Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDevelopment Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report - Prepar Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Deport for the City of Huntington Beach, California October, 2011 Copyright, 2009, 2010&2011 by Revenue& Cost Specialists, L_L_C. All rights reserved. No part of this work covered by the copyright hereon may be reproduced or copied in any form or by any means--graphic, electronic, mechanical, including any photocopying, recording, taping or taping or information storage and retrieval systems without written permission of- Revenue& Cost Specialists, L.L.C. 1519 East Chapman Avenue, Suite C Fullerton, CA 92831 (714)992-9020 SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION r, R9 DMe:Ja� Apnda item No. Ss #oZ L evenue 03 L pecial1StS, LLC Serving Local Governments Since 1975 October 17, 2011 Honorable Mayor and City Council Via Mr. Fred Wilson, City Manager City of Huntington Beach - City Hall 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 RE: 2011-12 Master Facilities Plan and Development Impact Fee (DIF) Calculation Honorable Mayor, Council and City Manager Wilson: The City is experiencing private development of remaining vacant parcels and the on-going redevelopment of existing homes and businesses. This continuous development results in increased demand that must be absorbed(and accommodated) by the City's existing infrastructure and the Levels of Service (LOS) offered by that existing infrastructure. Revenue & Cost Specialists, L.L.C., was contracted to undertake a comprehensive identification of the capital projects and capital acquisitions necessary to accommodate all such new demands for municipal service. Such a study is necessary to preserve the existing Levels of Service (LOS) currently offered to and enjoyed by (after having been paid for by) the existing community from the diminution of those existing LOS due to the addition of new residential and business development in Huntington Beach and calculate the development impact fees (DIFs) necessary to fund those required projects. Council and City staff, responsible for providing services to a continually expanding residential and business community,must recognize that the magnitude of the impact fees is a direct function of the nearly $403.4 million cost of the capital projects identified in the Master Facilities Plan as needed or required to accommodate new development. Regardless, anyone in the position of the Council members may find themselves reluctant to adopt the impact fees merely because they appear "too high". It is incumbent upon this Report and RCS Staff to convince the City Council of the justification and importance of the proposed impact fees The following Report calculates some new and a few updated impact fees for the City of Huntington Beach based on the aforementioned changes and the City's changing requirements for public safety, streets and signals, storm drainage and other quality of life facilities. The adoption of the updated DIFs will enable this City Council, as well:as succeeding Councils, to continue to ensure that the City will be able to meet the basic infrastructure needs of new growth, without unduly burdening the existing population and business community for these development-generated capital costs. Infernet vsnvw revenuepost com Voice 714 992; 0 C • u�1eox�, CA 92$31 Fix 714 992 901 Page 2 October 17, 2011 Letter to the Huntington Peach City Council and Staff Adoption of the recommended impact fees contained herein and imposition upon the numerous development opportunities in the City of Huntington Beach,would generate approximately$172.1 million in a combination of public improvement dedications and DIF revenues limited for use on the many capital expansion projects deemed as development generated. Existing Impact Fee Fund balances ($3.5 million) and other revenues sources ($23.0 million) make up a significant amount of the difference between the capital total and the total revenue sources. This leaves a shortfall of$204.8 million (95% of which is $194.4 million in unfunded storm drainage projects). The identification of$403.4 million in capital needs mostly generated by new development, is not to be taken lightly, but must be examined in perspective to the cost of existing infrastructure, facilities, vehicles and equipment that a new development will share in the use and enjoyment of upon City review, approval, construction and finally, occupancy. To offer such a perspective, a major element in this Report is a proportional analysis, or comparison of what is being asked of future residents, in the form of dedicated public improvements or an in-lieu(impact fee)payment,with the cost of the City's existing infrastructure (land, facilities, and equipment), contributed by the existing population and business community. The dedications, taxes and assessments contributed to date by the existing community over numerous decades of development have generated just over $2.1 billion (at current replacement costs) in infrastructure or capital improvements to the City of Huntington Beach. The following table identifies those existing asset commitments (or equity if you will), by infrastructure. Current Equity Service Pro�rided Innvestment Law Enforcement Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment $71,246,699 Fire Suppression/Medic Facilities, Vehicles and Equi meat $61,234,227 Circulation (Street, Signals and Brid es) System $533,539,375 Storm Drainage Collection System $203,631,313 Public Library Facilities and Collection $76,593,112 Community Use Facilities (community centers) $56,649,600 Park Land and Park Facilities Development $1,110,284,562 Total Existing Infrastructure Replacement Investment $2,113,178,888 Page 3 October 17, 2011 Letter to the Huntington Beach City Council and Staff It is not intended for the recommended Development Impact Fee schedule to address all of the City's capital needs, as identified on the various schedules in this Report. As per California Government Code 66000 et. seq. and common fairness, development impact fees cannot address current capital deficiencies. The proposed fees will recognize and meet the needs of the City's growing population and business community. However,with the adoption of development impact fees,other City discretionary revenue resources that may have been used to meet growth-generated needs for expanded services and facilities will now be available for those accumulating replacement and rehabilitation projects. The information required to develop the City's capital costs and equity data was generated by the Huntington Beach staff, without whose help and cooperation, this Report would have been impossible to complete. The following management and support personnel were instrumental in working with RCS staff to gather or generate the information and technical data so critically necessary for the legal support of impact fees through the Master Facilities Plan and/or the Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report. They are: Stephanie Beverage, Director of Library Services M. Todd Broussard, P.E, Principal Engineer (Storm Drainage) David Brunetta, Police Captain Luann Brunson, Senior Administrative Analyst - Community Services David C. Dominguez, Facilities Development/Concessions Manager Debbie Dove, - Police Specialist Eric C. Enberg- Fire Division Chief Operations Jim B. Engle, Community Services Director Scott Hess, Director of Planning Mindy James - Police Budget Manager Kevin Justen, Senior Administrative Analyst - Fire Tung M. Kao, - Information System/Network Specialist - Police Jeff Lopez, Deputy Fire Marshall/Programs Darin Maresh, Fire Department Specialist Mike McClanahan, Deputy Fire Marshall/Training Shirley McNamee. Police Personnel Analyst Tony Olmos, City Engineer Ricky Ramos, Senior Planner Bill Reardon, Fire Marshall/Division Chief Dan Richards, Information System GIS Manager Bob Stachelski. Transportation Manager Chuck Thomas, Police Captain Jerry Thompson, General Services Manager Ashley Wallace, Graduate Management Intern Darren Witt, Fire Engineer Page 4 October 17, 2011 Letter to the Huntington Beach City Council and Staff Without their hard work and willingness to provide the best data available, this Report could not have been completed to the degree of accuracy and completeness that it has. I would like to highlight the efforts of Bob Hall, Deputy City Manager for his efforts in generating timely responses to RCS's many requests for critical information. The quality of information and resulting calculation were directly improved by all of the participating staff member's efforts. The Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report and the Master Facilities Plan appendix are now submitted for your review and consideration. RCS is prepared to assist in increasing the Council's and community's understanding of this very significant part of the City's revenue structure. Sincerely, Z! m�� Scott Thorpe, Vice President CITY OF HUNTINGTON PEACH DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE CALCULATION AND NEXUS REPORT and MASTER FACILITIES PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. Chapter 1 - Background and Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Chapter 2 - Demographics and Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Schedule 2.I Proposed Development Impact Fee Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Chapter 3 - Law Enforcement Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Chapter 4 - Fire Suppression/Medic Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Chapter 5 - Circulation (Streets, Signals and Bridges) System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Chapter 6 - Storm Drainage Collection System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 Chapter 7 - Public Library Facilities and Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 Chapter 8 - Community Use Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 Chapter 9 - Park Land Acquisition and Park Facilities Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 Appendix A - Expanded Land-use Database . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 Appendix B - Summary of Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 . . . 119 Appendix C - Master Facilities Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter I Background and Introduction The City of Huntington Beach has retained Revenue & Cost Specialists, L.L.C. to recalculate some of the City's existing Development Impact Fee(henceforth occasionally referred to as DIFs) schedules calculated at various points in time. Since that time,the City has experienced continued development of vacant land within the City. There is no reason to believe that the remaining undeveloped parcels will not also develop and underutilized parcels will redevelop, the current temporary economic building climate not-with-standing. The periodic review and adjustment of the Development Impact Fees that the City has committed to, are appropriate and warranted. Such updates are necessary to insure that the City collects sufficient DIF revenues to construct or acquire the additional infrastructure needed to accommodate new residents and businesses developing in the City. This DIF calculation effort that staff has undertaken results in a complete list of projects to be financed by the recommended Development Impact Fee schedule.' The information contained in the Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report and the accompanying Master Facilities Plan (MFP) will allow the City Council to make more informed policy decisions. The DIF/MFP also combine to provide greater understanding or the need by the development community. It also provides an easier project tracking (and updating) system for the staff. Proportional Analysis. For perspective on the total amount of the calculated DIFs this Report includes a proportional analysis, or a comparison of the infrastructure identified as required to accommodate continued development through General Plan build-out with that of the City's existing infrastructure. This proportional analysis is intended to reconcile any difference between the City's desired level-of-service (LOS) required of new development, per statements in the various General Plan elements, with that of the de facto or actual level of service currently provided to the existing community. This addition will assist the Council in making many difficult policy decisions regarding the required additions of new development and will also recognize inter-generational equity along with common sense fairness. Development Impact Fee Structure. The City's General Plan provides a range of potential densities for residential development. The DIFs for residential uses need to be calculated on a per dwelling unit basis to reflect more accurately the average impacts for a specific development. For example, a parcel zoned for development as detached dwelling units may contain from three to six units per acre. If fees are calculated on an acreage basis, the developer proposing three units per acre will pay the same amount as a developer constructing six units per acre. Development impact Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 1 Chapter One Back round and Introduction fees for business uses are calculated on a square footage basis for commercial, office and industrial properties to reflect the impacts of different building intensities for this type of development. This structure addresses the issue of building expansion or intensification of commercial, office and industrial areas. For example, if a property owner of commercial, office or industrial property proposes an expansion to his building, the question exists about how to charge this proposed expansion for its impact on the City's streets, storm drainage system, and other infrastructures. A fee calculated on a building square footage basis will simplify this calculation. CALCULATION OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES In California, State legislation sets certain legal and procedural parameters for the charging of these fees. This legislation was passed as AB1600 by the California Legislature and is now codified as California Government Code Sections 66000 through 66009. This section of State Code became effective January 1, 1989. AB1600 requires documentation of projects to be financed by Development Impact Fees prior to their levy and collection, and that the monies collected actually be committed within five years to a project of "direct benefit" to the development which paid the fees. Many states have such controlling statutes. Specifically, AB1600 requires the following: 1. Delineation of the PURPOSE of the (development impact) fee. 2. Determination of the USE of the (development impact) fee. 3. Determination of the RELATIONSHIP between the use of the public facilities and the type of development paying the (development impact) fee. 4. Determination of the relationship between the NEED for the facility and the type of development project. 5. Determination of the relationship between the AMOUNT of the fee and the COST of the portion of the facility attributed to the specific development project. This Report, with some additions, utilizes the basic methodology consistent with the above requirements of AB 1600. Briefly,the following steps were undertaken in the calculation of impact fees for the City and are listed following: Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 2 Chapter One Background and Introduction 1. Review the City's land use map and,determine the existing mix of land uses and amount of undeveloped and developed land. The magnitude of growth and its impacts can thus be determined by considering this land use data when planning an infrastructure required to support General Plan build-out. This all-important inventory is summarized in Table 2-1 in Chapter 2 and detailed in Appendix A. 2. Define the level of service needed within the General Plan area for each project or acquisition identified as necessary. In some areas, certain statistical measures are commonly used to measure or define an acceptable level of service for a category of infrastructure. Street intersections, for instance, are commonly rated based on a Level of Service scale of "A" to "F" developed by transportation engineers. In some cases the identified level of service required of development may exceed that of what the City is currently providing. If so the reason must be explained and a methodology identified for raising the existing community's level of service without requiring new development to finance this increase. 3. Identify all additions to the capital facilities or equipment inventory necessary to maintain the,identified levels of service in the area. Then, determine the cost of those additions. 4. Identify a level of responsibility of General Plan develo meat, identifying the relative need for the facility or equipment necessary to accommodate additional growth as defined, and as opposed to current needs. 5. Distribute the costs identified as a result of development growth on a basis of land use demand. Costs are distributed between each land use based on their relative use, nexus or demand on that particular capital infrastructure system. For example, future street costs were distributed to each land use based on their trip generation characteristics (frequency and distance creating daily trip-miles). Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 3 Chapter One Background and Introduction OTHER ASSUMPTIONS OF THE REPORT In addition to the land use assumptions contained in the next Chapter of this Report, other important assumptions of this study include the following: Land Costs. Cost estimates for land acquisition were developed after discussions with City officials. Arguments for higher or lower costs can be made. However, the Report contains land costs (per acre)which are estimated to be the most appropriate figures for purposes of this study. PROPORTIONALITY TEST A test for proportionality is important, if for no other reason, than because it attempts to identify and achieve community inter-generational equity, i.e., fairness in balancing the infrastructure investment made by existing residents and businesses with the investment asked of new residents and businesses that will benefit from the existing infrastructure. In short, previous generations of businesses and residents have contributed to the development of the City's existing infrastructure and this fact should be recognized by future residents and businesses by contributing a like amount (but no more than) toward completing the various infrastructure systems. Mere replacements or the elimination of an existing deficiency cannot be required of new development. It is one thing to identify the many public improvement projects needed through build-out. It is an entirely different thing to assume that all of the identified improvements are required to meet the demands of the new development. Clearly, some projects are replacements of the existing infrastructure while others are capacity increasing projects. Within the category of the latter,they may also be further classified into two categories; 1. Projects dealing with existing deficiencies, i.e., projects required regardless of whether there is additional development or not. An example2 would be a traffic intersection currently controlled by stop signs that currently meets traffic warrants for a traffic signal, but is unfunded. However, some portion of that signal may be appropriate for impact fee financing. Another example would be the replacement of an existing but aged facility that creates no more capacity, but is merely the replacement of that same capacity. 2. Projects that are required as a result of development. An example of this would be a signal that is currently controlled quite adequately by stop signs, but because of development in the near and "downstream" areas, will ultimately need to be signalized. All impact fee calculations claim to be fair. Government Code §66000 (also referred to as A131600) takes only two pages of text to describe the findings that development impact fees must Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 4 Chapter One Background and Introduction adequately make, but does not explain specifically how to do so. Most DIF calculations will identify the desired or needed capital projects, ostensibly required as a result of the new development. Therefore, what is fair and equitable? Is it fair to require future residents and businesses in a city to construct, via payment of impact fees, a new Police Station when the current station is merely rented or leased space? On the other hand, if a community already has all of the water utility system they will need at build-out, are they precluded from imposing an impact fee to recoup some of that expenses incurred in the construction of the maximum needed water utility improvements prior to need for the maximum demand? These are difficult questions that may be made clearer and easier by reviewing the following examples. Comparison of Needed Infrastructure with Existing Infrastructure. The answer to these difficult questions may best be answered by comparing various infrastructure scenarios. This can be accomplished by looking closely at our friends in the planned community of Happy Valley3 for a few scenarios to explain the three possible conditions that can occur regarding the agency's current infrastructure and the demand upon them. We will use the provision of fire protection, a service that most of us as nonprofessional fire fighters can somewhat understand. These three "conditions" include that the fire suppression system infrastructure construction has: 1. been On-target. 2. been Deficient. Or; 3. created Excess Service Capacity. Adoption of a Standard - According to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), a standard two-bay fire station (estimated for purposes of this example to cost about $3,000,000) can meet the needs of roughly 5,000 homes or 10,000,000 square feet of business pad. If these standards were adopted as Happy Valley's public safety element of the City's General Plan, they would be known as the demure or stated (or desired) standard (i.e., the standard the community would like to meet). This fee would be referred to as the General Plan Build-out Need-based Development Impact Fee. The inductive development impact fees (or cost per proportional unit served) for this de jure standard would then be: Table 1-1 Calculation of NFPA Impact Cost Land Use Station Cost Units Served Impact Fee Residential Dwellings $3,000,000 5,000 $600.00 per home Business Square Feet $3,000,000 10,000,000 $0.30 per S.F. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 5 Chapter One Background and Introduction Service Base- Happy Valley's General Plan indicates that at General Plan build-out there will be 10,000 residential units and about 20,000,000 square feet of commercial/office/industrial space creating a need for four stations at build-out. The station calculation is as follows: Table 1-2 Determination of Required Number of Stations Number Units served by Stations of Units One Station Regnired Residential Dwellings 10,000 5,000 2 Stations Business Square Feet 20,000,000 10,000,000 2 Stations Re aired Stations at General Plan Build-out 4 Stations The infrastructure is "On-target" - The need for four stations appears simple and the Happy Valley Council need only impose the impact fees identified in Table 1-1. Currently, Happy Valley has 6,250 residential units and 7,500,000 square feet of commercial/industrial building pad and is half"built-out" (in terms of fire calls for service). In this example, existing development within Happy Valley is generating half of the ultimate (General Plan build-out) fire calls-for-service. This is demonstrated in Table 1-3 following: Table 1-3 Development of Current Infrastructure is "On-Target" Number Units served by Stations of Units;. One Station Re aired Residential Dwellings 6,250 5,000 1.25 Stations Business Square Feet 7,500,000 10,000,000 0.75 Stations Total Number of Stations Required Currently 2.00 Stations Conversely, Happy Valley has the remaining half of its fire demand(in terms of calls-for-service) yet to come. Left to build are 3,750 detached dwelling units and 12,500,000 square feet of business floor space, and when constructed would generate the following capital needs identified Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 6 Chapter One Background and Introduction on Table 1-4 following: Table 1-4 Remaining Development and Station Requirement Number Unzts`served by Stations of'Units . One..Station Required Residential Dwellings 3,750 5,000 0.75 Stations Business Square Feet 12,500,000 10,000,000 1.25 Stations # of New Stations Required from Land to be Developed 2.00 Stations If the earlier calculated impact fees ($600 per residence and$0.30 per square foot of business pad) were adopted and imposed,Happy Valley would collect(by General Plan build-out)enough capital revenues to construct the remaining two stations and proportionality between existing and future residents and businesses would be evident. Table 1-5 following demonstrates this: Table 1-5 Remaining DIF Collection Number Impact Amount of.Units Fee Collected: Residential Dwellings 3,750 $600.00 $2,250,000 Business Square Feet 12,500,000 $0.30 $3,750,000 Amount Collected in Development Impact Fees $6,000,000 Cost of a Single New Station $3,000,000 Stations to be Built with Development Impact Fees 2.00 And everyone in the community of Happy Valley is adequately served by the four stations having been financed generally fairly by the total community. The infrastructure is in Deficient Condition-Consider,however, the implications if the current Happy Valley residents and businesses had shown the earlier limited commitment to contribute Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 7 Chapter One Background and Introduction The infrastructure is in Deficient Condition-Consider, however,the implications if the current Happy Valley residents and businesses had shown the earlier limited commitment to contribute only enough financing to construct one station when, based upon their own adopted standards and level of development,they should have two stations? Clearly three more stations would be needed on the path to General Plan "build-out." The possibility of requiring the remaining future home and business owners to finance all three remaining stations would be completely inequitable. But would it be fair and equitable to charge new residents the $600 per home and new businesses the $0.30 per business square foot in order to acquire the remaining two stations required to meet the NFPA standards required of the new development? The simple and direct answer is probably not. With only one station constructed at half build-out, the Happy Valley community has not demonstrated to a proportional commitment to meeting the NFPA standards, and as a result would not have a strong case to assert that others who build later need to contribute toward the construction of multiple (two) fire stations at a higher service rate by including the "missing" second station. The problem is in trying to identify a municipal revenue source imposed only on the existing development. Simply, there is none. Soon as a business pays its impact fees, constructs, that business becomes part of the existing community. The service provided by the single existing station is the community's de facto (or"in fact") standard service level. In short, it is difficult(but possible) to claim that a higher level of service is required of new development when the City is somehow getting by with a lower level of service. With one station, the contributed equity to build the single station would be half of the impact fee proposed in Table 1-1, or $300/residential unit and $0.15/square foot of business space respectively (See Table 1-6, following). Table 1-6 Development Impact Fee at Deficient Condition Numbed Exrsing Amount of Units= Eontributon Cdllected Residential Units 3,750 $300.00 $1,125,000 Business S.F. 12,500,000 $0.15 $1,875,000 Amount Contributed by Existing Community $3,000,000 Cost of One New Station $3,000,000 Station(s) built with Community's Contribution 1.00 Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 8 Chapter One Background and Introduction If Happy Valley has only built one station at half General Plan build-out, we would be forced to conclude that the City is currently deficient by one station (or 50%Q of the amount required). If the future residents were asked to pay at a rate that would build two stations(the$600/$0.30 rates) the City would have three stations at General Plan build-out, one financed and built by the first half of the community, and two financed and built by the second half of the community. Considering that the fire department will respond to all calls-for-service within the entire community from one of the three completed fire stations, the first half of the community would, in effect "inherit" one half of a station at no cost to themselves. In short, Happy Valley would fail the proportionality test. The inequity would then be exacerbated when the community decides to build the final "missing" last(fourth) station from a Citywide assessment or from annual General Fund receipts, paid for by the entire community, including those who just paid for the two new stations via the adopted fire impact fees. The only equitable option is for the City to adopt impact fees at the $300/residence and $0.15/square foot rates. Adoption of this fee would be referred to as the Current Community Financial Commitment or Investment-based Impact Fees. Admittedly, the City will go further into a deficit position in terms of the number of required stations, from being deficient by one station at half General Plan build-out to a deficiency of two stations at General Plan build-out, but the deficiency (or proportionality) would remain a constant 50% of the stations needed at either point in time. The community, if they are truly serious about meeting the NFPA recommended Level of Service(or standard), would then need to assess the entire community to raise the needed money in some fashion for financing the remaining two stations either in the form of an assessment or dedication of general receipts of the City. The Infrastructure has "Excess Capacity" -One final but important scenario remains and must be considered. In this scenario the existing residents of Happy Valley were the industrious sort and (at half General Plan build-out) had constructed three stations when they were at the point when they only needed two stations. Clearly there is excess capacity in each of the three existing stations. In this case, the Happy Valley's current de facto standard would be well above the de- jure or target standard. Statistically, each of the three stations would have 1/3 excess capacity(for providing services) and should be busy only about two-thirds of the time. Should the impact fee be limited only to the marginal $300 per residence and $0.15 per square foot for business space required to construct the one remaining required station or should the City be able to recover the costs for the existing capacity in the three stations through a recoupment impact fee? If so, the future residents receive a gift of the extra (third)station. If the excess capacity was recognized at the time the facilities were constructed and the excess capacity was identified for future use, there will be tough decisions ahead to be made by the Happy Valley City Council. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 9 Chapter One Background and Introduction General Plan Build-out Needs-based Development Impact Fees or Recoupment Fee? The Happy Valley City Council should adopt, at a minimum, the $300/residence and $0.15/square foot business space rates to insure that the fourth station would be built. Again, referred to as the General Plan Build-out Needs-based impact fees. This would be a benevolent gesture, giving the new residents a free ride on the cost of the (already built and paid for) third station. Or in the alternative, the Council can recognize that the $3,000,000 used to build the third station was a loan from the existing community's General Fund receipts, and should be repaid by the future community receiving an instantaneous level of fire protection the day they receive their occupancy permie, through the imposition and collection of impact fees.s In this case, the $600/residence and $0.30/square foot of business space impact fees should be adopted, imposed and collected. The impact fee would accumulate $6,000,000 through build-out, with$3,000,000 required to repay the General Fund in delayed revenue(for Station#3) and$3,000,000 necessary to construct the fourth station. This would be referred to as a Recoupment-based Fee at General Plan build-out. More important, long term equity at General Plan built-out would be achieved as each home and business would have contributed the same$600 per residence and$0.30 per square foot. This situation is usually fairly limited and should be supported by the appropriate element of General Plan. Exceptions to Proportionality Test. The previous discussion applies particularly well to above ground or capacity-based services such as community use centers, pools, police and fire stations, civic centers, maintenance yards or other fixed location and finite capacity facilities that serve the entire population. However, it does not necessarily work well on ground level or below system infrastructures such as streets, utilities, and storm drainage, where the continuation of a deficient system into the future is not at all possible and the lack of additions would ensure the complete inability to approve any further private construction without creating unsafe conditions to a specific area. As an example, if the agency's storm drainage system is currently deficient and creates some period flooding but not necessarily in dangerous amounts,the agency may not be able to approve and allow any more future development unless the storm drainage runoff created by the new development, is properly collected and released at a river or flood control channel. Additionally, a currently deficient water system, i.e., one with only the most minimal of distribution pipes, may not be able to serve any more future development without a substantial increase in the capacity of the water distribution system. However, a water utility with users rates can increase existing user fees to eliminate any existing deficiencies. Specific Plan. or Benefit to a Specific Area. An additional exception occurs when the need or benefit from a specific facility is generated by a finite or easily defined area such as a specific plan or a new area of the agency that is significantly outside of the existing agency's urban in-fill service area or the specific plan is primarily the sole beneficiary of the infrastructure to be Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 10 Chapter One Background and Introduction constructed. An example may be a small area of the City, proposed for say 2,000 homes, but separate from the rest of the City in such a way that, to meet the General Plan's stated fire suppression standard level of service of a five minute response time, it requires a separate fire station but serving less than any of the other stations, which on average serve 5,000 homes. There is little argument as to why the remaining residents and businesses should not need to finance that higher cost per home served. This is common in an area geographically separated from the major, or urban part of the community. An example would be a small area separated by a river or up on a hillside or in a canyon. These areas may need facilities specific to that area that are of little or no benefit to the rest of the community, such a bridge across a river that only benefits those live or work across the river. Density may also be a factor. Fire infrastructure system improvements to date may be spread over a more compact density(say 4-5 homes per acre)than the remaining development in town(say 2-3 homes per acre). The fire system infrastructure costs per residential dwelling for a lower density area will likely be higher than a more compact area with a higher dwelling density. Public Utilities. The treatment for municipal utilities is particularly clear in that the utility's operating and capital funds do not receive any General Fund financial support and they do not typically charge stand-by fees to vacant property. This means that the entire utility system has been supported only by what are called utility user fees (payments by the utility's customers). Or stated in another way, it is user financed. In many cases the utility may have significant extra capacity because most infrastructures cannot be expanded in small defined portions that exactly match the pace of new development. An example would water reservoirs which are generally expanded on 1.0 million gallon portions, not 1,000 gallons at a time. To an individual user who has been contributing to the existing system over a period of time, it would appear quite fair for this excess capacity to be "purchased" for by new users that connect to the system who will benefit from the excess capacity has been constructed and identified. This holds particularly true for the purchase of water shares required for future water users. A water distribution system may also have significant distribution system capacity to reach homes and businesses in more outlying areas. RCS recently worked with a city where the existing water users, currently representing some 55% of the water use demand at General Plan build-out, had already constructed nearly 70% of the General Plan build-out water system. The 15% difference amounted to just more than $7.0 million. Should any excess capacity paid for by existing users be a gift to the future users? Government Code §66000 et. seq. appears to prevent the city from trying to recoup the costs of the excess capacity purchased by the current users that will be the direct benefit of future users. Some excess capacity can and should be identified wherever possible, and recovered, providing that was identified as necessary for future development at the time it is created.6 The excess capacity must be identified in terms of"existing project segment" and how it will benefit the future users must be identified. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 11 Chanter One Background and Introduction Such equity is the attempt of this Report. Excess capacity is often difficult to identify and even more difficult to convince others of. The City is probably much like Happy Valley, with excess or overcapacity in some areas of the infrastructure,and perhaps slightly deficient'in others, as you will see in the remainder of the Report. OTHER ISSUES Some members of the building industry have claimed that the addition of impact fees unfairly creates an inflated resale price for existing homes. The argument is that if the public agency adopts a development impact fee of$20,000 to $25,000 per detached dwelling home, then the price for an existing home is artificially increased by that same amount. We will use the example of detached dwelling at a construction cost of$200,000 to complete to a point that the occupancy permit is approved. Full Cost of a Residential Dwelling. The $200,000 represents only the above ground cost's construction. The true and actual cost of a new dwelling unit consists of the cost of acquiring the parcel, necessary government approvals and permits, construction supplies, labor, debt service on the above, on-site' public improvements, and The hidden cost of extending public services'to that home. The costs of extending public services includes (but is not limited to); • The addition of law enforcement personnel requiring the expansion of the police station and response vehicles • Additional fire stations and response vehicles. • Widening of arterial and collector roads. • Additional capacity in downstream storm drainage pipes. • Additions to water delivery capability, including source, treatment, storage and delivery. • Additions to the sewage capability, including collection, treatment and disposal. • Additions to the maintenance capabilities (i.e., municipal corporation yard and maintenance vehicles) necessary to maintain the above added infrastructure. • Additional parks, library, and public meeting space for recreational/social purposes. Thus while the cost of constructing the above ground portion of a detached dwelling may be $325,000, the "downstream" costs identified above may be in the area of$20,000 to $30,000 per detached dwelling or in the area of 6% to 9%% of the above ground cost. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 12 Chapter One Background and Introduction As an example, imagine a 2,800 square foot home, costing $325,000 to construct the above ground structure, located in the middle of an empty square mile, no roads, no utility service, no public safety response, no flood control and no recreational facilities. What is the market value of this home? Probably not even the$325,000 that it cost to construct the structure. The$25,000 development impact fee for all the infrastructures needed to support that one home, now seems like a relative bargain. Thus, the true and complete cost of a new detached dwelling is the cost of building the structure and the cost of extending the municipal services to the home regardless of who pays for the actual costs of extending those services. To some degree these service-related infrastructure costs have been recognized. The only question remaining is,who should for pay the required improvements, existing or new residents? Affect on Market Price. Again, let us assume that a cumulative$25,000 impact fee imposed upon new detached dwelling construction increases the market price of an existing detached dwelling. This additional amount is the recognition that the existing detached dwelling already has those physical links to the municipal services and thus has that value. A slightly different way of looking at this argument is that each existing detached dwelling has a "share" in a municipal corporation10 and that share is valued at the cost of the connections to the various municipal utilities, circulation system, flood protection and public safety. CHAPTER ORGANIZATION Chapters three through six will have three fee cost/fee tables. These four chapters include: Identification of Projects and Cost Allocation -This schedule identifies the various projects that the infrastructure manager has identified as required prior to General Plan build-out. These projects may be necessary in part or fully to accommodate new development. This schedule will identify the cost of the project and the portion of the project identified as resulting from new development. General Plan Build-out Needs-based Development Impact Fee - This table will identify the set of impact fees that would need to be adopted to meet the basic, or marginal needs, capital needs identified in the Report. Adoption of this level of impact fees would allow City officials to claim that new development is being approved and constructed without any additional cost to the existing residents and businesses. You could not, however, claim that new development is paying its `fair share." Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 13 Chapter One Background and Introduction Existing Financial Commitment or Equity-based Proportionality Test Fees - This table will identify the cost (in current nominal dollar value) of the existing infrastructure, including land, physical improvements and capital equipment. This is the average amount "invested" by the existing community of residents and businesses. This equity will be expressed in terms of the cost to construct or acquire the assets at current costs. If the average "equity" (for a detached dwelling for example) on this Table is greater then the average cost on the previous General Plan Build-out Needs-based impact fee Table, the infrastructure system is "front-ended" or has excess capacity. Stated slightly differently, the existing community has put more of the system into place than would be required of the remaining unbuilt portions of the community, (as they build). In effect,the existing community has advanced money to build capacity into the infrastructure system to meet the needs of residents and businesses not yet there! A good example of a front-ended system is the scenario where the City of Happy Valley had already built three fire stations while it only had the current actual demands for two stations. If the Existing Commitment-based 'impact fees are less than the General Plan Build-out Needs- based impact fee,we must conclude that existing community may not have contributed the amount of equity that they have needed to and that the construction of a needed infrastructure to support that municipal service has been lagging and is deficient. When this occurs, the Existing Community Financial Commitment or Investment-based development impact fees may act as a ceiling or upper limit of the development impact fees. A good example of a deficient system is the scenario where the City of Happy Valley had only built one fire station while it had current actual demands for two stations. In short, if the existing community has not been inclined to construct an infrastructure system proportionally as the community developed, what basis does the community have to require those future residents to invest more, thus by eliminating to some degree, the deficiencies created by the existing community? The answer is, there can be no such rational argument. To adopt the General Plan Build-out Needs-based impact fees, under these circumstances, would be an unfair attempt to eliminate the existing deficiency on the back of new development. Adoption of the Existing Commitment-based impact fees,under these circumstances,would allow City officials to claim that new development is not being required to pay to eliminate existing deficiencies. [This space left vacant to place the following Chapter endnotes on a single page]. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 14 Chanter One Back round and Introduction CHAPTER ENDNOTES 1. For greater detail of each project, refer to the City's Master Facilities Plan in Appendix C. 2. Examples using other infrastructure will be used from time to time in this report, even though the City may not provide that service. 3. "Happy Valley"has been used as an imaginary community for purposes of DIF example for about nine years. Clearly no insult is intended to any real or imagined community of Happy Valley. It is also a Happy Valley because there is no inflation and the value of a dollar remains nominal. 4. Actually, the permitted structure receives fire protection services as it is being constructed. 5. This example assumes that each of the existing three stations is debt-free and owned out-right. 6. This action would be more supportable with a recent appraisal of the existing utility assets. 7. Not necessarily in a manner that indicates a danger,just below the standard being asked of the future residents. 8. On-site improvements include local streets and medians, curbs and sidewalks, sewer lines, water lines, street Iights, storm gutter or drainage pipes, electrical power lines and all of the other requirements of the Department's building requirements on the privately held property,hence the"on-site"reference. "Off-site"improvements are increased capacity need that occur"down-stream" from the private property. The on-site public improvements generally become a city asset upon acceptance of the on-site public improvements made by the developer while the property upon which the on-site improvements, is still privately owned. 9.This Report does not address all of these services. They are only highlighted to make a point about the types of public services typically required to support a residential dwelling. 10. Not unlike a share in a corporation such as I.B.M. or A.T. &T. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 15 Chapter 2 Demographics and Findings This Chapter provides an inventory of developed and undeveloped (and under-developed) land within the City. The City, surprisingly, still possesses areas of vacant land zoned for residential and business uses. LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS This Report contains an inventory of developed land and land with remaining development opportunities within Huntington Beach boundaries.The undeveloped land inventory columns form the base for distribution of the estimated infrastructure costs required to extend the existing levels of service to the new development. The developed land inventory also forms the base for distributing the cost of the existing infrastructure for comparison and for the de facto identification of the existing levels of service (LOS) provided by those existing infrastructures. Table 2-1 below, summarizes the inventory of all private land uses contained within the current City limits. They are based upon General Plan data, Orange County projections, City records and a staff analysis of only privately held parcels.' Some of the vacant parcels have vested rights and would have the existing impact fees imposed. The acreage and unit data are detailed in Appendix A. Table 2-1 Detailed Land Use Inventory CEtyo#Hunitngton;BeaGh Developed Net IncreaseI. Total Trial Lan'it Use.Database Acres #/a#Units AcrnS I; # of Units Acres #of Units Detached Dwelling Units(1) 6,436.0 38,616 295.00 1,749 6,731.00 40,365 Attached Dwelling Units 1,805.4 36,108 111.20 5,307 1,916.60 41,415 Mobile Home Dwelling Units(2) 204.6 2,865 1.00 9 205.60 2,874 Hotel/Motel Lodging Units 33.4 1,070 18.60 818 52.00 11888 Resort Lodging Units 20.2 809 9.30 535 29.50 1,344 Commercial/Office Uses 841.9 12,836,000 39.80 2,417,000 881.70 15,253,000 Industrial/Manufacturing Uses 930.3 20,261,000 187.00 3,638,000 1,117.30 23,899,000 Total-City Limits iQ,271.8 ----- 661.90 ----- 10,933.70 --- - Private Residences 8,446.0 77,589 407.2 7,065 8,853.2 84,654 Commercial Lodging Rooms 53.6 1,879 27.9 1,353 81.5 3,232 Business Square Feet 1.772.2 33.097,000 226.8 6,055,000 1,999.0 39,152,000 Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 16 Chapter 2 Demographics and Finding Land Use Definitions. This Report classifies properties as either one of three residential land uses or two different categories of commercial/industrial development. These land uses are defined belowz: Residential Land Uses: • Detached Dwelling Residential - This category of land use is generally found in the City's General Plan designations of RL (Residential Low Density) and RM (Residential Medium Density). • Attached Dwelling Residential - This category of land use is generally found in the City's General Plan designations of RM(Residential Medium Density), RMH (Residential Medium High Density) and RH(Residential High Density). ® Mobile Home Residential-This category of land use is generally found in any of the City's residential General Plan designations as noted above. With the more frequent replacement of a manufactured dwelling unit on an existing mobile home pad, it is important to note that such a replacement is not a development impact fee event. It is merely a replacement of an existing structure thus the demand already exists. No additional mobile home (or modular) units in private park like settings is are anticipated. However, one acre has been included in the calculations in order to calculate a development impact fee for that use should such an application be filed. BusinesslCommerce Land Uses: • Motel/Motel Lodging - This category identifies the hotel and motel commercial lodging units and is generally found in the City's General Plan designations of CV (Commercial Visitor) and CG(Commercial General). It is limited to commercial lodging that is two stories or less and does not have an inordinate amount of meeting space. • Resort bodging - This is a recognition that in terms of commercial lodging, a resort facility, with more intensive banquets or convention space, most likely will incur differing municipal service demands than that of a typical hotel/motel facility. It is also generally found in the City's General Plan designation of CV (Commercial Visitor). Resort lodging has been defined as three stories or higher with significant amounts of square feet with which to accommodate large events such as conventions, business sessions and weddings, thus having a large drive-in population that does not necessarily stay at the facility overnight. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 17 Chapter 2 Demographics and Findings • Commercial Uses-As utilized in this Report,Commercial uses include the general category of retail services and thus includes outlets ranging from restaurants to auto repair shops to shopping centers. This category is generally found in the City's General Plan designations of CN(Commercial Neighborhood), CO (Commercial Office), CG (Commercial General)), CR (Commercial Regional), and CV (Commercial Visitor). It would encompass all office uses. i Industrial Uses - This category contains all businesses generally found in the City's General Plan designation of I(Industrial). Definitions of Land Use Status. Each of the major land use categories detailed above is categorized as either Developed or Net Increase. Definitions are as follows: Developed Acreage - Includes land in the City which is fully developed and, or land which has received a building permit but which is not yet constructed. Acreage in this category may also include non-conforming use areas of the City which contain extensive development prior to annexation or before changes to the General Plan were made. City staff has also included projections regarding properties which are currently classified as "Developed" but which may undergo redevelopment in the future. In fact, most of the development increases within the Beach/Edinger Specific Plan Corridor and Downtown Specific Plan areas consist of redevelopment of existing uses. Net Increase Acreage - (Intensified/Redeveloped/or acreage available for development or redevelopment) -Refers to all non-public vacant acreage located within the City. This category also includes any parcels that may currently be partially developed but may have capacity for redevelopment. Table 2-2, following, provides a summary of the detailed land use inventory, limited to privately held property more detailed on Table 2-1. Staff's land use inventory reveals that there are approximately 10,271.80 acres of privately-held developed land within the City's planning boundaries. There remain approximately 661.90 acres of vacant or land available to be redeveloped(and thus increased in terms of demand) in the City. Available(undeveloped land or available for redevelopment) land represents approximately 6.0% of the total 10,933.7 privately held acres within the City of Huntington Beach. Undeveloped parcels to be developed as detached dwellings constitute the greatest amount(at 2.7%) of available acreage of all the land uses. [This space left vacant to place the following table on a single page]. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 18 Chapter 2 Demographics and Findings Table 2-2 Summary of Undeveloped and Developed Acreage - Developed Percent Vacant;; - Percent Total Acres of Redeveloped of Acres Total:, or Intensified Total. . . - Acres, Detached Dwelling Units 6,436.0 58.9% (1) 295.0 2.7% 6,731.0 Attached Dwelling Units 1,805.4 16.5% 111.2 1.0% 1,916.6 Mobile Home Dwellings 204.6 1.9% 1.0 0.0% 205.6 Comm. Lodging Units 33.4 0.3% 1 18.6 0.2% 52.0 Resort Lodging Units 20.2 0.2% 9.3 0.1% 29.5 Commercial/Office Uses 841.9 7.7% 39.8 0.3% 881.7 Industrial/Manu. Uses 930.3 8.5% 187.0 1.7% 1,117.3 1E-- Total L 10,271.8 94.0% 661.9 6.0% =10,933.7 (1)Only 34 of the 295 acres are vacant lots. The remaining 261 acres represents the subdivided acres necessary for the addition of 1,566 detached units(on their own lots)in areas already developed such as a lot split of a larger parcel with an existing detached dwelling unit. See Appendix A for greater detail. General Plan Build-out is defined as that point in time when most if not all of the City's privately owned land is developed at maximum levels allowed by the City's General Plan. Commercial/Industrial Development. In order to assess the costs of impact for commercial or industrial building intensification or building expansions, this Report includes a calculation of impact fees both on a per square foot basis for commercial and industrial development. In order to accomplish this, City Planning staff provided the typical maximum square feet of building allowable by the City's General Plan on a net acre of land. This percentage is sometimes referred to as the maximum Floor Area Ratio (or FAR), as shown following: Commercial/Office Development- 15,246 G.S.F. per Acre (about 35% F.A.R.) Industrial Development- 21,390 G.S.F. per Acre (about 50% F.A.R.) Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 19 Chapter 2 Demographics and Findings POPULATION PROJECTIONS A second component in determining the magnitude of impact of future development and the necessary facilities needed to mitigate that impact is a realistic assessment of the build-out population of the City. Many of the facilities contained in this Report are sized according to the estimated population at theoretical "build-out" or upon service levels which are based in part upon an estimation of the population to be served. Library facilities,parks and recreation facilities and community center facilities and equipment are examples of cost areas which rely heavily on population projections to determine space and facility needs. Park standards are usually stated in terms of the number of acres of park land per 1,000 persons, for instance. There are at least two generally accepted methods for projecting future population levels in a City: (1)past growth trends projected forward and(2)population holding capacity based on the General Plan land-use element. Each of these methods can be useful even though both possess certain limitations. There are several serious flaws in projecting the build-out population of a community using the past growth trend methodology. While this method is relatively simple and therefore easy for the general public to understand, it does not give consideration to when an area is actually built out. Eventually there comes a point in time where the amount of available land to build on is negligible. This technique does not help explain when that point is reached. Also, the past growth trend approach is not sensitive to policy changes made by Council or land use issues contained in the City's General Plan. For these reasons, this technique is more useful in projecting short-term population levels and should not be used to forecast the built-out population of an area. This Report relies on the methodology of holding-capacity, (described in the following section), to project future service levels and facility requirements. Holding Capacity Analysis. The methodology used in this Report to forecast the built-out population of City of Huntington Beach is the current holding capacity approach. This method calculates the sum of existing development and potential development allowable under current land use regulations, using average densities found in the City. The first step in projecting the City's population using the holding capacity approach is to inventory the remaining undeveloped acres within the City limits, which was previously accomplished in Tables 2-1 and 2-2 of this Chapter. The next step is to estimate the potential Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 20 Chapter 2 Demographics and Findings dwelling units allowed per acre and then multiply the potential number of units by the average number of residents per unit. Table 2-3, on the following page, projects the additional number of dwelling units and potential population for the City of City of Huntington Beach through build-out. The number of potential new dwelling units was calculated by multiplying the amount of vacant acreage for each land use zone by the average densities (i.e., number of units allowed per acre) indicated in the City's General Plan. The number of persons per unit for new residential units is based on the 2000 US. Census and ranges from 2.913 and 1.822 persons for detached dwelling units and mobile home dwelling units respectively to 2.257 persons for attached dwelling units. Based on these assumptions, future residential development is expected to generate approximately 17,089 additional residents'to City of Huntington Beach, joining the approximately 190,377 citizens already living in City. This results in a total estimated population at General Plan build-out of roughly 207,221 residents.' The estimated General Plan build-out population of approximately 207,221 residents using this holding capacity approach is typically lower than the population forecasts based on the mathematical models described previously. This implies either that the City's period of residential build-out will actually be shorter than the 10 years indicated above or that the City's growth rate will decline from historical levels. This latter scenario is probably more likely to occur. As the residentially zoned land within the City's limits remaining to be developed continues to be developed during the next ten to twenty years, the City is likely to see fewer new dwelling units developed each year. [This space left vacant to place the following table on a single page]. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 21 Chapter 2 Demographics and Findings Table 2-3 City of City of Huntington Beach Average Dwelling Occupancy, by Type (2000 United States Census Data) Nu Less Number Total Number Average Percentage; Existing Residential of'Units Vacant Occupied of Qccupants Occupancy Occupied Detached Residential Detached Total 37,007 630 36,377 105,981 2.913 98.30% Mobile Home Total 3,024 125 2,899 5,281 1.822 95.87% Other 122 31 91 1541 1,692 0.00°/a A##acFred Etesidential Duplex to Quadplex 9,681 265 9,416 26,190 2,781 97.26% Five or more 16,488 605 15,883 31,356 1.974 96.33% Attached 9,471 329 9,142 20,186 2.208 96.539% Total-MFR 35,640 1,199 34,441 77,732 2.257 96.64% Existing-State Department of Finance 01101111 Population " 190,377 Potentral:G.P.&gild out Population Anticipated: Occupancy; Probable Dwelling Anticipated;. At H�stofic Occupancy Rates... !lnits Rate Occrpaney Density Populat+on Undeveloped Detached Dwellings 1,749 98,300/0 1,719 2,913 5,007 Undeveloped Attached Dwellings 5,307 96.64% 5,129 2.257 11,576 Undeveloped Mobile Home's 9 95.87% 9 1.822 16 Population to be added development 16,599 16,599 Potential"Build-out" Population,at Historic Vacancy Rates. 206,976 206,976 Potential G.P.build out Population Anticipated' Odcupancy' Probable [7►velling Antcipaeed At7t10° �ccupancyRate Units hate Oecvpancy Density Population: Undeveloped Detached Dwellings 1,749 100.00% EM9 2.913 5,095 Undeveloped Attached dwellings 5,307 100.00% 2.257 11,978 Undeveloped Mobile Home's 9 100.00°/o 1.822 16 Population to be added development 117,089 17,089 Potential Maximum"Build-out" Population. 207,466 207,466 Population at General Plan Build-out @ Low per Dwelling Resident Densities 206,976 Population at General Plan Build-out @ High per Dwelling Resident Densities 207,466 Average Population at General Plan Build-out 207,221 (1)Summary File 3(SF3), available at http://factfinder.census.gov (2)Current population based upon State of California Department of Finance data. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 22 Chapter 2 Demographics and Findings SUMMARY OF FINDINGS City staff identified just under$403.4 million in needed and desired capital improvement projects required through the City's General Plan build-out, including both projects related to existing deficiencies and those needed solely to support future growth. The adoption of the recommended maximum impact fees supported by the calculations in this Report (Schedule 2.1) would finance about 42.6% of the needed capital facilities by raising some $172.1 million. Existing fund balances of$3.6 will finance roughly 0.9% of the capital needs. Other sources, primarily existing agreements or intergovernmental support will finance about$23.0 million or 5.7%. Other capital revenue sources will need to be pursued for the remaining unfunded$205.5 million through build- out (50.8%). Roughly 95% (or $194.4 million) of the $204.8 million represents unfunded storm drainage projects that may never come to fruition. Based on these costs and the schedules found at the end of each of the remaining chapters of this Report, costs attributable to future development were derived on a per unit basis for residential land uses and on a per square foot of pad basis for commercial and industrial land uses. Schedule 2.1, found at the end of this Chapter, provides a summary detail of the maximum DIFs for each type of infrastructure and land use category. The fees are summarized in Table 2-4, following: Table 2-4 Summary of Recommended Development Impact Fees (Based Upon the Lower of General Plan Build-out Needs or Equity-based Impact Fees) Recoimmended Development. Land Use l:m act Fees_ Detached Dwelling Units $25,890/Dwelling Unit Attached Dwelling Units $17,995/Dwelling Unit Mobile Home Dwelling Units $17,235/Dwellin Unit Hotel/Motel Lodgin Units $2,854/Lodging Unit Resort Lodging Units $3,956/Lodging Unit Commercial/Office Uses $5.002/S uare Foot Industrial/Manufacturing Uses $4.010/Square Foot Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 23 Chapter 2 DemoQranhics and Findings Specific impact fee rates for each land use can be found at the end of each chapter relating to each infrastructure. Schedule 2.1 at the end of this Chapter also identifies the probable impact fee revenue, the capital cost total and the difference, by individual infrastructure type (e.g., fire). Given the magnitude of the City's project list, vis-a-vis the proposed list of projects, and the lack of previous findings regarding any excess capacity, there is no potential for recoupment of the costs of previous development-generated capital projects (excess capacity) as was described in Chapter One. Additionally, the detail of the existing value of the various systems, does not approach the level of accuracy required to adopt a recoupment style impact fee. The recommended Development Impact Fees are those indicated following in Schedule 2.1. STRUCTURE OF THIS REPORT The following chapters of this Report contain the detailed information relative to the calculation of DIFs recommended by RCS for the entire City. Appropriate textual explanations are contained in each chapter, with a chapter devoted to each of the nine sets of DIF cost schedules, listed below and three appendices. CHAPTER 3 - Law Enforcement Facilities, Vehicles, and Equipment CHAPTER 4 - Fire Suppression/Medic Facilities, Vehicles, and Equipment CHAPTER 5 - Circulation (Streets, Signals and Bridges) System CHAPTER 6 - Storm Drainage Collection System CHAPTER 7 Public Library Facilities and Collection CHAPTER 8 - Community Use (community center type) Facilities CHAPTER 9 - Park Land Acquisition and Park Facilities Development APPENDIX A - Expanded Land-use Database APPENDIX B - Summary of Recommendations APPENDIX C - Master Facilities Plan NOTE REGARDING TEXTUAL MATHEMATICS: It is important to note that the use of a computer provides for calculations to a large number of decimal points. Such data, when included in text and supporting textual tables, has been rounded to no more than two decimals for clarity and thus may be not replicated to the necessary degree of accuracy as the spreadsheet schedules at the end of each chapter. Should there be any difference between tables within a chapter and the schedules at the end of the same chapter, the schedules will prevail. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 24 Chanter 2 Demographics and Findings CHAPTER ENDNOTES 1. The figures are consistent with the City of Huntington Beach General Plan Land Use Element. 2. bid. 3. Assuming that the vacancy factor retains its traditionally high occupancy factor as evidenced in 2000 Census (averaging just under 97%). The estimated 16,844 additional residents is the average of full occupancy(17,089) and the roughly 97% average occupancy(16,599). 4. Ibid. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 25 Schedule 2.1 City of Huntington Beach Summary of Development Impact Fees By Type of Fee (Fees per Residential Dwelling Unit, or Business Square Foot) at Fair Share or Equity-based Development Impact Fees l atN Erg Circulation System`: Storm:pramage Public Public Park land/open Development Enforcement 5uppre1 Local Streets Collection Library Meeting Space Acgsiisrtion Impact Fee Total Facilities;et a1.„ Facilities;¢t al :Signets&fridges System Fat iiities Fai lhties &Improvements Par Unit or Square To Schedule 32 Schedule 4 2 Scheifute 5.2 Schedule 6 2 Schedule 7 1 Seh¢dule 8 1 Schedule 9.1 &9;4 Gik:Ulated GostsIDIF5 _-.- Detached Dwelling Units(1) $396 $922 $2,482 $3,061 $1,172 $967 $16,990 $25,890 per Unit Attached Dwelling Units $815 $382 $1,657 $397 $908 $072 $13,164 $17,995 per Unit Mobile Home Dwelling Units(2 $369 $1.683 $1,299 $2,082 $733 $542 $10,627 $17,235 per Unit Hotel/Motel Lodging Units $455 $356 $1,105 $479 No Fee No Fee $459 $2,854 per Unit Resort Lodging Units $532 $794 $1,915 $356 No Fee No Fee $359 $3,956 per Unit Commercial/Office Uses $1.041 $0,329 $2.331 $0.347 No Fee No Fee $0.954 $5.002 per S.F. industrial/Manufacturing Uses $0,443 $0.030 1 $1.621 $1.144 No Fee No Fee $0.772 $4.010 per S.F. Anticipated DIFOollection `.: >: ; >;'' Detached Dwelling Units(1) $692,604 $1,612.578 $4,341,018 $5,353,689 $2,049,828 $1,516,393 $29,715,510 $45,281,610 Attached Dwelling Units $4,325,205 $2,027,274 $8,793,099 $2,106,879 $4,818,766 $3,566,304 $69,861,348 $95,499,465 Mobile Home Dwelling Units(2 $3,321 $14,247 $11,691 $18,738 $6,597 $4,878 $95,643 $155,115 Hotel/Motel Lodging Units $372,190 $291,208 $903.890 $391,822 $0 $0 $375,462 $2,334,572 Resort Lodging Units $294,620 $424,790 $1,024,525 $190,460 $0 $0 $192,065 $2,116,460 Commercial/office Uses $2,516,097 $795,193 $5.634,027 $838,699 $0 $0 $2,306,818 $12,089,834 Industrial/Manufacturing Uses $1,611,634 $109.140 $5,897,198 $4,161,872 $0 $0 $2 808,538 $14,698 380 Total $9;$05,671 $5 27A 430: $26,606,048 $].3 062,Y59 $6 875,i t31 $5 087,565 05 354 382 $172 068,436 City-wide Impact Fee $9,805,671 $5,274,430 $26,606,049 $13,062.159 $6,875,181 $5,087,665 $105,354,382 $172,065,436 Existing Fund Balance $0 $0 $200.000 $0 $0 $0 $3,379,000 $3,579.000 Other Sources $0 $700,000 $260,020 $0 $0 $22,000,000 $0 $22,960,020 Capital Total $10.100,895 $11,941,972 $28.537,800 $207494,050 $7,841,369 $28750000 $108,733,000 $403,399,086 Overage((.Shoitfall) {$295,22A): ($5 7J ($1,471,732} ($194 A31,891) ($966,188) ($1 662,435) $382 ($204 794 630) N O� Chapter 3 Law Enforcement Facilities, vehicles, and Equipment The Existing System(or the infrastructure). The Police Department currently operates out of the 78,700 square foot facilities at the Civic Center on Main Street and the 7,050 square foot 5`"Street Substation. These combined 85,780 square feet of the two facilities provide roughly 365 square feet per each of the 235 sworn (budget approved) officers. The facility meet's current needs but will not likely accommodate the space needs required for the additional officers necessary to accommodate the additional calls-for-service generated by new development at General Plan build- out, Certainly not at the same standards of service afforded to existing development. The Department will need to hire additional officers to maintain the existing levels of law enforcement services and the current static facility will ultimately prove insufficient to house the entire staff at General Plan build-out. An expansion of the City-owned facility will need to occur before General Plan build-out to allow the City to accommodate that new development. Due to size limitations of the current police station parcels, it may be difficult to enlarge the current buildings at either of the existing sites. The existing facility space would cost approximately $53,423,178 to acquire at current land acquisition and construction costs. Additionally, the Department has a response fleet consisting of 231 vehicles installed with significant, and costly, amounts of sophisticated equipment costing some$12,640,310 to replace. The 235 General Fund-supported sworn officers are each assigned equipment such as various leathers, armaments, clothing, radios, protective vests, safety apparel costing an average of $9,930 per sworn officer for a total of $2,155,801 for the 235 current officers. The final key asset is the estimated$3,027,410 in law enforcement specialty equipment. These assets, totaling some$71,246,699, represent the cumulative commitment of the cumulative City Councils(and community)to the Police Department standards of service as supported by Law Enforcement Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment infrastructure. Demand Upon Infrastructure Created by the Development of Under or Undeveloped Parcels. Residents/businesses benefit from law enforcement services in three ways; directly,indirectly and through standby availability. Direct services are those involving an actual unit response, usually as a result of being the victim of a crime or other emergency situation. Direct service results in the form of a law enforcement officer directly contacting the victim. Indirect benefits, such as crime prevention programs, free patrol time and other more general services that serve all, are benefits that are more difficult to calculate. As an example, the burglar that is arrested today in some neighbors home,may have broken into your home tomorrow. Most residents and businesses may go for many years before ever requiring a direct call-for-service. These fortunate residents Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 27 Chapter 3 Law Enforcement Facilities Vehicles and Equipment and businesses still benefit for law enforcement services, if in no other way, than in the security that a law enforcement officer is available, through adequate planned stand-by, to respond if you require public safety assistance. Everyone benefits from stand-by capabilities, which is just the fact that law enforcement services are simply there, staffed, trained, equipped and available to respond as they are needed. Sworn law enforcement officials are the first responders to emergency problems that can occur to anyone. They are trained to act and solve just about any law enforcement problem that might occur. The concept of stand-by service is similar to stand-by water service. Consider owning a vacant lot not requiring water service, regardless of the fact that others have built a functional water system near your vacant lot. At some point in time, that vacant lot is developed and needs a water meter and water service. Because of the forethought of others, the water service is available when the lot is developed. One may not feel they need law enforcement services, but some day they will, and because of the foresight of others, the service capability will be available. The addition of new residential units and new businesses will increase the demand upon the law enforcement capacity to serve by creating more direct calls-for-service, more areas requiring preventive patrol, and in general, more opportunities for crimes to be committed. The development of vacant parcels into residential or business units will also generate more calls. Residents and business-owners occupying those residences and businesses will create the increase in law enforcement calls-for-service. Simply stated, more homes and businesses will mean more responses to the additional burglaries, domestic disputes, noise complaints, shoplifting, and miscellaneous incidents that will occur in the new homes and businesses. If the Law Enforcement capabilities (the base) are not expanded, then any increasing number of calls-for-service from development (the rate) will reduce the amount or free hours available for preventive patrol. This inability to expand the capabilities would ultimately drive the Department fully into a reactionary mode. Table 3-1, following, summarizes an analysis of the calls-for-service received by the Police Department in recent twelve month period.' The table indicates the breakdown of calls into the land uses that generated them and divides them by the number of developed units (during the same period). This process generates a calls-for-service factor for the various land-uses. [This space left vacant to place the following table on a single page]. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 28 Chapter 3 Law Enforcement Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment Table 3-1 Law Enforcement Calls-for-Service Generated by Land Use (2009) Developed. Calls Total Calls Per Land Use Dwellings For Dwelling or' or Acres Service Acre Detached Dwelling Units 38,616 13,185 0.341/Unit Attached Dwelling Units 36,108 25,350 0.702/Unit Mobile Home Dwelling Units 2,865 910 0.318/Unit Hotel/Motel Units 1,070 420 0.393/Unit Resort Lodging Units 809 371 0.459/Unit Commercial Uses (in KSF) 12,836,000 11,514 0.897/KSF Industrial Uses (in KSF) 20,261,000 7,729 0.381/KSF Beach Area 1,806 The previous Table representing the 59,479 annual police calls-for-service to privately-held developed parcels within the City's limits(for a recent twelve months reporting periods),identifies the differing demand caused by the differing land uses. As an example, there was approximately 13,168 calls-for-service requiring a response to one of the 38,616 existing detached dwellings in the City (during the tested twelve month sample). The result indicates that each residential detached dwelling unit will statistically generate just slightly more than one third of a call-for- service per year,2 on average. The same analysis was undertaken for the other seven land uses. Obviously there are calls to incidents on publicly owned roads and right-of-way,in parks and other publicly held parcels, these calls represent approximately 3% of the annual calls-for-service. Calls-for-service to resort lodging facilities,typically larger than hotel/motel facilities(defined as three stories or more) have been separated in order to generate a more relevant calls-for-service rate for each of the two differing types of temporary lodging. Resort facilities have been shown to generate more calls-for-service, most likely due to their convention and banquet facilities. However, any such resorts constructed in the future would also have such amenities. The annual calls-for-service was responded to by one of the City's existing 235 sworn officers establishing an average of about 260.79 calls-for-service per sworn officer annually.' Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 29 Chapter 3 Law Enforcement Facilities Vehicles and Equipment Average Demand as Determined by Calls-for-Service. The calls-for-service ratios are on-average, that is to say that not every detached dwelling unit will generate 0.341 annual calls-far-service. Since they are statistically representative of averages of how calls for-service are generated in City of Huntington Beach, they can be used to project the number of additional law enforcement calls- for-service that can be expected at General Plan build-out. This process is accomplished by multiplying the average calls-for-service rate, per Table 3-1, by the number of anticipated additional residential dwellings or business square feet per Table 2-1. The result is approximately 8,697 additional annual calls-for-service at General Plan build-out. The number of additional officers necessary to meet the anticipated (net) additional 8,697 annual calls-for-service from future development (8,448 from development and 249 from public rights-of-way) is then divided by the average number of calls-for-service capacity that an officer currently responds to(or 260.79 per year per officer). This process indicates that an additional thirty-three sworn police officers will be necessary to accommodate the anticipated new development at the current standards of service provided to the existing community. Or in the contrary,without the doubling of the Police staff, the City would experience a roughly 14.2% reduction in the standards-of-service at General Plan build-out, as defined by the ability to respond to calls-for-service. Information from Table 3-1 and Table 2-1 (Land-use Database) has been used to determine how many additional officers will be required at build-out. By multiplying the demand rate for detached dwelling units (0.341 calls-for-service per unit) times the 1,749 anticipated detached dwelling units to be constructed through General Plan build-out, the City could expect an additional 597.2 annual calls-for-service. The total 8,697 additional calls-for-service, (8,448 from development and 249 from the public beach area from all land-uses (and rights-of-way) divided by roughly 260.79 calls per officer per year indicates the need for thirty-three additional officers to be able to accommodate the additional calls generated by the new development at General Plan build-out without diminishing the existing standards of coverage to the existing community to do so. Table 3-2 identifies the calls-for-service anticipated for each of the seven major land uses. [This space left vacant to place the following table on a single page]. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 30 Chapter 3 Law Enforcement Facilities Vehicles and Equipment Table 3-2 Additional Law Enforcement Calls (rounded) Generated by New Development, by Land Use Anticipated Total Calls Per Additional Calls Land Use Dwellings . Dwelling or Acre'` for-service or S:F;. Detached Dwelling Units 1,749 0.341/Unit 597.18 Calls Attached Dwelling Units 5,307 0.702/Unit 3,725.83Calls Mobile Home Units (1) 9 0.318/Unit 2.86 Calls Hotel/Motel Units 818 0.393/Unit 321.08 Calls Resort Lodging Units 535 0.459/Unit 245.35 Calls Commercial Uses (net in KSF) 2,417,000 0.897/KSF 1,268.07 Calls Industrial Uses (KSF) 39638,000 0.381/KSF 1,387.80 Calls LProportional Beach Increase 248.96 Calls NOTES:(1)Development of these types of units is not anticipated.One acre of units is included for calculation purposes. Cumulatively, an additional (rounded) calls-for-service would be expected at General Plan build- out. It is important to note that the additional of the thirty-three officers (8,695 annual calls-for- service _ 260.79 calls/sworn officer) by General Plan build-out would merely maintain the existing levels of service, and would not increase the existing levels of service because of the additional 8,697 annual calls-for-service, or the 8,448 calls-for-service to the privately-held land- uses. No judgement is made, regarded or offered about the existing standards-of-service (LOS) or the current ratio of officers to calls-for-service, or that it is the City's desired level-of-service or that it is optimum, it merely is the existing, or defacto, level-of-service (LOS). The Purpose of the Fee. The purpose of the fee is to collect proportional contributions from new development to pay for additionally required law enforcement facilities, vehicles and equipment. Specifically, additional law enforcement calls-for-service can be expected, and the cost of adding sworn officers necessary to respond to these anticipated calls, and thus maintain the existing Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 31 Chapter 3 Law Enforcement Facilities Vehicles and Equipment levels-of-service afforded the existing residential and business community,can also be determined. The additional costs can be proportionally determined and translated to a fee, or an amount, necessary to offset the added costs of the required additional law enforcement staffing. Those impact costs include housing and equipping the additional required officers. Providing that the impact cost is adopted and imposed as a fee, new development will finance the capital costs of expansion of the City's Police Department. The annual operations cost of the annual salary and benefits for those additional officers, will need to come from the increases in the base amounts of property, sales and transient occupancy general tax increases generated by the new residences and businesses and their occupants. The Use of the Fee. The fees collected will be used to fund the law enforcement facilities and equipment (identified in the Master Facilities Plan) that are necessary to accommodate the anticipated (and planned for) development identified in Table 2-1. The revenues raised for a properly calculated and legally-supported Law Enforcement Development Impact Fee would be limited to capitalized)costs related to that growth. The fees would be used to expand or increase capacity within the law enforcement facilities, increase the number of response and investigator's vehicles, and specialty equipment. Conversely, the General Plan Build-out Needs-based Law Enforcement Development Impact Fee receipts cannot be used repair the existing building,replace existing vehicles, or re-outfit a new officer(due to normal vacancies of the existing 235 officers). The Relationship Between the Use of the Fee and the Type of Development Paying the Fee. The fees collected from new development will be used to pay the proportional facility expansion costs generated by new development. As the development occurs, the impact (in the form of new or additional demands for service) is generated in differing amounts by differing land-uses and the development impact fees would be collected as the various types of development occurs (at a time in the development review and approval process determined by the City). The collected fee would be put to use to acquire law enforcement space, vehicles and equipment for the new (and additional) officers necessary to respond to those additional calls generated by that same new development, without reducing the capability of responding to calls for the existing community. The Relationship Between the Need for the Public Facili and the Type of Development Pro'ect. As noted in this report, residents and businesses will generate calls-for-service at different rates. Thus, there is a need to establish a specific schedule of development impact fees to fund the law enforcement facilities needed to support the development anticipated in Table 2-1. To meet that need, Police Department calls-for-service records were used to verify that differing land uses generate differing amounts of calls-for-service. Anecdotally we can all recognize that a retail store would be more likely to suffer shoplifting incidents, whereas a residence is more likely to experience a domestic disturbance or break-in and thus would have differing demands. The data in this Chapter demonstrates those expected differences using data specific to the City of Huntington Beach. The collected impact fees would be used to acquire additional building space, Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 32 Chapter 3 Law Enforcement Facilities. Vehicles and Equipment response vehicles and specialty and issued equipment for additional officers necessary to respond to the additional calls-for-service generated by private residential dwelling and business space. It would take the construction of roughly 368 attached dwellings to generate the need for a one full police officer. Cumulatively over time, the calls generated by various new developments within the City will create the need for additional officers and ultimately an additional patrol beat. It is interesting to note that on an acreage basis, an acre of detached dwellings, yielding about six detached units, will generate about 2.0 annual calls-for-service, only 15% of that generated by an acre of attached dwellings, yielding about 47 units. The Relationship Between the Amount of the Fee and the Cost of the Portion of the Facility Attributed to the Development Project. Each new development would finance a proportional amount of the expansion of the Police Station,vehicle response fleet and specialty law enforcement equipment and thus a proportional share of the costs. The existing Police Station, while quite large and is generally capable of meeting the needs of the existing staff required to serve the existing community, was not necessarily designed to meet the City's law enforcement needs at General Plan build-out. The two buildings combined 85,750 square feet provides about an average of about 364.89 square feet per existing officer, a reasonable target to maintain for future police officers'. Based upon the future addition of thirty-three officers to maintain the existing levels of staffing, a 12,041 square foot expansion of the existing facility, or some other City-owned facility would be needed, (33 X 364.89 = 12,041)to maintain the same ratio of space per officer that is currently afforded by the existing facility. As a result of potential addition of thirty-three sworn officers,the City will also need to add thirty- three response vehicles at a total cost of $1,751,040 (or 33 vehicles X $54,720Ivehicle) to maintain as close to the existing ratio of 0.98 vehicles per sworn officer as possible (231 vehicles divided by 235 officers = 0.98 vehicles per officer). The thirty-three new officers would each require a full set of personal equipment and armament at $9,930 each for a total of $327,690. Additional communications, telemetry and specialty operations equipment at an estimated total $425,000 has been included to maintain a similar ratio of specialty equipment to sworn officer. General Plan Build-out Needs-based Development Impact Fee Schedule. Table, 3-3, following, summarizes the resulting General Plan Build-out Needs-based Development Impact Fees (see Schedule 3.2 for detailed calculation) for development to contribute financially to the expansion of the City's Law Enforcement capacity in order to allow the City to extend the same level-of- service to the City's newest citizens and businesses without diminishing the existing level-of- services offered to the existing residents and businesses. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 33 Chapter 3 Law Enforcement Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment Table 3-3 General flan Build-out Needs-based Law Enforcement Impact Fees Allocation of Expansion Cost Land Use 7Expansion Costs Per Unit or S.F. Detached Dwelling Units $692,944 $396/Unit Attached Dwelling Units $4,323,304 $815/Unit Mobile Home Dwelling Units $3,319 $369/Unit Hotel/Motel Lodging Units $372,568 $455/Unit Resort Lodging Units $284,694 $532/Unit Commercial/Office Uses $2,515,742 $1.041/S.F. Industrial/Manufacturing Uses $1,610,348 $0.4431S.F. DIF Proportionality Test by Comparison with Existing Financial Commitment._ The current equity in the City's law enforcement assets includes the 85,750 square feet of law enforcement facilities with a replacement cost of$53,423,178, the 231 law enforcement vehicles costing the City some $12,640,310, the inventory of assigned equipment for 239 officers at a total of $2,155,801,the specialty and communications equipment at$3,027,410. There is no existing Law Enforcement Development Impact Fee thus no existing fund balance. When this combined equity figure of $71,246,699 is distributed to the current community (via Table 3-4, following and detailed in Schedule 3.3), the existing community commitment, on a per unit basis, is just slightly less than the calculated Law Enforcement General Plan Build-out Needs-based Development Impact Fees(or cost)per unit, as indicated by the existing$71,246,699 invested in capital for the Provision of law enforcement. [This space left vacant to place the following table on a single page]. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 34 Cha ter 3 Law Enforcement.Facilities Vehicles and E ui ment Table 3-4 Existing Financial Commitment or "Equity-based" Law Enforcement Impact Fees Allocation: Total Equity Land Use of-E uty ' Per Unit or SF Detached Dwelling Units $15,793,603 $409/Unit Attached Dwelling Units $30,365,403 $841/Unit Mobile Home Units $1,090,040 $380/Unit Hotel/Motel Units $503,096 $470Unit Resort Lodging Units $444,401 $549/Unit Commercial/Office Uses $13,792,002 $1.074/S.F. Industrial Uses $9,258,164 $0.475/S.F. RESULTING DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES The General Plan Build-out Needs-based impact fees, identified in Table 3-3, are slightly less than the Financial Commitment or Investment-based fees identified in Table 3-4 indicating that the existing commitment has kept relative pace with law enforcement asset expansion. In order to ensure that proportionality, and its underlying fairness, be maintained the development impact fee schedule identified in Table 3-3, (General Plan Build-out Need-based Development Impact Fees) are the most reasonable for both additional new development and the existing community. The adoption of Table 3-3, and detailed in Schedule 3.2 at the end of the Chapter, would also generate sufficient capital, about 97% of the full amount identified in the Master Facilities Plan, to construct most of the law enforcement facilities and capital equipment needed to absorb the new demands generated by the City's continued new development while maintaining proportionality with the commitment demonstrated by the existing community. The remaining 3% would need to come from other sources. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 35 Chapter 3 Law Enforcement Facilities Vehicles and Equipment RECAP OF RECOMMENDED LAW ENFORCEMENT FACILITIES, VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES • Adopt Schedule 3.2, General Plan Build-out Needs-based development Impact Fees for the seven basic new land-uses. CHAPTER ENDNOTES 1. The twelve month period spanning 2009. 2. Stated slightly differently, we could expect that any randomly selected thirty homes would generate about ten calls in a given year. 3. Again, this is not intended to imply that each officers annul work effort is limited to only 260.79 calls-for- service. Patrol officers respond to a far greater number of calls-for-service. Investigators may spend an entire year on only a few cases, while officers involved in management of the Department do not necessarily respond to any. The 260.79 calls-for-service is only an average and represent the composite calls-for-service workload distributed between the entire 235 sworn officers. 4. This is almost the same as the average of 365.0 square foot per officer of six cities (with greater than 85 officers)where RCS has conducted similar analyses. Those six municipalities include Huntington Beach, Anaheim, Ontario, Riverside, Chino and Corona. The average for twenty cities (of all sizes)is 353.6 square feet per sworn officer. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 36 Schedule 3.1 City of Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Amount Allocated Amount Allocated Identification of Projects and Cost Allocation to Ettmnat$ to General Plan Law Enforcement Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment �zr"sung peticreneies New Ltevel00 ent Estimated Percent Apportion ed <Percent Apportioned Line# Description Cast Need pollar Gost Need Dollar Cost LE-001 Additional Law Enforcement Facility Space $7,597,165 2:95% $224,116 97.05% $7,373,049 LE-002 Acquire Additional Response Vehicles $1,751,04.0 2,95°/6 $51,656 97.050 $1,699,384 LE-003 Acquire Additional Sworn Office Issued Equipment $327,690 2 95% $9,667 97.05% $318,023 LE-004 Acquire Law Enforcement Specialty Equipment $425,000 $12,538 97.05% $412,463 SUB-TOTAL ESTIMATED NEW PROJECT COSTS $10,100,8 55 2 95°Id $297,976 97,05% $9,802,919 LESS: Existing Law Enforcement Impact Fee Fund Balance 1 $0 0.'00°70 $0 0.00% $0 SUB-TOTAL ADJUSTMENTS $0 1 0.00% $0 Total - Law Enforcement Capital Project Needs $10,100,895 295a1 $297,976 97.05% $9,802,919 Forward,to Schedule 3.2' NOTES: 1. Costs distribution based upon a 10%sampling of Police Department"Cal ls-f or-Service,statistics. w J Revenue&Cost Specialists,L.L.C. Fullerton,CA 92831 Schedule 3.2 City of Huntington Beach 2010-11 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report General Plan Build-out Needs-based Development Impact Costs(Fees) Law Enforcement Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment Net lncrea5ed Units Calls Expecfed Percentage: Atlocatran of Cast Average Units Development Acres Units Gerteratron New Calls of Additional. Expansion Drsfributian< or Square. Impact Feae per U>fiit Prapased Land Use Bate for'Service Service Cglls Costs Par Acre.. FsetlACre or Square Foot Detached Dwelling Units(1) 295.0 1,749 0.341 597.18 7.07% $692,944 $2,349 5.93 $396 per Unit Attached Dwelling Units 111.2 5,307 0.702 3,725.83 44.10% $4,323,304 $38,879 47.72 $815 per Unit Mobile Home Dwelling Units 1.0 9 0.318 2,86 0.03% $3,319 $3,319 9.00 $369 per Unit Hotel/Motel Lodging Units 18.6 818 0.393 321.08 3.80% $372,568 $20,031 43.98 $455 per Unit Resort Lodging Units 9.3 535 0.459 245.35 2.90% $284,694 $30,612 57.53 $532 per Unit Commercial/Office Uses 39.8 2,417,000 0.897 2,168.07 25.66% $2,515,742 $63,210 60,729 $1.041 per S.F. Ind ustrial/M anuf actu ring Use 187.0 3,638,000 0.381 1,387.80 16.43% $1.610,348 $8,611 19,455 $0.443 per SF TOTAL' 661 9 - 8,44$.17 104 0Q°/n $9$02 91'9 in Total Law Entorcernent Capta}Neetls to Complete 5yste': w 00 Fullerton,CA 92831 Revenue&Cost Specialists,L.L.C. Schedule 3.3 City of Huntington Beach 2010-11 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Community Financial Commitment or Equity-based Proportionality Test Fees Lase Enforcement Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment L7evelaped Calf Existing Percentage Alfocation of Distrfbutlbn. Average Units Current Financial Acres Units :' Generation Galls for of:Exlsting Mfrastructure of"Equity"' &,square Gommitrnent per Unit Proposed Lend Use Rate Service Service Calls "€quity" per Acre Feig dre or Square Foot. Detached Dwelling Units(1) 6,436.0 38,616 0.341 13,185.0 22.170/a $15,793,603 $2,454 6.00 $409 per Unit Attached Dwelling Units 1,805.4 36,108 0.702 25,350.0 42.621/10 $30,365,403 $16,819 20.00 $841 per Unit Mobile Home Dwelling Units 204.6 2,865 0.318 910.0 1.530/a $1,090,040 $5,328 14.00 $380 per Unit Hotel/Motel Lodging Units 33.4 1,070 0.393 420.0 0.71% $503,096 $15,063 32.04 $470 per Unit Resort Lodging Units 20.2 809 0.459 371.0 0.62% $444,401 $22,000 40.05 $549 per Unit Commercial/Office Uses 841.9 12,836,000 0.897 11,514.0 19.36% $13,792,002 $16,382 1 15,246 $1.074 per S.F. Ind ustrial/M anufactu ring Use 930.3 20,261,000 0.381 7,729.0 12.99% $9,258,154 $9,952 21,779 sa457 per S.F. TOTAL: 10,271 8 - - 59,479;D 100 Otl°� $71,246,699 in Total Equity. in Current Law Enforcement Assets -.. $5:3,423,178 in Equity in Current Law Enforcement Facilities. $f2,640,310 in Equity in Current Law Enforcement Vehicles $3,027,41.0 in Equity in F)cisting SpecialfyjElectronic Equipment t/nits oc Calls for Annual Calls $2,155,8(}i in Equit In Current Law Enforcement Officer Equipment. land Use Acres` Servrce Per Unit $0 in:Ex Law Enform ceent.l'mpact Fee Fun d. Balance. Detached Dwelling Units 38,616 13,1 85 0.341 Attached Dwelling Units 36,108 25,350 0.702 Mobile Home Units 2,865 910 0.318 Hotel/Motel Units 1,070 420 0.393 Resort Units 809 371 0.459 Commercial/Office KSF 12,836 11,514 0.897 Industrial KSF 20,261 7,729 0.381 w Revenue&Cost Specialists,L.L.G. Fullerton,CA 92831 Chapter 4 Fire Suppression/Medic Facilities, Vehicles, and ]Equipment The Existing Fire Suppression/Medic Infrastructure, The Fire Department responds to calls for service from eight existing stations and trains at a facility consisting of a training (and drying) tower,classrooms,offices and support areas with specialty situation training mock-up implements. There is also a storage facility for reserve vehicles. The fire facilities are detailed as follows: Fire Station #1 (Gothard) is a 10,200 square foot facility on parcel that is just under an acre (42,166 square feet) and is located at 18311 Gothard Street. Fire Station #2 (Murdy) is a 11,500 square foot three-bays wide by two vehicles deep facility also on a 42,166 square foot parcel at 16221 Gothard Street. Fire Station #3 (Bushard) is a one-bay wide by one-vehicle deep, 5,700 square foot facility located on a 12,980 square foot parcel located at 19711 Bushard Street. Fire Station #4 (Magnolia) is a 5,702 square foot, one-bay wide by one-vehicle deep facility located on a 21,780 square foot parcel located at 21441 Magnolia Street. Fire Station#5 (Lake) is a 11,508 square foot, three-bays wide by two-vehicles deep facility on a 14,200 square foot parcel located at 530 Lake Street. Fire Station#6 (Edwards) is a 13,000 square foot, three-bays wide by two-vehicles deep facility located on a 208,478 square foot parcel located at 18591 Edwards Street. Fire Station #7 (Warner) is an 8,750 square foot, two-bays wide by one-vehicle deep facility located on a 53,273 square foot parcel at 3831 Warner Avenue. Fire Station #8 (Heil) is a 5,712 square foot, two-bays wide by one-vehicle deep station on a 10,280 square foot parcel located at 5891 Heil Avenue. The Training Facility is also located at 18301 Gothard next to Station#1 on a 77,580 square foot portion of a City parcel and consists of 7,081 square feet of classrooms and offices. The site also has numerous training exercise implements and a drafting pool. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 40 Chapter 4 Fire SuppressionlMedic Facilities Vehicles and Equipment Reserve Vehicle Storage Building - The facility is 2,525 square foot storage building and is located behind Fire Station#1 (Gothard). The land and replacement construction cost of the existing stations and training facilities is approximately $52,999,718. Not surprisingly, the City also has a sizable fleet of City-owned response and prevention units (and equipment) consisting of, • Four front line and three reserve ambulances; • Two front line ladder trucks, one aerial platform and a large tiller ladder truck and one reserve tiller ladder truck; • Eight front-line and four reserve engines; • Two Battalion Chief incident command vehicles; • Seven utility pick-up trucks of varying sizes (utility and specialty support); • Three specialty vehicles, a decontamination vehicle, a HazMat vehicle and Light/Air support vehicle; and, • Twenty-two administrative, inspection and investigation sedans. The total investment in the Department's vehicle compliment is about $9,237,000. The City's investment in assigned fire fighter equipment is approximately $1,010,202 at$7,595.50 for each of the 133 sworn fire fighters. The City has also acquired approximately $537,780 in computers/Electronic equipment. There is no existing Fire Suppression/Medic Facilities,Vehicle and Equipment Impact Fee Fund thus no current year-end fund balance. The current equity of the stations, parcels, specialty equipment and the response fleet is estimated to be$63,784,700. The sale of Station#8 (Heil), to allow it to be relocated, decreases this figure by a net $2,550,473 to $61,234,227. This figure represents what it would cost to establish the existing eight station(along with the reserve vehicle and training facilities) response capability at current vehicle, equipment, land acquisition and facility construction costs. The relevance of this figure will be established later in this Chapter. Demand Upon Infrastructure Created by the Development of Under or Undeveloped Parcels. While it can be said that numerous factors are considered when determining the number of and location of fire stations in any city, it can be stated without any logical argument that all new(net) private development in the City will have an effect on the City's current ability to respond to fire, medic, and emergency calls-for-service. The effect, simplified but not trivialized, is twofold. Initially, each new residential and business development will create, on average, more calls-for- service increasing the likelihood of simultaneous (and thus competing) calls-for-service. Additionally, as development spreads further from any existing station or stations, as large-scale development is often likely to do, the distances (and thus response times)will increase, taking the existing engine companies out-of-service for greater lengths of time. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 41 Chapter 4 Fire Suppression/Medic Facilities Vehicles and Equipment The capacity of any fire station to respond to calls-for-service is finite and will ultimately reach practical limits (through a combination of call-frequency and total time on that call). When that station's capacity is exceeded,the level-of-service afforded to existing development will be greatly diminished. Or stated in another way, if development continues without the addition of fire stations (additional capacity), the existing station will be overwhelmed (new demand), making a timely response for emergency service less likely. That is to say, the existing engine companies may not be available to respond to your needs as they may be out-of-service on a call in a different part of the community. The Purpose of the Fee. The purpose of the fee is to collect proportional financial contributions from new development to pay for additional fire suppression/medic facilities, vehicles and specialty equipment. In order to be able to continue to be able to respond to an ever-increasing number of expected calls, the Fire Department staff has determined the need for the relocation of one new station(as opposed to adding a ninth) and an expansion of one existing station. Having the right type and inventory of fire stations in the right locations enables the City's policy makers to house fire fighters, apparatus, and equipment in a rational way for maximum use of resources. Conversely, the penalties are high and extremely visible, for inadequate fire response capacity. Adverse effects are felt by the City's fire staff, the council, and indeed by the existing taxpayers. With poor response capacity response times, (via distance or out-of-service due to a previous call), can become excessive and if a tragedy occurs, the incident will be well publicized. Often, response time is mistakenly referred to for only the first-in unit. This can be a grave error. More correctly, response time must consider the time necessary to assemble all of the fire resources necessary to place the incident under control. If the first unit arrives within five minutes but cannot provide the necessary water flow,undertake entry,or perform the needed functions due to a lack of staffing, the five minute response becomes insignificant and irrelevant. Thus an increase in the number and type of response vehicles is also necessary to match and equip the needed additional staff. The following sections identify the manner in which the City plans to meet the demands of additional calls-for-service and can thus accommodate new development. The Use of the Fee. The development impact fee would be collected as the development occurs at some point of the development review process determined by the City. As the development occurs, the impact is generated. The collected fees would be put to use to acquire the additional fire-fighters' facilities necessary to respond to additional calls-for-service, necessary to avoid reducing the capability of responding to calls from the existing community. These fees will be used to finance the construction or acquisition of fire suppression/medic facilities,vehicles and specialty equipment (identified in the companion Master Facilities Plan) that have been identified as necessary to accommodate the anticipated (and planned for) development identified in Table 2-1. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 42 Chapter 4 Fire Suppression/Medic Facilities Vehicles, and Equipment The proposed fire suppression/medic facilities and equipment that are necessary to accommodate the anticipated(and planned for) in Table 2-1 are identified in the companion document the Master Facilities Plan. It is important to note that the fees would be used to acquire additional stations or expand existing stations (to increase the response capacity of that station)and increase the number of emergency response vehicles. Conversely, the Fire Suppression/Medic Facilities, Vehicles, and Equipment Impact Fee receipts could not be used to simply repair any existing fire station or replace any existing emergency response vehicles. Additional facility capacity is planned to come on-line, as needed, as development creates additional demands beyond the existing capability (frequency and distance) of the existing stations. The six capital projects expansions proposed by the City's fire staff will cost a net $11,241,972. They are described briefly: FS-001-Relocate Station#8(Heil) -The proposed project involves the relocation of the existing station from it's current location on Heil Street just west of Springdale to a more northerly area near Graham Street, north of Edinger Street. The relocation is largely needed to meet the shifting and increasing demands resulting from the redevelopment/up-sizing of both the Downtown Specific Plan and the Beach/Edinger Specific Plan corridor. The proposed building would be a three-bay wide by two-vehicle deep facility. The project would need approximately an acre and a quarter. FS-002- Construct Station#8 (Heil) Apparatus Storage Facility -The reserve vehicle storage facility behind the existing Station#1 would need to be supplemented with a storage facility behind Station#8 as part of the above project but is not fully needed as result of the redevelopment of the two large specific plans. It is partly needed to accommodate existing reserve vehicles. FS-003 - Construct a Single Bay/Quarters At Station #4 (Magnolia) - The project will add 2,400 square feet to the station. The additional space would consist of an additional 1,600 two vehicle deep bay to house and additional engine company and an ambulance. FS-004 - Acquire an Additional Engine and Ambulance for Station #4 (Magnolia) - This project consists of the response vehicles in support of the Station#4 expansion. FS-005-Acquire an Additional Engine for Station#1 -This additional engine would be needed to assist in handling the additional call volume resulting from the development in both the Downtown Specific Plan and the southerly portion of the Beach/Edinger Specific Plan corridor. FS-006-Acquire an Additional Engine for Station#2-This additional engine would be needed to assist in accommodating additional call-for-service volume resulting from the development in the Beach/Edinger Specific Plan corridor. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 43 Chapter 4 Fire SuppressionlMedic Facilities Vehicles and E ui went The proposed projects and costs are identified on Schedule 4.1 and are detailed in the Master Facilities Plan. The total cost of completing the fire infrastructure system is $11,941,972, which is mitigated by the$700,000 offset anticipated by the sale of the Station#8, Heil for a net total of $11,241,972. There is no existing Fire Suppression/Medic Development Impact Fee fund thus no fund balance. The Relationship Between the Need for the Public Facility and the Type of Development Project. As noted in this report, residents and businesses will generate calls-for-service at different rates. Thus, there is a need to establish a specific schedule of development impact fees to finance the required expansion to the fire suppression/paramedic facilities et. al. needed to support.the development anticipated and identified in Table 2-1. Fire suppression/medic response standards extended to new development should be consistent with the fire response currently enjoyed by the City's existing citizens and business community by constructing new facilities, or the result will be a deterioration in the level-of-service provided both to the existing residents and future citizens and businesses within the City. It follows that it is appropriate to assess future development to contribute additional fire suppression/medic facilities, vehicles and equipment. To project the impact of future development on fire services, it was first necessary to quantify the current impact on services from each of the City's land uses. Then, a determination of the costs of future capital facilities necessary to meet this increased demand was made. The following section illustrates the relative impact from each land use on fire services and facilities. The Relationship Between the Need for the Public Facility and the Type of Development Project. As noted in this report, residents and businesses will generate calls-for-service at different rates. Thus, there is a need to establish a specific schedule of development impact fees to fund the fire suppression/paramedic facilities needed to support the development anticipated in Table 2-1. To meet that need, actual Fire Department calls-for-service records'were used to verify that differing land uses generate'differing numbers of calls. The data in this Chapter demonstrates those expected differences using data specific to City of Huntington Beach, The collected impact fees would be used to acquire equipment for additional fire fighters, vehicles and additional building space necessary to respond to the calls-for-service generated by private residential dwelling and business space. The Relationship Between the Amount of the Fee and the Cost of the Portion of the Facility Attributed to the Development Project. Each new development would finance a proportional amount of the expansion of the fire station/company response capacity, vehicle response fleet and specialty response/paramedic equipment and thus a proportional share of the costs. It is unlikely that any specific development will generate the need to construct the additional fire station, but each one will pay for their proportional demands on that expansion. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 44 Chapter 4 Fire SuppressionlMedic Facilities Vehicles and E ui went The beach/City right-of-way areas generated 195 calls for service. Of residential land uses, the occupants of an attached dwelling unit are less likely, by less than half as much, to require an emergency fire service response at 0.051 annual responses per unit, than the occupants of a detached dwelling unit at 0.123 annual responses per unit. Commercial/Office development is shown to generate 0.044 responses per 1,000 square feet of building pad, while industrial development generates a minimal response demand of 0.004 calls per 1,000 squarefeet of building pad. The lower demand by industrial uses over commercial/office uses should be expected given the greater density of employees and patrons in a commercial or office establishment when compared to an industrial business of similar building size. However, it should be noted that while there are fewer calls for industrial properties, significant specialty training is required to be prepared for industrial responses, (i.e., confined space and hazardous materials training). Table 4-2 indicates that, given the high density of rooms and accompanying facilities, an acre of resort development, creates the highest demand for fire services, thus the development impact fee for that land use is the highest, on an average acreage basis. Table 4-2 Calls-for-service by ]Land-use an Acre Basis Calls Units or Annuals;. , Land Use. per Unit KSF Calls per,.: or KSF per Acre Acre Detached Dwelling Units 0.123 6 0.74 Attached Dwelling Units 0.051 20 1.02 Mobile Home Dwelling Units 0.212 14 2.97 Hotel/Motel Lodging Units 0.048 32 1.53 Resort Lodging Units 0.106 40 4.25 Commercial/Office Uses (per KSF) 0.044 15,246 0.67 Industrial/Manufacturing Uses {KSF} 1 0.004 1 21,779 1 0.09 Based on the existing rate of responses by land use, the increased number of fire suppression/medic service responses generated by future residential, commercial/office and office Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 46 Chapter 4 Fire Suppression/Medic Facilities Vehicles and Equipment development was extrapolated. This was accomplished by multiplying the average responses per unit or 1,000 square feet (KSF), established in Table 4-1, by the number of anticipated dwelling units, commercial rooms or business KSF. Table 4-3, following, indicates the number of additional calls-for-service that could be anticipated from the development of currently vacant land within the City's planning area. Table 4-3 Additional Annual Fire Suppression/Medic Responses Generated by Future Anticipated Development Fire/Medic Potential Additional Land Use Responses Units Annual Fire Per UnitIKSP -; or.KSF' Responses . Detached Dwelling Units 0.123/unit 1,749 units 215.68 calls Attached Dwelling Units 0.051/unit 5,307 units 271.32 calls Mobile Home (in parks) 0.212/unit 9 units 1.91 calls Hotel/Motel Units 0.048/unit 818 units 38.99 calls Resort Lodging Units 0.106/unit 535 units 56.87 calls Commercial/Office Uses 0.044/KSF 2,417 KSF 106.39 calls Industrial Uses 0.040/KSF 3,638 KSF 14.72 calls Total - 705.88 calls Proposed Capital Expenses. The total cost of the required improvements to the City's investment of fire suppression/medic facilities, vehicles and specialty equipment was previously estimated to be $11,941,972 with an offset of$700,000 from the proceeds of sale of the to-be vacated Heil Station#8. Roughly 46.4% has been identified as required to serve the net new calls-for-service resulting from development or up-sizing due to redevelopment. Projects FS-001 through FS-006 are capacity-increasing and have been determined by City staff to be necessary to accommodate the anticipated additional calls-for-service from new development or for a more appropriate aerial unit. When this cast is distributed the various land-uses and the demands created by each, a proportional cost is determined,by development unit. Table 4-4, summarized from Schedule 4.2, indicates the proportional cost by land-use unit. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 47 Chapter 4 Fire SuppressionlMedic Facilities Vehicles, and EAuipment Table 4-4 General Plan Build-out Needs Fire Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment Development Impact Fees Allocation= Total Cost Land Use of Costs Per Unit SF o r Detached Dwelling Units $1,693,338 $968/Unit Attached Dwelling Units $2,130,176 $401/Unit Mobile Home Units (in arks) $14,996 $1,666/Unit Hotel/Motel Units $306,117 $374/Unit Resort Lodging Units $446,495 $835/Unit Commercial/Office Uses $835,285 $0.346/S.F. Industrial Uses $115,569 $0.032/S.F. Existing City Financial Commitment. The replacement value of the existing fire infrastructure (parcel and station, response fleet and related safety/specialty equipment) at a net $61,234,227 (includes the potential sale of the Heil Station) was referenced earlier in this Chapter. This represents the current investment or financial commitment by the existing community toward fire suppression/medic capability/capacity. When this figure is distributed over the existing development in the same manner as were the future costs, by the land use demands, an average investment, or financial commitment(or equity for that matter)per unit is determined. The results are summarized in Table 4-5 (from Schedule 4.3). As an example, each detached dwelling unit has "invested" over the lifetime of the City, about$922 (as identified in Table 4-5 following) into fire suppression/medic capital, an amount that is about 95% of the General Plan Build-out Needs- based Development Impact Fee schedule identified in the previous Table 4-4 and detailed in Schedule 4.3. The current community's commitment has established the eight response station capacities and was paid for through years of General Fund receipts. To allow future residents to benefit by use of all of the capital needs without contributing additional assets, could endanger the existing residents and businesses. Table 4-5, following, summarizes the distribution of the $ in replacement costs to the existing community, (Schedule 4.3 indicates this in greater detail). Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 48. Chapter 4 Fire SuppressionlMedic Facilities. Vehicles, and Equipment Table 4-5 Existing Fire Suppression/Medic Existing Community Financial Commitment Allocation Tatal Equity Land Use of E it .Per Uni or"SF Detached Dwelling Units $35,586,696 $922/Unit Attached Dwelling Units $13,795,263 $382/Unit Mobile Home Units (in arks) $4,536,145 $1,583/Unit Hotel/Motel Units $381,126 $356/Unit Resort Lodging Units $642,683 $792/Unit Commercial/Office Uses $4,222,277 $0.3291S.F. Industrial Uses $612,791 $0.030/S.F. Other (beach area) $1,457,246 NA Of importance is the fact that the Community Financial Commitment or Equity-based costs on Table 4-5 are just slightly higher, at roughly 105%, than the proposed General Plan Build-out- based impact fees as demonstrated in Table 4-4. This indicates that the City is just slightly behind in its cumulative and proportional investment in needed fire suppression/medic facilities, vehicles and equipment. RESULTING DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES Since the equity position of the existing community is slightly less than the General Plan Build-out Needs-based development impact fees necessary for expansion, the current Community Financial Commitment or Equity-based Proportionality Test-based Development Impact Fees, as identified in Table 4-5 and Schedule 4.3, would be the most equitable fee schedule to adopt. Resulting Development Impact Cost Distribution. The collection of the proposed development impact fee,through build-out would allow the City to provide a great deal(44.7%)of the proposed expansions and most of the equipment, but not all of it. It would fall about$6.0 million short of financing all of the required improvements attributed to new development. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 49 Chapter 4 Fire Suppression/Medic Facilities Vehicles and Equipment OTHER NOTES AND ISSUES 1. The City will need to monitor the approval of conditional uses within industrial zoned development where newly constructed industrial developments. These land uses are initially have the lower industrial use development impact fees imposed when constructed as "spec" buildings but end up being used, with a CUP, for commercial/office uses. These commercial/office uses generate far greater demand than the industrial uses. If left unchecked, the Fire Department, as well as other City services, will be faced with the greater demand from the actual commercial/office uses but will be left only with the collection of the far lower industrial use development impact fee rates. To avoid this under collection, the City should impose an impact fee representing the difference between the commercial/office development impact fee and the previously paid industrial land-use impact fee when a CUP is approved and tenant improvement plans are submitted indicating a commercial or office use. RECAP OF RECOMMENDED FIRE SUPPRESSION/MEDIC FACILITIES, VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES. • Adopt Schedule 4.3 General Plan Build-out Needs-based for the seven basic land-uses. CHAPTER ENDNOTES 1. The response data is generated from Department response incident data used to complete the annual National Fire Incident Report(NFIR's). Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 50 Schedule 4.1 City of Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Construction Needs; Construction(Creeds Identification of Projects and Cost Allocation Supported by Gerterated by Ncry ? Fire Suppression/Medic Facilities and Vehicles Other Resources Development. estimated Percent Apportia7i)ed Percent AppOrtfOnerl In Descriptran Cast Need ltollar Cost Need DallarCast' FS-001 Relocate Station#8(Heil) $7,169,470 50p0°/4 $3,584,735 50.00°% $3,584,735 FS-002 Construct Second Apparatus Storage Facility(@ Heil Station) $1,716,044 75:00°lo $1,287,033 25.00% $429,011 FS-003 Add Bay/Quarters at Station#4(Magnolia) $1,266,458 5b 00°4 $633,229 50,00°% $633,229 FS-004 Acquire Engine Company and Ambulance for Station#4(Magnolia) $740,000 5fl 00°(4 $370,000 50.000/0 $370,000 FS-005 Acquire Engine Company for Station#1 (Gothard) $525,000 50 00% $262,500 50.00% $262,500 FS-006 Acquire Engine Company for Station#2(Murdy) $525,000 50 00°4 $262,500 50.00% $262,500 SUB-TOTAL ESTIMATED NEW PROJECT COSTS $11,941,972 53596/6 $6,399,997 46.41% $5,541,975 LESS: Existing Fire Suppression Impact Fee Fund Balance $0 100 OOnlo $0 0.00% $0 Sale of Property(Heil Station) ($700,000) 10000°l4 ($700,000) 0.00% $0 SUB-TOTAL ADJUSTMENTS ($700,000} 4:k 4 ($700,000) 0.00% $0 Total-Fire Suppression/Medic Capital Project Needs $11,241,972 5b0%4 $5,699,997 49.300/o $5,541,975 _ Fr'orwardtoSch..6000.4_21' NOTES: 1.The cost distribution is based upon annual Fire Department"Calls-for-Service"statistics(NFIRs). v, Revenue&Cost Specialists,L.L.C. Fullerton, CA 92831 Schedule 4.2 City of Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report General Plan Build-out Needs-based Development Impact Costs(Fees) Fire Suppression/Medic Facilities and Vehicles Undevelo ped Galt Fzpacted Percentage Al/acation of Cost Average Units l7eveloprrrent 7fcres Units Generation NSW Gails of,4dditional Exparr&ion DtStrlbution or Square Irrrpact Fee per Unit ProposeclL'anp Use Hate for SerViCe Service Calls Costs Per Acre,;;; FeeL"Acre. ar Square f oot: Detached Dwelling Units(1) 295.00 1,749 0.123 215.68 30.550/b $12693,338 $5,740 5.93 $968 per Unit Attached Dwelling Units 111.20 5,307 0.051 271.32 38.44% $2,130,176 $19,156 47.72 $401 per Unit Mobile Home Dwelling Units 1.00 9 0.212 1.91 0.27% $14,996 $14,996 9.00 $1,666 per Unit Hotel/Motel Lodging Units 18.60 1 818 0.048 38.99 5.520/b $306,117 $16,458 43.98 $374 per Unit Resort Lodging Units 9.30 535 0.106 56.87 8.06% $446,496 $48,010 57.53 $835 per Unit Commercial/Office Uses 39.80 2,4171000 1 0.044 106.39 15.070/b $835,285 $20,987 60,729 $0.346 per S.F. Industrial/Manufacturing Use 187.00 3,638,000 0.004 14.72 2.090/c $115,569 $618 19,455 $0032 per SF TOTAL 661,90 705:88 100.i)0°rO $5,541,975 in Total Fire:Suppre5sion Capital Needs to finis in.�sh System to N Fullerton,CA 92831 Revenue&Cost Specialists,L.L.C. Schedule 4.3 City of Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Community Financial Commitment or Equity-based Proportionality Test Fees Fire Suppression/Medic Facilities and Vehicles Developed Call Existing Percentage. Allocation af; 17isfrlbution Average Units Current Ftnancral Acres Units Gerteratian Calls for of Existing.:. Infrastructure of"E"quity" of Square Coinmifmant per Unit ' Proposed Land Use; bate Service Service Galls "Equity" perAcre FeetlAem or Square Foot Detached Dwelling Units(1) 6,436.00 38,616 0.123 4,762.0 58.12o/a $35,586,696 $5,529 6.00 $922 per Unit Attached Dwelling Units 1,805.40 36,108 0.051 1,846.0 22.53% $13,795,263 $7,641 20.00 $382 per Unit Mobile Home Dwelling Units 204.60 2,865 0.212 607.0 7.41 a/o $4,536,145 $22,171 14.00 $1,583 per Unit Hotel/Motel Lodging Units 33.40 1,070 0.048 51.0 0.62a/a $381,126 $11,411 32.04 $356 per Unit Resort Lodging Units 20.20 809 0.106 86.0 1.05O/D $642,683 $31,816 40.05 $794 per Unit Commercial/Office Uses 841.90 12,836,000 0.044 565.0 6.900/0 $4,222,277 $5,015 15,246 $0.329 per S.F. IndustrialiManufacturing USE 930.30 20,261,000 0.004 82.0 1.000 $612,791 $659 21,779 $0.030 per S.F Beach Area 195.0 2.38Wo $1,457,246 TC?TAL 10,27;1.80 - 8,194 0 ; 100A 6 $6`I;,234,227 in Total 1=qu!ty In Current l7ire,Suppression Assets $52,999,71$ in r=xisting Fire Suppression Facilities, {$3,25t3.473) Less,Heil Station tt8{to be relocated)_`< i700,00,0 Proceeds of Saie of Heil Station#$ $9,23T000 in Fisting Fire Suppression Vehicles:; 4537,78U in Existing Computer/Electronic Fire Equipment 7.7 $1 010,202 in aisting Fire-fcghter Assigned Egtr prnent $U in Existi ng Firs Suppression Impact Fee Fund Bap to w Revenue&Cost Specialists, L.L.C. Fullerton,CA 92831 Chapter 5 Circulation (Streets, Signals and Bridges) System The following Chapter will identify the street, traffic signal and bridge improvements(henceforth referred to as the Circulation System)planned for the City through General Plan Build-out of the existing City limits as identified in the Land-use Database Table in Chapter 2. RCS recommends the continuation of the City's comprehensive Circulation System Development Impact Fee, i.e.,a fee that combines the required street, signal and bridge expansions, all of which are related to the movement of primarily vehicles. The reasons are practical in that combining these three components will provide greater flexibility in establishing priorities in what is essentially a singular circulation issue with a common nexus, traffic or as stated in trip-mile generation. It is fairly common that a single circulation system capital improvement project will involve both a street improvement (or intersection) and signal improvement. The Existing Circulation System. The City currently has and maintains an extensive system of roadways available for transportation of goods and services, as well as for educational, recreational, and social purposes. Streets that fall under the jurisdiction of City of Huntington Beach are classified as one of four types of roadways for the purposes of this Report. Roadways are defined in part (in the City's General Plan Circulation Element)' as: • Freeway-Very high mobility with limited access to arterial streets and no access to adjacent land use. [The City is not responsible for the construction of freeways but will likely have to financially assist CALTRANS with any alteration to an existing access/egress ramps]. a Arterial - High mobility with access to collectors, some access to local streets and major traffic generators. ® Collector-Limited mobility connecting local streets with arterials; also provides good access to adjacent land uses. ® Local -Limited mobility but provides very good access to adjacent land uses and collector streets. Typically, locals would be constructed upon the developer's private property and generally only benefits those new residential or business buildings. Assuming that the design criterion has been met and that the right-of-way improvements meet inspection requirements, the City then accepts Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 54 Chapter 5 Circulation (Streets Signals, and Bridges) System the local street improvements along with the responsibility to maintain the improvement in perpetuity. In short, local streets are of little benefit to the Citywide circulation system, and these costs are not shared by other developers, as the collector and arterial system improvements are. For these reasons, the cost of all local streets is excluded from the Circulation System Development Impact Fee calculation. Demand Upon Infrastructure Created by the Development of Undeveloped Parcels. Undeveloped parcels create few trip-ends beyond an occasional visit to the site for weed abatement purposes or to consider a sale or development of the vacant parcel. None of these trip-ends are on a routine basis. However, a developed parcel will generate a statistically predictable number of trip-ends, depending upon the specific land use of the development. Thus it can be stated that a vacant parcel, when developed into a specific use, i.e., residential or business, will generate more traffic than it did when it was vacant. Similarly, a change in the use of the parcel may also increase the number of daily trip-ends. A good example would be the demolition of a low trip-generating insurance office which is reconstructed as a new high trip-generating fast-food restaurant. All new development contributes to cumulative traffic impacts, which are difficult to measure and mitigate on a project-by-project, basis but which have significant and widespread cumulative impacts on the City's existing road system. Factors that will increase the competition for existing lane miles (and freeway crossings) include, (as measured by trip-miles defined later in Chapter text) the following: B An increase in the City's full-time population through the construction of about 7,065 additional dwelling units contributing approximately 183,270 new trip-miles daily or just more than 49.4% of the newly expected daily trip-miles. e The construction of 1,353 commercial lodging units (resort and hotel/motel) will generate 26,882 daily trip-miles, not quite 7.3% of the total new trip-miles annually. ® The construction of private commercial and office uses on the (net) 40 acres currently identified as undeveloped commercial or office uses will generate 78,553 new daily trip- miles, or about 21.2% of the total new trip-miles expected at General Plan build-out. This figure could vary significantly depending upon the type of commercial uses constructed and possible zoning changes or conditional use permits issued. ® The addition of 187 acres of industrial development(and Institutional Uses) generating the potential for an additional 82,219 daily trip-miles,just under a quarter of the total new trip-miles at 22.1%Q. Again, it is possible that some parcels zoned for industrial uses will end up being commercial uses after obtaining a Conditional Use Permit. There Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 55 Chapter S Circulation (Streets Signals and Bridges) System are likely many existing industrial buildings contiguous to the City's many arterials and collectors that have become commercial uses. When all (or most) of the available vacant land is developed, the City can expect an additional 370,924 daily trip-miles. For perspective,the City currently experiences approximately 3,135,213 daily trip-miles from the existing residences and businesses. The 370,924 anticipated trip-miles represents an approximate 11.8% increase over the existing 3,135,213 daily trip-miles. The Purpose of the Fee. The purpose of the fee is to collect proportional contributions from new development to pay for additional circulation system capacity and by creating more lane miles or more efficient lane miles with which to accommodate the additional trip-miles created by and anticipated from new development. Additionally there are circulation projects required to alter existing arterials, collectors or intersections that currently exist, but due to additional trip-miles are becoming ineffective at moving vehicles. An example would be the intersection of Beach Boulevard and Edinger Avenue (ST-001). This project is required because additional citizens and business-owners will use the existing intersections along with the current users rendering it, again, ineffective at moving traffic at a reasonable pace, primarily during the a.m. and p.m. peak hour of traffic. Acceptable traffic paces can be maintained with a combination of road widening, freeway access/egress, proper signalization and turn lane channelization. The simple answer to increasing demand for lane miles is to construct additional lane miles. Unfortunately there are little if any opportunities to construct additional lane miles of arterials or collectors within the City's limits without the impractical and acquisition of very expensive right-of-way. Thus, given the size of City of Huntington Beach and the magnitude of growth projected in this Report,numerous intersection improvements and construction of technologically improved traffic signals will be the primary methodology employed by the City to avoid congestion and gridlock in the future. Traffic planners have long known that the critical constraint in a typical roadway network is usually not the roadway itself but the many intersections of arterial and collector roadways. While the street capacity may be theoretically adequate to carry traffic volumes at build-out, motorists may experience congestion and even gridlock at the intersections of the arterial/collector. While the City will likely undertake, some street widening projects where possible, the installation of traffic signals and lane reconfiguration at critical intersections in the City is perhaps a more important component of traffic circulation. The importance of traffic signals is twofold. First, the City can build only so many major collector streets and there are limits as to how wide they can be, indeed there are no more practical opportunities for additional lane-miles. Second,a north-south arterial/collector,by definition,will intersect with an east-west arterial/collector assuring that someone will have to stop, either at a stop sign or a traffic signal, adding time to their tasks. The traffic carrying capacity of each Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 56 Chanter 5 Circulation (Streets Signals and Bridges) System collector can only be maximized by assuring orderly flow of traffic by efficient signalization of those intersecting arterial/collector roadways. None of this is intended to eliminate the time-honored practice of the developer constructing the full width roadway and being reimbursed for the portion greater than would otherwise be required of the developer. This impact fee calculation and resulting fee collection would simply improve the reimbursement capability. The City's Master Facilities Plan Circulation System section identifies fifteen circulation projects costing a net$28,539,780. The individual projects and costs are identified on Schedule 5.1 at the end of the Chapter and detailed in the Master Facilities Plan. A total of$26,608,410 has been identified by staff as capacity increasing, leaving $1,929,390 to be supported by other financial resources such as assessment districts, State(CALTRANS)assistance, General Funds,etc. There is an existing Circulation System Development Impact Fee Fund balance of$200,000 leaving some $1,469,370 with unidentified revenue sources. The Use of the Fee. The continued collection of the Circulation System Development Impact Fee would be used to construct the projects (or portions of projects) identified in Schedule 5.1 at the conclusion of this Chapter's text. The collected fees will be used to create additional lane miles with which to accommodate the additional 370,924 additional daily trip-miles that will be generated by the scope of development identified in Table 2-1. Nineteen specific signal modification/intersection modification improvement projects have been included in the list of proposed projects. They include: Beach Boulevard - Seven signal modification/intersection improvement projects would be constructed along Beach Boulevard at the intersections with Edinger, Heil, Warner, Slater, Talbert, Garfield, and Yorktown Avenues. Pacific Coast Highway - Three signal modification/intersection improvement projects would improve traffic flow along Pacific Coast Highway at Warner Avenue, Goldenwest and Brookhurst Streets. Newland Street - Three signal modification/intersection improvement projects along Newland Street include the intersections with Talbert, Warner and Yorktown Avenues. Goldenwest Street - There are two such projects planned at the intersections of Goldwest Street with Bolsa and Slater Avenues. Gothard Street There are also two signal/intersection improvement projects planned at the intersection of Gothard Street with Slater and Talbert. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 57 Chapter 5 Circulation (Streets Signals and Bridges) System There are two more signal improvement projects, one at the intersection of Ward Street and Garfield Avenue and one at Brookhurst Street and Adams Avenue as well as a few minor intersection improvements that will be identified as development projects arise. There is a minor amount for a facility addition at the City yard to store replacement signal equipment. The Relationship Between the Use of the Fee and the Type of Development Paving the Fee. There is a reasonable relationship between the fees' use and the types of projects on which the fees are imposed. The fees will be used to provide for a fair share contribution for transportation system improvements, including various street, signal and bridge project improvements needed to accommodate additional development of residential units and business square feet. The development impact fee to be imposed and collected will be based on the ratio of projected number of trip-miles the proposed development will generate in relationship to the total 370,924 additional projected trip-miles at General Plan build-out. Any amount imposed as a Circulation System Development Impact Fee will continue to be placed in a separate fund as the current City practice (collecting interest) and is to be used only on the projects identified on Schedule 5.1 as development-related. From time to time the City may require an applicant of a private project to construct a street or signal improvement(or portion thereof) that is on the list of required improvements at the end of this Chapter. This method is often undertaken to expedite the project at the request of the applicant/developer. The developer should receive a credit representing the cost of those required improvements, against their mathematically calculated impact fee, for any money expended on this required improvement against any circulation projects. Should one not exist, a portion of the ordinance addressing the issue of credits should be prepared and added to the City of Huntington Beach Municipal Code. The following table identifies some of the key system attributes of the Circulation System. The attributes identify that approximately 89.4% of the total trip-miles at "build-out" are represented by the existing community who have contributed a similar, but larger amount(96.2%) of the cost of the entire system. The traffic system yet to be built represents about 3.9% of the total trip-mile supporting system when the City is fully developed. Since there is a finite amount of room for additional major roads, traffic signals must be constructed at the intersection of major arterials. All of this generally indicates that the City is "on target" in terms of the construction of a circulation infrastructure. Or another way to state it is that the current drivers will generate 89.4% of the ultimate "build-out" trip-miles, have constructed about 96.2%, (in terms of cost) of the required infrastructure. It would be appropriate to assume that the remaining 10.6% of the traffic trip-mile generators contribute the remaining 3.9% of the infrastructure. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 58 Chapter 5 Circulation Streets Signals, and Brld es stem [This space left vacant to place the following table on a single page]. Table 5-1 Comparison of Circulation System Attributes Infrastructure Existing Future Total, at Factor Community Community Bud-out„ Number of Trip-miles 3,135,213 370,924 3,506,137 Percentage of Total 89 4% 10.6% 100.0% Cost of Total System $533,539,375 $26,608,410 $560,147,785 . 7771 Percentage of Total , 95.2. 4.8% 100.0% The Relationship Between the Need for the Facility and the Type of Development Project. There is a reasonable relationship between the need for the proposed circulation projects and the types of developments on which the fees would be imposed. New residents and new business owners will utilize the community's existing circulation system which will then require a number of street, signal and bridge improvements to maintain the existing level-of-service (LOS) enjoyed by the existing community. Schedule 5.1 identifies the additional traffic to be generated by new development, by type of development. The technical volume, Trip Generation (Manual) 7th Edition,produced by the Institute of Traffic Engineers,has been used to identify part of the nexus, or the relationship between the type of development and the projected number of trips that development will generate. The nexus will be based upon the combined factors of trip frequency and trip distance. New Trip Adjustment for Pass-by or Diverted Trips (trip frequency factors). Schedule 5.2 contains a sub-schedule that identifies adjustments to new total trip-ends. As an example, an acre of general commercial use would be expected, on average, to generate about 381 daily trip-ends. However, approximately 15% of those trip-ends, or about 57 trip-ends per day, are pass-by trip- ends, in that, the trip-end is not truly an end but is actually a one in a series of stops, i.e. at various commercial establishments, with a different location such as a residence as the final trip- end or destination of the series of trip-ends. In order to be considered a pass-by trip, the location of the stop must be contiguous to the generator' route, i.e. the route that would have been used even if the temporary stop had not been made 4. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) indicates that: Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 59 Char S Circulation (Streets Signals and Bridges) System Thus when forecasted trips based upon the trip generation rates are distributed to the adjacent streets, some reduction is made to account for those trips already there that will be attracted to the proposed development.' Pass-by trip-ends are fully adjusted (reduced at 100%) from the average trip-ends (per day) generated by the eleven land uses identified in Schedules 5.2 and 5.3. A diverted trip is similar to a pass-by trip-end in that it is an extra stop between, as an example, a motorist's work site and his or her residence. A diverted trip differs slightly in that it requires a minor deviation from the normal generator route and the temporary stop. In short, a diverted trip-end creates a separate side trip using additional (and different) lane miles from that of the normal route from the motorist's place of employment and his or her home 6. These trip-ends increase the traffic volume from the generator route only for brief distances. The ITE adds that diverted trips. are produced from traffic volume on roadways within the vicinity of the generator(route) and require a diversion from that roadway to another roadway with access to the site. These roadways could include streets or freeways adjacent to the generator but without access to the generator.' These diverted trip-ends will be adjusted(reduced at an assumed 50%) from the full trip-end count for each of the land uses identified in the Chapter 2. Again,the trip-end adjustment schedule at the bottom of Schedule 5.2 indicates the total daily trip- ends reduced by the number of pass-by trips(at 100%) and diverted trips (at 50%). The trip pass- by and diversion percentages were generated by a study conducted by the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) in conjunction with various U.S. and California agencies'. Average Trip Distances by Land Use (trip distance factors). Additionally, the same SANDAG data schedule referenced above provides information for a trip distance factor component to the nexus. Based upon that data,a trip to an industrial work-site has the greatest distance at 9.0 miles. A trip to an office average 8.8 miles, a residential trip averages 7.9 miles, a trip from a hotel or motel (once in residence) averages 7.6 miles, and an average trip to a commercial site is the shortest at 4.3 miles. This indicates that drivers are generally willing travel further distances to work and for treatment at medical offices than they are to shop. Both frequency (trip-ends) and distances(average miles per trip)have been combined into the nexus by combining frequency and distance, the two major factors of circulation master planing. When the trip frequency and trip distance factors are combined, a 200-unit attached dwelling residential specific plan would generate about 4,620 daily trip-miles (200 unit's X 23.1 daily trip- Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 60 Chapter 5 Circulation (Streets. Signals, and Brides} System miles per unit)and a ten-acre commercial-retail development would generate 4,955 daily trip-miles (10 acres X 32.6 trip-miles/K.S.F. X 15,246/1,000 S.F.), Each would pay their proportionate share of the total 370,924 newly created trip-miles expected at General Plan build-out. In the case of the detached dwelling development, the 4,620 daily trip-miles generated by the new 200 attached dwellings represents about 1.25% of the 370,924 total new trip-miles anticipated at build- out, thus they would be required to contribute financially to the DIF fund or construct projects on the DIF list to an amount equal to 1.49% of the total development-related project costs. The 4,955 daily trip-miles generated by the ten acres of commercial development represent 1.34% of the total 370,924 new trip-miles anticipated at build-out. As a result they would be required to contribute financially to the DIF fund or construct projects on the DIF list to an amount equal to 1.34% of the total development-related project costs. The Relationship Between the Amount of the Fee and the Cost of the portion of the Facility Attributed to the Development Project. Again, the calculation of the Circulation System Development Impact Fee is based upon the recognition that differing types of developments generate differing numbers of trip-ends. The fee is based upon the projected number of trip-miles generated by the proposed private development project. Circulation System Development Impact fee receipts will be accumulated until they reach the amount necessary to construct a meaningful project to alleviate or mitigate the demands of those new developments. Table 5-2 (summarized from Schedule 5.2) following, identifies the General Plan Build-out based Circulation System Impact Fee Schedule based upon the net $26,608,410 in identified capacity-increasing projects. Table 5-2 General Plan Build-out Based Circulation System Impact Fees Allocation Total Cost Land Use of;Costs... Per Unit or:SF Detached Dwelling Units $4,341,072 $2,482/Unit Attached Dwelling Units $8,794,196 $1,657/Unit Mobile Horne Units (in arks) $11,693 $1,299/Unit Hotel/Motel Units $903,562 $1,105/Unit Resort Lodging Units $1,024,741 $1,915/Unit Commercial/Office Uses $5,635,037 $2.331/S.F. Industrial/Manufacturing Uses $5,898,019 $1.621/S.F. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 61 Chapter S Circulation (Streets Signals, and Bridges) System Again, adoption of this set of proposed fees would generate the total revenue necessary to construct a significant portion (about 93%) of the needed street, traffic signal and bridge construction projects. The shortfall is largely due to removing new "passthrough" trips from new development outside of the City limits from the calculation. These figures, however, need to be compared to the existing community financial commitment demonstrated by the existing circulation assets to identify the level of fairness in adopting this schedule of development impact fees. Proportionality Test. Table 5-3, following (and summarized from Schedule 5.3) identifies the assets of the existing system (at current construction and acquisition costs). The $533,539,375 consists of the existing $431.6 million in circulation plan arterial/collector streets, $96.8 million in traffic signals and intersection improvements and $5.0 million in major bridges inventory. There is also a$200,000 balance in the Circulation System Development Impact Fee fund balance. When the combined$533.6 million is distributed over the existing community, using the identical nexus factor used for distribution future costs, the existing community has contributed the following, on average, by land use: Table 5-3 Existing Circulation System Community Commitment Comparison Development Impact Fees Allocation Total Cast Land Use of Costs P'er Unit,:or SF Detached Dwelling Units $227,375,119 $5,888/Unit Attached Dwelling Units $141,943,317 $3,931/Unit Mobile Home Dwelling Units $8,824,837 $3,080/Unit Hotel/Motel Lodging Units $2,804,166 $2,621/Unit Resort Lodging Units $3,675,809 $4,544/Unit Commercial/Office Uses $70,9923 504 $5.531/S.F. Industrial/Manufacturin Uses $77,923,618 $3.846/S.F. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 62 1 Chapter S Circulation (Streets Signals and Bridges) System Of importance is that the existing community has contributed, on average, far more, (at nearly 237%)than would be required of future development to meet the General Plan build-out needs for all users. This indicates that there is no proportionality issue as the future community is being asked to contribute at a far lesser amount(at about 42%) than has been contributed by the existing community. Alternative Cost Methodology. A more precise calculation of costs for specific types of land uses (i.e., banks, hospitals, convalescent homes, etc.) can be determined by multiplying the average cost per trip of$71.74 by the applicable daily trip-mile rate. An example of this calculation can be found in Schedule 5.3 at the end of the Chapter and applied to Table 5-4, on the following page. These tables list trip-mile rates and costs for various residential, resort, industrial and commercial developments. A fee system based on a lengthy schedule of trip-mile rates theoretically provides greater accuracy and therefore greater equity in determining specific uses demand on the City's circulation system, but at the same time may increase the City's administrative costs to administer the fee. A more extensive listing of traffic generators by land use is available in Trip Generation as published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, New York, NY and SANDAG. [This space left vacant to place the following table on a single page]. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 63 Chapter 5 Circulation (Streets Signals and Bridges) System Table 5-4 Detail of Circulation System Financial Commitment-based Impact Fees for Specific Business Uses Adjusted Average Trip-end Additional Cost per Cost per 1,000 Square LAND USE Trip-ends Distance to Trip Trip-miles Trip--mile Feet or Dwelling Unit RESIDENTIAL LAND USES{per Unit):; Detached Dwelling 8.76 7.9 0.5 34.60 $71.74 $2,482.20 /Unit Apartment 6.15 79 0.5 24.3 $71.74 $1,743.28 /Unit Condaminium/Townhome 5.36 7.9 0.5 21.2 $71.74 $1,520.89 !Unit Mobile Home Dwelling 4.57 79 0.5 18.1 $71.74 $1,298.49 /Unit RWORTI WPJST(per Unit or Entty l3dox) Hotel 6.29 76 0.5 23.9 $71.74 $1,714.59 /Roam All Stites Hotel 3.77 7.6 0.51 14.3 1 $71.74 $1,025.88 IRaom Motel 4-M 76 0..51 16.51 $71.74 1 $1,183.71 /Room INDfI3TRtA1 (per 1,{lQ0 SF): General Ligbt Industrial 6.17 9.0 0.5 27.8 $71.74 $1,994.37 IKSF Heavy Industrial 5.97 9.0 0.5 26.9 $71.74 $1,929.81 IKSF Manufacturing 2.73 9.0 0.5 12.3 $71.74 $882.40 IKSF Warehousing 4.39 9.0 0.5 19.8 $71.74 $1,420.45 IKSF COMMERCIAL(per I;0011 SF);. Office Park 7.42 8.8 0.5 32.6 $71.74 $2,338.72 IKSF Research Park 5.01 8.8 0.5 22.0 $71.74 $1,578.28 IKSF Business Park 9.34 8.8 0.5 41.1 $71.74 $2,948.51 IKSF Bldg.MatefialslLamber Store 29.35 4.3 0.5 63.1 $71.74 $4,526.79 IKSF Garden Center 23.45 4.3 0.5 50.4 $71.74 $3,615.70 IKSF Movie Theater 2.47 4.3 0.5 5.3 $71.74 $380.22 IKSF Church 5.92 4.3 0.5 12.7 $71.74 $911.10 IKSF Medical Dental Office 22.21 8.8 0.5 977 $71.74 $7,009.00 IKSF General Office Building 7.16 8.8 0.5 31.5 $71.74 $2,259.81 IKSF j Shopping Center 30.20 4.3 0.5 64.9 $71.74 $4,655.93 IKSF 1Hospital 11.42 4.3 0.5 24.6 $71.74 $1,764.80 IKSF Discount Center 62.93 4.3 0.5 135.3 $71.74 $9,706.42 IKSF High-Turnover Restaurant 3.90 4.3 0.5 19.1 $71.74 $1,370.23 IKSF Convenience Market 43.57 4.3 0.5 93.7 $71.74 $6,722.04 IKSF walk-in Bank 13.97 4.3 0.51 30.0 1 $71.74 $2,152.20 IKSF Qtbe :(nut available per KSF') Cemetery(per acre) 3.07 4.3 0.5 6.6 $71.74 .$473.48 Mere Service Station/Market(avg) 107.69 4.3 0.5 231.5 $71.74 1 $16,607.81 IFPIDay(4) Service Station and Car Wash 99.35 4.3 0.5 213.6 $71 741 915.323.66 IFPIDay(4) NOTES: 1.AD =Average Daily Trips 3.Adjusted for Pass-by and Diverted Trips. 2.KSF=Thousand Square Feet of Gross Floor Area 4.FP/Day=per"Fueling Position"per day. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 64 Chapter 5 Circulation (Streets Signals and Bridges) System RESULTING DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES The contribution of the existing community as evidenced in Table 5-3, Community Financial Commitment-based Proportionality Test Fees is far greater than what is to asked of future development (Table 5-2) the General Plan Build-out Needs-based Development Impact Fee schedule is adequate and reasonable for adoption. It would be more than adequate for the usual and normal application to the seven broad land-uses. as the fairest schedule of impact fees. However, it is further recommended that there should also be the option for the engineering staff to apply the per trip-mile fee from Schedule 5.2 multiplied by the specific use Table 5-4 or the more extensive listing of traffic generators by land use(available in Trip Generation as published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, New York, N.Y.) multiplied by the SAND AG land- use trip distances. RECAP OF RECOMMENDED (LOCAL) CIRCULATION SYSTEM, VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES. • Adopt Schedule 5.2. for the seven basic new land-uses including the per Daily Trip-mile rate with standard ITE trip-end rates for the application to unusual or highly specific development proposals. • Adopt Table 5-4 for application on specific business uses as necessary by engineering staff, as well as the table at the bottom of Schedule 5.2 to allow City staff to calculate specific Circulation System DIFs, based upon ITE data not necessarily highlighted on Table 5-4. [This space left vacant to place the Chapter Endnotes on a single page]. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 65 Chapter 5 Circulation (&reets Signals and Bridges) System CHAPTER ENDN®TES 2.For complete definitions and standards, see the City of Huntington Beach General Plan Circulation Element as part of the Infrastructure and Community Services Chapter page III-CE-1. Further description of the components of the Element are on page III-CE-2 and III-CE-3. 3.The normal route between a daily work-site and the residence of the motorist. 4.As an example, a motorist travels the same route from work to home daily. On some number of occasions, the motorist stops at a market along the route to pick up some groceries. These stops at the market would be considered pass-by trips in that they do not generate an additional trip along that route. 5.Trip Generation, Institute of Traffic Engineers, 525 School Street, SW., Ste. 410, Washington D.C. 20024- 2729, Chapter III, Definition of Terms, Pass-by Trips, page I-7. 6.An example of a diverted trip would be a single trip where, along the way from work, a motorists evening drive home deviates from the normal route taken home to stop at perhaps a preferred grocery store, drop mail off at a post office and pick up a child from piano lesson before continuing home. Each of these three stops would be considered diverted trips. 7.Trip Generation, Institute of Traffic Engineers, 525 School Street, SW., Ste. 410, Washington D.C. 20024- 2729, Chapter III, Definitions of Terms, Diverted Linked Trips, I-5. 8.Traffic Generators, San Diego Association of Governments, 401 B Street, Suite 800, San Diego, CA 92101, Brief Guide to Traffic Generation Rates compiled in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, U.S. Department of Transportation, the California Department of Transportation and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. July 1995. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 66 Schedule 5.1 City of Huntington Reach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Construction Needs (,ctnstrttctlon'Neerls Identification of Projects and Cast Allocation Supported by That Increase Circulation(Streets, Signals and Rndges)System Other Resources Infrastructure Capacity; Estimated Percent Appnrtipned Percer+t Apportioned Line# Description Cnst Need L�QUarCast NOW, Dollar Cost , ST-001 Beach Boulevard and Edinger Avenue $600,000 25 DO°(o $150,000 75.00% $450,000 ST-002 Beach Boulevard and Heil Avenue $1,000,000 S.QD%a $50,000 95.000% $950,000 ST-003 Beach Boulevard and Warner Avenue $400,000 5 00q $20,000 95.000/0 $380,000 ST-004 Beach Boulevard and Slater Avenue $500,OD0 5.0Q°l° $25,000 95.00% $475,000 ST-005 Beach Boulevard and Talbert Avenue $1,000,000 38.00% $380,000 62.00% $620,000 ST-006 Beach Boulevard and Garfield Avenue $1,00D,D0D 5.0D%u $50,000 95 00% $950,000 ST-007 Beach Boulevard and Yorktown Avenue $500,000 5 009/6. $25,000 95.006/ $475,000 ST-008 Pacific Coast Highway and Warner Avenue $2,000,000 5 00°%a $100,000 95.00°/10 $1,900,000 ST-009 Pacific Coast Highway and Goldenwest Street $750,000 12 00°!0 $90,000 88.00/. $660,000 ST-010 Pacific Coast Highway and Brookhurst Street $750,000 5.006/,? $37,500 95.O0°7o $712,500 ST-011 Golden West Street and Bolsa Avenue $500,000 5.006/p $25,000 95.D0°!o $475,000 ST-012 Golden West Street and Slater Avenue $50,000 5.0WV0 $2,500 95;00c% $47,500 ST-013 Newland Street and Talbert Avenue $500,000 5.00 6 $25,000 95.0D° $475,000 ST-014 Newland Street and Warner Avenue $30,000 ,5.0M9/u $1,500 95.Q0°!° $28,500 ST-015 Newland Street and Yorktown Avenue $300,000 5.000/b $15,000 95,Q0% $285,000 ST-016 Gothard Street and Slater Avenue $500,000 5,00% $25,000 95.000/a $475,000 ST-017 Gothard Street and Talbert Avenue $264,000 5A0%u $13,200 95.0d°!o $250,800 ST-018 Ward Street and Garfield Avenue $8,800 5.00% $440 95.00% $8,360 ST-019 Brookhurst Street and Adams Avenue $10,000,000 5.Q0%a $SDD,OD0 95.D0°/av $9,5QO,QQQ ST-020 Miscellaneous Traffic SignalslIntersection Improvements $5,000,ODQ 5.000/0 $250,000 95.0D% $4,750,000 ST-021 Public Works Maintenance Building $2,820,000 7775 00°Ia $141,000 95.00% $2,679,000 ST-022 Public Works Maintenance Vehicles $65,000 5A0% $3,250 95.000/0 $61,750 SUB-TOTAL ESTIMATED NEW PROJECT COSTS $28,537,800 6.766/ $1,929,390 17 03,24%1 $26,6087410 LESS: Local Circulation Impact Fee Fund Balance ($2DD,D00) 1 Qt)_DD°/a ($200,00D) 0.40°Iu $D Support from Other Agencies ($260,020) iOD.OD4o ($260,020) Q.00g'o $0 SUB-TOTAL ADJUSTMENTS ($460,020) 100.00% ($460,020) 0.009/0 $D Total-Local Circulation-related Capital Project Needs $28,077,780 5 23°Zo $1,469 370 94.77% $26,608,410 Forward to Schedule 5.2: ,VOTES: ~�1.There are no notes_ Revenue&Cost Specialists, L.L.C. Fullerton,CA 92831 Schedule 5.2 City of Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report General Plan Build-out Needs-based Development Impact Costs(Fees) Circulation(Streets, Signals and Bridges)System 77777777 tlndeveloned Daily'Trip-end Atidrtlonal „ Percentage Allocation a Gost Average Units I Developrrient Acre Units Generation Daily of Addtiona! Expansion Distribution or Square Impact Fee per Unit Proposed Land Use Mate Trlp-miles Trip-miles Costs Per Acre FeetlAcre ar'Square Faot Detached Dwelling Units 295 1,749 34.60 60,515 16.31% $4,341,072 $14,715 5.93 $2,482 per Unit Attached Dwelling Units ill 5,307 23.10 122,592 33.050/0 $8,794,196 $79,084 47.72 $1,657 per Unit Mobile Home Dwelling U 1 9 18.10 163 0.040A $11,693 $11,693 9.00 $1,299 per Unit Hotel/Motel Lodging Unit 19 818 15.40 12,597 3.40% $903,652 $48,583 43.98 $1,105 per Unit Hotel/Mate!Lodging Unit 9 535 26.70 14,285 3.85% $1,024,741 $110,187 57.53 $1,915 per Unit Commercial/Office Uses 40 2,417,000 32.50 78,553 21.18% $5,635,037 $141,584 60,729 $2331 per S.F. Industrial/Manufacturing 187 3,638,000 22.60 82,219 22.17% $5,898,019 $31,540 19,455 $1.621 per S.F. TOTAL 662' 370 924 100.00/0 $26,608 410 in Capital projecf:Needs;tO Finlsh Circulation System ALTERNATIVEFEEMETHODLOGY 370,924 ,.. _. $26,608,470 $77.74 per Daily Trip-mile Trip-ends Adjustment Daily Percent of Diverted Diverted Percent Combined Remaining Adjusted Trip Average Trip-ends Calculation Total Diverted Trip 1% Trip of Pass-by Diverted and Trip No as Rate,Adjustment Trip X 0.5 Land Use Trips Trips Adjustment Percent Trips(1) Pass-by Adjustment% %X Total Trips Length X Length Detached Dwellings 9.57 11.0 0.50 5.5 3.0 8.5 91.500/4) 8.76 7.9 34.6 Attached Dwellings 6.39 11.0 0.50 5.5 3.0 8.5 91.50% 5.85 79 23 1 Mobile Home Units 4.99 11.0 0.50 5.5 3.0 8.5 !g77.00% 91.50% 4.57 7.9 78.1 Hotel/Motel Lodging 527 38.0 0.50 19.0 4.0 23.0 4.06 7,6 15.4 Resort Lodging 9.13 38.00.50 19.0 4.0 23.077.00% 7.03 7.6 267 Commercial Uses(KSF) 23.25 40.0 0.50 20.0 15.0 35.065.00% 15.11 4.3 32.5 Industrial Uses(KSF) 5.68 19.0 0.50 9.5 2.0 11.5 88.50% 5.03 9.0 22.6 (1)Pass-by trips adjusted at 1000/0. a> Revenue&Cost Specialists,L.L.C. Fullerton,CA 92831 Schedule 5.3 City of Huntington Beach 201 1-12 Development impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Community Financial Commitment or Equity-based Proportionality Test Fees Circulation(Streets, Signals and Bridges)System Llevetopi Daily Trrp-enrl Existing Percentage AtloCation of D/stributlnn Average Units Current Financial Acres Units Genera#ion Daity of Existing Infrastructure of"Equity" or Square Commitment per U»it Proposed Land Use Rate Trip=miles Trip-mites "Equity" per Acre FeetlAcre or.5quare Fogf Detached Dwelling Units 6,436 38,616 34.60 1,336,114 42.62% $227,375,119 $35,329 6.00 $5,888 per Unit Attached Dwelling Units 1,805 36,108 23.10 834,095 26.60% $141,943,317 $78,622 20.00 $3,931 per Unit Mobile Home Dwelling U 205 2,865 18.10 51,857 1.65% $8,824,837 $43,132 14.00 $3,080 per Unit Hotel/Motel Lodging Unit 33 1,070 15.40 16,478 0.530/0 $2,804,166 $83,957 32.04 $2,621 per Unit Resort Lodging Units 20 809 26.70 21,600 0.69% $3,675,809 $181,971 40.05 $4,544 per Unit Commercial/Office Uses 842 12,836,000 32.50 417,170 13.31a/. $70,992,504 $84,324 15,246 $5.531 per S.F. Industrial/Manufacturing 930 20,261,000 1 22.60 457,899 14.61-/ol $77,923,618 $83,762 21,779 $3.846 per S.F. TOTAL: 10272 - 3,1: 5,213 100.00% $533,539,375 in TotalEquity in Current Circulation System Assets $431,5$9 35, in General Plan Circulation Major:Streets: $0 in General Plan Major Streets R.O.W. $6: OQ,000 in General plan orculatio ntp Bridges. $62,500,000 jn General Plan Circufatian Intersections . $34,250,000 :';in Generat Pldn e✓irculat bn Signals. $�00,000..jn Circulation Enpact Fee Fund Balance:;... ALTERNATIVE FEE mErHODLOGY 3,735,213 - $533,539,375 $170,18 per Daily Trip-mile Revenue&Cost Specialists, L.L.C. Fullerton, CA 92831 Chapter 6 Storm Drainage Collection System The Existing System. The City's existing storm drainage network is composed of street gutter facilities, inlets and a pipeline network of storm drain lines, ranging from 24" to 96" pipe"'. This combination of improvements conveys storm water runoff to various larger lines and Flood Control District storm channels located throughout the City leading directly into the Santa Ana River to the north. There are also numerous small outlets which. lead directly into the Pacific Ocean. The system, with minor exceptions, functions well to remove storm water runoff and protect developed parcels and other City infrastructure. However,as the City continues to develop currently vacant or underutilized parcels, the existing City-owned storm drainage lines will approach maximum capacity reducing the ability of the existing drainage lines to sufficiently and adequately collect and remove additional runoff. . The City currently has more than 532,000 linear feet of storm drain pipe sized from 24" to 96" creating some 5.3 million cubic feet of storm drainage capacity. The system consists of roughly 1,000 inlet boxes and 2,000 junction/combination boxes2. The system also has 9,000 linear feet of reinforced concrete box providing additional large flow capacity. The estimated replacement value of the existing (non-local) storm drainage collection line's system assets are approximately $158,631,313. There are also fifteen storm drainage pump stations with a replacement value of $45,000,000, The City has in place an existing Storm Drainage Collection System Development Impact Fee but that fund currently has a zero fund balance. Property-based Benefit Reasoning. Initially, separate zones was considered for each drainage basin within the City because each area has specific capital needs for storm-water collection. Storm-water runoff from along the northerly area of Beach Boulevard may not directly impact the homeowner near Huntington Harbour; similarly, a 24" collection line near Adams Avenue and the Santa Ana River required to handle runoff from the homes in that area may provide little direct benefit to a business in the downtown area of the City. In each case, there can be some distinct property-related areas of benefit for each drainage basin. User-based Benefit Reasoning, the Human Element. The owners and users of all developed and undeveloped parcels benefit, directly and indirectly, from all Citywide existing and future storm drainage improvements. As the various systems within the greater community of the City of Huntington Beach develop, the benefits are generally recognized as: Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 70 Chapter 6 Storm Drainage Collection System 1. Proposed development projects can only be approved by the City when precautions, generally in the form of infrastructure improvements, have been made that assure that developed and undeveloped downstream parcels will not be adversely affected (i.e., inundated, flooded, cut off from access in and out), by storm water from the project being proposed. The avoidance of downstream or down-zone damage from the development of an upstream parcel may not be a major concern to a developer, but the City must concern itself with such issues when approving private development proposals. 2. The private development being assessed a development impact fee will receive the same storm-water protection from other development projects upstream or up-zone from their own developments. 3. Storm water must be adequately controlled and removed to large scale flood control channels or creeks to assure access by public safety vehicles to all parts of the City, regardless of which zone a call for service is in. Fire suppression and other paramedic calls, as well as law enforcement and public works responses cannot wait during heavy rainstorms. To the contrary,the number of emergency calls-for- service probably increases during such storm events and the City's public safety and maintenance units must be able to respond, to all zones. 4. The City of Huntington Beach's citizens and business owners/employees must also be able to travel safely in heavy rain through one storm drainage zone to another. An adequate and sufficient storm drainage system will provide such protection. For the above stated four reasons, RCS recommends the adoption of a single storm drainage development impact fee to be applied Citywide. Storm runoff does recognize a boundary between downtown and the other areas. It will leave one part of the City and pass through another to reach its southwest ultimate location, the Pacific Ocean. Demand Upon Infrastructure Created by the Development of Underdeveloped or Undeveloped Parcels. The construction of flood control and storm drainage facilities is essential to the preservation of private property, public streets, curbs and other facilities. The county or a regional level of government is generally responsible for flood control', and cities are generally responsible for storm drainage. The building of new homes and businesses on presently undeveloped land will increase the amount of runoff and thus accelerate the need for additional storm drainage facilities to handle increased runoff from these developing areas. As vacant and underdeveloped parcels are developed and pervious surfaces are replaced with impervious rooftop, parking lots, driveways, pools, and sidewalks, greater amounts of the rainfall runs off of the developed parcel. The amount of the runoff varies with differing types of development(i.e., land- Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 71 Chapter 6 Storm Drainage Collection System use) and the varying amounts are referred to as the runoff coefficients. Approximately 0.775 (or 77.5%) of rainfall that falls on a parcel developed with detached dwelling residences, exits that developed parcel. The rate for attached dwelling residences runoff is little much higher at 0.810 (81.0%). Most business uses such as a hotel/motel, resort, retail/office and industrial have a runoff coefficient of between 0.875 and 87.5% with industrial acres to 0.950 or 95%. Clearly, water runoff increases when a vacant property is developed with impervious roof-top, sidewalks and driveways/parking lots. The cumulative effects of additional runoff must be managed with the appropriate capital facilities to move the water and, in some cases such as during heavy downpours, detain the storm water prior to releasing it slowly into the downstream storm drain. The costs of the new storm drainage will be distributed by the coefficients of drainage, i.e., the percentage of property that will end up with impervious coverage such as asphalt or cement-based concrete drives or parking lots, rooftop, pools and any other hard surface that do not allow any absorption into the soil. The Purpose of the Fee. The purpose of the development impact fee is to collect fair share contributions from the various land-uses to finance the proportional acquisition of additional storm drainage system improvements needed to collect that additional storm water runoff from the that same proposed development. The cost of extending the same level of storm drainage protection to the newly developing homes and businesses as is provided to the existing community, (that has largely paid for the existing system), can be calculated, an impact fee imposed and collected. The impact fee revenues can then be used to expand the storm drainage facilities necessary to extend the existing level-of-services. The City's Storm Drainage Plan identifies a total of$207,494,225 in storm drainage collection system capacity-increasing projects required to fully complete the City's General Plan build-out network of pipes, small channels and detention ponds. This cost cannot be mitigated by Storm Drainage System Development Impact Fee fund balance. The Use of the Fee, The construction of storm drainage collection facilities in the City of Huntington Beach is essential to the preservation of private property, and the millions of dollars invested in public streets, curbs,parks and other public facilities. The building of new residences and businesses on presently undeveloped (or underdeveloped) land will require the installation of additional storm drainage collection lines and inlets to handle the ever increasing runoff from this same new development. This Chapter reviews the costs of expanding the storm drainage collection system facilities needed to accommodate the drainage generated by future development. The revenues raised from a properly calculated and supported Storm Drainage Collection System Development Impact Fee would be limited to capital(ized) costs related to that growth. The fees would be used to construct additional or parallel storm drainage lines (to increase the drainage capacity of the system). Conversely, the Storm Drainage Impact Fee receipts would not be used to repair, replace or rehabilitate any existing storm drainage lines with adequate capacity. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 72 Chapter 6 Storm Drainage Collection System The Relationship Between the Need for The Public Facilities and the Type of Development Project. There is a reasonable relationship between the need for the public facilities and the types of developments on which the fees are imposed. New residents and businesses utilize and impact the community's existing storm drainage system which requires various storm drainage improvements.Upon the identification of the costs of storm drainage facilities,generated by future development, costs must be further distributed for each of the land uses (i.e., commercial and residential uses)based on their estimated storm runoff. Detached and attached residential dwelling development provides the most landscape percentage per parcel and thus the greatest percolation and conversely the least runoff of storm-water. As such, these land uses should not bear the same cost as Commercial/Office or Industrial use developments, both of which generally will have lesser landscape area (or stated another way, have a higher percentage of impervious area) and therefore generate a higher amount of storm water runoff. Schedule 6.1 contains the list of storm water projects identified 4 as necessary to control the storm water runoff resulting from the creation of an impervious surface by future development and also continue to protect the existing developed community. The list consists of hundreds of small projects in six storm drainage zones estimated to cost$207,494,050. For this Report, costs were distributed between land uses on established runoff coefficients. Table 6-1 is the listing of these runoff coefficients employed in this Report.' Table 6-1 Storm Drainage Runoff Coefficients (@ a 2"/hour rainfall) Proposed Land Uk Coefficient of'` , Runoff Detached Dwelling Units 0.775 Attached Dwelling Units 0.810 Mobile Home Dwelling Units 0.800 Hotel/Motel Lodging Units 0.900 Resort Lodging Units 0.875 Commercial/Office Uses 0.900 Industrial/Manufacturing Uses 0.950 Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 73 Chapter 6 Storm Drainage Collection System Since this development impact fee category is an acre-based calculation, (as opposed to the number of units built on an acre), it is determined by applying a drainage factor to the type of land use zone. Differences result between what the City's development rules allows (for the General Plan Build-out Need-based Impact Fee) and what has actually been approved in the past (for the Community Financial Commitment or Proportionality Test) can significantly skew the resulting figures. As, an example, the City anticipates future approval of 5,307 attached dwelling units at roughly 48 units per acre density. However, the 36,108 existing attached dwelling units generate an average density of closer to 20 to 25 units per acre. Assuming a storm drainage impact fee of$5,000 per acre, each existing unit would have an equity share of about$200, ($5,000 per acre �25 units per acre = $200/unit)while the future units would be assessed about$100, ($5,000 per acre _ 48 units per acre = $104/unit). Schedule 6.1 identifies the six storm drainage zones and the projects necessary to provide flood protection and insure the ability to traverse the City during a heavy storm. The project costs total $207,494,050 without any mitigation by Development Impact Fee fund balance. Table 6-2, following, indicates that the 8,303,18 acres of acre-runoff factor created by the currently developed community represents about 92.7%of the total acre-runoff factor that can be expected at General Plan build-out. Table 6-2 Comparison of Storm Drainage System Attributes Infrastructure Existing Future Total at Factor Community Comurit Build-out Total Runoff Acre Factor 8,303.18 557.85 8,861.03 Percenta e>of Total 92.7%- 6 3% 1000 17, System Cost Contribution $203,631,313 $207,494,050 $411,175,363 Percenta e;of Total 49:5% ` 50.5% . 100.0% At the same time the currently developed community's investment in the existing storm drainage system, at $203,631,313 is a lesser proportion at about 49.5% of the cost of the total system at projected General Plan build-out. Conversely that means that the current vacant and underdeveloped parcels will generate the remaining 6.3% of the demand expected at General Plan build-out but would, if allocated all of the remaining storm drainage projects would need to Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 74 Chapter 6 Storm Drainage Collection System finance the remaining 50.5% of the total General Plan cost of the system at a guaranteed preventive (and assuredly illegal) development impact fee of about $370,000 per acre. This clearly indicates that the City's storm drainage collection system has not been constructed proportionally and ratably with the amount of storm runoff generated by the development in the City to date. Stated slightly differently, with 92.7% of the City's acreage developed, the storm drainage system should also be close to 92.7%developed. However, such is not the case. Such a statement can be said of virtually all of Southern California's cities. The most likely reason is that the storm drainage system, without an exclusive revenue source, must compete with other far more needed(or desired) capital projects within the City's limited General Fund. As an example, a $1.0 million dollar signal modification that eliminates significant traffic delays daily, would more likely be funded as compared to a $1.0 million storm drainage project that benefits the community during a few hours of the few rainiest days of the year. A fair cost allocation would be to recognize that future additional drainage represents approximately 6.3% of the total at General Plan build-out thus should be allocated roughly 6.3% of the total cost of the remaining projects. Table 6-3, following, indicates the impact fee amounts that would need to be imposed to pay for the cost of completing the portion of the system's collection pipes and channels identified by staff to be financed with impact fees. It would be reasonable to expect future development to finance its proportional share of the identified storm drainage needs without violating the proportionality rule as has been done with other development impact fees in this report. Table 6-3 General Plan Build-out Needs Storm Drainage Facilities Impact Fees Allocation; Cost,. Total Cost nd Use of Project Distribution Per U La nit or. SF Costs per Acre Detached Dwelling Units $5,354,096 $18,149 $3,061/Unit Attached Dwelling Units $2,109,274 $18,968 $397/Unit Mobile Home Dwelling Units $18,735 $18,735 $2,082/Unit Hotel/Motel Lodging Units $392,020 $18,149 $479/Unit Resort Lodging Units $190,624 $20,497 $356/Unit Commercial/Office Uses $838,839 $21,076 $0.347/S.F. Industrial/Manufacturing Uses $4,160,238 $22,247 $1.144/S.F. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 75 Chapter 6 Storm Drainage Collection System The Relationship Between the Use of the Fee and the Type of Development Paying the Fee. There is a reasonable relationship between the fees' use and the types of projects on which the fees are imposed. The Storm Drainage Collection System Development Impact Fees that are imposed and collected will be used to mitigate the storm water runoff generated by the various types of development. If the development is a commercial/office or industrial/manufacturing property generating a significant amount of runoff, the fee collected will be proportionally higher and will be enough to construct the required additions to the storm drainage system downstream from this development. From time to time the City may require an applicant of a private project to construct an improvement (or portion thereof) that is on the list of required improvements at the end of this Chapter. This is often done to expedite the project for the applicant/developer. The developer should receive a credit for any money expended on this required improvement against their calculated storm drainage collection system impact fee. An ordinance clearly addressing the issue of credits should be prepared and added to the City of Huntington Beach Municipal Code should one not fully exist at this time. The Relationship Between the Amount of the Fee and the Cost of the Portion of the Facility Attributed to the Development Project. Each new development, or demand increasing redevelopment,would finance a proportional amount of the expansion of the City's storm drainage collection system. Similar to the previous findings, the relationship is based upon the projected amount of storm water to be collected, contained and safely transported to flood control channels or rivers as a proportion of the entire amount of storm water to be so conveyed. The downstream collection lines (lines further down from the proposed project but prior the outfall into a river or flood control channel)need to be sized to handle all of the storm-water collected upstream. Storm- water that is collected in one location accumulates with feeder lines along the way and thus the downstream system must be built increasingly larger (at increasing higher material and construction costs) the further it gets away from its source. Table 6-4 distributes the total existing community financial commitment (or equity value) of the existing system, at $203,631,313, consisting of the actual storm drainage pipe, channels and detention basins. Please note that the resulting development impact cost, by land use, is in terms of units such as residential dwellings or commercial/office and industrial/manufacturing square feet of building pad (including multiple floors). [This space left vacant to place the following table on a single page]. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 76 Chapter 6 Storm Drainage Collection System Table 6-4 Distribution of Current Equity-based Commitment in Storm Drainage System Collection (or Proportionality Verification) Allocation System Total Cost Land Use of Equity Equity-per Per Unit or.SF Costs Acre Detached Dwelling Units $122,325,402 $19,006 $3,168/Unit Attached Dwelling Units $35,863,547 $19,865 $993/Unit Mobile Home Dwelling Units $4,013,573 $19,617 $1,401/Unit HotellMotel Lodging Units $737,145 $22,070 $689/Unit Resort Lodging Units $433,735 $21,472 $536/Unit Commercial/Office Uses $18,583,394 $22,073 $1.448/S.F. Industrial/Manufacturing Uses $21,674,517 $23,298 $1.070/S.F. Of note is the fact that Table 6-4 summarizing Schedule 6.3, the investment "investment" (albeit General Plan proportionally deficient) of the current community is slightly greater, (at about 8%) of the previously exhibited General Plan Build-out Needs-based fees identified in Table 6-3 summarizing Schedule 6.2. Based upon these proportional facts, the adoption of the General Plan Build-out Needs-based fees identified in Schedule 6.2 and summarized in Table 6-3, would be reasonable and equitable. RESULTING DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES The adoption of Schedule 6.2 at the end of this chapter, as summarized in Table 6-3 and based upon as the Storm Drainage Collection System Development Impact Fees would generate approximately $13.0 million in capital revenues with which to construct a portion of the remaining $207.4 million in the storm drainage infrastructure required to complete the system. The City should adopt both the per unit fees, i.e., the dwelling unit fees and the square foot business construction square foot fees and the per acre figures under the column heading titled Cost Distribution per Acre on Schedule 6.2. The former is for application to projects that include a building creating new demand for all infrastructure and the latter for projects merely creating additional runoff(e.g. a parking structure). Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 77 Chapter 6 Storm Drainage Collection System RECAP OF RECOMMENDED STORM DRAINAGE COLLECTION SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES. • Adopt Schedule 6.2. for the seven basic new land-uses, and; • Adopt the Schedule 6.2, "Cost per Acre" column for construction of parking lots and other private construction causing additional runoff but few other impacts. CHAPTER ENDNOTES 1. Storm drainage pipe below the size of 21" is almost exclusively used for "local" or tract storm water collection and is thus not included in the equity calculation. In Huntington Beach this amounts to an additional 80,100 linear foot of reinforced concrete pipe that is 18" to 21" and considered to be "local" in nature and thus not included in this calculation. 2. Roughly assumes inlet boxes constructed at 425 linear foot intervals, combination boxes at 750 foot intervals and junction boxes at 300 linear foot intervals. 3. Projects of major importance generally involving the control of large quantities of flood water{over 500 C.F.S.} through numerous cities and unincorporated areas. 4. The projects individual scope and cost estimates have been provided by the City's contractual engineering firm Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Engineers and Scientists, Irvine, CA 92612-1311. 5. San Bernardino County Hydrology Manual, Williamson and Schmidt, Civil Engineers, Irvine, California, August, 1986, Runoff Index Number 56. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 78 Schedule 6.1 City of Huntington Beach - 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Canstructian Needs Construclron Needs Identification of Projects and Cost Allocation supported by rhal;lncrease Storm Drainage Collection System Qftrer Resources In/rastructure Capacity !stimated FErcent Apportioned PErcent Apportrarred' i irie#. Descptlon .7777777 Cost Need poller Cost Need Dallar Gost SD-001 Santa Ana River&Talbert Channel Region(SD Region#1) $23,728,000 93:7Q97o $22,234,085 6.300/a $1,493,915 SD-002 Coastal and Bolsa Chica Wetlands Region(SD Region#2) $21,527,000 93.70°Zo $20,171,660 6.30%1 $1,355,340 SD-003 Slater Channel Region(SD Region#3) $34,236,000 93:70%n $32,080,501 6.30°/ $2,155,499 SD--004 Wintersburg Channel Region(SD Region#4) $28,749,000 9330�(0 $26,938,963 6.30°/ $i,810,037 SD-005 Bolsa Chica Channel&Harbour Region(SD Region#5) $98,549,000 9370°l $92,344,355 6.30% $6,204,645 SD-006 Public Works Maintenance Building $705,050 9370% $660,660 6.30% $44,390 SUB-TOTAL ESTIMATED NEW PROJECT COSTS $207,494,050 F, 9370°10 $194,430,2251 6.30% $13,063,825 LESS: Existing Storm Drainage Impact Fee Fund Balance $0 0!00°/d $0 0.00% $0 Other Revenue Sources $0 Q;000 $0 0.00% $0 SUB-TOTAL ADJUSTMENTS $0 O'i00°(o $0 0.00% $0 Total-Storm Drainage Collection System Capital Project Needs $207,494,050 93 70%4 $194,430,225 6.30% $13 063,825 Forward to Schedule NOTES: There are no notes. v Revenue&Cost Specialists,L.L.C. Fullerton,CA 92831 Schedule 6.2 City of Huntington Beach 2O11-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report General Plan Build-out Needs-based Development Impact Costs(Fees) Storm Drainage Collection System fliideveloped Coefficient Storm Percentage, Allocation of Cost Average Units Development Acres Units of Drainage . Drainage of Additional Farpansion Distribution or Square ! Impact Fee per Unit Proposed Land Use' Factor Run-atf Service Calls Gosts Per Acre Feet/AFre or Sgaare Foot Detached Dwelling Units(1) 295.00 1,749 0.775 228.63 40.980/c $5,354,096 $18,149 5.93 $3,067 per Unit Attached Dwelling Units 111.20 5,307 0.810 90.07 16.15% $2,109,274 $18,968 47.72 $397 per Unit Mobile Home Dwelling Units 1.00 9 0.800 0.80 0.14°% $18,735 $18,735 9.00 $2,082 per Unit Hotel/Motel Lodging Units 18.60 818 0.900 16.74 3.00% $392,020 $21,076 43.98 $479 per Unit Resort Lodging Units 9.30 535 0.875 8.14 1.46% $190,624 $20,497 57.53 $356 per Unit Commercial/Office Uses 39.80 2,417,000 Q.900 35.82 6.42% $838,839 $21,076 60,729 $0347 per S.F. industrial/Manufacturing Us 187.00 3,638,000 0.950 177.65 31.85% $4,160,238 $22,247 19,455 $1.144 per S.F. TOTAL' 661.90 -- 557 85 100 QO% $13,063.825 in Total Storsm Drainage Caotai Needs to Finish System oa a Revenue&Cost Specialists,L.L.C. Fullerton,CA 92831 Schedule 6.3 City of Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Community Financial Commitment or Equity-based Proportionality Test Fees Storm Drainage Collection System Developed Cnelfficient Storm Percentage Allocation of Distrabutian Average Units Current Financial Acres Units of Drainage_'_ Drainage of EkWing lntrastructure' of"Lquaty" or Square Commitment per Unit Pro,Qosed Land Usesctnr Kura nff Service Calls; "Equity" ,' perAcre FeetlAcre or squar..e!oot Detached Dwelling Units(1) 6,436.00 38,616 0.775 4,987.90 60.07% $122,325,402 $19,006 6.00 $3,168 per Unit Attached Dwelling Units 1,805.40 36,108 0.610 1,462.37 17.61% $35,863,547 $19,865 20.00 $993 per Unit Mobile Home Dwelling Units 204.60 2,865 0.800 163.68 1.97% $4,013,573 $19,617 14.00 $1,401 per Unit Hotel/Motel Lodging Units 33.40 1,070 0.900 30.06 0.36% $737,145 $22,070 32.04 $689 per Unit Resort Lodging Units 20.20 809 0.875 17.68 0.21% $433,735 $21,472 40.05 $536 per Unit Commercial/Office Uses 1 841.90 12,836,000 0.900 757.71 9.13% $18,583,394 $22,073 15,246 $1.448 per S.F. Ind ustriallManufacturing Use 930.30 120,261,000 0.950 883.78 10.640/c $21,674,517 $23,298 21,779 $1,070 per S.F. TOTAL 10,271.80 -- 8,303.1'S 100.00% $203,631,3133 in Total Equity in Current LawllforGement Assets $158,631,313 in Equity in Storm drainage Collection iSystem Facilities. $45,000,000 in Equity in Storm Drainage Basins. $0 in Existing Storm Drainage Impact.l=ee Fund Balance. 00 Revenue&Cost Specialists,L.L.C. Fullerton,CA 92831 Chapter 7 Public Library Facilities and Collection The Existing_System. The City's library system consists of five library facilities providing a total of 127,400 square feet. When the 127,400 square feet of the library building space is divided by the City's residential population of 190,3771, a space standard of 0.669 square feet/resident is established, (127,400 square feet of library space - 190,377 residents). The City's library operations also house an extensive inventory of 410,594 collection items contained within the five libraries. When the 410,594 collection items are divided by the City's residential service population of 190,3772, a collection item standard of 2.157 library collection items/resident is established, (410,594 collection item's _ 190,377 residents). Demand Upon Infrastructure Created by the Development of Underdeveloped or Undeveloped Parcels. Stated simply, the 127,400 square feet of library facilities utilized by the City will accommodate only a finite number of collection items and residents/patrons. Additional residential development will increase the demand on the existing square feet of library pad and the existing collection items. The Purpose of the Fee. The purpose of the fee is to enable the City to collect a fee that would allow the City to construct additional square feet that would ensure that the City's existing and new residents would have adequate and sufficient access to and enjoyment of the library space and collection. The calculation in Table 7-1, following, establishes the City's existing de-facto library standards. [This space left vacant to place the following table on a single page] Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 82 Chapter 7 Public Libraa Facilities and Collection Table 7-1 Calculation of Existing City Library Facilities/Collection Items Standard Library . Collection Facility S.F. Items Banning Library 2,400 27,637 Central Library 115,000 314,921 Graham Library 1,200 14,920 Main Street Library 4,500 30,429 Oak View Library 4,300 22,687 Total Library Resources 127,400 410,594 Current Residential Population 190,377 190,377 Existing Standard/Resident 0.669 2.157 Table 7-2, following, indicates that the remaining residential dwelling development and typical number of residents per type of residential dwelling will generate a need for 11,443 additional square feet in order to maintain the existing library facility standard of 0.669 square feet per person. Table 7-2 Square Feet Required to Maintain Existing Facility Standard Residential Number Persons per Resident Land-Use of Units Dwelling Yield Detached Dwellings Units 1,749 3.053 5,095 Attached Dwellings Units 5,307 2.257 11,978 Mobile Home Dwelling Units 9 1.660 16 Additional Residential Population to be Served 17,089 Square Foot per Person Existing Standard 0.669 Square Feet Required to Maintain Existing Standard 11,433 Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 83 Chapter 7 Public Library Facilities and Collection The library system also has a collection of 410,594 collection items3 generating a collection standard of 2.157 collection items per resident within the system (410,594 collection item's 190,377 persons). Table 6-3, following, indicates the additional number of residents to be served and the number of collection items required to maintain the existing standard. The City will need to acquire roughly 36,861 collection items to maintain the existing 2.028 collection items per person in light of the additional 17,089 additional Huntington Beach residents expected at General Plan build-out. Table 7-3 Collection items Required to Maintain Existing Standard Residential Number Persons per Resident Land-Use of Units Dwelling Yield Detached Dwellings 1,749 2.913 5,095 Attached Dwellings 7,207 2.257 11,978 Mobile Home Dwellings 9 1.822 16 Additional City Population to be Served 17,089 Collection Items per Person Existing Standard 2.157 Collection Items Required to Maintain Existing Standard 36,861 The Use of the Fee. The fee, if adopted, would be imposed, collected, and, as needed (and desired), expended on expansion of the amount of library facility space in the two libraries and the number of collection items in the system's collection. The library staff has indicated that the proceeds of any Library development impact fee would be used to expand the Banning Library from its 2,400 square feet to approximately 12,500 square feet and expansion of the existing 4,500 square feet Main Street Branch Libraries into the remaining 4,804 square feet(for a total of 9,304 square feet) in the same building after the current tenant chooses to move elsewhere. Collection items would be expanded in proportion with the population increase,most likely into the additional proposed library space. The Relationship Between the Need for the Fee and the Type of Development Project. The development of any acreage zoned for residential uses, increases the demand on the finite amount of library space and collection items. Thus, those residential land uses that generate higher. numbers of residents (i.e., detached dwelling) will be charged a proportionally higher amount. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 84 Chapter 7 Public Library Facilities and Collection There is no information available demonstrating a substantive link between library use and local businesses. Library use is primarily by residents as opposed to business persons. The Relationship Between the Use of the Fee and the Type of Development PaXing the Fee. Additional square feet will be constructed with the DIFs collected from residential development and additional collection items will be added to the existing collection. If not adopted and used to expand the City's existing Library standards' the level of service will decrease by about 8.3% to 0.620 square feet and 1.98 collection items per resident at General Plan build-out. The Library DIFs, if adopted, imposed and collected, cannot be used for any other purpose than their stated use of maintaining the existing library standards. The Relationship Between the Amount of the Fee and the Cost of the Portion of the Facility Attributed to the Development Project. The cost of acquiring land for additional library space and construction is about$520.63 per square foot , (per Schedule 6.1). The 127,400 square feet of library space, when divided by the 190,377 existing potential patrons create a standard of 0.669 square feet of library space per City resident. The standard of 0.669 square foot standard multiplied by the $520.63 per square foot of pad cost of library construction results in a charge of$348.30 per additional City resident. Table 7-4 following, demonstrates this. Table 7-4 Establishment of the Library Facilities Standard and Cost per Person to Maintain the Standard Library Facilities Owned Square Feet 127,400 Current City Service Population 190,377 Square Feet per Resident Standard 0.669 Cost of Library Building Construction per Square Foot $520.63 Square Feet per Resident Standard 0.669 Cost per Additional Resident $348.30 The cost of acquiring additional collection items, called the accession process', (per Schedule 6.1) is estimated by the Library staff to cost roughly $25.00 per collection item. The 410,594 collection items, when divided by the City's 190,377 population create a standard of 2.028 collection items per City resident. The standard of 2.157 collection item standard multiplied by the $25.00 per collection item results in a cost of$53.93 per additional City resident, in order to maintain the existing standard. Table 7-5 following, demonstrates this. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 85 Chapter 7 Public Library Facilities and Collection Table 7-5 Establishment of the Library Collection Standard and Cost per Person to Maintain the Standard Library Collection Items 410,594 Current City Service Population 190,377 Collection Items per Resident Standard 2.157 Cost of Library Collection per Collection item $25.00 Collection Items per Resident Standard 2.157 Cost per Additional Resident $53.93 Resulting Impact Costs. The combined cost per new resident is $402.23, consisting of$348.30 for 0.669 square feet of library space and$53.93 for 2.157 additional collection items. Table 7-6, following, indicates the amount required for pro-rata expansion of the library space per Schedule 7.1. If adopted and imposed on the remaining development, it would collect enough to acquire land for and construct an additional 11,432 square feet of public library space and an additional 36,861 collection items. Table 7-6 Summary of Library Space and Collection Impact Costs Residents Cast per Impact Cost Land Use per Dwelling Resident Per Unit Detached Dwelling Units 2.913 $402.23 $1,172/Dwelling Attached Dwelling Units 2.257 $402.23 $908/Dwellin Mobile Home Dwelling Units 1.822 $402.23 $733/Dwelling Huntington Beach 20II-I2 Development .Impact Fee Calculation Report 86 Chapter 7 Public Library Facilities and Collection RECOMMENDED DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES ® Adopt Schedule 7.1 which contains the recommended City Library Facilities and Collection (item) Development Impact Fees and is summarized in Table7-6. • Establish a General Plan square foot standard for Library Facilities square feet per resident and a standard for Collection Items per resident. Chapter Endnotes 1. Based upon the 2011 State of California Department of Finance City population estimate of 190,377. 2. The current population of 190,377 establishes the existing standard. 3. A collection item is generally a book but can also be a CD, magazine subscription, video tape or some other like item with a similar cost and accession cost. 4. Based upon the construction cost of a 30,000 square foot library constructed in Highland, CA at a cost of $11,500,000 and increased by the Engineering News Record construction cost index increase of 14.95% over the 01/06 construction date(or$441.63 per square foot)and land acquisition at a cost of$20 per square foot of land with a FAR(floor area ratio) of 0.20 requiring five square feet of land per square foot of building pad. 06/2010 ENR-CCI = 8805 divided by the 01/06 ENR-CCI of 7660 = 14.95 percent increase. 5. The accession process includes: needs research, ordering, receipt, preparation, entering it into the computer and actual placement on the shelves. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 87 Schedule 7.1 City of Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Public Library Facilities and Collection Library Library Space Collection Banning Library 2,400 27,637 Central Library 1151000 314,921 Graham Library 1,200 14,920 Main Street Library 4,500 30,429 Oak View Library 4,300 22,687 Existing Square Feet of Library Space 127,400 [—Exisfing Library Collection Items [ion of Existing Standards: Current Population (Residents) 190,377 190,377 S.F. of Library Space/Resident 0,669 Collection Items/Resident 2.157 Library Construction/Square Foot 06/2010 $440.63 Land Acquisition at$20.00/S.F. and 0.25 FAR. $80.00 ........... Land Acquisition and Construction per Square Foot $520.63 Cost per Collection Item $2500 lCost per Square Foot or Collection Item $529.63 $25.00 F ,Existing City Library Standard(s) 0.669 2.157 Cost of Space per Resident $348.30 Cast of Collection Item per Resident $53.93.. Type of Density Library- Library Total Residential per Dwelling Space Collection Library Dwelling Unit Unit Component Component Impact Fee Detached Dwelling Unit 2.913 $1,015 $157 $1,172 Attached Dwelling Unit 2.257 $786 $122 $908 Mobile Home Dwelling Unit 1.822 $635 $98 $733 88 Revenue & Cost Specialists, L.L.C. Fullerton, CA 92831 Chapter 8 Community Use Facilities The Existing_System, The City has a number of facilities dedicated for Community Use. The existing 118,020 square feet of Community Use Facilities are identified in Table 8-1, following. Table 8-1 Inventory of Existing Community Use Facilities Community Use Facility Square Feet Beach Public Service Center 2,561 City Gymnasium and Pool Facility 23,600 Edison Community Center 11,065 Harbor View Clubhouse 2,203 Huntington Beach Municipal Art Center 11,092 Huntington Beach Youth Shelter 5,600 Junior Lifeguard Headquarters 5,922 Lake Park Clubhouse 3,000 Lake View Clubhouse 2,000 LeBard Clubhouse 1,000 Murdy Community Center 11,000 Newland Barn 6,000 Newland House Museum 2,750 Oak View Community Center 10,000 Rodgers Senior Center 14,000 Seniors Outreach Center 2,700 Shipley Nature Center Interpretive Building 1,863 Terry Park Community Center 1,664 FTott:a1:7Community Use Facilities Square Feet 118,020 Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 89 Chapter 8 Community Use Facilities This category of facilities differs from general facilities which are facilities generally used by the City staff in the commission of their government tasks and duties on behalf of the community's many residents and businesses. Community Use Facilities are typically made available to community groups for social, community and educational group uses. Based upon an existing City population of approximately 190,377, as identified in Schedule 8.1, the City's 118,020 square feet designated for use as Community Use facilities create a standard of 0.620 square feet per resident. While there is no nationally recommended standard for Community Use facilities, RCS staff typically finds that most cities have an actual standard ranging anywhere from 0.300 to a 1.000 square foot per person standard`. While the City's overall standard of 0,619 square feet per person compares well with other municipal agencies, the offerings of the combined facilities may not provide the City with the most desired configuration of space for the many differing needs of the community. As a result, the City may desire to either expand one of the existing community centers or construct additional such facilities to obtain the additional space to accommodate the growing public needs for social,recreational,educational and cultural needs of residents of varying ages and interests that will result from the anticipated seven thousand additional residential dwelling units expected at General Plan Build-out, Table 8-2, following, demonstrates the calculation of the existing Community Use Facilities square foot standard: Table 8-2 Establishment of the Community Use Facilities Square Foot Standard and Cost per Person to Maintain Said Standard City-owned Community Use Facilities Square Feet 118,020 Current City Service Population, 190,377 Square Foot per Resident 0.620 Cost of Community Use Facilities Construction (S.F.) $480.00 Cost per Additional Resident $297.60 Table 8-3, following, indicates the additional number of residents to be served and the number of square feet of additional Community Use space required to maintain the existing standard of 0.620 square feet per resident. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development'jmpact Fee Calculation Report 90 Chapter 8 Community Use Facilities Table 8-3 Square Feet Required to Maintain Existing Standard Residential Number Persons per Density Land-Use of Units Dwelling Yield Detached Dwelling Units 1,749 2.913 5,095 Attached Dwelling Units 5,307 2.257 11,978 Mobile Home Dwelling Units 9 1.822 16 Maximum Additional Population to be Served 17,089 Square Foot per Person Existing Standard 0.620 Square Feet Required to Maintain Existing Standard 10,595 Demand Upon Infrastructure Created by the Development of Under or Undeveloped Parcels. Simply stated,additional residential dwelling units will increase of the population placing demands upon the existing community centers. The construction of a detached dwelling will house, on average 2.913 potential new potential community center facilities users. The addition of a new attached dwelling will create 2.257 potential new users. The addition of mobile home dwelling units in park-like settings, although unlikely, would generate approximately 1.822 residents per dwelling unit. The Purpose of the Fee. The purpose of the fee is to determine the cost of proportionally expanding the community center to meet the added demands created by the construction of additional residential dwelling units and imposing it in order to maintain the current standard. The Use of the Fee. The fee, if adopted, would be imposed, collected, and spent on the construction of additional Community Use Facilities space that accommodates additional City of Huntington Beach residents,but would not be used on the rehabilitation of any existing Community Use facility. The Relationship Between the Need for the Fee and the Type of Development Project. Different types of residential dwellings generally have differing densities of people dwelling in them. Census data indicates the following occupancy statistics for the City: Detached Dwelling Units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . • . 2.913 Persons Per Unit Attached Dwelling Units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.257 Persons Per Unit Mobile Horne Dwelling Units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.822 Persons Per Unit Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 91 Chapter 8 Community Use Facilities The Relationship Between the Use of the Fee and the Type of Development Paying the Fee. The fee will be used to expand the amount of community center square feet in proportions consistent with the average persons per dwelling unit. Community Use Facilities would be expanded/constructed in the following amounts, fallowing, by type of residential dwelling: Detached Dwelling Unit . . . . . . . . . . 2.913 Persons Per Unit x 0.620 Square Feet = 1.806 Square Feet Attached Dwelling Unit . . . . . . . . . . 2.257 Persons Per Unit x 0.620 Square Feet = 1.399 Square Feet Mobile Home Dwelling Unit . . . . . . . 1.822 Persons Per Unit x 0.620 Square Feet = 1.130 Square Feet The Relationship Between the Amount of the Fee and the Cost of the Portion of the Facility Attributed to the Development Project. The cost of adding 0.620 square feet of building space per person is roughly $297.60 based upon a $480.00 per square foot land acquisition and construction cost. A detached dwelling unit with 2.913 persons requires 1.806 square feet of Community Use facilities' space at $480.00/square foot for a total cost of $867.00 (or 2.913 additional residents multiplied by the$297.60 cost per resident, rounded). An attached dwelling unit requires 1.399 square feet of community use meeting space at a cost of$672.00(1.399 square feet X $480.00 per square foot, rounded). Resulting Development Impact Fee Schedule. Table 8-4, following, indicates the proposed Community Use Facilities Development Impact Fee Schedule. Table 8-4 Summary of Community Use Facilities Development Impact Fee Impact Fee Residemial Land Use Per Unit Detached Dwelling Units $867 Attached Dwelling Units $672 Mobile Home Dwelling Units $542 [This space left vacant to place the Chapter Recommendations and Endnotes on a single page]. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 92 Chapter 8 Community Use Facilities RECAP OF RECOMMENDED COMMUNITY USE FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES. ® Adopt Schedule 8.1 for the three basic residential land-uses. ® Establish a General Plan square foot standard for Community Use Facilities. CHAPTER ENDNOTES 1. RCS is not recommending any particular size of Community Use facility. That is a matter for the Council and community to decide and set a General Plan standard. However, it appears from visual experience that any facility smaller than 3,500 square foot in size tends to have little flexibility and may not meet the needs of the community. Regardless of desired size, the development impact fee is based upon the actual standard created by the existing 118,020 square feet of Community Use facilities and the existing population of 190,377. Any higher standard could be construed as unreasonable to the development community and those purchasing the new homes. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 93 Schedule S.1 City of Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Community Use Facilities Building Size Beach Public Service Center 2,561 City Gymnasium and Pool Facility 23,600 Edison Community Center 11,065 Harbor View Clubhouse 2,203 Huntington Beach Municipal Art Center 11,092 Huntington Beach Youth Shelter 5,600 Junior Lifeguard Headquarters 5,922 Lake Park Clubhouse 3,000 Lake View Clubhouse 2,000 Lebard Clubhouse 1,000 Murdy Community Center 11,000 Newland Barn 6,000 Newland House Museum 2,750 Oak View Community Center 10,000 Rodgers Seniors Center 14,000 Seniors Outreach Center 2,700 Shipley Nature Center Interpretive Building 1,863 Terry Park Community Center 1,664 Existing City-owned Public Use Facilities Square Feet 118,020 Current Population 190,377 Square Foot per Resident Standard 0.620 Average Construction Cost per Square Foot(1)&(2) $400.00 jLand Cost @$20.001S.F. and 0.25 Floor Area Ratio $80.00 Total Cost for one Square Foot of Public Use Space $480.00 Total Cost for one Square Foot of Public Use Space $480.00 Square Foot per Resident Standard 0.620 Cost per New Resident $297.60 Residents Proposed Type of Dwelling Unit per Unit Impact Fee Detached Dwelling Units 2.913 $867 Attached Dwelling Units 2.257 $672 Mobile Home Dwelling Units 1.822 $542 (Votes. (1)Includes,grading,design,permits,engineering,inspection and furnishings. (2)Assuming a Floor Area Ratio of 2501b,so four times as much land is required as pad. 94 Revenue&Cost Specialists, L.L.C. Fullerton, CA 92831 Chapter 9 Park Land Acquisition and Park Facilities Development (including Open Space) This Chapter summarizes the City's existing inventory of parks and identifies the ratio of park land per resident allowable under the Quimby Act (§66477 of the Government Code) for residential developments involving the subdivision of land and AB 1600 (§66000) for the construction of residential developments not involving the subdivision of land. The existing per capita standard is then utilized to calculate the park dedication requirement for future residential development. EXISTING PARKS AND RECREATION SYSTEM Open space notwithstanding, intensive parks and recreational facilities constitute one of the City of City of Huntington Beach's greatest needs both with respect to facilities for current residents and future citizens. The provision of a well-planned park system, with a variation in the size and nature of facilities offered, is an important amenity to residents of any city, the City of City of Huntington Beach included. A mixture of passive and active uses and facilities and programs which appeal to a broad spectrum of potential park and trail users are considered optimal in most urban cities. The City currently has at its disposal (and within general control)some 999.09 acres of park, beach and specialty uses for use by the City's many residents. However, not all of these acres are owned by the City, many are leased or owned by other agencies made available to the City via a joint use agreements with the various school districts or are S.C.E. right-of-way. The current acres dedicated to park use(and owned or under long-term control by the City) can reasonably well serve the City's current needs. However if the number of owned park acres remains static at 778.41 acres, the City may not be able to continue to meet recreational demands in light the probable 9.0% increase in the City's population. At an attempt to achieve a high level of fairness, the City's owned park acreage will be used as the standard for calculating the park standard and the development impact fee schedule. The figure is a Government Code statute-based calculation and thus does not include other park opportunities in the area such as Harriet Weider Regional Park, which while clearly serving the City residents, are not City-facilities and thus cannot be programmed by the City. The City has a General Plan standard target of 5.0 acres per 1,000 acres per residents and the calculation of target does include the park acres of other agencies (i.e. the regional park and state-owned beach land) within the calculation of that General Plan Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 95 Chapter 9 Park Land Acquisition and Park Facilities Development target. That is completely acceptable for General Plan issues,and the City does meet that General Plan standard. Future residential development, by increasing the City's population, will impact the City's park system by requiring additional athletic fields and adequate space for various athletic activities. Given the magnitude of growth projected in this and other reports, the challenge facing the City will be to provide new facilities and park land to serve the recreational needs of these new residents. Without additional park land acquisition and development of currently owned but underutilized park land during the remaining period of private residential development, the City's parks will become overcrowded and overused, with the ultimate result becoming a negative experience for park users. Existing Park Land and Open Space Land. Currently, the City owns(or has long-tern control of) approximately 778.41 acres of traditional park land, about 87.9%(683.9 acres) of it, developed. The entire list of parks and their acreage is identified on Schedule 9.1 at the conclusion of this Chapter with a summary by type in Table 9-1. Central Park is the largest developed park, representing just under a half of the park system acreage and provides the greatest variety of sports and passive uses. Table 9-1 Current Park Total Inventory City Park Owned Acres Acres Neighborhood Parks 183.79 129.74 Community/Sports Parks 546.82 470.81 Other (beaches, etc) 268.48 177.86 Total Acres (Owned) 999.09 778.41 City Park Standard. Table 9-2, following, is a comparison of the acreage of parks to the City of Huntington Beach's current population and indicates that the City presently possesses a total standard of 5.248 acres of park land per 1,000 residents, (999.09 park acres ; [190,377 resident's 1,000], rounded). However as stated previously, the owned acreage will be used to calculate the standard and resulting impact fee. The City presently owns 778.41 acres and thus possesses an owned standard of 4.089 acres of owned park land per 1,000 residents, (778.41 owned park acre's _ [190,377 resident's _ 1,000], rounded). This is above the benchmark of 3.0 acres per Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 96 Chapter 9 Park Land Acquisition and Park Facilities Development 1,000 persons contained in Section 66477 of the California Government Code relating to dedication of parks. Table 9-2 Calculation of Actual City-owned and Developed Park Acres Standard All.Park ` ®wrned Park Ae es Ares Current Park Acres 999.09 778.41 Current City Po elation 190,377 190,377 Population Stated in Thousands 190.377 1 190.377 Park Acres per 1,000 Population 5.248 4.089 The Quimby Act, to be discussed later, allows a minimum standard of 3.0 acres per thousand resident's even if the City has not attained that standard. However,the park acres owned standard for the City of Huntington Beach, at 4.089 acres per 1,000 resident's, exceeds that minimum standard and thus the Quimby allowable minimum standard of 3.0 acres per 1,000 new residents is irrelevant and the 4.089 acres/1,000 resident's standard will be used for Park Land Acquisition and Park Facilities Development. Though not particularly relevant to the City of Huntington Beach, the Quimby Act has a cap on land dedications required as a part of the subdivision of land of 5.0 acres per thousand (Government Code §66447 (a)(2). Planned Improvements. In addition to the ongoing improvement of the remaining 115.85 acres3 available for increased residential development, the City will need to acquire 70.5 additional park acres, per Table 9-3, and develop these new parks to serve the additional 17,089 residents anticipated to live in City of Huntington Beach at General Plan build-out. [This space left vacant to place the following tabe on a single page] Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 97 Chapter 9 Park Land Acquisition and Park Facilities Development Table 9-3 Calculation of Required Park Acres per Allowable Standard Future Added Population 17,089 Population Stated in Thousands 17.089 Allowable City of Huntington Beach Park Standard 4.128 Parks Acres Required to Maintain Standard 70.5 The 70.5 acres could be constructed in any of the following configurations: Mini or"Pocket" Parks -This type is the smallest of the park type designations, usually an acre or less. Mini parks are generally not planned due to higher maintenance costs. They are usually the result of the acquisition of an unusual parcel oftentimes with historical or community significance. Tarbox, Booster, Trinidad or Baily Parks are good examples of this category. Local or Neighborhood Parks-These parks are generally 3.0 to six acres and serve local (walk- in distance) users. Not surprisingly, the City has a number of these parks, roughly forty-nine at an average of about 3.5 acres in size. Neighborhood Parks, per the category title, are intended to serve walk-in populations nearby the park and typically are not highly programmed with City-run activities. Community - These parks, to be functional, are usually closer to ten acres or larger and are designed to meet the needs of the entire community. These needs include youth and adult sports organizations, clubs or associations and large scale community events such as 4`h of July celebrations or festivals. Langenbeck, Baca, Bartlett, Carr and Gisler Parks are good examples of a broad-based use community park. Sport Parks - These park, again as titled, are highly infrastructure-developed to meet the active sports needs of both youth and adults. Edison and Greer Parks are good examples of the City's sports parks. The proposed park improvements that could be contained within the roughly 65 needed acres and the existing standard(Table 9-2)are consistent with the City's Park and Recreation Element of the General Plan. The City's 3.785 acres per 1,000 population standard speaks reasonably well for the City as a three-acre per 1,000 population standard is the common minimum, but frequently Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 98 Chapter 9 Park Land Acquisition and Park Facilities Development unmet,target of municipalities and recreation and park special districts throughout California. City staff has plans and has identified parcels that would assist help reach the 5.0 acres per 1,000 standard at General Plan build-out. CALCULATION OF PARK DEDICATION STANDARD Unlike the other facilities discussed in this Report, the California Government Code contains specific enabling legislation for the acquisition and development of community and neighborhood parks by a City. This legislation, codified as Section 66477 of the Government Code and known commonly as the "Quimby Act," establishes criteria for charging new development for park facilities based on specific park standards. This Report will recommend the adoption of Quimby- style park fees over an AB 1600-style development impact fee for developments requiring the subdivision of land and an AB 1600 fee for non subdivided land. . Allowable Park Standard As stated earlier, under Section 66477 of the Government Code, the City may charge new residential development based on a standard of 3.0 acres per 1,000 population if the City does not presently possess a ratio of 3.0 acres per 1,000 for the existing population. The Government Code also enables a city to charge development based on a standard higher than 3.0 acres (to a maximum of 5.0 acres) if the City currently exceeds the minimum benchmark ratio of 3.0 acres per 1,000 persons. Schedule 9.1 indicates that the City exceeds that minimum standard (with 3.785 acres/1,000 residents) and may then impose a fee in order to maintain that standard. The law states that "if the amount of existing neighborhood and community park area ... exceeds the [3 acres of park area per 1,000 person] limit ... the legislative body may adopt the calculated amount as a higher standard not to exceed 5 acres per 1,000 persons."4 Park fees may be required by the City provided that the City meets certain conditions including: ® The amount and location of land to be dedicated or the fees to be paid shall bear a reasonable relationship to the use of the park by the future inhabitants of the subdivision. s The legislative body has adopted a general plan containing a recreational element, and the park and recreational facilities are in accordance with definite principles and standards contained therein. a The city ... shall develop a schedule specifying how, when, and where it will use the land or fees, or both, to develop park or recreational facilities ... Any fees collected under the ordinance shall be committed within five years after the payment of such fees. Once a per capita standard for parks is determined, the cost of residential development's impact on the City's park system can then be computed as follows: Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 99 Chapter 9 Park Land Acquisition and Park Facilities Develo ment Park-land Acquisition Costs. Land costs will vary significantly from one park to another. The park land to be acquired must be suitable for park construction and is somewhat conservatively estimated at approximately$871,200 per acre(or$20.00/square foot)which has been used in the park development impact fee calculation, as a default park development impact fee for ordinary residential dwelling development. This is consistent with the cost of recent development for detached dwelling development in the more northerly areas of the City of Huntington Beach area. However, the use of this $20.00 per square foot figure could be criticized if a developer can show that the cost of the residential land they are developing is currently valued at less than the $871,200/acre figure. Conversely the City should retain the ability to increase this impact fee in areas where the cost of land exceeds the $20.00 per square foot figure. The fee recommendation at the end of the Chapter will recognize this need for flexibility. Park Development Costs_. Park development costs are based upon the very recent construction of Schedule 9.3, a current schedule of common park costs and typical improvements by type of park. Schedule 9.2 identifies the three types parks' that the City will likely construct over General Plan build-oue and the costs of the types and numbers of improvements generally included in each.' Community Use Facilities were not included in the cost calculation (see Chapter 8)Table 9-4, following and summarized from Schedule 9.2, identifies the factors in the average costs to develop an acre of park land for the three types, based on figures which are consistent with the probable improvements and costs to build similar parks incurred by other communities. For cost estimate purposes, roughly forty-five acres of Central Park has been identified as higher cost sports park acres with the remainder as Community Park. Sixty acres of beach land has been categorized as neighborhood park due to the nature of the more limited improvement costs. The table also indicates the three major types of parks. The existing 834.06 developed park acres' cost the City an estimated $258,698,242 construct as parks for an average construction cost of$310.168 per acre. Table 9-4 Average Park Construction Cost per Acre Type Park Cost/ Average of Acres Acre Construction Park Cost Neighborhood/Mini Park 271.01 $223,441 $60,559,816 Conumunity Park 229.15 $289,296 $66,292,242 Sports/Regional Park 333.90 $394,884 $131,851,622 Total Cost $258,698,242 Total Acres 834.06 834.06 Cost/Acre rounded $310,168 Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 100 Chapter 9 Park Land AaLuisition and Park Facilities Development The $310,168/acre is then increased by 15% to $356,693 to account for the park architectural costs and 24% to $442,299/acre to account for project administration, plan check, engineering, inspection and materials testing costs. Lastly, the $422,299 per acre figure is increased by 15% to $508,644 for a typical park project contingency. Schedule 9.2 shows this in numeric detail. Schedule 9.3 shows the average park construction cost by type of park. Average Park Acquisition and Development Cost per Capita. The combined park acquisition and development cost is$1,379,846 per acre($871,200/acre for acquisition and$508,644 per acre for development). If the City were to charge development for the maximum allowable amount of park acreage as allowed in the Quimby Act and as recommended here, then the City would need to acquire 4.128 acres of new park land for every potential 1,000 new residents to the City. The 4,128 acres of land acquisition and development per 1,000 persons would be$5,832,415 or about $5,832.42 per new resident. Table 9-5 and Schedule 9.1 calculates the cost,per type of residential dwelling, to develop 4.089 acres, which represents the required park land cost for 1,000 persons. Table 9-5 Summary of Quimby Park/AB1600 Development Impact Fees for Residential Dwelling Construction Persons per Fee,per Impact Fee:...`. Residential Land Use Dwelh Resident Per Unit Detached Dwelling Units 2.913 $5,832.42 $16,990 Attached Dwelling Units 2.257 $5,832.42 $13,164 Mobile Home Dwelling Units 1.822 $5,832.42 $10,627 The development impact fees for residential detached dwelling development involving the subdivision of land, as identified in Table 9-5, should be adopted under the auspices of the Quimby Act. The development impact fees for residential dwelling units not requiring the subdivision of a parcel, will need to be adopted as an AB 1600-supported development impact fee. BUSINESS USE PARK OPEN SPACE IMPACT FEE COMPONENT Open Space Fees for Business Uses. Imagine a community without any (or very little) park or open space. There a small number of such communities in the greater Los Angeles area. All private development benefits from the acquisition of land that is never developed, and exists, at Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 101 Chapter 9 Park Land Acquisition and Park Facilities Development a minimum, as a buffer from all other businesses. Schedule 9.4 identifies the cost for park land (as open space) for the business type land-uses. Again, the City owns 778.4 acres of park space which at a minimum acts as open space for all land uses. There are 10,271.8 acres of privately held developed land within the City's limits. As a result there is 0.0758 acres of park/open space for each developed privately held acre. The 0.0758 acres of open space per privately held acre is the recommended standard to be applied to the development of vacant parcels zoned for the business uses of commercial and resort lodging, commercial/office and industrial/manufacturing uses. The open space land acquisition cost will be limited to the $20.00 per square foot (or $871,200 per acre)acquisition cost only based upon the argument that business use benefit largely from the open space component and do not require the benefits of developed parks. The cost to acquire that 0.0578 acre of park land would be $16,605. Again the cost is limited to only open space land acquisition, but does not include the development component of that land as a park. That will fall to the developers of residentially zoned land that will generate park users(residents). Business acres benefit from the parks as open areas that make the City a desirable location for that business. The $300,000 per acre of development will be divided by the varying units from the three differing types of business uses in Table 9-6. Schedule 4.5 is summarized in Table 4-9 on the following page. Table 9-6 Cost Calculation for Business Uses Units or Cost/Acre Cost per ; Residential Land Use S F per of Open Keyed Rooan Acre Space or Square Foot:. Commercial Lodging Unit 36 $16,505 $458 Resort Lodging Unit 46 $16,505 $359 Commercial/Office Square Feet 17,300 $16,505 $0.954 Industrial Square Feet 21,390 $16,505 $0.772 Note: A lodging unit is defined as keyed room. Land Acquisition Cost Adjustment Challenge. As mentioned previously,the use of$871,200/acre as the default park land acquisition cost is based upon the assumption that parks acreage would likely be close in proximity and thus similar in cost to residential land value of the private project the park is intended to serve. However, if the developer or contractor of a home can provide evidence (acceptable to the City), in the form of a recent purchase agreement or appraisal of the property they will be developing that the current land value is worth less than the$871,200/acre Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 102 Chapter 9 Park Land Acquisition and Park Facilities Development (or a $20.00/square foot), the development impact fee could be adjusted accordingly by placing the actual cost of land acquisition into the Schedule 9.1 calculation. Again, if the City wishes to adopt such an adjustment, the terms under which the challenge may be made and proved should be included in the Development Impact Fee Ordinance. Similarly, if a development is closer to the beach area and land costs are higher, the City should be able to impose a park development impact fee consistent with the local land acquisition costs. Schedule 9.1 shows this calculation. RECAP OF RECOMMENDED PARK LAND ACQUISITION AND PARK FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES. A Schedule 9.1 contains the maximum Park Land Acquisition and Parr Facilities Development Impact Fees to be imposed upon residential development based upon the facts presented in this Chapter for default or standard residential developments. ® Schedule 9.4 contains the maximum Park/Open Space Land Acquisition Impact Fees to be imposed upon business development based upon the facts presented in this Chapter. CHAPTER ENDNOTES 1. Adoption of a Quimby Act fee requires a Park"plan". 2. The figure has relevance for municipalities that have large tracts of land available for subdivisions in the thousands or more. 3. The Quimby Act does allow use of revenues raised by the adoption of a Quimby Act Park Impact Fee to be used for rehabilitation of existing parks. 4. California Government Code,Title 7, Division 2, Section 66477(b). 5. Totaling the roughly 64.7 acres of park land acquisition and development that could be expected to be financed by imposing the proposed development impact fees over General Plan build-out. 6. Mini parks are not included in the mix as they are very costly to construct on a per acre cost and generally are expensive maintenance factors. Mini parks are rarely planned for but generally occur as a result of a land donation or as the recognition of a historical site. 7. Community Use facilities are not included in the cost calculations and they have been removed and placed separately in Chapter 8. 8.13ased upon the 1,006,58 acres of parkland available, less the 45.01 acre Weider County Regional Park and the 127.51 un-improved park acres of City Parks. Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation Report 103 Schedule 9.1 City of Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Park Quimby Fee for Dwellings on a Sub-divided Parcel, and; AB1600 Fee for Dwelling on Non-subdivided Parcels Park City Owned Developed Size F'arklad Parkland Arevelos Park 2.58 0.00 2.58 Baca Park 14.35 14.35 14.35 Bailey Park 0.59 0.59 0.59 Banning/Magnolia Park 1.18 1.18 0.00 Bartlett Park 27.73 27.73 2.00 Bauer Park 2.04 2.04 2.04 Beach, City-owned 60.20 60.20 60.20 Beach, City-leased 90.62 0.00 90.62 Bluff Top Park 19.66 19.66 19.66 Bolsa View Park 2.70 2.70 2.70 Booster Park 0.85 0.85 0.85 Burke Park 2.50 2.50 2.50 Bushard Park 2.38 2.38 2.38 Carr Park 10.72 10.72 10.72 Circle View Park 2.31 0.00 2.31 Clegg-Stacey Park 2.80 0.00 2.80 College View Park 2.70 0.00 2.70 Conrad Park 2.71 2.71 2.71 City Gym/Pool Site 0.50 0.50 0.50 Davenport Beach 0.46 0,46 0.46 Discovery Well Park 6.60 6.60 6.60 Drew Park 2,28 2.28 2.28 Eader Park 2.68 2.68 2.68 Edison Community Park 39.69 26.97 39.69 Farquhar Park 3.52 3.52 3.52 Finley Park 0.56 0.56 0.56 Franklin Park 1.52 0.00 1.52 French Park 0.33 0.33 0.33 Gibbs Park 6.83 6.83 6.83 Gisler Park 11.67 1.17 11.67 Glen View Park 3.02 0.00 3.02 Golden View Park 2.81 0.00 2.81 Green Park 4.04 4.04 4.04 Greer Park 10.44 10.44 10.44 Harbour View Park 4.02 0.00 4.02 Haven View Park 2.95 0.00 2.95 Hawes Park 2.68 0.00 2.68 Helme Park 2.02 2.02 2.02 Hope View Park 3.61 0.00 3.61 Humbolt Beach Park 0.48 0.48 0.48 Huntington Central Park 343.24 343.24 253.24 104 Irby Park 10.91 10.91 2.91 Revenue &Cost Specialists, L.L.C. Fuilerton, 92831 CA Schedule 9.1 City of Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Park Quimby Fee for Dwellings on a Sub-divided Parcel, and; AB1600 Fee for Dwelling on Non-subdivided Parcels Park City Owraed Developed. Size Parkland I Par:.kland Lake Park 4.75 0.00 4.75 Lake View Park 2.16 2.16 2.16 Lamb Park 2.60 2.60 0.00 Lambert Park 3.50 3.50 3.50 Langenbeck Park 17.02 9.24 17.02 Lark View Park 3.65 0.00 3.65 LeBard Park 4.99 3.01 4.99 Manning Park 2.46 2.46 2.46 Marina Park 9.34 9.34 9.34 Marine View Park 2.96 0.00 2.96 McCallen Park 5.84 5.84 5.84 Meadowlark Golf Course 98.00 98.00 98.00 Moffett Park 2.38 2.38 2.38 Murdy Park 16.04 16.04 16.04 Newland Park 2.94 2.94 2.94 Oak View Center Park 1.31 0.00 1.31 Weider Regional (County-owned) 45.01 0.00 23.01 Pattinson Park 3.51 3.51 3.51 Perry Park 1.88 1.88 1.88 Pleasant View Park 2.17 0.00 2.17 Prince Park 0.22 0.22 0.22 Robinwood Park 1.41 0.00 1.41 Rodgers Senior Center Site 2.01 2.01 2.01 Schroeder Park 2.37 0.00 2.37 Seabridge Park 3.91 3.91 3.91 Seeley Park 3.37 3,37 3.37 :Sowers Park 2.65 2.65 2.65 Sun View Park 2.45 0.00 2.45 Talbert Park 5.44 5.44 5.44 Tarbox Park 0.44 0.44 0.44 Terry Park 4,81 4.81 4.81 Triangle Park 1.11 1.11 1.11 Trinidad Park 0.75 0.75 0.75 Wardlow Park 8.36 8.36 8.36 Wieder Park 4.80 4.80 4.80 Worthy Community Park 7.00 7.00 7.00 Total Acres(Owned/Developed) 999.09 778.41 849.58 Current Population 190,377 190,377 190,377 Population11,000 190.38 190.38 190.38 Current Standard 5.248 4.089 4.463 105 Revenue&Cost Specialists, L.L.G. Fullerton, 92831 CA Schedule 9.1 City of Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Park Quimby Fee for Dwellings on a Sub-divided Parcel, and; A81600 Fee for Dwelling on Non-subdivided Parcels Park City Ownetl Developed::`: Size Parkland Parkland Acres/1,000 Population Standard 5.248 4.089 4.463 Quimby Maximum Allowable 5.000 4.089 4.453 Acquisition Cost pe�Acre $871,200 n o t e 8,644 Constructio C s p Cost X Standard $3,562,337 1 $2,270,078 Total Fee Population Served by Standard ,1,000.0 1,000A Per Person Cost per Resident $3,562.34 $2,270.08 $5,832.42] :Occupants/ Land Park Land anti Dwelling Acquistion Development Development Detached Dwelling Units 2.913 $10,377 $6,613 $16,990 Attached Dwelling Units 2.257 $8,040 $5,124 $13,164 Mobile Home Dwelling Units 1.822 j $6,491-j 1 $4,11 L $10,627 1. Current estimate of$20.00 per acre acquisition cost for land consistent with park use. 2. See Schedule 9.3 for typical park amenity construction cost details. 106 Revenue&Cost Specialists, L.L.C. Fullerton, 92831 CA Schedule 9.2 City of Huntington Beach Park Site Inventory Improvement Cost Residential Park Development Impact Fee Calculation of Average Park Acre Construction Cost Park Average.Cost Total Cost Size per Acre fmPark Prince Park 0.22 $223,441 $49,157 French Park 0.33 $223,441 $73,736 Tarbox Park 0.44 $223,441 $98,314 Davenport Beach 0.46 $223,441 $102,783 Humbolt Beach Park 0.48 $223,441 $107,252 City Gym/Pool Site 0,50 $223,441 $111,721 Finley Park 0.56 $223,441 $125,127 Bailey Park 0.59 $223,441 $131,830 Trinidad Park 0.75 $223,441 $167,581 Booster Park 0.85 $223,441 $189,925 Triangle Park 1.11 $223,441 $248,020 Banning/Magnolia Park 0.00 $223,441 $0 Oak View Center Park 1,31 $223,441 $292,708 Robinwood Park 1.41 $223,441 $315,052 Franklin Park 1.52 $223,441 $339,631 Perry Park 1.88 $223,441 $420,070 Rodgers Senior Center Site 2.01 $223,441 $449,1 17 Helme Park 2.02 $223,441 $451,351 Bauer Park 2.04 $223,441 $455,820 Lake View Park 2.16 $223,441 V482,633 Pleasant View Park 2.17 $223,441 $484,868 Drew Park 2.28 $223,441 $509,446 Circle View Park 2.31 $223,441 $516,149 Schroeder Park 2.37 $223,441 $529,556 Bushard Park 2.38 $223,441 $531,790 Moffett Park 2.38 $223,441 $531,790 Sun View Park 2.45 $223,441 $547,431 Manning Park 2.46 $223,441 $549,665 Burke Park 2.50 $223,441 $558,603 Arevelos Park 2.58 $223,441 $576,478 Lamb Park 0.00 $223,441 $0 Sowers Park 2.65 $223,441 $592,119 Eader Park 2,68 $223,441 $598,823 Hawes Park 2.68 $223,441 S598,823 Bolsa View Park 2.70 $223,441 $603,291 College View Park 2.70 $223,441 $603,291 Conrad Park 2.71 $223,441 $605,526 Clegg-Stacey Park 2.80 $223,441 $625,636 Golden View Park 2.81 $223,441 $627,870 Newland Park 2.94 $223,441 $656,917 Haven View Park 2.95 $223,441 $659,152 Marine View Park 2.96 $223,441 $661,386 Glen View Park 3.02 $223,441 $674,793 Seeley Park 3.37 $223,441 $752,997 107 Lambert Park 3.50 $223,441 $782,044 Revenue&Cost Specialists, L.L.C. Fullerton, 92831 CA Schedule 9.2 City of Huntington Beach Park Site Inventory Improvement Cost Residential Park Development Impact Fee Calculation of Average Park Acre Construction Cost Park Average host Total Cost ". Size per Acre for:Park Pattinson Park 3.51 $223,441 $784,279 Farquhar Park 3.52 $223,441 $786,513 Hope View Park 3.61 $223,441 $806,623 Lark View Park 3.65 $223,441 $815,561 Seabridge Park 3.91 $223,441 $873,655 Harbour View Park 4,02 $223,441 $898,234 Green Park j 4.04 $223,441 $902,703 Lake Park 4.75 $223,441 $1,061,346 Wieder Park 4.80 $223,441 $1 ,072,518 Terry Park 4.81 $223,441 $1,074,752 LeBard Park 4,99 $223,441 $1,114,972 Talbert Park 5.44 $223,441 $1,2151520 McCallen Park 5.84 $223,441 $1 ,304,897 Discovery Well Park 6.60 $223,441 $1,474,712 Gibbs Park 6.83 $223,441 $1,526,104 Wardlow Park 8.36 $223,441 $1,867,969 Marina Park 9.34 $223,441 $2,086,941 Meadowlark Golf Course 98,00 $223,441 $21,897,243 Carr Park 10.72 $289,296 $3,101,256 Irby Park 2.91 $289,296 $841,852 Gisler Park 11.67 $289,296 $3,376,088 Baca Park 14.35 $289,296 $4,151,402 Langenbeck Park 17.02 $289,296 $4,923,823 Bluff Top Park 19.66 $289,296 $5,687,565 Bartlett Park 2.00 $289,296 $578,593 Beach, City-leased 90.62 $2$9,296 $26,216,029 Beach, City-owned 60.20 $289,296 $17,415,636 Worthy Park 7.00 $394,884 $2,764,185 Greer park 10.44 $394,884 $4,122,584 Murdy Park 16.04 $394,884 $6,333,932 Edison Park 47.18 $394,884 $18,630,607 Huntington Central Park 253.24 $394,884 $100,000,314 Total 834,06 $258,698,680 Total Park Acres 834.06 Average Construction Cost/Acre $310,168 Community Input, Design, Engineering 115.00% Sub-total Park Construction Cast $356,693 Project Administation, Soils<Materials Testing, etc. 124.00% Sub--total Park Construction Cast $442,299 Contingency 115.00% Total Park Construction Cost $508,644 108 Revenue &Cost Specialists, L.L.C. Pullerton, 92831 CA Schedule 9.3 City of Huntington Beach Development Impact Fee Calculation Report Park Improvement Cost Estimates, by Type of Park Unit Cyst, InstaEled ;5 Acre IVeighb.o.h.pod 20 Acre Community Park Pub Imps, Road/curb, gutter, etc. $200 Linear Foot 1,040 $208,000 2,704 $540,800 Lg Pk Grading/Irrigation/Turf $37,500 Acre 0 $0 15 $562,500 Sm Pk Grading/Irrigation/Turf $42,750 Acre 5 .$213,750 0 $0 Plant Material: Trees-5, 24 gallon box/acre $149 Each 60 $8,940 225 $33,525 Trees-15, 15 gallon/acre $290 Each 30 $8,700 75 $21,750 Shrubs-10, five gallon $30 Each 40 $1,200 150 $4,500 Shrubs-30, one gallon $8 Each 120 $960 450 $3,600 Play apparatus Curbing, 450' per large $41.30 Linear Foot 0 $0 450 $18,585 Curbing, 225' per small $41.30 Linear Foot 225 $9,293 225 $9,293 Play equipment- large $123,750 Lot 0 $0 1 $123,750 Play equipment- medium $99,000 Lot 1 $99,000 0 $0 Play equipment-small $67,500 Lot 0 $0 2 $135,000 Sand/Other Surfacing $5,775 Lot 1 $5,775 3 $17,325 Buildings: Restroom -Small $132,000 Each 1 $132,000 1 $132,000 Restroom - Large $181,500 Each 0 $0 1 $181,500 Equipment storage facility $99,000 Each 0 $0 0 $0 Combined Restroom/Concession $297,000 Each 0 $0 1 $297,000 Parking Lot 4" A.C. W/6" Rock base $8.30 Square foot 12,000 - $99,600 40,000 $332,000 V-gutter $13.20 Linear Foot 300 $3,960 800 $10,560 Drain Inlet $990 Each 1 $990 2 $1,980 Drain Inlet connector $330 Each 1 $330 2 $660 Storm drain line $19.80 Linear Foot 300 $5,940 200 $3,960 Drive approach $2,970 Each 1 $2,970 4 $11,880 Perimeter curbing $16.50 Linear Foot 490 $8,085 800 i $13,200 Striping $0.50 Linear Foot 400 $200 i 1,300 $650 Lighting $2,970 Each 2 $5,940 18 $53,460 Lot signage $330 Lot 1 $330 3 $990 Entrance $4,950 Lot 1 $4,950 3 $14,850 Curb and Gutter $15,27 Linear Foot 3,780 $57,721 3,232 $49,353 Storm Drainage Facilities Inlets $1 ,320 Each 2 $2,640 4 $5,280 Connections $2,145 Each 2 $4,290 4 $8,580 Lateral (to arterial) $82.50 Linear Foot 45 $3,713 80 $6,600 Sewer Facilities Connection to arterial $4,125 Lot 1 $4,125 1 $4,125 Line in street $107.30 Linear Foot 29 $3,112 80 $8,584 Line in park $24.80 Linear Foot 125 $3,100 1,500 $37,200 109 Revenue &Cost Specialists, L.L.C. Fullerton, CA 92831 Schedule 9.3 City of Huntington Beach Development Impact Fee Calculation Report Park Improvement Cost Estimates, by Type of Park Unit'Cost, )nstalled:. 5 Acre:Neighborhood 24 Acre Community Park.:. Fire Hydrant $4,950 Each 1 $4,950 6 $29,700 Street Lights Standards $2,475 Each 3 $7,425 20 $49,500 Duct work/wiring $1,568 Each 3 $4,704 12 $18,816 'Water Facilities 3" metered service $4,125 Each 1 $4,125 1 $4,125 Backflow device $4,125 Each 1 $4,125 1 $4,125 Line in street $19.80 Linear Foot 1,320 $26,136 120 $2,376 Water fountains $1,155 Each 1 $1,155 8 $9,240 Fountain lines in park $19.80 Linear Foot 200 $3,960 1,000 $19,800 BenchestTables Tables, cement pads $2,475 Each 4 $9,900 60 $148,500 Individual grills $825 Each 2 $1,650 30 $24,750 Benches, cement pads $908 Each 4 $3,632 30 $27,240 Bleachers $5,775 Each 0 $0 0 $0 Large Covered Picnic Area(lot) $123,750 Each 0 $0 2 $247,500 Individual Covered Picnic Pad $24,750 Each 1 $24,750 10 $247,500 User Electrical Service park $16,500 Each 0 $0 1 $16,500 Electrical Service per Area $2,063 Each 1 $2,063 6 $12,378 Game Courts $0 $0 Basketball Courts $66,000 Each 1.0 $66,000 1 $66,000 Basketball Court Lighting $57,750 Each 0 .$0 0 $0 Fenced Tennis Courts $99,000 Each 0 $0 2 $198,000 Tennis Court Lighting $57,750 Each 0 $0 0 $0 Baseball Field -Competitive $82,500 Each 0 $0 0 $0 Ballfield Lighting $412,500 Per two fields 0 $0 0 $0 Baseball Field - Recreational $24,750 Each 1 $24,750 6 $148,500 Pedestrian Walkway 5' Wide $22.28 Linear Foot 500 $11,140 1 2,000 $44,560 6' Wide $28.88 Linear Foot 100 $2,888 500 $14,440 9' Wide $37.13 Linear Foot 100 $3,713 500 $18,565 Miscellaneous Flatwork $6.20 Linear Foot 500 $3,100 8,500 $52,700 Small Park Signage $4,538 Lot 1 $4,538 0 $0 Large Park Signage $24,750 Lot 0 $0 1 $24,750 Bike Rack/Pad $2,890 Each 1 $2,890 6 $17,340 Natural Element Improvement(Lake, a $825,000 Each 0 $0 0 $0 Small Concrete Stage $41,250 Each 0 $0 0 $0 Small Ampitheater stage only, graded 1 $82,500 Each 0 $0 0 $0 Large Ampitheater with bowl 1 $247,500 Each 0 $0 1 1 $247,500 Total Cost 1,117,206 _.........:.:.......` $ 4 339 444 r Total Acres 5 15 Average Cost per Acre $223,441 $289,296 110 Revenue&Cost Specialists, L.L.C. Fullerton, CA 92831 Schedule 9.3 City of Huntington Beach Development Impact Fee Calculation Report Park Improvement Cost Estimates, by Type of Park Un+t Cost, Installed 20 Acre Sports Park Pub Imps, Road/curb, gutter, etc. $200 Linear Foot 2,704 $540,800 Lg Pk Grading/IrrigationlTurf $37,500 Acre 20 $750,000 Sm Pk Grading/Irrigation/Turf $42,750 Acre 0 $0 Plant Material: Trees--5, 24 gallon boxlacre $149 Each 150 $22,350 Trees-15, 15 gallon/acre $290 Each 50 $14,500 Shrubs-1 0, five gallon $30 Each 100 $3,000 Shrubs-30, one gallon $8 Each 300 $2,400 Play apparatus Curbing, 450' per large $41.30 Linear Foot 450 $18,585 Curbing, 225' per small $41.30 Linear Foot 225 $9,293 Play equipment - large $123,750 Lot 0 $0 Play equipment - medium $99,000 Lot 1 $99,000 Play equipment - small $67,500 Lot 2 $135,000 Sand/Other Surfacing $5,775 Lot 3 $17,325 Buildings: Restroom -Small $132,000 Each 1 $132,000 Restroom - Large $181,500 Each 1 $181,500 Equipment storage facility $99,000 Each 1 $99,000 Combined Restroom/Concession $297,000 Each 2 $594,000 Parking Lot 4" A.C. W/6" Rock base 4 $8.30 Square foot 40,000 $332,000 V-gutter $13.20 Linear Foot 800 $10,560 Drain Inlet $990 Each 2 $1,980 Drain Inlet connector $330 Each 2 $660 Storm drain line $19.80 Linear Foot 200 $3,960 Drive approach $2,970 Each 4 $11,880 Perimeter curbing $16.50 Linear Foot 800 $13,200 Striping $0.50 Linear Foot 1,300 $650 Lighting $2,970 Each 18 $53,460 Lot signage $330 Lot 3 $990 Entrance $4,950 Lot 3 $14,850 Curb and Gutter $15.27 Linear Foot 1,664 $25,409 Storm Drainage Facilities Inlets $1,320 Each 4 $5,280 Connections $2,145 Each 4 $8,580 Lateral (to arterial) $82,50 Linear Foot 80 $6,600 Sewer Facilities Connection to arterial $4,125 Lot 1 $4,125 Line in street $107.30 Linear Foot 80 $8,584 Line in park $24.80 Linear Foot 1,500 $37,200 111 Revenue&Cost Specialists, L.L.C. Fullerton, CA 92831 Schedule 9.3 City of Huntington Beach Development Impact Fee Calculation Report Park Improvement Cost Estimates, by Type of Park UnitCost, Iri:stalled� 2Q Acre Sports Park Fire Hydrant $4,950 Each 1 $4,950 Street Lights Standards $2,475 Each 20 $49,500 Duct work/wiring $1,568 Each 5 $7,840 Water Facilities 3" metered service $4,125 Each 1 $4,125 Backf low device $4,125 Each 1 $4,125 Line in street $19.80 Linear Foot 120 $2,376 Water fountains $1,155 Each 8 $9,240 Fountain lines in park $19.80 Linear Foot 1,000 $19,800 Benches/Tables Tables, cement pads $2,475 Each 30 $74,250 Individual grills $825 Each 10 $8,250 Benches, cement pads $908 Each 15 $13,620 Bleachers $5,775 Each 8 $46,200 Large Covered Picnic Area(lot) $123,750 Each 0 $0 Individual Covered Picnic Pad $24,750 Each 4 $99,000 User Electrical Service park $16,500 Each 1 $16,500 Electrical Service per Area $2,063 Each 4 $8,252 Game Courts $0 Basketball Courts $66,000 Each 3 $198,000 Basketball Court Lighting $57,750 Each 8 $462,000 Fenced Tennis Courts $99,000 Each 8 $792,000 Tennis Court Lighting $57,750 Each 8 $462,000 Baseball Field-Competitive $82,500 Each 8 $660,000 Ballfield Lighting $412,500 Per two fields 4 $1,650,000 Baseball Field - Recreational $24,750 Each 0 $0 Pedestrian Walkway 5' Wide $22.28 Linear Foot 1,000 $22,280 6' Wide $28,88 Linear Foot 250 $7,220 9' Wide $37.13 Linear Foot 250 $9,283 Miscellaneous Flatwork $6.20 Linear Foot 4,000 $24,800 Small Park Signage $4,538 Lot 0 $0 Large Park Signage $24,750 Lot 1 $24,750 Bike Rack/Pad $2,890 Each 6 $17,340 Natural Element Improvement(Lake, e $825,000 Each 0 $0 Small Concrete Stage $41,250 Each 1 $41,250 Small Ampitheater stage only, graded $82,500 Each 0 $0 Large Ampitheater with bowl $247,500 Each 0 $0 Total Cost $7,897,671 Total Acres 20,00 Average Cost per Acre $394,884 112 Revenue &Cost Specialists, L.L.C, Fullerton, CA 92831 Schedule 9.4 City of Huntington Beach 2011-12 Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report Open Space Land Acquisition for Business Uses Land Acquisition Development Impact Fee Calculation Total City-owned Park/Open Space Acres 778.4 Current City-wide Privately Developed Acres 10,271.8 Current Open Space Standard per Developed Acre 0.0758 Acres/Developed Acre Standard 0.0758 Acquisition Cost per Acre $8711200 Cost X Open Space Standard $16,509 Units./SF Open Space per Acre Acquisition Commercial Lodging Keyed Units 36 $459 per Keyed Unit Resort Lodging Keyed Units 46 $359 per Keyed Unit Commercial Acres(in Square Feet) 17,300 $0.954 per Square Foot Industrial Uses(in Square Feet) 21,390 $0.772 per Square Foot 113 Revenue&Cost Specialists, L.L.C. Fullerton, 92831 CA APPENDIX A Expanded Land-use Database 114 City of Huntington Beach Develaped Net Increase Total Total: Lane#Use Database Acres.... #vfi Unrts Acres #of Units ..: Acres: of Units Detached Dwelling Units(1) 6,436.0 38,616 295.00 1,749 6,731.00 40,365 Attached Dwelling Units 1,805.4 36,108 111.20 5,307 1,916.60 41,415 Mobile Home Dwelling Units(2) 204.6 2,865 1.00 9 205.60 2,874 Hotel/Motel Lodging Units 33.4 1,070 18.60 818 52.00 1,888 Resort Lodging Units 20.2 809 9.30 535 29.50 1,344 Commercial/Office Uses 841.9 12,836,000 39.80 2,417,000 881.70 15,253,000 Industrial/Manufacturing Uses 930.3 20,261,000 187.00 3,638,000 1,117.30 23,899,000 Total - City Limits 10,271.8 ----- 661.90 ----- 10,933.70 ----- Private Residences 8,446.0 77,589 407.2 7,065 8,853.2 84,654 Commercial Lodging Rooms 53.6 1,879 27.9 1,353 81.5 3,232 Business Square Feet 1,772.2 33,097,000 226.8 6,055,000 1,999.0 39,152,000 F520 sting Community Devveloped To Be De�elaped Tourrrently Developed Acres,. #of Units Acres #of Units Acres #of Units Detached Dwelling Units(1) 6,436.0 38,616 34.0 183 6,470.00 38,799 Attached Dwelling Units 1,805.4 36,108 15.0 159 1,820.40 36,267 Mobile Home Dwelling Units(2) 204.6 2,865 1.0 9 205.60 2,874 Hotel/Motel Lodging Units 33.4 1 1,070 0.0 0 33.40 1,070 ,Resort Lodging Units 20.2 809 3.4 300 23.60 1,109 •Commercial/Office Uses 841.9 12,836,000 4.5 69,200 846,40 12,905,200 Industrial/Manufacturing Uses 930.3 20,261,000 44.0 958,320 974.30 21,219,320 Existing Comrrtunity 10,271.8 ----- Additional Units frrn Developed Intensified/Redevelaped Tata#'. Intensiffcation of'Existirig Uses Acres : #of Units Acres #of Units' Acres #of Units Detached Dwelling Units(1) 0.0 0 261.0 1,566 261.00 1,566 Attached Dwelling Units 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.00 0 Mobile Home Dwelling Units(2) 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.00 0 Hotel/Motel Lodging Units 0.0 0 14.6 468 14.60 468 Resort Lodging Units 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.00 0 Commercial/Office Uses 0.0 0 106.2 2,313,817 106.20 2,313,817 Industrial/Manufacturing Uses 0.0 0 143.0 2,679,680 143.00 2,679,680 Redeveloped 6.6 ----- 524.80 ----- 524.80 ----- anA Deveped R pew-:::. totalSp cific Pl a Beach and Edinger i4cres #of Units Acres #o#Units Acres #.of Units Detached Dwelling Units (1) 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.00 0 Attached Dwelling Units 0.0 0 80,0 4,500 80.00 4,500 Mobile Home Dwelling Units (2) 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.00 0 Hotel/Motel Lodging Units 0.0 0 4,0 350 4.00 350 Resort Lodging Units 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.00 0 CommerciallOffice Uses 0.0 0 37.0 850,400 37.00 115850,400 Industriai/Manufacturing Uses 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.00 0 Sub-total Specific Plan A 0.0 ----- 121,00T 121.00 ----- Specific Plan 8 Developed lntensifiedlRede�eloped Total Downtown AcreS #of Units. Acres{3} #pf Units Acres # of Units Detached Dwelling Units (1) 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.00 0 Attached Dwelling Units 0.0 0 16.2 648 16.20 648 Mobile Home Dwelling Units(2) 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.00 0 Hotel/Motel Lodging Units 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.00 0 Resort Lodging Units 0.0 0 5.9 235 5.90 235 Commercial/Office Uses 0.0 0 13.1 398,583 13.10 398,583 Industrial/Manufacturing Uses 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.00 0 Sub-total Specific Plan B 0.0 ----- 35.20 35.20 ----- Specific Plan A ©eveloped Intensified/Redeveloped - Totat Removal Acres #of Units ::Acres #of Units 1 Acres #of Units Detached Dwelling Units(1) 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.00 0 Attached Dwelling Units 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.00 0 Mobile Home Dwelling Units(2) 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.00 0 HotellMotel Lodging Units 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.00 0 Resort Lodging Units 0.0 -0-1 0.0 0 0.00 0 Commercial/Office Uses 0.0 0 (121.0) (1,215,000) (121.00) (1,215,000) Industrial/Manufacturing Uses 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.00 0 Sub-total Specific Plan A 0,0 -- (121.00) ----- -- NOTES: (1). Only 34 of the 295 acres are vacant lots. The remaining 261 acres represents acres for the addition of 1,566 detached dwelling units in areas already developed such as a lot split of a larger parcel parcel with an existing detached dwelling units. (2).The inclusion of one acre of Mobile(or modular)Home Dwelling Units(in parks)is to establish such a fee and does not imply that that the City anticipates such a private proposal. (3).The 35.2 acres is not intended to suggest there is 35.2 acres of vacant acres in the downtown area. The 35.2 acres is the result of anticipating 648 additional units at roughly 40 units per acre. 116 APPENDIX B Summary of Recommended Impact Fees 117 SUMMARY OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE SCHEDULE RECOMMENDATIONS Chapter 3 - Law Enforcement Facilities and Equipment • Adopt Schedule 3.2, page 38, General Plan Build-out Need-based Development Impact Fees. Chapter 4 - Fire Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment • Adopt Schedule 4.3, page 53, Community Financial Commitment-based Development Impact Fees. Chapter 5 - Circulation (Streets, Signals and Bridges) System • Adopt Schedule 5.2, page 68, General Plan Build-out Need-based Development Impact Fees along with the per Trip-mile rate for application to Table 5-4 (page 64) or for staff calculation per the Table on the bottom of Schedule 5.2. Chapter 6 - Storm Drainage Collection System • Adopt Schedule 6.2, page 80, General Plan Build-out Need-based Development Impact Fees for the seven specific land uses and the "per acre" cost for unusual uses not involving a structure. Chapter 7 - Public Library and Collection • Adopt Schedule 7.1, page 88. • Formalize a General Plan square foot and collection item per resident standard. Chapter S - Community Use Facilities • Adopt Schedule 8.1 page 94, (Current Standard). • Formalize a General Plan square foot per resident standard. Chapter 9-Park (and Open Space) Land Acquisition and Park Land Development • Create Quimby Act Park Land Acquisition and Development Impact Fee Fund, Note (1). • Adopt Schedule 9.1, page 104-106, for residential uses requiring the subdivision of land for Quimby Act application. • Create AB1600 Park Land Acquisition and Development Impact Fee Fund, Note (1) • Adopt Schedule 9.1 page 104-106, for residential uses not requiring the subdivision of land for AB 1600 application. • Adopt Schedule 9.4, page 113, for business uses for application to business use development. • Adopt alternative process for residential developments with significantly varying land values from the standard or default calculation embodied in Schedule 9.1 and 9.4. (1). Separate Park Land Acquisition and Development Funds are necessary because the Quimby Act allows use of receipts for rehabilitation of existing facilities whereas theAB1600 requirements prevent such expenditures. 118 APPENDIX C Master Facilities Flan (See Separate Document) 119 End of Document