Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-08-13 - AGENDA REPORTS - PH FEE REVISIONS RESO 91 106 (2)PUBLIC HEARING DATE: August 13, 1991 AGENDA REPORT City Manager Item to be presented c SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING FOR FEE REVISIONS TO THE ROUTE 126 AND BOUQUET CANYON BRIDGE AND MAJOR THOROUGHFARE CONSTRUCTION FEE DISTRICTS; RESOLUTIONS TO ADOPT FEE REVISIONS AND TO TARE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY AS AN URGENCY MEASURE Resolution Numbers: 91-106 and 91-127 DEPARTMENT: Community Development BACKGROUND On June 11, 1991 the City Council considered an agenda report showing the reasons and distribution of the fee revisions. for the Bouquet Canyon and Route 126 Bridge and Major Thoroughfare Construction Fee Districts. In order to provide public participation in this fee increase process, staff has conducted two meetings. One was with representatives or organizations, i.e., chambers of commerce, board of realtors, building industry association, etc., that would be affected daily by this fee increase so they could inform their membership. A.second public meeting was held for the community at large to explain the process and receive comments and input from anyone interested in the process. There seemed to be no disagreement that increased1fees were necessary to construct these roads. A public hearing has been properly noticed for August 13, 1991 to consider these fee revisions. The public notice invited both written and oral testimony to be presented at this time. Two resolutions have been prepared by the City Council. Following the public hearing, the Council may first consider a regular resolution to adjust the fees. Additionally, a resolution has been prepared to make the same fee increase immediately effective as an urgency measure. The fee increase pursuant to the regular resolution would take effect 60 days following adoption. Upon approval of the resolution for fee revisions the Community Development Department also requests that the urgency measure be voted on. to make the revised fees immediately effective. Approving the urgency measure will make the revised fees effective immediately and remains effective for 30 days, with an opportunity for an additional 30 -day extension subject to another approval. At the end of the second 30 -day period the regular resolution and fees shall take effect. The urgency measure requires a four-fifths vote of the City Council for approval.- The necessary findings regarding the immediate threat to the public health, welfare and safety are described in the urgency resolution. The extension of the 30 -day urgency resolution will require a duly noticed public hearing. Adep3Cd: Agenda Item: 91 i© d 9.1 is 7 PUBLIC HEARING FOR FEE REVISIONS ;6 Page 2 This is the first phase of our approach to the issue regarding Bridge and Thoroughfare Fees. Our neat step will be to meet with the County .Director of Public Works and the Building Industry Association toward developing a four -lane approach to these new roadways. Since this .was the motion approved by the County Board of Supervisors, we feel quite confident. that we will be. able to reach an agreement on our approach of collecting fees to buildfour-lane roadways rather than two. RECOMMENDATION 1) Conduct the public hearing. 2) Adopt the Resolution 91-06. 3) Upon four-fifths vote of the City Council, adopt Urgency Resolution 91-127. 4) Set a public hearing and direct staff to provide . proper public notice . on September 10, 1991, on a 30 -day extension of the Urgency Resolution 91-127. ATTACHMENTS Resolution 91-106 Urgency Resolution 91-127 hds:494 RC1`.EY:'WiT-1.5AN LAN"vASTc^ E -10-£i ;10:30Ah; Route 126 and Bouquet Canyon Bridge and Major Thoroughfare and Construction Fee Districts Fee Revisions The City of Santa Clarice will hold a public hearing to discuss the proposed Route 126 and Bouquet Canyon Bridge and Major Thoroughfare Construction Fee District Fee revisions. The establishment of the fee revisions sets new fees to be levied against future subdivision and qualifying building permit activity within each district boundary for. the- purposes of financing •the previously identified district's improvements. The Route 126 B & T Construction Fee District Boundary generally follows the Angeles National Forest boundaries to the north; the south of the Angeles National Forest's northern boundary on .the south; the Los Angeles City's Owens River aqueduct and the easterly boundary of the existing Bouquet Canyon B & T Construction Fee District from Soledad Canyon Road to the Angeles National Forest to the west; and the westerly t•cundary of the Angeles National Forest to the east. PROPOSED FEE RE I- SIONS The Route 126 Bridge and Major Thoroughfare Construction Fee District was adopted by :the City of Santa Clarita en November -28, 1989, to fund the construction of new road improvements for the following proposed .District projects: Golden valley Road, Lost Canyon Road, Newhall Ranch Road (Route 126), Oak Springs Canyon Road, Sand Canyon Road, Shadow Pines Boulevard, Soledad Canyon Road and Whites Canyon Road. The total estimated cost of the proposed District improvements at the time of District establishment was $81,690,000. The established fee rates.for new development were as follows: Residential Property: Single Family $2,100/unit Townhouse $10680/unit Apartment $10470/unit Non -Residential Property: Commercial $10,500/acre Industrial $ 61300/acre The current estimated cost for the construction of these District improvements is now $101,900,000. The increases in the construction costs are due to an increase in the scope of the whites Canyon Road project, construction cost inflation -increases, and elimination of earlier anticipated public agency contribution to the District which do not appear to be forthcoming. To date, $10.99 million in fees have been collected and conditioned. An additional $90.91 million is needed to fully finance the proposed District improvements. This amount is proposed .to be generated from new development within the fee district. About 20,077 new residential units and 380 acres of new commercial development are anticipated to be built within. the District boundary. The proposed fee rates are as follows: Notice of Public Hearing Page 3 For both Bouquet Canyon and Route 126 B & T Distrieta, the new fee rates Will be imposed upon new development projects within district's boundaries. Payment of fees would be required at the time of: a) Recordation of new subdivisions, and b) new qualifying building permit issuance. The proposed fee inereasee.affect only new development. proposed fee increasee do not affect: • Existing homes 9 Existing commercial or industrial buildings • Building permits for residential remodeling or additions • Building permits for reconstruction of existing residential units You have the right to appear at said hearing you may submit written comments prior to the to: Donna Grindey, City Clerk City of Santa Clarita 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 301 Santa Clarita, CA 91355 and be heard on thin matter, or close of the hearing, addressed For information, please call the Department of Public Works at (805) 255-4935. By order of the City Council; City of Santa Clarita, State of California on June 44 1991. DATE OF HEARING: TIM& OF SEARING: LOCATION OF HEARING: HDS:996 August 13, 1991 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers City of Santa Clarita 1st Floor City of Santa Clarita BOUQUET CANYON BRIDGE AND MAJOR THOROUGHFARE I CONSTRUCTION FEE DISTRICT I ED El it kv, is 1 gl I ED ==COUNTY AREA OF BENEFIT it BOUNDARY. OF AREA OF BENEFIT El ME= CITY ==COUNTY AREA OF BENEFIT it BOUNDARY. OF AREA OF BENEFIT CONS r i AREA ( .y AREA OF BENEFIT PUBLIC HEARING PROCEDURE 1. Mayor Opens Hearing a. States Purpose of Hearing 2. City Clerk Reports on Hearing Notice 3. Staff -Report (City Manager) or (City Attorney) - or (RP Staff) 4. Proponent Argument (30 minutes) 5. Opponent Argument (30 minutes) 6. Five-minute Rebuttal (Proponent) a. Proponent 7. Mayor Closes Public Testimony 8. Discussion by Council 9. Council Decision 10. Mayor Announces Decision RESOLUTION NO. 91-106 A—RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA CONFIRMING THE BOUQUET CANYON AND ROUTE 126 BRIDGE AND MAJOR THOROUGHFARE CONSTRUCTION FEE DISTRICTS FEE REVISIONS WHEREAS, the City of Santa Clarita has adopted by Previous Resolutions the Bouquet Canyon and Route 126 Bridge and Major Thoroughfare Construction Fee Districts ("B&T Districts" or "Districts") for. the funding of certain highway improvements; and WHEREAS, upon their adoption, the following.fees were established as the District Fees: Route 126 Residential Property B&T District Single Family S2,100/unit Townhouse $1,680/unit Apartment $1,470/unit Non -Residential Property Neighborhood Commercial N/A Commercial $10,500/acre Industrial $ 6,300/acre Bouquet Cyn B&T District $2,650/unit $2,120/unit $1,855/unit $ 2,650/acre $13,250/acre $ 7,950/acre WHEREAS, the Districts' fees established by the Resolutions at the time of B&T District's formation were based upon the estimated total improvement costs and the. established potential development within the Districts at that time; and WHEREAS, the established total improvement costs for the Districts have increased substantially since the establishment of the Districts primarily due to an increase in the scope of the Whites Canyon Road project, construction cost inflation increases, and elimination of earlier anticipated public agency contributions to the District; and WHEREAS, the development potential estimated within the District at the time of District formation has been reevaluated and should be revised downward based upon experience trends; and WHEREAS, the Districts' Formation Report indicated that the Districts' fees may be increased or decreased upon evaluation of building trends and construction costs. WHEREAS, as a result of the above facts, the projected revenue from collection of Districts'- fees at the existing fee rates will be insufficient to fully finance the proposed Districts' improvements; and WHEREAS, there is a need to revise the Districts' fees to provide for sufficient revenue to fully finance Districts' improvements as is demonstrated in the Bouquet Canyon and the Route 126 B&T Construction Fee Districts' Fee Revision Agenda Report presented to the City Council on June 11, 1991; and WHEREAS, on June 11, 1991, the City Council received and preliminarily approved information regarding the Districts' fee revisions and called a hearing thereon; and WHEREAS, the requirements.for notice and public hearing in relation to the proposed fee revisions have been met in accordance with Government Code Section 65091; and WHEREAS, at the time, date and place set for public hearing on the Districts' fee revisions, the City Council duly heard and considered all oral and written testimony in support of or opposing.such fee revisions levy and collection; and WHEREAS, at such public hearing, no written protests were filed or the written protests filed and not withdrawn did not amount to more than one-half the area to be benefited; and WHEREAS, the Districts are within the jurisdictions of the County of Los Angeles and the City of Santa Clarita; and WHEREAS, the revisions to the Districts' fees contained in this Resolution will apply only in the area within the City's jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, it has been determined that the proposed Districts' fee revisions are categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA in that they are intended only to provide full funding for those previously identified improvements within approved Districts; and NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. That the City Council finds; determines and declares as follows: A. The proposed District fee revisions are categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act in that they are intended only to provide full funding for those previously identified improvements within the existing approved Districts. B. The projected total cost of the Bouquet Canyon District improvements is now $35.4 million. C. The projected total cost of the Route 126 District improvements is now $101.9 million. Section 2. The B&T District fees are hereby revised as follows: Route 126 Bouquet Cyn Residential Property B&T District B&T District Single Family $4,800/unit Townhouse $3,840/unit Apartment $3,360/unit Non -Residential Property Neighborhood Commercial N/A Commercial $24,000/acre Industrial $14,400/acre $4,000/unit $3,200/unit $2,800/unit $ 4,000/acre $20,000/acre $12,000/acre Section 3. That the City Council further finds, determines and declares: A. That the approved revised Districts' fees will be implemented only in the areas within the City's jurisdiction. B. That the method of fee apportionment for the revised District fees is set forth in the Bouquet Canyon Bridge and Major Thoroughfare Construction Fee Analysis Report, generated by the County, attached hereto and incorporated as Exhibit A. C. That the method or fee apportionment for the revised District fees is set forth in the Route 126 Bridge and Major Thoroughfare Construction Fee Analysis Report, generated by the County, attached hereto and incorporated as Exhibit B. D. That the purpose of the revised Districts' fee is to finance completion of the Route 126 and the Bouquet Canyon B&T Construction Fee District Improvements as generally identified in Exhibits C and D respectively of the original Districts' Report for formation of the District. E. That the revised Districts' fees collected pursuant to this Resolution shall be. used to finance, or where appropriate, to provide reimbursement for financing of, the Districts' improvements. F. That there is a reasonable relationship between the proposed revised Districts' fee's use for the District improvements and the affected subdivision and building permit approvals to which the fee applies because this new development will directly benefit from the'improved traffic circulation provided for by the completion of the Districts' improvements. G. That there continues to be a reasonablerelation ship between the need for the Districts' improve ments and the affected subdivision and building permit -approvals because the Districts' improve ments will help mitigate the additional traffic congestion impacts generated by those approvals. H. That the proposed construction schedule for the completion of Districts' improvements as set forth in the respective Bridge and Major Thoroughfare Construction Fee Districts' Fee Analysis Reports,. attached hereto, to each report, is adopted. Section 4. That the City Clerk shall certify to -the adoption of this Resolution, and shall record a certified copy of this Resolution with the Los Angeles County Recorder. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of 1991 MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES) ss. . CITY OF SANTA CLARITA) I, Donna M. Grindey, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa-Clarita at a regular meeting thereof, held on the day of. 1991 by the following vote of the Council: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: CITY CLERK F: EXHIBIT A / February 26, 1991 MMET CANYON BRIDGE AND MAJOR THOROUGHFARE CONSTRUCTION FEE DISTRICT FEE ANALYSIS REPORT BACKGROUND The Bouquet Canyon Bridge and Major Thoroughfare (B&T) Construction Fee District was approved by. the Board of Supervisors on October 1, 1985. The District was established to provide for the construction of five projects: the improvements of the Rio Vista Road, Newhall Ranch Road (Route 126), Golden Valley Road, Plum Canyon Road, and Whites Canyon Road, originally estimated at $24.55 million. The fees charged to new development to finance these improvements were as follows: Residential Property: Single Family $2,650/unit Townhouse $2,120/unit Apartment $1,855/unit Non -Residential Property: Neighborhood Commercial $2,650/acre Other Commercial $13;250/acre Industrial $7,953/acre Since the adoption of this District, the estimated project costs have changed substantially due to construction cost inflation Increases, the increased scope of the Whites Canyon Road project, and elimination of earlier projected public agency contributions to the District which are not materializing. -The total estimated cost for the completion of the District improvements is now 535.4 million. FEE ANALYSIS We have analyzed the remaining amount of potential development to be constructed in the District and have calcuiated.the new fee rates needed to balance the expected cost of the District projects. The following analysis shows the fees collected to date, the tracts that have been conditioned to pay fees, a unit breakdown of the anticipated development remaining in the District and the District fee calculation and a proposed construction schedule. - 1 - $35,400,000 DISTRICT FUND STATUS Fees collected to date $12,200.000 * Fees conditioned $ 6,600,000 $18,800,000 Funds needed to complete District $16,600,000. Projects * Only developments that have received tentative tract approval are included in this category. DEVELOPMENT REMAINING IN DISTRICT Undeveloped Area This includes tentatively approved tracts that have expired, proposed developments that have not reached the Tentative Tract approval stage, and an analysis of the remaining developable area in the District. The amount of development in this categorey is based on the County's current Land Use Policy. Acres Remaining Estimated Housing Units Residential Non -Residential 6,653 25 4,433 - - 2 - "` DISTRICT PROJECTS COSTS 1992 Projects in District Costs Whites Canyon Road $14,900,000 Plum Canyon Road $ 2,600,000 Newhall Ranch Road (Route 126) $ 3,300,000 Golden Valley Road $ 9,900.000 Rio Vista Road $ 4,700,000 $35,400,000 DISTRICT FUND STATUS Fees collected to date $12,200.000 * Fees conditioned $ 6,600,000 $18,800,000 Funds needed to complete District $16,600,000. Projects * Only developments that have received tentative tract approval are included in this category. DEVELOPMENT REMAINING IN DISTRICT Undeveloped Area This includes tentatively approved tracts that have expired, proposed developments that have not reached the Tentative Tract approval stage, and an analysis of the remaining developable area in the District. The amount of development in this categorey is based on the County's current Land Use Policy. Acres Remaining Estimated Housing Units Residential Non -Residential 6,653 25 4,433 - - 2 - DISTRICT FEE CALCULATION Per the District Report, the proposed fee is related to the degree with which future developments benefit from the proposed improvements. To make the fee equitable between funding participants, the fee is based on the participants' proportionate share benefit from the improvements. The proportionate shares -are based on the number of trips generated by the development. Residential Unit Breakdown Based on 4.433 Units Non-Residentia Acres Breakdown Based on 25 Acres Trips Type S of Total* t of Acres Per Acre Total Neigh. comm. 5 1.2 10 12 Other comm. 60 15 50 750 Industrial 35 8.8 30 264 Total Acres 25.0 Total Trips 1,026 *Based on District Report Total Number of Trips 43,493 FEES NEEDED TO FINANCE DISTRICT PROJECTS $16,600,000 - $381.67* TOTAL NUMBER OF TRIPS 4�4 9— * Round to $400/trip Fee per factored development unit (fdu) - $400/trip x 10 trips/fdu - $4,000/fdu B&M Trips Type S of Total* / of Units Per Unit Total Single Family 80 3,546 10 35,460 Townhome/Condo 18 798 8 6,384 Apartment 2 89 7 623 Total Units 4,433 Total Trips 42,467 Non-Residentia Acres Breakdown Based on 25 Acres Trips Type S of Total* t of Acres Per Acre Total Neigh. comm. 5 1.2 10 12 Other comm. 60 15 50 750 Industrial 35 8.8 30 264 Total Acres 25.0 Total Trips 1,026 *Based on District Report Total Number of Trips 43,493 FEES NEEDED TO FINANCE DISTRICT PROJECTS $16,600,000 - $381.67* TOTAL NUMBER OF TRIPS 4�4 9— * Round to $400/trip Fee per factored development unit (fdu) - $400/trip x 10 trips/fdu - $4,000/fdu B&M Construction Fee Residential Fee Single Family 4,000 Townhouse 4.000 Apartment 4,000 Hon -Residential Neighborhood C0MMercial 4,000 Other Commercial 4,000 4,000 Industrial HHC:mv P -3:14 -FAR Factor Fee per Development Type X 1 54,000/unit X .8 53,200/unit x .7 52,800/unit X 1 $ 4,000/acre X 5 520,000/acre X 3 _ 512,000/acre - 4 - Ftbruary 25, 1991 BOUQUET CANYCN BRIDG2 AND NA,',OR.THOROUGHFARE CONSTRUCTION FEE DISTRICT PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE * Whites Canyon Road Phase I C=plete Phase II Construction began September id, 1990 Phase III May 1991 -Advertise for construction bids ** PI= Canyon Road Spring 1992 -Advertise for construction bids Easterly teminus of existing Plum Canyon Road to existing northerly terminus of Whites Canyon Road Newhall Ranch Road (Route 125) Rio Vista Road to Golden Valley Road 1993 Golden Valley Road Newhall Ranch Road to Soledad Canyon Road 2005 Rio Vista Road Newhall Ranch Road to Soledad Canyon Road 2011 * This project is being funded jointly with the Route 125 BST District. ** The Plum Canyon Road 1s to be opened within six months of cccnpletion of the Whites Canyon Road project. 8 v rl'fr-'I12rJ•'w rr•�°. �.�: '�'I�..1L�' I I lU'QpEVCANV'Q.N ILI ! '� � 1• , —,_Y0.! (•Y C_. �/1 1 �MI X11• 1 fl •`! 1 32 , LJL- Vo � _ �1 1 I 1 1 1 1 y, tel,—y�-i"•��•�'st: 1 A IFIEST,: Aft B( 36 1l. 1 8 v rl'fr-'I12rJ•'w rr•�°. �.�: '�'I�..1L�' I I lU'QpEVCANV'Q.N ILI ! '� � 1• , —,_Y0.! (•Y C_. �/1 1 �MI X11• 1 fl •`! 1 32 , LJL- Vo � _ �1 1 I 1 1 1 1 y, tel,—y�-i"•��•�'st: 1 A ft _- F r it :J Ahi'fn: f!Il;ill , .\tat p• • l -'� 4wn•,y FCS IFIEST,: Aft 1l. 1 •� - - y,r r I t.. - ft _- F r it :J Ahi'fn: f!Il;ill , .\tat p• • l -'� 4wn•,y FCS IFIEST,: Aft fi r. ' fVYON ' , ,CLU N f KY; MINT .' �•1�1,.CCANY )NV C y,, f��a - tet, ---•'---'-'_t x•11 1 • 711/ 1, .N♦ �'Y•...�V �I. ��.1VMJ�.. • lV ." Y: I I• YJI\�1 Notice of Public Hearing Page 2 Residential Property: Single Family $4,800/unit Townhouse $3,840/unit Apartment $3,360/unit YVv�JV%�Ql- Non—Residential Property: V VJi LirJv�r.. 1. O Commercial $24,000/acre Industrial $14,400/acre The Bouquet Canyon Bridge and Thoroughfare Construction Fee District. Boundary generally follows the Angeles National Forest to the north; generally the North Santa Clara River boundary and Soledad Canyon Road to the south; following a major north -south ridge line from Angeles National Forest to the intersection of Valencia Boulevard, Soledad Canyon Road and Bouquet Canyon Road as the westerly boundary; and the westerly boundary of the existing Route 126 B & T Construction Fee District from Soledad Canyon Road to the Angeles Vational Forest as the easterly boundary. PROPOSED FEE REVISIONS The Bouquet Canyon Bridge and Major Thoroughfare Construction Fee District was adopted by the City of Santa Clarita on November 28, 1989 to fund the construction of new road improvements for the following proposed district Projects: Rio Vista Road, Plum Canyon Road, Whites Canyon Road, Newhall Rench Road, and Golden Valley Road. The total estimated cost of the proposed district improvements at the time of district establishment was $24,550,000. The established fee rates for new development were as follows: Residential Property: Single Family $21650/unit Townhouse $2,120/unit Apartment $ 855/unit Non -Residential Property: Neighborhood Commercial $ 20650/acre Other Commercial $13,50/acre Industrial $ 7,950/acre The current estimated cost for the construction of these district improvements is now $35,400,000. The increases in the construction costs are due to an increase in the scope of the Whites. Canyon Road project, construction cost inflation increases and elimination of earlier anticipated public agency contributions to the district which do not appear to be forthcoming. To date, $18,800,000 in fees have been collected and conditioned. An additional $169600, 000. It needed to filly finance the proposed district improvements. This amount is proposed to be generated from new development within the fee district. About 4,433 new residential units and 25 acres of new commercial development are anticipated to be built within the district boundary. The proposed fee rates are as follows: Residential Property: Single Family $4,000/unit Townhouse $3,200/unit Apartment $2,800/+mit Non -Residential Property: Neighborhood Commercial $ 41000/acre Other Commercial $20,000/acre Industrial $12,000/acre RESOLUTION NO. 91-127 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA CONFIRMING THE BOUQUET CANYON AND ROUTE 126 BRIDGE AND MAJOR THOROUGHFARE CONSTRUCTION FEE DISTRICTS FEE REVISIONS AND PROVIDING FOR THEIR ADOPTION AS AN URGENCY MEASURE WHEREAS, the City of Santa Clarita has adopted by previous Resolutions the Bouquet Canyon and Route 126 Bridge and Major Thoroughfare Construction Fee Districts ("B&T Districts" or "Districts") for the funding of certain highway improvements; and WHEREAS, upon their adoption the following fees were established as the District Fees: Residential Property Single Family Townhouse Apartment Non -Residential Property Neighborhood Commercial Commercial Industrial Route 126 B&T District $2,100/unit $1.680/unit $1.470/unit N/A $10,500/acre $ 6,300/acre Bouquet Cyn B&T District $2,650/unit $2,120/unit $1,855/unit $ 2,650/acre $13,250/acre $ 7,950/acre WHEREAS, the Districts' fees established by the Resolutions at the time of B&T District's formation were based .upon the estimated total improvement costs and the established potential development within the Districts at that time; and WHEREAS, the established total improvement costs for the Districts have increased substantially since the establishment of the Districts primarily due to an increase in the scope-of'the Whites Canyon Road project, construction cost inflation increases, and elimination of earlier anticipated public agency contributions to the District; and WHEREAS, the development potential estimated within the District at the time of District formation has been reevaluated and should be revised downward based upon experience trends; and WHEREAS, as a result of the above facts, the projected revenue from collection of Districts' fees at the existing fee rates will be insufficient to fully finance the proposed Districts' improvements; and WHEREAS, there is a need to revise the Districts' fees to provide for sufficient revenue to fully finance Districts' improvements as is demonstrated in the Bouquet Canyon and the Route 126 B&T Construction Fee Districts' Fee Revision Agenda Report presented to the City Council on June 11, 1991; and WHEREAS, on June 11, 1991, the City Council received and preliminarily approved information regarding the Districts' fee revisions and called a hearing thereon; and WHEREAS, the requirements for notice and public hearing in relation to the proposed fee revisions have been met in accordance with Government Code Section 65091; and WHEREAS, at the.time, date and pl'ace set for public hearing on the Districts' fee revisions, the City Council duly heard and considered all oral and written testimony in, support of or opposing such fee revisions levy and collection; and WHEREAS, at such public hearing, no written protests were filed or the written protests filed and not withdrawn did not amount to more than one-half the area to be benefited; and WHEREAS, the Districts are within the jurisdictions of the County of Los.Angeles and the.City of Santa Clarita; and WHEREAS, the revisions to the Districts' fees contained in this Resolution will apply only in the area within the City's jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, it has been determined that the proposed Districts' fee revisions are categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA in that they are intended only to provide full funding for those previously identified improvements within approved Districts; and WHEREAS, the Districts' Formation Report indicated that the Districts' fees may be increased or decreased upon evaluation of building trends and construction costs. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. That the City Council finds, determines and declares as follows: A. The proposed District fee revisions are categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act in that they are intended only to provide full funding for those previously identified improvements within the existing approved Districts. B. The projected total cost of the Bouquet Canyon District improvements is now $35.4 million. C. The projected total cost of the Route 126 District improvements is now $101.9 million. Section 2. The.B&T District fees are hereby revised as follows: Route 126 Bouquet Cyn Residential Property B&T District B&T District Single Family Townhouse Apartment Non -Residential Property Neighborhood Commercial Commercial Industrial $4,800/unit $3,840/unit $3,360/unit N/A $24,000/acre $14,400/acre $4,000/unit $3,200/unit $2,800/unit $ 4,000/acre $20,000/acre $12,000/acre Section 3. That the City Council further finds, determines and declares: A. That the approved revised Districts' fees will be implemented only in the areas within the City's jurisdiction. B. That the method of fee apportionment for the revised District fees is set forth in the Bouquet Canyon Bridge and Major Thoroughfare -Construction Fee Analysis Report, generated by the County, attached hereto and incorporated as Exhibit A. C. That the'method or fee apportionment for the revised District fees is set forth in the Route 126 Bridge and Major Thoroughfare Construction Fee Analysis Report, generated by the County, attached hereto and incorporated as Exhibit B. D. That the purpose of the revised Districts' fee is to finance completion of the Route 126 and the Bouquet Canyon B&T Construction Fee District Improvements as generally identified in Exhibits C and D respectively of the original Districts' Report for formation of the District. E. That the revised Districts' fees collected pursuant to this Resolution shall be used to finance, or where appropriate, to provide reimbursement for financing of, the Districts' improvements. F. That there is a reasonable relationship between the proposed revised Districts'. fee's use for the District improvements and the affected subdivision and building permit approvals to which the fee applies because this new development will directly benefit from the improved traffic circulation provided for by the completion of the Districts' improvements. G. That there continues to be a reasonable relation ship between the need for the Districts' improve ments and the affected subdivision and building permit approvals because the Districts' improve ments will help mitigate the additional traffic congestion impacts generated by those approvals. H. That the proposed construction schedule for the completion of Districts' improvements as set forth in the respective Bridge and Major Thoroughfare Construction Fee Districts' Fee Analysis Reports, attached hereto, to each report, is adopted. Section 4. Urgency. Pursuant to Section 66017(b) of the Government Code this Resolution is adopted as an urgency measure and the fee revisions set forth in Section 2 shall take effect immediately upon adoption of this Resolution by a four-fifths vote of the City Council and shall remain in effect for a period of 30 days. The effectiveness of the fee revisions may be extended for an additional 30 days, with no more than two such extensions, following a duly noticed public hearing and upon a four-fifths vote of the City Council. This urgency ordinance is adopted due to an immediate threat to the public health, welfare and safety of the City. The findings of the City Council are as followst A. Failure to adopt the urgency measure would result in a funding shortfall in the two B&T Districts. B. Such a funding shortfall would cause further delays in construction.of the roads and bridges to be funded in these B&T Districts. C. Construction delays would further exacerbate the current traffic congestion in the Santa Clarita Valley. D. The sooner the District fees are in place, the sooner the projects will have a positive environmental effect on the area and residents, as the traffic congestion.will decrease. Section 5. That the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution, and shall record a certified copy of this Resolution with the Los Angeles County -Recorder. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of 1991 ATTEST: CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES) ss. CITY OF SANTA CLARITA) I, Donna M. Grindey, foregoing Resolution was duly. the City of Santa Clarita at a on the day of following vote of the Council: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: MAYOR hereby certify that the adopted by the City Council of regular meeting thereof, held 1991 by the CITY CLERK ROUTE 125 BRIDGE AND XAJOR THOROUGHFARE CONSTRUCTION FEE DISTRICT FEE: ANALYSIS REPORT BACKGROUND EXHIBIT B February 2S, 1991 The Route 126 Bridge and Kajor Thoroughfare (B3T) Construction Fee District was approved by the Board of Supervisors on July 21, 1987. The District was established to provide for the construction of the following projects the improvements of the Golden Yalley Road, Lost.Canyon Road, Newhall Ranch Road (Route 126), Oak Springs Canyon Road, Sand Canyon Road, Shadow Pines Boulevard, Soledad Canyon Road, and Whites Canyon Road, originally estimated at 381.69 million. The fees charged to new development to finance these Improvements were set as follows: Residential Property: Single Family $2,100/unit Townhouse $1,680/untt Apartment $1,470/unit Non -Residential Property: Cwmericial $10,500/acre Industrial $6,300/acre Since the adoption of this District, the estimated project costs have changed substantially due to construction cost inflation increases, the increased scope of the Whites Canyon Road project, and elimination of public agency contributions to the District which are not materializing. The proposed total estimated cost for the completion of District improvements and administration is now $101.9 million. F== ANALYSIS We have analyzed the amount of development remaining to be constructed in the District and have calculated the new _fee rates needed to balance the expected cost of the District projects. The following analysis shows the fees collected to date, the tracts that have been conditioned to pay fees, a unit breakdown in the anticipated development semaining In the District, and the District fee calculation. - 1 - ' DISTRICT PROJECTS COSTS 1992 Pr0,iects in District Costs Whites Canyon Road $14,900,000 Newhall Ranch Road (Route 126) $57,600,D00 Golden Valley Road $12,900,000 Lost Canyon Road $ 9,400,000 Shadow Pines Boulevard $ 300,000 Oak Springs Canyon Road $ 1,700,000 Sand Canyon Road $ 2,100,000 Soledad Canyon Road $ 3,000,000 $101,900,000 DISTRICT FUND STATUS Fees collected to date $ 8,810,000 *Fees conditioned $ 2,180,000 $10,990,000 Funds needed to complete District Projects $90,910,000. *Only developments that have received tentative tract approval are included in this category. DEVELOPMENT REMAINING IN DISTRICT Undeveloped Area This includes tentatively approved tracts that have expired, proposed developments that have not reached the tentative tract approval stage, and an analysis of the remaining developable area in the District. The amount of development in this category is based on the County's current Land Use Plan. Total **Residential **Non -Residential Acres 17,060 380 Housing Units 20,077 - ** Refer to District Fee Calculation for breakdown of Residential and Non Residential Area. -2 - DISTRICT FEE CALCIXATIDII Per the District Report, the proposed fee is related to the degree with which future developments benefit frac the proposed trprovements. To make the fat equitable between fending participants, the. fee 1s based on the participants' proportionate share of improvements. The proportionate shares are based on the number of trips generated by the development. Residential Units Breakdown Based on 20,077 Units *Based on District Report Total Number of Trips 189,833 FEES NEEDED TO FINANCE DISTRICT PROJECTS $90,910,000 = 478.89* TOTAL NUMBER OF TRIPS 189,833 * Rounded to $4801trip Fee per factored development Unit (fdu) • $480/trip x 10 trips/fdu - $48001fdu - 3 - Trips Type X of Total* J of Units Per Unit Total Single Family 38.8 7,790 10 77,900 Townhome/Condo 57.4 11,S24 8 92,192 Apartment 3.8 763 7 5,341 Total Units 20,077 Total Trips 175,433 Non -Residential Acres Breakdown Based on 380 Acres Trips Type X of Total* f of Units Per Acre Total Commercial 39.5 150 50 7500 Industrial 60.5 230 30 6900 Total Acres 380 Total. Trips 14,400 *Based on District Report Total Number of Trips 189,833 FEES NEEDED TO FINANCE DISTRICT PROJECTS $90,910,000 = 478.89* TOTAL NUMBER OF TRIPS 189,833 * Rounded to $4801trip Fee per factored development Unit (fdu) • $480/trip x 10 trips/fdu - $48001fdu - 3 - Construction Fee Residential Fee Single Family $4,800 x Townhouse $4,800 x Apartment $4,800 x Hon -Residential Commercial $4,800 x Industrial $4,800 x HHC:mv P -3:15 -FAR Factor Fee per Development Type 1 . $4,800/unit .8 $3,840/unit .7 $3,360/unit 5 $24,000/acre 3 $14,400/acre - 4 - February 25, 1991 ROUTE 126 BRIDGE AND MAJOR THOROUGHFARE CONSTRUCTION FEE DISTRICT PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE *Whites Canyon Road Phase I Phase II Phase III Route 125 Convlete Construction began September 14, 1990 Kay 1991—Advertise for construction bids Golden Valley Road to Soledad Canyon Road 2002 Soledad Canyon Road to Sierra Highway 2004 Sierra Highway to Route 14 Golden Valley Road Soledad Canyon Road to Via Princessa 2005 Via Princessa to Sierra Highway 2006 Sierra Highway to Green Mountain Drive 2007 Lost Canyon Road Via Princessa to Tentative Tract Hap 45023 2008 Tentative Tract Map 45023 to Sand Canyon Road 2009 Shadow Pines Boulevard Grandiflores Drive to Begonias Lane 2009 Oak Springs Canyon Road Lost Canyon Road to Soledad Canyon Road 2009 Sand Canyon Road At Route 14 2009 At Santa Clara River 2010 Soledad Canyon Road Sand Canyon Road to Oak Springs Canyon Road 2010 Shadow Pines Boulevard to Route 14 * This project is being funded jointly with the Bouquet Canyon BST District. r ' �'"" E,•..'") IulItillix]11JI�n�I�Oiiiiiiii1fl)iiiItiir111�I11u1 4, g jY''ET:CANYO N /-J • �" ! 32 33 3/ ..'fir ��.. . 3� / 76• I •r 71 32 y.i. ` •`fj I ���ti' �....::1� , w r..;1: 't..'..Ft`-"CREST .f'AHK �. I - •.,.. � — � r �, t�r.,. ;.-♦L M •.F��r/ --F—' �'r:r r -,...�..� I•, J i I�AI°P)� `°' 'f� �� j _ 1M tet!• -.;:: • 1��!!'•.@-1---- � ....�: �--•t,' .. , f .+:• .... _ R UTE 1 :a '. __el 1�1,�,•,• Y :art rs 2 PINETREV I�« CSLUN*fFiY; pp r, MIN' 1 - f.'`r 1 fVTRY r, �•L-�b'AN Itr'" 19Ls=i,-� U I�IIIIWIIII�I�fJGc •�r► WG r � 7�- Jam„ 19 _ .. .70 44 1p �' ,• C 1 , ...3n IN;. .tr ,.p. t7 , ?J.h r� \ '♦ 30 -- -- -: 31 �� %- ;'�•.. .{..C,_� - ---•-- y� �;lf_• _ . __f _�.. _-+_ `," ', '' -i �.'.• - .. .... .;9'••ti,,..:`�. Illllll�lllllllllllllf� +�°�a'""�.. ..,� I � •"-- �. ;r •��� •1}..�.: � IJill InIlI�111ilian.a •�, � •/�- �Y ,..r,� ,; ; I.. ..1'.:. --� i �I� III � . r, � '•%` �. '�