Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-02-01 STAFF REPORTS 1B i i2 � IV ALMS c � co4asmF Cq41FOR Vitt/ Council Staff Report DATE: FEBRUARY 1, 2006 PUBLIC HEARING SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED ORDINANCE ADDING CHAPTER 9.69 TO THE PALM SPRINGS MUNICIPAL CODE, RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF DRAINAGE, ROAD AND BRIDGE, AND FIRE PROTECTION IMPACT FEES IN THE PALM CANYON AREA. FROM: David H. Ready, City Manager BY: Community & Economic Development Department SUMMARY: As a condition of approval on most development projects, developers are required to construct public improvements that benefit their projects, especially if those improvements are located adjacent to the project site. Over the past fifteen years, developers have made requests for Agency assistance on flood control improvement costs in several residential projects in the South Palm Canyon area, particularly the El Portal and Monte Sereno projects, because many of the improvements are"regional'in nature:that is,the majority of the benefit accrues to properties spread over a wide area and not one particular project. The regional nature of the improvements is a good argument for public agency participation, rather than being borne by a single project. The development community has asked to be able to pay their "fair share" of the improvement costs but not a disproportionate amount. As part of an effort to tackle the Master Plan of Flood Control issues, as well as other infrastructure needs, the City Council created the Canyon Redevelopment Project Area in 1991, with the Agency committing in 1991 to funding the development of all the flood control and drainage infrastructure, as well as streets, bridges and roads, In the project area. The single master-plan developer is no longer operating in the Canyon and the initial pledge of Agency financial assistance is no longer feasible based on the slow growth in tax increment in the project area over the past decade. Page 1 Item No. . In 2003, the Agency hired the engineering firm of Berryman & Henigar(the"Consultant")to conduct a fee study under the provisions of the California Government Code Section 66000. The purpose of the study was to determine the public-and private benefit shares of the estimated Master Plan costs to determine an equitable share for developers seeking to develop in the Canyon area. The Ordinance, based on the conclusions of that study, is presented at this meeting more approval and adoption. RECOMMENDATION: PROPOSED ORDINANCE ADDING CHAPTER 9.69 TO THE PALM SPRINGS MUNICIPAL CODE, RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF DRAINAGE, ROAD AND BRIDGE, AND FIRE PROTECTION IMPACT FEES IN THE PALM CANYON AREA: RECOMMENDATION: 1)Open the public hearing and receive public testimony; 2)Waive reading of the proposed ordinance and read by title only; and 3) Introduce on first reading Ordinance No. , "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, ADDING CHAPTER 9.69 TO THE PALM SPRING MUNICIPAL CODE, RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF DRAINAGE, ROAD AND BRIDGE,AND FIRE PROTECTION IMPACT FEES IN THE PALM CANYON AREA." STAFF ANALYSIS: The South Palm Canyon Area south of Murray Canyon Drive is not included in the City's Drainage Master Plan; therefore, each development proposal is subject to review and approval by the Riverside County Flood Control District, with each developer bearing the cost of his own direct(on-site) and indirect (off-site)flood control mitigation. The estimate of the entire cost of the master plan flood control improvements in the Canyon could be as high as$12 million or more. In addition, there are several areas of infrastructure that need to be upgraded to accommodate current and future development in the Canyon, including the installation of an all-weather bridge on South Palm Canyon Drive and the construction of anew fire station in the Canyon. The development community sees at least a portion of the flood control and infrastructure costs to be "regional," to be borne by either the public agencies (City/Redevelopment Agency) or other benefiting property owners. Significant studies have been done to determine the appropriate flood control mitigation measures and to estimate the construction costs, as well as to develop a cost basis for the streets, bridges, and other required public improvements. The flood control studies are a basis for determining the pro rata cost of the flood control improvements for the parcels in the area; in addition, there are estimates available for the necessary streets and traffic improvements. There are a number of factors that complicate the calculation of an implementable fee, however: first, the topography of the area suggests that there may be a high degree of disparity between the benefit of a flood control fee across the Canyon,with adjacent tracts Page 2 being subjected to very different direct requirements for flood control improvements, depending on which is in the flood plain; second, a portion of the area is already developed and may have been developed under more lenient flood control guidelines, suggesting that existing development may derive benefit from the future improvements without paying for them, and that there was no prior mechanism for collecting an infrastructure impact fee; third, about half the developable Canyon area lies outside the City limits of the City of Palm Springs, making the assessment of those parcels difficult, even though some improvements need to be constructed outside the City; and, fourth, a significant portion of the Canyon is either Indian allottee land or directly owned by the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians. While the City has the right to impose development fees on allottee land within the City limits, its ability to assess fees on Tribally owned parcels is circumscribed and the City and Tribe have not yet negotiated the specific terms of a voluntary fee program on Tribal or allottee land outside the City limits, though the City has presented the program at least twice to the Tribal Council. This flood control problem has been a long-standing one in the Canyon. As the Council may know, developers have made repeated requests for Agency assistance on several residential projects in the Canyon area, particularly El Portal and Monte Sereno. When the Canyon Redevelopment Project Area (now part of Merged Area#2)was created in 1991, the Agency committed to the developer of the Canyon Park Master Plan that the Agency would fund the development of all the flood and drainage infrastructure in the project area, up to a maximum of$300 million over the life of the project(40 years). The argument was simple: while these residential projects (and the redevelopment of the Canyon Hotel, as part of the Canyon Park project) promise to generate significant tax increment for the Agency and would increase the supply of truly high-end housing in the city, they face extraordinary costs due to flood control measures required by Riverside County Flood Control in order to address the regional offsite hydrology issues. The total anticipated cost of the flood control improvements alone is nearly$8 million,far more than can be absorbed by either the developer or the home buyers in the tract (even in $1 million homes, if the project is to remain competitive with others in the Valley). The last potential developer of the Canyon Hotel made a more modest request for Agency assistance for the Canyon Vista project, a major hotel and conference resort, of approximately$8 million. While that project fell into bankruptcy, staff searched for a way to accommodate the requests for development assistance related to drainage- and other infrastructure. The Agency was then asked in 2001 to look at ways of providing assistance to the hotel and residential projects, as the extraordinary costs of developing the flood control improvements have created a financial burden that has kept development in the Canyon from moving forward. Most of the improvements are "regional' in nature: that is, they benefit properties spread over a wide area and not one particular project. The regional nature of the improvernents was a good argument for public agency participation, rather than being borne by a single Page 3 project. The development community has asked to be able to pay their"fair share"but not a disproportionate amount. In the end, staff looked at three financial assistance alternatives: 1. Redevelopment Agency assistance:. This would be accomplished either through an Owner Participation Agreement, whereby the developer would construct the improvements and be reimbursed by the Agency over a period of years based on tax increment produced; or, the Agency would issue bonds to construct the improvements as a capital project. 2. Assessment District Financing. The area benefitted by the improvements is significantly larger than the three private development projects requesting the assistance. The developers were reluctant to assess all of the (disproportionate) costs solely on their projects, and to try to create an assessment district over the entire several-thousand acre study area would be extremely difficult because of the need to hold an election and get majority support of the property owners. 3. Development Fee. In the end, staff and the development community agreed to pursue a Development Fee program that would assess a per-unit or per- acre fee on new development in the study area. A developer fee must be calculated on all the property in the study, as an Assessment District is, but because it is assessed at the time of building permits, it is only collected on new development. The "gap" between the total cost and the amount able to be assessed on new development is the amount that could or should be borne by the public agency. The City has a Master Plan of Drainage in other areas of the community, where developers can pay a per-acre fee for master plan improvements rather having to construct them. I=ven deciding to proceed with the development fee, there were a number of challenges that needed to be addressed. These challenges include: 1. City limits. Hydrology does not respect city limits. A significant portion of the study area is actually outside the City limits, and under the jurisdiction of the Tribe (it was removed from the Tribal-County land use agreement several years ago. The Tribe will also need to adopt and implement the fee program for the program to work, and the fund created would need to be able to receive money from and spend money in areas outside the City. 2. Other infrastructure. In addition to drainage and flood-control improvements, the cost of some of the major street and bridge improvements in the area, especially the low-water crossing on South Palm Canyon Drive and related roadway improvements. Additionally, the City's Master Plan of Fire Page 4 Protection identifies a new fire station as necessary for the area in order to meet the five-minute response time for the area. The estimated cost of the station is $2.5 million, with only a portion of the cost being covered by the new fee. Both of those elements were included in the fee study. The Agency conducted a solicitation in the fall of 2002 for an engineering firm familiar with parcel-by-parcel benefit calculations for the purpose of calculating a prospective flood control and infrastructure mitigation fee for the Canyon area of the City. In 2003, the City hired the engineering firm of Berryman &Henigar(the"Consultant")to conduct a fee study under the provisions of the California Government Code Section 66000. The City or Agency did not have a desire to create a community facilities district or other benefit assessment district for this purpose but wanted to implement a reasonable per-acre development fee as is collected in the other areas of the City under the Master Plan of Drainage; the infrastructure costs would be covered as an impact fee. The Consultant helped the City and Agency formulate the legal basis for the imposition of an impact fee. Because of the nature of developer fees (i.e. the City's ability to collect the fee against all property is quite limited, though the"costs" are spread against all the property in the study area), establishment of such a Drainage Fund would build in a "structural gap" due to the costs allocated to existing development(per Government Code Section 66000, et seq.)but uncollectable because the fee is established as a Developer Fee paid at building permit stage rather than an assessment district where costs are spread equitably against all properties. The structural gap is as follows: Total Structural Gap on all Drainage Fees based on a fee of $4,213 per acre $637,006 Structural Gap on El Portal alone ("area benefit" cost attributed to existing development) $520,721 Infrastructure Costs 'The master plan of flood control improvements, as prepared and summarized by the engineering firm of Tettemer and Associates, include: Page 5 i Estimated Watershed/Drainage Facilities Construction Cost Dry Canyon Improvements 1 Arenas Lateral 30,000 2 Dry Canyon Debris Basin 37,500 3 Dry Canyon Channel 1,828,750 4 Acanto Drive Storm Drain 137,500 Palm Canyon Wash 5 Westerly Bank Rip Rap Protection 1,401,250 12 Westerly Bank Concrete Levee 2,500,000 Arenas Canyon 6 Arenas North Channel 1,055,000 7 Andreas North Desilting Basin 1,043,750 8 South Palm Canyon Drive Culvert Crossing 155,000 9 Arenas South Channel 2,000,000 10 South Palm Canyon Drive Bridge & Street 3,494,079 11 Improvements New Fire Station 2,500,000 Total Estimated Construction Cost $16,747,829 Developer Fair Share Since Proposition 13 and the other tax-limiting measures that have succeeded it, developers in California have learned to bear a greater share of the cost of the infrastructure cost attributed to development they create. These costs typically include street and sidewalk improvements, median islands, parkway or green belt landscaping, traffic signals, and all flood control and drainage facilities (on site or off site). In Palm Springs, where there exists a Master Plan of Flood Control Improvements in most of the city,the cost of drainage and flood control improvements are rational and predictable, if not Page 6 i I inexpensive. In the most expensive portion of the City, in the east-central portion (around Lowe's), a fee of approximately $9,600 per acre is assessed against all development. I The Consultant in the Fee Study has identified a fair set of fees that are calculated on both the basis of regional benefit and local benefit. It spreads the cost among several categories of land, and then determines a projected amount of revenue from new development. These land uses include: City Jurisdiction Tribal Jurisdiction Single Family Development Single Family Development Existing Hotel Development Estate Lots Golf Course/Open Space Parkland/Preserve Single Family Development Single Family Development Future Hotel Development Estate Lots Golf Course/Open Space Parkland/Preserve Levels of Area- and Local-Benefit Fees The cost per acre for the various types of land use B in terms of area benefits B as calculated by Berryman & Henigar are shown as follows: Cost Per Acre for New Development Flood Road/ Fire Future Control Bridge Station Development Costs/ Cost per Cost/ Net Acres Acre Unit Acre City Single Family 326.3 $4,213 $2,704 $469 Development Hotel Development 13.0 $3,180 $1,875 Golf Course/Open n/a $0 Space Page 7 I I City Totals 339.3 $4,213 Non-City(Tribal) Single Family 39.5 $4,213 $2,704 n/a Development Estate Lots 332.0 $2,170 n/a Parldand/Preserve n/a n/a n/a County Totals 371.5 $2,207 n/a One notable difference between the consultant's report and the proposed per-acre fee is that staff recommends increasing the per-acre fee for$4,213: staff needed to reconcile the cost spread of all the drainage costs shown in the study with an estimate of existing- and future-developable land shown. Because of the uncertainty over the Tribe's plans for the Heritage park land at the time of the study, the consultant failed to allocate all of the Area Benefit drainage costs: the total dollar amount of Area Benefit costs shown to be attributed to Existing Development was$1,176,561 in one table but only$377,395 per the formula in the table that calculates the per acre revenue($2,496 per acre for 151.2 developed acres). I The difference in the Area Benefit costs for future development is even greater: Table 3 shows $2,863,714 in cost while Table 5 only shows $1,664,916 in potential cost recovery from new development, leaving about $2,000,000 completely unallocated B it isn't assigned to either existing development or future development. The problem they likely encountered was what to do with 1,084 acres of Tribally-reserved "parkland"that is neither already developed or part of the future development calculation. I The solution was to reallocate all of the Area Benefit costs, minus the 1,084 acres of "parkland" that won't be developed. The resulting per-acre figure for single family development is $4,213, an increase of about 69% in per acre fee. Therefore, the "Area Benefit" share of the combined El Portal/Monte Sereno project would climb from about $187,200 to $315,975, an increase of$128,775. On the other hand, a recalculation of the fees to show full distribution makes the fee "system"work better: it reduces the amount of subsidy that would potentially be required by the Redevelopment Agency and it shows a better potential cash flow in the Drainage Fund itself. All together, it makes the Drainage Fee program more feasible. There are several projects, El Portal and Monte Sereno in particular, that in addition to paying the area benefit fees, also would have to pay a local benefit fee. These fee levels would be, for example: I Page 8 Development Fee Costs for Selected Protects El Portal Monte Sereno Totals Drainage Total Capital Costs $2,033,750 $1,401,250 $3,435,000 Area Benefit Costs $1,781,250 $0 Local Benefit Costs $252,500 $1,401,250 $1,653,750 Area Benefit/Acre $4,213 $4,213 Area Benefit Fees $126,390 $210,650 $337,040 Road & Bridge Total Capital Costs $3,494,079 $3,494,079 Area Benefit Costs $3,494,079 $3,494,079 Local Benefit Costs $0 $0 Area Benefit/Unit $2,704 $2,704 Area Benefit Fees $181,168 $240,656 $421,824 Fire Station Total Capital Costs $3,494,079 $3,494,079 Area Benefit Costs $3,494,079 $3,494,079 Local Benefit Costs $0 $0 Area Benefit/Acre $469 $469 Area Benefit Fees $14,070 $23,450 $37,520 Improvement Cost $574,128 $1,876,006 Area Benefit Costs $321,628 $474,756 Local Benefit Costs $252,500 $1,401,250 Totals Per Unit $8,569 $21,079 In order to begin the development of the"backbone"of the drainage system in the Canyon, as well as make the City's federal bridge grant application competitive, the Agency used a portion of its 2004 bond refinance proceeds (the bond was approved in April 2004)to fund two projects in the area. These projects are: Page 9 J i I Description Cost Reimbursement Constructing a "four lane" road on $1,000,000 To be repaid from Bridge and South Palm Canyon Drive to (to be Road Fund established as facilitate a federal "Bridge Grant" reimbursed) part of Developer fee in application; includes right of way Canyon as $2,704 per unit acquisition El Portal Drainage Improvements in $2,033,750 Developer would offset a Canyon Area. Agency could fund (to be portion of the cost ($567,975) the entire $2,033,750 which would reimbursed) over the short-term in be partially offset by Developer's drainage fees; other payment of$567,975 in Local reimbursements would come Benefit and Area Benefit Fees on from other development in both El Portal and Monte Sereno the Canyon ($1,465,275) by City's Drainage Fund. Therefore, the Agency could be repaid the$2,033,750 expended forthe construction of the El Portal Drainage Improvements, which includes Improvements 1 'through 4 (Dry Canyon Improvements) described above. Additionally, the Agency is funding the development of Palm Canyon Drive from two lanes to four lanes in order to qualify the City for a grant to construct a four land bridge. That estimated cost is $1,000,000, which could also be reimbursed to the Agency through the collection of fees. FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact to the City of Palm Springs from the adoption of the Drainage Fee and master Plan of Drainage should be negligible, as the fees will deposited into a separate Drainage Fee fund and expended on a per-needed basis. Moreover,the fees have already been collected by Condition of Approval from the El Portal (ALTA) project, the Estancias, and Monte Sereno and deposited into a separate account. OHN . MOND, THOMAS J. W '°SON, ire r of mmunity & Assistant City Manager— Economic Development Development Services DAVID H. READY, _ DAVID J. BARAKIAN City Manager '� City Engineer/Director of Public Works Attachments: Ordinance Page 10 E 'f� ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, ADDING CHAPTER 9.69 TO THE PALM SPRINGS MUNICIPAL CODE, RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF DRAINAGE, ROAD AND BRIDGE, AND FIRE PROTECTION IMPACT FEES IN i THE PALM CANYON AREA CitV Attorneys Summary I I This Ordinance establishes drainage, road and bridge, and fire protection impact fees as a condition of approval of development I projects in an area of the City generally described as the "Canyon Area"and as further described in the Ordinance. The Council of the City of Palm Springs finds: A. Government Code Sections 66000 et seq. authorize the City of Palm Springs ("City") to impose fees for drainage and flood control improvements (the "Drainage Fees") as a condition to the approval of a development project. B. On December 11, 1967 the City Council, by Resolution 9107, adopted a Master Plan of Drainage as a part of the General Plan of the City. The General Plan then and now contains policies to protect residents from health and safety hazards including flooding and fire hazards. C. On March 18, 1981, the City Council adopted the Master Plan of Flood Control and Drainage as prepared by Riverside County Flood Control District ("RCFCD"). On January 18, 1984 a joint Master Agreement was executed by the City and RCFCD delineating responsibilities for funding, construction, and maintenance requirements for each party. Pursuant to this Agreement, the City agreed, pursuant to its land use permitting authority, to require developers at the time of development to enter into appropriate master drainage agreements and make mitigation payments for drainage and funding problems. i D. On June 6, 1984 the City Council adopted a revised Master Plan of Drainage, added two drainage areas to the original plan, and established an acreage developer fee program. One of the added areas was in the southeast area of the City (the "Southeast area") but no fees were collected. The Southeast area, also known as "Palm Canyon," was largely undeveloped. E. In 1991, the City Council adopted, and in 1994 amended, the Canyon Park and Spa Resort Specific Plan (the "Canyon Plan"), encompassing much of the Southeast area. The Canyon Plan included a comprehensive Flood Control Facilities Study prepared by Tettemer Associates ("Tettemer"). The drainage areas in the Study included Palm Canyon, Andreas Canyon, Dry Canyon, Arenas Canyon, and Arenas Canyon (North). The Study concluded that the 100-year flows in Andreas and Palm Canyons extended beyond the capacities of the natural channels and would overflow 1 their banks. In addition, various areas were subject to sheet flooding. Accordingly, specific flood control improvements were recommended to handle flooding and sediment flows. It was presumed that a contemplated hotel and golf course resort project would construct all improvements. The developer of this project did not proceed. F. A subsequent smaller scale project was proposed by Palm Canyon LLC in 2001 and Tettemer in April 2001 updated its prior study. Although the conclusions concerning 100-year flows were unchanged, the recommended flood improvements were modified due to the changes in the proposed development. In addition, the 2001 Study also included an analysis of the Canyon Vista Resort/Spa project planned by the Agua Caliente Development Authority ("ACDA"), a resort hotel and golf course project planned on the site of the former Canyon hotel and golf course. The 2001 Study reaffirmed that 100-year peak flows exceed the capacities of the natural drainage channels for Andreas and Palm Canyons. The 2001 Study also found that the area is subject to flooding resulting from sheet flow between Acanto Way and Bogert Trail and along the Palm Canyon Wash. G. There has been increased interest by the development community in a portion of the Southeast area commonly referred to as the "Canyon Area." A map of the Canyon Areas is attached to this ordinance as Exhibit "A." I H. The City has determined that the Canyon Area requires backbone infrastructure to adequately serve development of this area, including major drainage and flood control facilities to provide 100 year flood protection, all-weather access, and enhanced fire protection. The City has further determined that the cost to construct and install such backbone infrastructure is cost prohibitive for any single developer to fund on a reimbursement basis from developers of subsequent development. I. As a consequence of the foregoing, the City has approved several projects with conditions that developers pay fees based on a fee study to be performed by the City. In addition, the Community Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") provided bond financing to pay for certain drainage improvements associated with the El Portal Project (now "Alta"), and the City is also obtaining a $3 million grant from the federal government for an all-weather bridge improvement on South Palm Canyon Drive. J. The Agency contracted with Berryman & Henigar, Inc. to develop a fee methodology to fairly allocate the cost of constructing backbone infrastructure among current and future development. Berryman &Henigar, Inc. have produced and presented the Palm Canyon Infrastructure Fee Study, dated February 9, 2004 (the 'B&H Study"). The "B&H Study and its recommended fee methodology is the basis of this ordinance. K. In addition to drainage improvements, the B&H Study identified the need for certain road and bridge improvements to South Palm Canyon Drive and the construction of a new fire station which would serve the Canyon Area and certain other areas within the Southeast area. South Palm Canyon Drive provides ingress and egress to the Canyon Area and is subject to flooding during major storm events leaving pertain parcels south of Murray Canyon Drive without a means of access, including restricted access for emergency service providers. Portions of South Palm Canyon Drive must be constructed to ensure access to the Canyon Area and Murray Canyon Drive during major storm events by emergency service providers and to improve traffic flow. The construction of the bridge on South Palm Canyon Drive will be necessary to accomplish the improved access to the Canyon Area and the improved traffic flow as well as to provide acceptable levels of response time for emergency service providers. The B&H Study identified the need for a 'Road and Bridge Impact Fee" to fund the improvements to South Palm Canyon Drive L. The new development in the Canyon Area will be outside the five minute fire response time required by the Palm Springs Municipal Code and the National Fire Protection Association Standard for the Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression Operations, Emergency Medical Operations and Special Operations to the Public by Career Fire Departments (NFPA 1710). In 2005, the City commissioned a Study by CityGate Associates, which study identified the eventual need for an additional fire station which would serve, among other areas, the Canyon Area. The construction of this fire station would bring the Canyon Area within the five minute response time sanctioned by NFPA 1710. The B&H Study, provides for a "Fire Protection Impact Fee" to fund a portion of the costs related to construction of the fire station attributable to the new development in the Canyon Area. M. Consistent with the B&H Study and the legislative findings of this ordinance, the City Council desires to implement a Drainage Fee, a Road and Bridge Impact Fee, and a Fire Protection Impact Fee with respect to the Canyon Area. N. Of the 2086.0 acres in the Canyon Study Area, approximately 1,644.6 acres of land (the "County Land") are under the jurisdiction of the County of Riverside (the "County") or the Agua Calienta Band of Cahuilla Indians (the 'Tribe") and another 153 acres in the City are owned directly by the Tribe, the ACDA, or members of the Tribe. Thus, it is the intent of the City to cooperate with the County and the Tribe to implement a Drainage Fee, a Road and Bridge Impact Fee, and a Fire Protection Impact Fee on the County Land and the Tribal Land, which fees shall be beneficial to the residents of the County and the Tribe and which fees may be administered by the City. O. The City desires to implement the Drainage Fee, the Road and Bridge Impact Fee, and the Fire Protection Impact Fee as described in these recitals by adoption of this Ordinance. P. This Ordinance has been duly considered by the City Council following a public hearing as required by Section 66016 of the California Government Code and the fees discussed herein will be effective within 60 days of adoption of this Ordinance by the City Council. NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Palm Springs ordains: SECTION 1. Chapter 9.69 is added to the Palm Springs Municipal Code to read: oC 3 F l Chapter 9.69 Canyon Area Impact Fees I Sections: 9.69.010 Legislative Findings. i 9.69.020 Definitions. 9.69.030 Exemptions. 9.69.040 Fee; Authority and Purpose; Use. 9.69.050 Payment of Fee. 9.69.060 Automatic Annual Fee Adjustment. 9.69.070 Credit for Developer Construction. 9.69.080 Accounting and Expenditure of Fees. 9.69.090 Limitations. 9.69.100 Appeals. 9.69.110 Cooperation with Other Agencies. I 9.69.010 Legislative Findings. I A. The City Council hereby finds and determines: 1. There has been increased interest by the development community in the Canyon Area of the City; however, the need to construct backbone infrastructure including major drainage and flood control facilities to provide 100 year flood protection, all weather access, and enhanced fire protection is cost prohibitive for any single developer to fund with the hope of being reimbursed by other property owners in the future as adjacent lands develop. 2. Surface runoff occurs from the Palm, Andreas, Dry, and Arenas (North and South) Canyons which are located west of the Canyon Area. As a result of runoffs from these canyons, the 100 year peak flows exceed the capacity of the natural drainage ways, as well as existing flood control facilities. 3. Portions of the Canyon Area are also subject to flooding as a result of sheet flow between Acanto Way and Bogert Trail. 4. The construction of the flood control and storm drainage facilities identified in this Chapter is essential to provide adequate drainage for the protection of private property and public infrastructure within the Canyon Area, including the new construction and development in the Canyon Area. 5. There is a need to reconstruct a portion of South Palm Canyon Drive which provides ingress and egress to the Canyon Area. South Palm Canyon Drive is subject to flooding during major storm events leaving certain parcels south of Murray Canyon Drive without a means of access, including restricted access for emergency service providers. .oa 4 i 6. A portion of South Palm Canyon Drive must be constructed to ensure access to Murray Canyon Drive during major storm events by emergency service providers and to improve traffic flow. The Council finds and determines that without such construction, the ability of police and fire to respond to the Canyon Area will be severely impaired. 7. In order to provide acceptable response time to residents of the Canyon Area, a new fire station is needed to serve the vicinity of the Canyon Area, together with other areas. Approximately 15% of the area that the new fire station would serve would be development in the Canyon Area. 8. There is a reasonable relationship between the use of the Drainage Fee, the Road and Bridge Impact Fee, and the Fire Protection Impact Fee and the type of development projects upon which these fees are imposed because the fees will be used to construct drainage, road and fire protection improvements that are necessary for the safety, health and welfare of residential and commercial users of the Development Projects on which the fees will be levied. 9. There is a reasonable relationship between the need for the drainage improvements, the road and bridge improvements, and the fire station and the type of development projects upon which these fees are imposed. It will be necessary for the residents and owners in the Canyon Area to be protected from floods and fires and have emergency providers access the area during emergencies. Such development will benefit from such improvements and the burden of such development will be mitigated in part by payment of the fees. 10. The fees established in this ordinance are consistent with the reasonable cost estimates for constructing the improvements and the amount of each fee expected to be generated by new development will not exceed the total fair cost to such development for its fair share of the improvements. The fees established in this ordinance are further predicated on allocation of costs based on hydrological studies, current land-use entitlements and development densities, local and area benefits, and current and anticipated projects and improvements. 11. The Council finds that the improvements proposed to be funded in part by the fees generated under this Chapter are consistent with the Canyon Park Resort & Spa Specific Plan Amendment No. 1, dated October 13, 1993, and the Canyon South Specific Plan (Amendment to Canyon Park Specific Plan, #1), adopted July 16, 2003, which plans contain policies and standards for drainage and flood control facilities to be constructed in the Canyon Area and the fees adopted herein will be in accordance with the above-referenced plans' principles and standards. 12. The Council finds that the improvements proposed to be funded in part by the fees generated under this Chapter are consistent with the Indian Canyons Master Plan, approved in January, 2002 ("Indian Canyons Plan") by the Tribe and the Master Plan of Drainage as required by the City of Palm Springs for the Andreas Alluvial Cone, Dry Canyon, Arenas South and North Canyons and Palm 7o oC 5 1 Canyon (1800 Feet Downstream of Bogert Trail) Drainage Courses City of Palm Springs, dated April 2001, together with an Addendum, dated October 2001. B. The Council hereby finds that with respect to the Drainage Fee allocable to the Canyon Area, the reasonable and fair per-acre fee to be charged is derived by dividing •I the total cost of the improvements by the total number of developable (already developed and to-be-developed) acres. However, the Indian Canyons Plan provides that approximately 1,084 acres of Canyon area are identified as Heritage Park, an area of land that will never be developed and such acres are therefore not designated as developable. The removal of those acres from the "developable" category does not lower the overall cost of the drainage system but does remove the feasible number of acres over which to assess the fee. Since Heritage Park will not be developed, and its removal from the "developable" category does not remove the flood and drainage burdens, the remaining acreage must bear the burden of the cost of the improvements and contingencies. C. The Council finds that the improvements proposed to be funded in part by the fees generated under this Chapter are consistent with all applicable adopted plans and policies of the City. D. Certain development projects have been recently processed with a condition providing for the payment of fees subject to fee studies being conducted by the City. The provisions of this Chapter shall be applied to the calculation of the required fees for such projects. E. The City Council finds and determines that this Chapter and the plans and studies prepared in conjunction with the consideration and adoption of this Chapter, comply with California Government Code Section 66001, and fully provide a reasonable and fair basis for the imposition of fees on new development. The City specifically finds that the plans and studies prepared in conjunction with the consideration and adoption of this Chapter: 1. Identifies the purposes of the fees; 2. Identifies the uses to which the fees will be put; 3. Demonstrate a reasonable relationship between the uses of the fees and type of development projects on which each of the fees is imposed; 4. Demonstrate a reasonable relationship between the need for public facilities and the type of development projects on which the fees are imposed; and 5. Demonstrate a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fees and the cost of public facilities or portion of the public facilities attributable to the development on which the fees are imposed. 9.69.020 Definitions. ac 6 (`'l For the purpose of this Chapter, certain words and phrases are defined in this Section, unless it is apparent from the context that a different meaning is intended: "Affordable Housing" shall mean low and moderate income housing as defined by federal and state law. "B&H Study" shall mean the Palm Canyon Infrastructure Fee Study, dated February 9, 2004, prepared by Berryman & Henigar, Inc., on file in the Office of the City Clerk "Canyon Area" shall mean the area delineated on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A. I "Development Approval" means any approval or permit from the City, whether discretionary or ministerial, including but not limited to, a development plan, conditional use permit, tentative subdivision map, parcel map, final subdivision map, building permit, or other permit or entitlement for construction or reconstruction. "Development Project" means any project undertaken for the purpose of development requiring a Development Approval. "Finance Director" means the Director of Finance of the City or such other person as the City Manager of the City may designate. "Net Acres" shall mean the gross area of a Development Project less major and secondary street rights of way and less easements for public utilities, city or public agency property, schools and railroads. 9.69.030 Exemptions The provisions of this Chapter shall not apply to the following: A. Development Projects already constructed as of the effective date of this Chapter; B. Proposed development for which Development Approvals have been obtained, except for developments that have been required by the conditions of approval to pay a legally established fee or which provided for adjustment of the fee pursuant to a legally valid fee study, in which case, the developers of such developments shall pay the fee pursuant to such conditions as provided in this Chapter; C. Land that is restricted or covenanted to remain as open space or to remain undeveloped; D. Development of affordable housing projects for such dwelling units which are restricted to Affordable Housing and burdened with affordability covenants; and E. Public buildings, public schools, and public facilities. o 7 9.69.040 Establishment of Fees A. AUTHORITY AND PURPOSE. All of the fees listed in subsections B, C, and D of this Section are hereby adopted. The fees are enacted pursuant to the authority granted by Sections 66000 and 66001 of the Government Code of the State of California and shall be interpreted to be consistent with the provisions thereof. The purposes of these fees are to finance the increased need for drainage and flood control facilities, a fire station, and roads and bridges within the Canyon Area caused by new development within the Canyon Area. B. DRAINAGE FEE 1. Use. The Drainage Fee, consisting of the Area Benefit Fee and the Local Benefit Fee as provided in this Subsection and imposed by this Chapter, shall be used to construct the improvements described in the B&H Study (collectively, the "Drainage Improvements"). 2. Local Improvements - Construction of Local Improvements or Payment of Fee in Lieu as condition to Approval of a Development Approval. Unless exempt pursuant to Section 9.69.030, the developer of each Development Project within the Canyon Area shall construct all local drainage and flood control improvements and shall construct or pay an in lieu Fee for all area drainage and flood control improvements; provided that no in lieu fee may be paid in substitution for construction of such drainage and flood control improvements if the failure to construct the improvement would constitute a health and safety hazard for the occupants of the development. The developer of each Development Project shall be required to construct such improvements in the manner and time required for such Development Project pursuant to this Code. 3. In-Lieu Fee. The City Engineer may, in the City Engineer's discretion, determine whether the developer of a Development Project will construct local drainage and flood control improvements or pay the Local Benefit Fee provided for under this Subsection. In making such determination, the City Engineer shall consider, but not be limited by, the following factors: (a) the percentage of local benefit to a particular development project, (b) whether the improvement completes a "missing link" between two previously constructed improvements, and (c) whether it is the first or last link up or whether it is downstream from other proposed or existing improvements. 4. Standards for Determining Drainage Fee. (a) Computation of "Area Benefit Fee". The Area Benefit Fee is calculated by multiplying the number of Net Acres of the Development Project by the applicable per acre costs listed below: o 8 f n� Type of Development Costs/ Net Acre Single Family $4,213 Development Hotel Development $3,180 I Golf Course/Open $0 Space �l Commercial/Multifamily $0 City Property $0 The Area Benefit Fee has been determined pursuant to the B&H Study and Section 9.69.010 hereof by determining the costs of those flood control improvements which show an area wide benefit and prorating such costs based on the ratio of developed and undeveloped land in the study area by land use. These costs take into account the runoff coefficients in the County of Riverside's hydrological manual. (b) Computation of "Local Benefit Fee". Each of the twelve flood control improvements described in the B&H Study has been determined to specifically benefit property immediately adjacent to such improvement (the "Local Benefit"). The Local Benefit assessed for each of the improvements is described in the B&H Study and each Development Project's proportionate share of such costs shall be determined by the City Engineer by reference to such study at the time that the fee is required to be paid. To the extent the developer is required to construct any portion of such local drainage and flood control improvements, the Local Benefit Fee shall be appropriately reduced. C. ROAD AND BRIDGE IMPACT FEE 1. Use. The Road and Bridge Fee imposed by this Chapter shall be used to construct the improvements described in the B&H Study, which include improvements to South Palm Canyon Drive and the replacement of the bridge on South Palm Canyon Drive. Such fees have been allocated on a per residential unit basis. 2. Amount of Fees. The Road and Bridge Impact Fees shall be paid on a per residential unit basis upon application for a Development Approval and shall be as follows: Single Family Residence $2,704 per unit Hotel $0.00 per unit Golf Course/Open Space $0.00 per unit Commercial/Multifamily $0.00 per unit oc 9 1F D. FIRE PROTECTION IMPACT FEE. 1. Use. The Fire Protection Impact Fee imposed by this Chapter shall be used to construct the improvements described in the B&H Study, which include the construction of a new fire station. The Fire Protection Impact Fee is based on the estimated cost to provide the station allocated by the net development acreage of the possible service area and prorated by land use. The Canyon Area Fire Protection Impact Fee would pay for approximately fifteen 15% of the estimated construction costs of a new fire station. 2. Amount of Fee. The Fire Protection Impact Fee shall be paid on a per acre basis based on land use and shall be as follows: Single Family Residence $ 469 per acre Commercial/Multifamily $1,875 per acre 9.69.050 Payment of Fees The Drainage Fee, the Road and Bridge Impact Fee, and the Fire Protection Impact Fee shall be required as a condition of approval of the issuance of any Development Approval and shall be paid prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the project, or such earlier time as permitted by Government Code 66007. To the extent such fees are imposed on a per acre basis, such fees may, at the discretion of the City, be divided by the number of units in the development or by some other proportional formula resulting in a payment equivalent to the per-acre fee provided herein. 9.69.060 Automatic Annual Fee Adjustment The Finance Director of the City shall adjusted annually the fees established by this Chapter, to be effective at the beginning of each fiscal year. The adjustment shall be based on the average percentage change over the previous calendar year set for in the Engineering News Record Building Cost Index for the City of Los Angeles. 9.69.070 Credit for Developer Construction When a developer is required, as a condition of approval of a Development Approval within the Canyon Area, to construct a public facility, and such facility is determined by the City to have size, length, or capacity exceeding that needed for the impacts on drainage, road and bridge and fire facilities of that development provided in this Chapter, and when such construction is necessary to ensure efficient, timely construction of the infrastructure, a reimbursement agreement with the developer may be entered into pursuant to which credit against the fee which would otherwise be charged pursuant to this Chapter shall be offered. The reimbursement amount shall not include the portion of the improvement needed to provide services or mitigate the impacts or the burdens created by that particular development, including the Local Benefit. .CC 10 (lp°�•Trr� 9.69.080 Accounting and Expenditure of Fees A. PLACEMENT OF FEES IN SEPARATE CITY ACCOUNT. The Finance Director shall receive all fees paid and place them in a separate Capital Facilities Account. Within the Capital Facilities Account, the Finance Director shall create sub-accounts for each of the Drainage Fee, the Road and Bridge Impact Fee and the Fire Protection Impact Fee. The Finance Director shall keep account of all funds I received, their source, all expenditures therefrom and the purpose of all expenditures. jAll interest earned on investment of the funds in the Capital Facilities Account shall be deposited in the Capital Facilities Account and the sub-accounts therein and shall be expended only for the purpose for which the fee was originally collected. B. ANNUAL REPORT. I IThe Finance Director shall prepare an annual report thereon pursuant to Government Code 66006, and make such report available to the public stating: (1) the type of fee in the account, (2) the amount of the fee, (3) the beginning and ending balance of the account or fund, (4) the amount of the fees collected and the interest earned, (5) information relating to the public improvements on which the fees were expended, (6) i the approximate date by which the construction of the improvement will commence if sufficient funds have been collected, (7) a description of interfund transfers or loans and (8) the amount of any refunds. The City Council shall review said report at the next regularly scheduled public meeting not less than fifteen (15) days after the report is made available to the public. Notice of such meeting shall be mailed at least fifteen days prior to the meeting to any interested person who files a written request with the local agency for mailed notice of the meeting pursuant to Government Code Section 66006. C. COMPLIANCE WITH GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 66006. The City shall comply with the determinations and requirements of Government Code Section 66006. 9.69.090 Limitations This chapter only applies to the improvements described herein and the applicant is responsible for installing all other required public infrastructure improvements in accordance with law and the Municipal Code. in07�`d .CC 9.69.100 Periodic Updating of Fees The City may from time to time restudy its drainage, traffic, fire, and other infrastructure needs in the Canyon Area. Based upon an appropriate fee study, the City may add, modify, or delete capital facilities, restudy the cost thereof, or otherwise adjust its fee calculations in accordance with current conditions, and modify this Chapter to accomplish the purposes hereof. 9.69.110 Appeals Any person aggrieved by determination of the City Council or City Engineer under this Chapter, may appeal to the City Council as provided in Chapter 2.05 of this code. 9.69.120 Cooperation with Other Agencies A. COUNTY LAND AND TRIBAL LAND. I To fully fund the necessary public improvements provided hereunder, the fees must be collected from the development of land, some of which is within the jurisdiction of the City, some of which is within the jurisdiction of the County and some of which is within the jurisdiction of the Tribe. The City and the Tribe process development projects pursuant to a 1977 Land Use Agreement. The provisions of this Section are intended to develop a cooperative program among these entities to provide for a fair allocation of costs to property owners. B. COOPERATION WITH TRIBE AND COUNTY. The City shall cooperate with the Tribe and the County in collecting and administering the fees allocable to the County and the Tribe in accordance herewith. The City may enter into any agreements with the County and the Tribe to effectuate the purposes hereof. The City may adopt an amendment to this Chapter relating to the fee to be assessed on County Land and Tribal Land. C. ADMINISTRATION From and after adoption of a resolution or ordinance relating to the fee or an agreement with the City, by the Tribe and the County, the City shall, pursuant to the terms of said ordinance, resolution or agreement, administer the fee in accordance with the provisions thereof. SECTION 2. It is the intention of the City Council that the sections, subsections, clauses and phrases of this Ordinance are severable, and if any portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity or the remainder of the Ordinance, and the City Council would have enacted such remainder without the portion found to be invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 3. The provisions of this Ordinance shall be construed as necessary to effectively carry out its purposes, which are hereby found and declared to be in 0 12 furtherance of the public health, safety and convenience. This Ordinance shall be interpreted, insofar as possible, to be consistent with other Ordinances or regulations of the City. SECTION 4. Adoption of this Ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) by virtue of Public Resources Code § 21080(b)(9) and CEQA Guideline 15378(b)(4), as the creation of a government funding mechanism which does not involve any commitment to any specific project is not a "project." The individual projects to by funded by the fees and the individual Development Projects subject to the fees shall be subject to the appropriate environmental review under CEQA. SECTION 5. In the event the City receives a Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Project Grant ("HBRRP") for replacement of the existing bridge on Palm Canyon Drive as described in the B&H Study, the City will review the Road and Bridge Impact Fee established in this ordinance and consider adjustments in such fee as the Council may in its discretion determine are appropriate. SECTION 4. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same, or the summary thereof, to be published and posted pursuant to the provisions of law and this Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after passage. PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF 2005. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: i RONALD ODEN, MAYOR ATTEST: I James Thompson, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: I Douglas Holland, City Attorney oC 13 �pA�M sp ° N City of Palm Springs * Office of the City Clerk Aoorsarsv^ 3200 E.Tahquitz Canyon Way • Palm Springs, California 92262 IFO Tel: (760) 323-8204 • Fax. (760)322-8332 • Web. www..palm-springs.ca.us NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the regular meeting of January 4, 2006, Public Hearing Item No. 1.B. PROPOSED ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING CERTAIN DRAINAGE, ROAD, BRIDGE, AND FIRE PROTECTION IMPACT FEES IN THE PALM CANYON AREA OF THE PALM SPRINGS MUNICIPAL CODE: No persons came forth to provide public testimony; therefore, on motion by Mayor Pro Tern Foat, seconded by Councilmember Mills, and unanimously carried noting the absence of Councilmember Pougnet, the public hearing was continued to 6:00 p.m., January 18, 2006, Council Chamber, 3200 Tahquitz Canyon Way. I, James Thompson, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, California, certify this Notice of Continuance was posted at or before 5:30 p.m., January 5, 2006, as required by established policies and procedures. ames Thompson City Clerk H:\USERS\C-CLK\Hearing Notices\NOTICE OF CONT-Alarm Fees.doc Post Office Box 2743 • Palm Springs, California 92263-2743 F?PAMSA City of Palm Springs V N Office of the City Cleric * �Oo C n'oORl,TCO ^' * 3200 E. Taliquitz Canyon WayPalm Springs, California 92262 � -I 1 � t ��P g1 Tel: (760)323-8204 • Pax: (760) 322-8332 • Web: wwwa.palm-spnngs.ca.us fFORN I NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE I NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the regular meeting of January 18, 2006, Public Hearing Item No. I .D. I PROPOSED ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING CERTAIN DRAINAGE, ROAD, BRIDGE, AND FIRE PROTECTION IMPACT FEES IN THE PALM CANYON AREA OF THE I PALM SPRINGS MUNICIPAL CODE: I No persons came forth to provide public testimony; therefore, on motion by Councilmember Pougnet, seconded by Councilmember Mills, and unanimously carried, the public hearing was continued to 6:00 p.m., February 1, 2006, Council Chamber, 3200 Tahquitz Canyon Way. I, James Thompson, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, California, certify this Notice of Continuance was posted at or before 5:30 p.m., January 19, 2006, as required by established policies and procedures. p James Thompson 1 City Clerk �s H:\USEWC-CLMHearing Notices\NOTICE OF CONT- Drainage Fees cont to 02-01-06.doc Post Office Box 2743 6 Palm Springs, California 92263-2743