a_cresl
Suburban 7
Low Density 959
Medium Density 27
High Density 156
1,149 ---""•'""'--"-'-'""-=~·"'"' ............ ...._.. .... _ Np(]I~sjg~_nllaU[.n_acres)
Central Downtown
Community Commercial
Neighborho od Commercial
Servic e Commercial
Office
Light Industrial
Heavy Industrial
Community Buffer
Open Space
Public /Institutional
City of Reedley
June 2022
40 92
11 75
16 142
54 0
96 408
934
2,083
10. STORM DRAINAGE FACILITIES
Estimated Existing Impervious
Developed New Developed 2035 Area
Acreage Developed Percent Impervious Impervious Growth
2035 Acres 2035 Impervious Acres Acres (acres)
(b) (c)~(b)-(a) (d) (a)x(d) (b)x(d) (c)x(d)
28 21 0.15 1.05 4.20 3.15
2,280 1,321 0.50 479.50 1,140.00 660.50
65 38 0. 70 18.90 45 .50 26.60
361 205 0.80 124.80 288.80 164.00
2,734 1,585 624.25 1,478.50 854.250 "- ~-- --•{.;_j •. -~ .......... ,....._ • ......,n40 0 0.90 36.00 36.00 0.0 100 8 0.90 82.80 90.00 7.2
20 9 0.90 9.90 18.00 8.1
80 5 0.90 67.50 72.00 4.5
20 4 0.90 14.40 18.00 3.6
200 58 0.85 120.70 170.00 49 .3
54 0 0.85 45.90 45.90 0.0
0 0 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.0
188 92 0.02 1.92 3.76 1.8
ill 103 0.25 102.00 127. 75 25.8
1,213 279 481.12 581.41 100.29
3,947 1,864 1,105 2,060 955
Growth Percentage of Total Impervious Acres 46%
58 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
10. STORM DRAINAGE FACILITIES
DRAINAGE SYSTEM COST ALLOCATION
The recommended drainage improvement costs for existing development, Phase l, and Phase 2 are listed in Table 10.4. The costs of the Phase l improvements are allocated between new development and existing development within the city limits using the 46 percent share of the cost attributable to growth in the Infill Area. Phase 2 improvements will serve only development of the Expansion Area. The City cost represents the 57 percent share of funding needed to construct improvements that benefit existing development and correct the existing deficiencies of the system identified in the Integrated Master Plan.
Table 10.4: Drainage System Cost Allocation
Estimated
Project Costs
(2021
dollars)
Drainage Improvements for 2035
Existing $38,666,068
Phase l Improvements
Phase 2 Improvements
Total Costs
$29,337,807
$8,195,378
$76,199,253
DRAINAGE SYSTEM COSTS PER IMPERVIOUS ACRE
Cost Allocation
New
Development/City
0.46/0.54
0.46/0.54
1.00/0.00
New
Development
Cost City Cost
$17,786,391 $20,879,677
$13,495,391 $15,842,416
$8,195,378 _$Q
$39,477,161 $36,722,092
In Table 10.5, the recommended improvements for the Phase l (including costs for the existing area) and Phase 2 growth are divided by the estimated increase in impervious acres in these areas to result in a cost per impervious acre and cost per square foot in the Infill and Expansion Areas .
Table 10.5: Drainage Costs per Impervious Acre
Drainage Improvements, Cost for New Development to 2035 $39,477,161 955
$41,337
$0.95
Growth of Impervious Acres 2035
Cost per Impervious Acre in Phase 2
Cost per Impervious Square Foot in Phase 2
The cost per square foot is given as a preferred means to calculate the drainage impact fee. By using the cost per square foot of impervious area , the fee will be more closely related to impacts on the drainage system caused by new development. The cost per square foot may also be used as a factor in adjusting the drainage system impact fee for a development project that incorporates low-impact development design into the project. Low-impact development is a method of site design that enhances stormwater management and reduces runoff by increasing on-site infiltration of rainfall-in effect, decreasing the impervious area of a project.
STORM DRAINAGE FEE SCHEDULES
Tables 10.6, 10.7, and 10.8 show the drainage facilities impact fee for new development in the Expansion Area, the Infill Area, and City Center, respectively, based on the facilities cost per impervious acre shown in Table 10.5. The fee represents the cost to fully fund all facilities needed to mitigate the downstream impacts of new development. Citywide residential and nonresidential City of Reedley
June 2022
59 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
10. STORM DRAINAGE FACILITIES
developments would pay the fee based on the density or floor area ratios (FAR), and the impervious factor.
For comparison with the current fee schedule for the drainage impact fee, these fees are calculated for typical projects based on average project densities (dwelling units per acre or FAR of nonresidential development). The table indicates average residential density factors for the ranges given in the 2030 General Plan (i.e., 4 to 12 for single-family and 8 to 29 for multi-family).
FAR is typical for the city's commercial and industrial development.
Table 10.6: Proposed Drainage System Fees for Example Projects-Expansion Area Number
of 1,000
Cost per Sq. Ft. Proposed
Impervious Density units per Impervious Fee3
Acre Factors1 acre Factor2 {a/{borc) Current
Land Use (a} (b} (c} (d} X d} Fee
Residential
Single Family $41,337 6.00 0.50 $3,444.75 $4,396
Multi-family $41,337 15.00 0.80 $2,204.64 $2,931
Accessory Unit4 N/A N/A N/A $861.19 $1,099
Nonresidential
Commercial $41,337 0.50 22 0.90 $1,691.06 $1,925
Industrial $41,337 0.60 26 0.85 $1,351.40 $990
Public/Institutional $41,337 0.70 30 0.25 $344.48 $311 1 Residential density factors: average General Plan density in units per acre. Nonresidential density factor is floor area ratio (square feet of floor area allowed/43,560). 2 Impervious factors are from the Integrated Master Plan (2014) given for low-density development and high-density development for single-family and multi-family, respectively. 3 Fee = cost per impervious area divided by the density factor for residential, or the number of 1,000 sq. ft. units for nonresidential, times the imperviousness factor. 4 The Accessory Unit fee is 25 percent of the Single-Family fee.
Table 10.7: Proposed Drainage System Fees for Example Projects-Infill Area Land Use1
Residential
Single-Family
Multi-Family
Accessory Unit
Nonresidential
Commercial
Industrial
Public/Institutional
City of Reedley
June 2022
Cost per
Impervious
Acre City Density
Limits Factors
$31,002.75 6.00
$31,002.75 15.00
N/A N/A
$31,002.75 0.50
$31,002.75 0.60
$31,002.75 0.70
Number
of 1,000
Sq. Ft.
Units per
Acre
22.00 26.00
30.00 60
Impervious Proposed Current Fee
Factor Fees Infill Area
0.50 $2,583.56 $3,297.00
0.80 $1,653.48 $2,198.25
N/A $645.89 N/A
0.90 $1,268.29 $1,442.00
0.85 $1,013.55 $743.00
0.25 $258.36 $233.00
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
10. STORM DRAINAGE FACILITIES
Table 10.8: Proposed Drainage System Fees for Example Projects-City Center Residential
Single-Family
Multi-Family
Accessory Unit
Nonresidential
Commercial
Industrial
Public/Institutional
Cost per
Impervious
Acre
$20,668.50
$20,668.50
N/A
$20,668.50
$20,668.50
$20,668.50
Density
Factors
6.00 15.00
N/A
.50
.60
.70
1,000
sq. ft.
units
per
acre
22 26
30 IMPROVEMENTS SERVING SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
Impervious
Factor
0.50 0.80
N/A
Proposed
Fees
$1,722.38
$1 ,102.32
$430.59
$845.53
$675.70
$172.24
Current City
Center Fee
$2,198.00
$1,465.50
N/A
$961.00
$495.00
N/A
The fees indicated in Table 10.4 cover only the drainage improvements described in the drainage section of the Integrated Master Plan . Drainage improvements necessary for development of individual properties, to mitigate on- or off-site flood hazards, or for stormwater quality management are not included in the improvements covered by the drainage impact fee proposed in this chapter. Project-specific improvements not covered by the fee include but are not limited to the following:
• Local and backbone storm drains and appurtenances serving individual parcels. • Storm drain trunk lines and their appurtenances required for larger master-planned developments.
• Detention basins designed to attenuate peak runoff of a development project in accordance with the City of Reedley 's Urban Storm Water Quality Management Ordinance whether located within the project or off-site. • Retention and debris basins, for stormwater quality and other purposes. • Downstream flooding mitigation measures not listed in the Integrated Master Plan . • Project-specific National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System measures.
Notwithstanding the above, a developer of a property may be required as a condition of approval to construct one or more or a portion of any of the drainage improvements covered by the fee . In such case, the value of constructed improvements that correspond to those listed in the Storm Drain section of the Integrated Master Plan may be credited against the drainage impact fee at the City 's discretion.
DRAINAGE FEE CREDIT FOR Low IMPACT DEVELOPMENT
Development projects that install approved on-site stormwater infiltration features designed to reduce runoff to the drainage system may apply for a credit against the drainage fee . The se low impact development (LID) features , such as infiltration swales, permeable pavement, and retention basins, effectively reduce the net impervious area of the development. The effective impervious area of the LID feature will be determined based on designs provided by the applicant City of Reedley
June 2022
61 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
10. STORM DRAINAGE FACILITIES
with submittal of the project's grading or landscape plans. The effective area of the LID feature may result in a square-foot-per-square foot reduction of the total drainage fee based on the fee per square foot of impervious area applicable to the Expansion Area , Infill Area , or City Center as determined by the Engineering Department.
City of Reedley
June 2022
62 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
11. IMPLEMENTATION
This chapter identifies tasks that the City should complete when implementing the fee program.
IMPACT FEE PROGRAM ADOPTION PROCESS
Impact fee program adoption procedures are found in California Government Code Section 66016-66019. Adoption of an impact fee program requires the City Council to follow certain procedures, including holding a public hearing with at least 30 days' notice prior to the hearing.
Mailed notice 14 days prior to the public hearing is required only for those individuals who request such notification. Data, such as this impact fee report and referenced material, must be made available at least 10 days prior to the public hearing. The City 's legal counsel should inform the City of any other procedural requirements as well as advice regarding adoption of an enabling ordinance and/or a resolution . After adoption, there is a mandatory 60-day waiting period before the fees go into effect, unless an urgency ordinance, valid for 30 days, is adopted making certain findings regarding the urgency being claimed. The ordinance must be readopted at the end of the first period (and possibly at the end of the second period, depending on City Council meeting dates) to cover the next 30 days and therefore the entire 60-day waiting period. Fees adopted by urgency go into effect immediately. This procedure must also be followed for fee increases.
PROGRAMMING REVENUES AND PROJECTS WITH THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN The City should update its CIP to identify specific projects and program fee revenues to those projects. Use of the CIP in this manner documents a reasonable relationship between new development and the use of fee revenues .
For the planning period of the CIP, the City should allocate all existing fund balances and projected fee revenue to facilities projects. The City should plan its CIP expenditures at least five years in advance and show where all collected development impact fee revenues will be spent.
The City can hold funds in a project account for longer than five years , if necessary, to collect sufficient funds to complete a given project. See Compliance Requirements below for the specific CIP update requirements stated in Government Code Section 62000.
FUNDS NEEDED TO COMPLEMENT IMPACT FEE PROGRAM
In adopting the fees presented in this report, additional funds will need to be identified to fund the share of costs not related to new development. Table 1.7 identifies the facilities studied in this report and the projected impact fee revenues. The General Fund/Other Sources column identifies the additional funding that the City needs to obtain for the facilities shown to cover the City's share related to existing development.
INFLATION ADJUSTMENT
For most of the projects, the costs in this report are shown in 2021 dollars based on the consultant's experience and actual construction costs of similar City-constructed improvements where available. To ensure that the fee program stays current with the prevailing cost of construction, the City should identify appropriate inflation indexes in the fee ordinance and include an automatic annual inflation adjustment in the ordinance for those facilities or systems that have not been completed . In addition, for those facilities for which the City is recouping funds for having built-in excess capacity, no annual adjustment factor is recommended . For these projects, the City of Reedley
June 2022
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
11. IMPLEMENTATION
annual adjustment factor is not necessary because the fac ilities have been constructed and the costs have been incorporated into the analysis.
A construction cost index can be based on the City's recent capital project experience or taken from any reputable source, such as the Engineering News-Record or the Consumer Price Index .
COMBINING FEES
Each facility category has been presented separately for analysis and reporting . However, fees may be combined into two or more fee categories at the City's discretion to facilitate administration.
COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS
The California Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Section 66000 et seq.) mandates procedures for administration of impact fee programs, including collection, accounting, refunds, updates, and reporting . The City must comply with the annual and five-year reporting requirements . For facilities to be funded with a combination of impact fees and other revenues, the City must identify the source and amount of the other revenues . The City must also identify when the other revenues are anticipated to be available to fund the project. The City's complianc e obligations vis-a-vis the act include but are not limited to the following specific requirements:
Collection of Fees. Section 66007 provides that a local agency shall not require payment of fees by developers of residential projects prior to the date of final inspection or issuance of a certificate of occupancy, whichever comes first. In a residential development of more than one dwelling unit, the local agency may choose to collect fees either for individual units or for phases upon final inspection, or for the entire project upon final inspection of the first dwelling unit when it is c ompleted. The local agency may require the payment of those fees or charges at an earlier time if:
A. The local agency determines that the fees or charges will be collected for public improvements or facilities for which an account has been established and funds appropriated and for which the local agency has adopted a proposed construction schedule or plan prior to final inspection or issuance of the certificate of occupancy; or B. The fees are to reimburse the local agency for expenditures previously made. "Appropriated," as used in this section, means authorization by the goveming body of the local agency for which the fee is collected to make expenditures and incur obligations for specific purposes.
Fee Exemptions, Reductions, and Waivers. If a development project is found to have no impact on facilities for which fees are charged, such project must be exempted from the fees . If a project has characteristics that indicate its impacts on a public facility or infrastructure system will be significantly and permanently smaller than the average impact used to calculate impact fees in this study, the fees may be reduced accordingly at the City 's discretion .
The City may base recommendations for exemptions, reductions , or waivers on evidence presented to the City by the project applicant that demonstrate or more of the following conditions:
• The project will have less residential oc c upancy or employment density than the assumptions indicated in this study for the proposed land use.
City of Reedley
June 2022
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
11. IMPLEMENTATION
• Due to the characteristics of the project 's expected occupants, there will be less anticipated demand on one or more of the public service and facility categories of this study.
• Due to the nature of the project, such as location, anticipated use, expected market, and/or customer base, there is justifiable reason to expect less demand on public safety, government, parks, water, sewer, drainage, and transportation facilities. The applicant may provide evidence or cite authoritative sources which indicate that, for their specific project, one or more of the factors used in this nexus study such as occupancy, trip generation, or rates of water demand and wastewater generation are lower than given for the general categories of this study.
The City shall review the evidence and make a recommendation to City Council of its findings and whether one or more of the impact fees may be exempted, reduced, or waived for the particular project.
In some cases, the City may desire to voluntarily waive or reduce impact fees that would otherwise apply to a project to promote goals such as affordable housing, economic development, or the provision of benefits that apply to the public at large. Such a waiver or reduction may not result in increased costs to other development projects and is allowable only if the City offsets the lost revenue from other funding sources.
Credit for Improvements by Developers. If the City requires a developer, as a condition of approval, to construct facilities or improvements for which impact fees have been or will be charged, the impact fee imposed on that development project for that type of facility must be adjusted to reflect a credit for the cost of facilities or improvements constructed or otherwise provided by the developer. If the reimbursement would exceed the amount of the fee to be paid by the development for that type of facility, the City may seek to negotiate a reimbursement agreement with the developer.
Earmarking of Fee Revenues. Section 66006 mandates that the City deposit fees for the improvements in a separate capital facilities account or fund in a manner to avoid any commingling of the fees with other revenues and funds of the City, except for temporary investments. Fees must be expended solely for the purpose for which they were collected . Interest earned on the fee revenues must also be placed in the capital account and used for the same purpose. The Mitigation Impact Fee Act is not clear as to whether depositing fees "for the improvements" refers to a specific capital improvement or a class of improvements {e.g., fire or police facilities). Recommended practice is for the City to maintain separate funds or accounts for impact fee revenues by facility category, but not necessarily for individual projects .
Reporting. Section 66006 requires that once each year, within 180 days of the close of the fiscal year, the City must make available to the public the following information for each account established to receive impact fee revenues :
1. The amount of the fee.
2. The beginning and ending balance of the account or fund .
3. The amount of the fees collected , and interest earned.
4. Identification of each public improvement on which fee revenues were expended and the amount of the expenditures on each improvement, including the percentage of the cost of the public improvement that was funded with fee revenues.
City of Reedley
June 2022
65 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
11. IMPLEMENTATION
5. Identification of the approximate date by which the construc tion of a public improvement will commence, if the City determines sufficient funds have been collected for financing of an incomplete public improvement.
6. A description of each interfund transfer or loan made from the account or fund , including interest rates, repayment dates, and a description of the improvements on which the transfer or loan will be expended .
7. The amount of any refunds or allocations made pursuant to Section 66001 , paragraphs {e) and (f) .
The above information must be reviewed by the City Council at its next regularly scheduled public meeting, but not less than 15 days after the statements are made public .
Findings and Refunds. Section 66001 requires that, for the fifth fiscal year following the first deposit of any impact fee revenue into an account or fund as required by Section 66006, and every five years thereafter, the City must make all the following findings for any fee revenues that remain unexpended, whether committed or uncommitted:
l. Identify the purpose to which the fee will be put.
2. Demonstrate the reasonable relationship between the fee and the purpose for which it is charged.
3. Identify all sources and amounts of funding anticipated to c omplete financing of incomplete improvements for which the impac t fees are to be used.
4. Designate the approximate dates on which the funding necessary to complete financing of those improvements will be deposited into the appropriate acc ount of fund .
Updating of the Impact Fee Nexus Study. Per California Government Code Section 66016.5 (a) (8) , impact fee nexus studies shall be updated at least every eight years, from the period beginning on January 1, 2022.
The City may use the impact fee nexus study template developed by the California Department of Housing and Community Development pursuant to Section 50466.5 of the Health and Safety Code to update the nexus study.
Annual Update of Capital Improvement Plan . Section 66002 provides that if the City adopts a CIP to identify the use of impact fees, that program must be adopted and annually updated by a resolution of the governing body at a noticed public hearing. The alternative is to identify improvements in other public doc uments, such as an impact fee nexus study itself.
City of Reedley
June 2022
66 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
APPENDIX A: TRANSPORTATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Funded Transportation Projects
APPENDIX A
2021-22
Description Proposed Budget 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 _ Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Years Year 6
ADA Improvements
Manning Sidewalks Reed to Frankwood
Reed Ave Sidewalk (Les Schwab)
Manning Sidewalks Reed to Frankwood
Reed Ave Sidewalk (Les Schwab)
East Ave Heavy Rehab G-14th
Manning Ave Pavement Rehab Phase 3
Manning Ave Pavement Rehab Phase 3
CDBG 21571 E Street Reconstruction
CDBG 21571 E Street Reconstruction
ADA Improvements
Lighted Street Name Signs (Arterials)
CDBG 22571 E Street Reconstruction
11th Street (PMP Poor/ Very Poor Quality)
FCTA SM 22/23 Match
FCTA SM 23/24 Match
FCTA SM 24/25 Match
FCTA SM 25/26 Match
FCTA FF 22/23 Match
FCTA FF 23/24 Match
FCTA FF 24/25 Match
FCTA FF 25/26 Match
City of Reedley
June 2022
$6,000
$197,384
$107,676
$25,573
$13,951
$300,000
$1,472,573
$190,788
$48,000
$230,000
$2,500
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 $2,594,445
67 $30,000 0
$230,000 0
$300,000 0
$277,000 0
0 $277,000
0 0
0 0
$268,000 0
0 $268,000
0 0
0 0
$1,105,000 $545,000
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
$277,000 0
0 $277,000
0 0
0 0
$268,000 0
0 $268,000
$545,000 $545,000
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
Unfunded Transportation Projects
Sweeper
Dinuba Ave Reconstruction East to Fisher Avenue
Dinuba Ave Reconstruction Fisher to Buttonwillow
Sidewalk on D, North, Frankwood (High School, Lincoln
School, Grant School)
Sidewalk on Myrtle between N Del Altair and N East Avenue Sidewalk between Carolyn Lane and E Dinuba Avenue
(Jefferson School)
Signalization @ I Street & 8th
I St, G St, Dinuba Ave Roundabout
North Ave, 11th St, East Ave Alignment Project
Signalization at Tobu Avenue
Sidewalk on E Dinuba Avenue between S Columbia and S
Hemlock
Dinuba Widening Tobu to Zumwalt
City of Reedley
June 2022
$85,000
$85,000
68 $350,000
$1 ,500,000
$350,000
$2,200,000
APPENDIX A
$2,300,000
$85,000
$60,000
$30,000
$30,000
$2,600,000
$1,350,000
$300,000
$175,000 $3,980,000 $2,600,000
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
APPENDIX B: UNIT COSTS FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS
Roadway Improvements
APPENDIX B
Cost per Lane-Foot
(unless noted
Lane Type
Cost per Square
Foot Width otherwise)
Travel lane, arterial
20" Excavate, Class 14" 2 AB, 6:"AC
Saw-cut, graphics & striping , cost
per lane
Total cost
Travel lane, collector
Excavate, Class 2 AB, AC
Saw-cut, graphic s & striping, cost
per lane
Total cost
Striping only
Medians
26-ft. median landscape only
$10.15
$6 .30
l 0-ft. median (concrete w/curbs) $8/sq. ft. paving+ $30 for curbing 12-ft. median (concrete w/curbs) $8/sq. ft. paving+ $30 for curbing 16-ft. median (concrete w/curbs) $8/sq. ft. paving+ $30 for curbing 22-ft. median (concrete w/curbs) $8/sq. ft. paving+ $30 for curbing Bike lanes
Bike lane (new construction) 5 ft.
with 3-ft. buffer (one direction)
Bike lane graphics, striping &
signage per linear foot
Total bike lane cost
Right-of-way
Bridge construction
Excavation
Class 2 base
Asphalt concrete
$7.00
$7.00
$7.00
$315
12 $122
1lQ
$132
12 $76
8 ft.
12 12
1lQ
$86
$2
$110
$110
$126
$158
$206
$56
.$2
$65
$40
$3,780
$30 per Cu. Yd.
$85 per Cu . Yd.
$250 per Cu Yd .
City of Reedley
June 2022
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
APPENDIX B
Intersection Cost Assumptions
Assuming 10-foot turning lanes, each lane is 75 feet long (arterial LTO = 250 ft.), ROW at $5.00 per square foot and $30 per sq . ft. for: grading, excavation, pavement section, striping and loops.
Add another $2,750 for pedestrian ramps at right-turn lanes. LTO: $26,250 (except on arterial legs where center lane or median is provided), RTO lane: $29 ,000.
New Signalization Costs :
$300,000 per 4-lane/2-lane approach with LTO lane
$400,000 per 4-lane approach with LTO lane
$175,000 4-lane approach without LTO lane
$125,000 per 2-lane approach with LTO lane
$100,000 per 2-lane without LTO lane
City of Reedley
June 2022
70 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
APPENDIX(: WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
Project ID Description of Waler System lmprovemEcnt
Well lmprovemenls
PEWIJ-1 Add c,1 additioital bowl to enslin.g WeJ 5A
PEWIJ-2 Add a11 addition.al bo1\t to eililfng Weil 10
PEWIJ.-3 Add an additto:t-al bO\\i to exilstfllg We{] 12 P!WE-1 N;,w 2,000 qpm Well, Sports Parl< wen:,:
Pl WE-2 N;,w 2,000 gpm Well, No.rill Cenll'-al W&J
Storage Improvements
P1RE-1 New Downtown Reser1oir, 1 MG Ground Storage
Pl RE-1 Abandon 0.1 MG Downtown Tank
Pipeline Improvements
P1EA-3 Downtown Tank Appurtenance Piping
P1FA-1 New pipe, W Aspen Dr & N Church Ave (1320')
P1FA-3 New pipe, West Cypress Ave & N Hollywood Dr (180') P1FA-4 New pipe. West of W Palm Ave & W Manning Ave (1020') P1FA-5 New pipe, North of N Reed Ave & W North Ave (5160') P1FA-6 New pipe, W North Ave & F St (230')
P1FA-7 New pipe , East of W Palm Ave & W Manning Ave (250') P1FA-8 New pipe. Palm Village Retirement Community (130') P1FA-9 New pipe, E Shoemake Ave & S Frankwood Ave (240') P1FA-10 New pipe, E Curtis Ave & S Buttonwillow Ave (720') Pl FA-11 New pipe, El Dorado Ave (160')
P1FA-12 New pipe, E Manning Ave & N Buttonwillow Ave (1380') P1FA-13 New pipe, E Manning Ave & Zumwalt Ave (1680')
P1FU-1 New pipe, North Reed Ave & W Aspen Dr (310')
P1FU-2 New pipe, W Aspen Dr (110')
P1FU-3 New pipe. West Manning Ave (200')
P'lFU-4 New pipe, N Birch Ave (1500')
P1FU-5 New pipe. E Curtis Ave & S Buttonwillow Ave (320') P1FU-6 New pipe, W Olson Ave & Wes1 Bank of King's River (2300') P1HU- 1 New pipe, North of N Reed Ave & W Manning Ave (250') P1HU-2 New pipe. South of N Reed Ave & W Manning Ave {2420') P1HU-3 New pipe, N Hollywood Dr (341 0')
P1HU-4 New pipe, W Myrtle Ave & N Acacia Ave, N Birch Ave (40') P1HU-5 New pipe, Manning Ave & N Frankwood Ave (200')
P1HU-6 New pipe, Cypress Ave & Concord Ave (9801
P1HU-7 New pipe, E Manning Ave & Del Altair Ave (1400') City of Reedley
June 2022
Phase Project
Cosll•I
Existing 13
Existing 13
Exis.ting 13
Existing N.'A
P-Aare 1 2,555
Phase 1 3,934
Phase 1 123
Phase 1 76
Existing 431
Phase 1 28
Existing 29
Existing 16
Existing 39
Existing 49
Existing 13
Existing 25
Existing 460
Exisbng 21
Existing 210
Exisbng 1,209
Phase 1 563
EXJsting 78
Existing 1,150
Existing 38
Existing 175
Phase 1 331
Existing 174
Phase 1 49
Phase 1 145
Existing 240
Existing 103
Existing 66
Exisbng 81
2015 2016 2017 2013 201:9 2020
13 13
13 123
86 345
6 23
3 13
8 31
10 39
3 10
5 20
92 368
42 168
242 967
16 62
230 920
8 30
35 140
35 48
13 53
16 71
2021 2022
511 2,044
139
192
21 65
APPENDIX(
2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
787 3,147
15 61
6 22
113 450
66 265
10 39
29 116
82 Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
Project ID Description of Water System Improvement
Pipeline improvements
P1HU-8 New pipe, E 11th St & N East Ave (520')
PlHU-9 New pipe, S Kings Drive Cir & Beechwood Ave (270') P1HU-10 New pipe, 1st St & 10th St (720')
PIHU-11 Newpipe. 1st St& 13thSt(1130')
P1HU-12 New pipe, S East Ave & E Springfield Ave (710') PlHU-13 New pipe. S East Ave & E August Ave. E Myra Ave (280') P1HU-14 New pipe, W Dinuba Ave & S Frankwood Ave (50')
P1HU-15 New pipe. South of S Reed Ave & Beech Ave -Well 10 (640') P1VU-1 New pipe, E 11th St & N East Ave (490')
P!VU-2 New pipe, Isl St & S Frankwood Ave (1180')
P1VU-3 New pipe, Klein Ave at Reed Ave (600')
City of Reedley
June 2022
Phase Project 2015 2016 2017 2018 Cost!•I
Existing 291
Phase 1 118
Phase 1 55
Phase ·t 13
Existing 125
Existing 525
Existing 770
Phase 1 9
Existing 25
Existing 114
Phase 1 44
72 2019 2020 2021 2022
58 0 0
0 0
25 100
105 420
154
APPENDIX(
2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
233
24 94
11 44
3 10
616
2 7
5 20 0 0
23 91 0 0
9 35
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
APPENDIX D: WASTEWATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
P«>jecl ID Sewer Syslem Improvement Project Description Phase Lift Station Improvements
PILS-1 i}pgrade to Ree:l Ave Lilt Station -Add 550 gpm s:tandby pump Existing P2L-S-2 New lilt station at Bur.tonwillow Canal Pitase2 Subtotal Lift Station Improvements
Pipeline Improvements
PmN-1 W D'..nuoa A•,e ben~-een ReerJ Ave & l t•lh St U~izea·ri-c,m 1Z' 1o 18" [2130') PIDN-2 I Sin St between W Dinuba Al/e & S East A•1e, Up.siz.;,:1 f10111 10' to various (2360') P\DN-3 I 5tii St betl•,-een W Dinuba Ave & S East A·1e, Upsiz>ed ful:>m 8" 1o 10-' {610'] Pi RA-1 Reed A•,•e betl•,een Olson Aore & W -S,h<r.make Ave, Upsized from 21" to 30" (6601 P1RA-2 Reed Ave ben~-een Din1iba Al/e & W Shoemake, A•1e, Upsil:ed from 12• ta various ( 1280') PI RA-3 Reed Me between Dinuba Me & 11th St U.osized from 1T 1o 24' (750') PI RA-4 Reed A•,·e between 11 th St & 8th si Upsiz.;,ci from IT to •,a:nous (1900'} PW-A-5 Reed A•1e between W Manning Me & 8th S~ Upsized m;,m &'1 0' 1o• ~arious (2630') PIP-A-6 Manning A-le betl\een Reed Ave and King; Riv,;,:, Profile Re,~;,se .;,n,:J i}pgra-::lw (3600') n RC-1 Sow:~ ol Olson A•1e at WWTP, Upsized frcm 12i'21" to 33• (1570'1 Pl RC-2 '.',' Olson A•,•e - Kings Ri•,er Crossing, U,wized from 21" to 33' {66i:l') PISM-1 Shoemake Me bet11een Reed A.•e & S Frankwood A\•e, Upsized from 13" to 27" {2720') PtSM-2 Shoemake Ave S Frankwood A·1e & R-:.:road, Upsszed from 18/24" to 27" ( l!lS01 P1SM-3 Columbia Ave beMeen Dinuba A-1e & Springft~d Aw,, Upsiil:ed from I 8" to var.c,11; {M"J) PtSM-4 Columbia Ave between Dinuba A~e & Springfield Me, llp~iil:ed from 15" to 18" (2320'} PlSM-5 E Springfield Ave east oi N Haney Ave. Upcized from 8' to 12• (1090') PISM-6 Columbia Ave bin E Manning A,·e ~, E Springfield Ave, Upsized from 12!'15" to •1.irious (~ PtSM-7 E Manning Me be~veen E 11th St & Button.willow Ave, Upsized from 10"tovariollS {21W) PIW'.'.'-1 '•'•' Henley Creek Rd, Upsized from 8" to IO" ( 1 i30') PWN,'-2 WWTP Heacfwori<s, V,c;sizeod irom 21' to 24' (150') PI IP-1 Indus.trial Pump Station Forcema'.11 Up;ra~. Ups!zed from 6" to 6" (540') City of Reedley
June 2022
Exis-ting
Exis.ting
Existing
Existing
Exis.ting
Pila:se I
Phase 1
P/1,~e I
Pi!-=...;Se i
Existing
Existing
Existing
Existing
Exi,,ting
Existing
Existing
Existing
Existing
Plla$e 1
Exis.iing
Existing
Projecl 2015 Cost'~
64 64
2,134
2,198 64
l ,506
1,.go
190
871 174
1,371
790
i,856
1,691
1,041
1,6i9 336
781
3,25 1
2,414
2,899
1,i2~
513
1,928
1,085
536
96 li5
73 2016 201 7 2018 201~ 2020 2021
0 0 0 0 0 0
301 1,205
288 1,1 52
697
274 1,09i
1,343
156 625
650 2.601
483 1,931
5W
APPENDIX D
2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 202!}
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3.s 152
156 632
3i1 1,465
338 1,353
208 833
2,319
345 1,379
103 410
386 1,542
217 668
107 429
19 77
35 140
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
APPENDIX E: STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
Project ID Storm Drainage System lmprO'Yement Project Desc~iption Storage Basin Improvements
EXL-Ba,sin Expand Slorage in Basin L lo 36.2 ac~'I
PlP-imin Replace Storage in Basin P, 76 ac-li:
PIQ-13,a,sin Replace Storage in Basin Q, 72.7 ac-1t
Pipeline Improvements
P1B-01 New 18-inch Pipe in W Cypress Ave (660')
P1B-02 New 18-inch Pipe in W Sycamore Ave (670')
P1B-03 New 18-inch Pipe m W Ponderosa Ave (690')
P1B-04 New 18-inch Pipe in W Palm Ave (670')
EXC-01 Ups1ze Pipeline from Outfall to canal (i0')
EXC-02 Upsiza Pipeline m E Myrtle Ave between N Sunset A\•e and N Columbia Ave (670') EXC-03 Ups1ze Pipeline in N Columbia Ave between E Ponderosa Ave to E Cypress Ave (670') EXD-01 Upsize Pipeline m East of railroad (near outfall) (730') EXD-02 Ups1ze Pipeline in N Reed Ave between W Manning Ave and W Ponderosa Ave (630') EXD-03 Upsize Pipeline in W Ponderosa Ave between N Reed Ave and N Hope Ave (650') EXD-04 Ups1ze Pipeline in N Reed Ave north or W North Ave (240') EXE-01 UpsIze Pipeline 111 S Reed Ave between W Curtis Ave and W Dinuba Ave (750') EXE-02 Upsize Pipeline mW Curtis Ave west or S Rive1View Ave to alley (330') EXE-03 Ups1ze Pipeline in W Dinuba Ave between alley easl of Rive1V1ew Ave to S Frankwood Ave (22i0') EXE-04 Upsize Pipeline in W Dinuba Ave between S Frankwood Ave and S East Ave (1210') EXE-OS Ups1ze Pipeline 111 S East Ave between W Dinuba Ave to G St ( 170') EXE-06 Upsize Pipeline m 1,1 St between 13th St and 12th St (420') EXE-07 Ups1ze Pipeline m 12th St between rvt St and I St ( 1560') EXE-08 Ups,ze PIpel1ne 111 I St between 11th St and 9th SI (970') EXE-09 UpsIze Pipeline 111 I St between 9th St and 8Ih St (480') EXE-10 Upsize Pipeline 111 8th St between I St and alley easl of H St (640') EXE-11 UP.siz_e._Pip_~li~e in_Alle)'_E!~_st H _St be_t;_veen ~th S~_and W North Ave (45_0:J. _ ... -- EXH-01 Upsize ~ line irom Outfall to Kings Ri•,er (660') EXH-02 Upsize Pipeline in W Eymann A~e betw-~ :, S Willow Glen Dr and alley w~t of S Oa.\ Dr (7W) EXH-03 Upsize Pipeline in W E~mann A•,•e between alley w~t of S oa.~ Dr aoo S Kl.ngs Dr {~,SO') EXH-04 Upsire Pipeline in W Eymann A·,e betw~.,11 S Kir.gs Dr and S Reed Ave {7.3.(fJ
EX H-05 Upsize Pl'.po,line in 9th St between S Reed Aile and northea$! of .J St [720"1 EXH-06 Upsize ?.~line in 9th St between alle:; northeast of J St a1t..:! I St (200') P1H-0 1 Mew Pipe in '.'.' Beechl\lJ0d Ave between a'.!.:;;y west of S Oak Dr and S Kings Dt (920'1 EX-J-0I Upsize Pipeline in E Duf, A~e between detention pond and S Hemlock A•,•e [3 10') EX-J-02 Upsize Pipeline in E Dufi A\·e between S Hemlock Aile and S Columbia A,·e (990') EX,J-03 Up size Pipeline in E Duf. A·,e between S Colufllffi; Ave and S Sune,;;t A\•e {WJ) EX.J-04 Upsize Pipeline in S Sunset Ave between E Duff Ave and E Myra .4ve (4~:)'J EX-J-05 Upsize Pipeline in S Sunset Ave belvjeen E ~lyra Ave ar,ci north of E A1-;11st Aile (570') EX-J-06 Upsize Pipeline in S Kad)' A•Je betwee.n E Duff Ave and E Eaily A\•e [3€1:1) Pl K-01 New Pipe in Zumwalt Ave north from Silas futscii E!f-.ment.,;ry &:hool to E M-:itu".:tc·~ Aw, (1960') City of Reedley
June 2022
Phase Project 2015 201'6 Cosll>'
Existing 1,646
Phase 1 6,326
Phase 1 4,129
Phase 1 483
Phase 1 491
Phase 1 505
Phase 1 491
Existing 53
Existing 708
Existing 491
Existing 963 193 770
Existing 665 133 532
Existing 476 95
Existing 110 22
Existing 1,185 237 948
Existing 521 104 417
Existing 2,620 524
Existing 1.594
Existing 180
Existing 886
Exisllng 3.286
Existing 1.023
Existing 633
Existing 675
Existing 475
Exislt'l:~ 1,074
Emting 986
Exislf.ng 906
Exislf.ng 963
Existing 759
Exislmg 211
Phase1 673
Exislf.ng 368
Existin-~ 1,304
Existtng 686
Existing 516
Existing 416
Eristtng 264
Phase 1 2,209
74 2017 2018 2019 21J20 2021
3,3,~ 1,318-
11 142
96 381
88 2,096
319 1,275
36 144
177 709
657 2,629
205 818
127 506
135 540
95 380 - -· 2t5 859
1SiS 790
181
193
APPENDIX E
2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2023 2029
1,266 5,062
626 3,3m
97 386
98 i 393
101 404
98 393
42 i 566
393 i
!
i
l
I
!
i I
I
I
I
I
i
i
I
725
770
152 f/J7
42 169
1:3.5 538
74 2~
26 1 1,043
137 54.0
103 413
84 334
53 211
442 1.767
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
Project ID Storm Drainage System lmpr0\'emen1 Project Desc~iption EXL-01 Upsize Pipeline in North itom retention basin~ to E Curtis A•,•e; Easi a!o.'l.g E Cums {950') EXL-02 Upsize Pipeline in North irom E Curtis A•,•e ( 11 O') EXN-01 Upsi!ze- Pipeline in S Church Ave between W Sasaki Ave and WHunisma.~ Ave (1010') EXN-02 Upsize Pipeline in W Shoemake Me between S Chutcil Ai/?; and Crier Ave {€-rol P1N-0 1 New Pipe in W Stanley Ave east from S Church Ave (5201 PIN-02 New Pipe in W Huntsman Ave- east irom S Church Ave (510'1 Pi P-01 New Pipe in South af,,ng S East Ave benveen E Da•;is Ave ta Lilac Ave (490') P1P,n New Pipe in S East A·1e beti1-een Lilac Avr:: and E FlmalAvr:: (to new ret;;n1ion b-:i:Sin) (1200') P2P-Ol New Pipe in Lilac A•,•e between S East Mr:: and ra:ioad (2350') P2Q-OI Upsize Pipeline in Benveen Olson A•1e and E Huntsman Avf:. (660') P2Q-02 New Pipe in South irom E Huntsman Ave (23B0')
P1Q-01 New Pipe in East along E Huntsman Ave from existing pipe ( 11,CI) Pi Q-02 New Pipe in North from existing retention pond to E Otn11oa Avif:, west to tem._ror.::.ry poru:I (2760') City of Reedley
June 2022
Phase Project
Costl>I
E:estin9 1,251
Emling 66
Existing l ,33 1
Existing 463
Phase 1 380
Phase 1 374
Phase 1 526
Phase 1 2,163
Phase 2 3,026
Phase 2 1,044
Phase 2 2,298
Phase 1 1,668
Phase 1 2,369
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Zoo 1,065
S7 386
75 APPENDIX E
2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
251.) 1,00 1
18 70
76 304
105 421
433 1,730
334 1,334
474 1,895
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report
City of Reedley. 2013. General Plan Update Final 2030.
--. 2021. Capital Asset Inventory Report .
REFERENCES
DOF (California Department of Finance, Demographics Research Unit) . 2021 . Table E-5, Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2011-2018 with 2010 Census Benchmark.
Institute of Traffic Engineers. 2003. Trip Generation Manual, 7th ed .
Natelson Company. 2001 . Employment Density Study Summary Report. Prepared for the Southern California Association of Governments.
SCAG (Southern California Association of Governments). 2002. Brief Guide to Traffic Generation Rates-Traffic Generators.
US Census Bureau. 2000. US Census 2000.
City of Reedley
June 2022
Development Impact Mitigation Fee Update
Final Report