Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 74-2007RESOLUTION NO. 74-2007 CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A GENERAL PLAN MAINTENANCE FEE TO RECOVER CITY COSTS INCURRED IN UPDATING THE GENERAL PLAN AND PREPARING RELATED ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS. WHEREAS, the State of California requires that all local agencies prepare and adopt a general plan and recommends that the local agency update the; general plan at least one every ten years; and WHEREAS, the South. San Francisco General Plan (also known as the 1999 General Plan) was adopted unanimously by the City Council in October 1999 and is currently in place; and WHEREAS, all. elements of the General Plan include implementing policies-which represent commitment to specific actions and programs-and, in effect, constitute an implementation program for the plan; and WHEREAS, the 1999 General Plan contains policies on the maintenance and improvement of residential and non-residential development, with a development buildout established in 2020 and includes necessary infrastructure improvements; and WHEREAS, since adoption of the 1999 General Plan, the City embarked upon many of the implementing strategies such as establishment of the SSF BART Linear Park, adoption of the Housing Element, detailed planning for areas around the South San Francisco BART Station, establishment of the Child Care Ordinance and fee, implementation of the Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Ordinance and fee, revision to the City's Second Unit Ordinance, approval of the East of 101 Traffic Improvement Program, and preparation of engineering studies for several of the new street proposals. In most cases, the City set aside General Fund budget to fund the professional services; and WHEREAS, under state law, every city must have a legally adequate and up-to-date general plan; and WHEREAS, the City will prepare a future update 'to the 1999 General Plan, and the preparation of the future general plan and necessary environmental documents will result in significant costs for materials and labor by both staff and consultants; and WHEREAS, a legally adequate and current genera plan benefits those who develop property in the City and property owners who apply for various entitlements to use their property, in part because the City cannot approve development without a determination that it is consistent with a legally adequate general plan. Moreover, property owners benefit from land use planning, including a general plan that is based on current ]land uses, circulation, housing, and other important elements of the City's development; and WHEREAS, because state law requires that all cities maintain current general plans and that development circumstances within the city will change, it will be necessary to eventually prepare and adopt a future general plan and the associated er.~vironmental documents before the buildout period identified in the 1999 General Plan; and WHEREAS, Government Code Section 66014 enables cities to collect fees "reasonably necessary to prepare and revise the plans and policies that a. local agency is required to adopt before it can make any necessary findings and determinations." The law enables local governments to charge fees for zoning variances, zoni,nl; changes, use permits, building inspections, building permits, filing, processing applications, processing maps, and planning services. The fees may include the costs reasonably necessary to prepare a general plan and the implementation programs. However, the fees may not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged; and WHEREAS, the City has prepared a Report, "General Plan. Maintenance Fee," to reflect the reasonable costs of providing the subject services and is attached to Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the General Plan Maintenance Fee would allow the City to fund a future comprehensive update of the General Plan and defray the ongoing costs associated with maintaining the General Plan policies and programs. The fees would be used primarily to fund outside consulting services. City staff is proposing to attach a surcharge on all building permits that would be used to fund the future General Plan update. The proposed fee would be 0.15 percent on the assessed value of a project and would be collected at the time the building permit is issued; and WHEREAS, staff recommends modification of the Master Fee Schedule for 2007-08 fiscal year as set forth in Exhibit A, "General Plan Maintenance Fee," of this resolution; and WHEREAS, the new fee reflects the reasonable costs of providing the subject services. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the (:ity Council of the City of South San Francisco that the City Council hereby approves the Master Free Schedule as modified to include the General Plan Maintenance Fee specified in the staff report and attached as Exhibit A hereto. I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was rel;ularly introduced and adopted by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a regular meeting held on the l lrh day of July, 2007 by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers Mark N. Addiego, Joseph A lrernekes and Kahl Matsumoto, Vice Mayor Pedro Gonzalez and Mayor Richard A. Garbarino NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: None ATTEST: L EXHIBIT A GENERAL PLAN MAINTENANCE FEE REPORT General Plan Requirement The State of California requires that all local agencies prepare and adopt a general plan. The State recommends that the local agency update the general plan at least once every ten years. The South San Francisco General Plan was adopted unanimously by the City Council in October 1999 and is currently in place. All elements of the General Plan include implementing policies- which represent commitment to specific actions and programs-and, in effect, constitute an implementation program for the plan. Although legally adequate and current, the1999 General Plan is approaching its tenth anniversary and will need to be updated. The 1999 General Plan and Environmental Impact Report planned for residential and non-residential development until 2020, which included the need to provide necessary infrastructure to support the growth. Due to the extraordinary growth in Research & Development ("R&D")/Office uses since 2002, the City may reach its General Plan buildout in the East of 101 area by 2016. Therefore, City staff must begin to plan for and fund a future general plan update. Collection of Fees California Government Code Section 66014 enables cities to collect fees "reasonably necessary to prepare and revise the plans and policies that a local agency is required to adopt before it can make any necessary findings and determinations." The law enables local governments to charge fees for zoning variances, zoning changes, use permits, building inspections, building permits, filing, processing applications, processing maps, and planning services. The fees may include the costs reasonably necessary to prepare a general plan and the implementation programs. However, the fees may not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged. Since 2002, several Bay Area cities have approved a General Plan Maintenance Fee, which is collected at the time of building permit issuance and is based on a development project's construction value. Purpose of the General Plan Maintenance Fee The General Plan Maintenance Fee (Fee) would allow the City of South San Francisco to fund a future comprehensive update of the General Plan and defray the ongoing costs associated with maintaining the General Plan policies and programs. The fees would be used primarily to fund outside consulting services. City staff is proposing to attach a surcharge on all building permits that would be used to fund the future General Plan update. The proposed Fee Valuation Rate would be 0.0015 of the value of a project, as calculated for the purposes of the issuance of building permits, and would be collected at the time the building permit is issued. Exhibit A Subject: General Plan Maintenance Fee Report Date: July II, 2007 Page 2 Projects Subject to the General Plan Maintenance Fee General Plan Maintenance Fee Imposed A General Plan Maintenance Fee (Fee), using a Valuation Factor of .0015, shall be imposed on and paid by applicants of all new residential projects, residential additions and non-residential projects at the times, and in the amounts, and otherwise apply and be administered as prescribed below. Application of and Time of Payment of Fee All new residential projects, residential additions and non-residential projects shall pay the fee at the time of issuance of a building permit. The new residential projects, residential additions and non-residential projects are subject to the adopted floor area ratios, development standards and design standards identified in the South San Francisco General Plan, the East of 101 Area Plan and the South San Francisco Municipal Code, and may include the following approvals: a. An amendment to the General Plan or a specific plan; b. A specific plan or precise plan; c. A land use, conditional use, construction, building, or similar permit such as electrical, mechanical, plumbing, or fire; d. A variance; e. A tentative subdivision or parcel map; f. Site development review; g. A development agreement; h. Rezoning; 1. Residential and non-residential Design Review; J. Any other discretionary approval granted by the Economic and Community Development Director, Chief Planner, Planning Commission, or City Council for which a finding of consistency with the General Plan is required by state law. Proiects That Would be Exempted From The Fee Minor building, electrical, mechanical and plumbing subcategory permits that constitute minor alterations and do not add additional square feet of living area, storage or garage space on residential properties (such as a roof replacement) would not be subject to the Fee. Estimated Project Costs Following adoption ofthe 1999 General Plan, the City embarked upon many of the implementing strategies, such as establishment of the SSF BART Linear Park, adoption of the Housing Element, detailed planning for areas around the South San Francisco BART Station, establishment of the Child Care Ordinance and fee, implementation of the Transportation Exhibit A Subj ect: General Plan Maintenance Fee Report Date: July 11, 2007 Page 3 Demand Management (TDM) Ordinance and fee, revision to the City's Second Unit Ordinance, approval of the East of 101 Traffic Improvement Program, preparation of the comprehensive Zoning Ordinance update, and preparation of engineering studies for several of the new street proposals. In most cases, the City allocated General Fund budget dollars, totaling approximately $775,000 between 2001 and 2007, to fund these projects and studies. Table 1 lists the anticipated projects and the estimated costs of maintaining the existing General Plan and preparing for and maintaining the future General Plan and implementation studies. Table 1: List of Anticipated Pro;ects to Prepare and Implement General Plan Policies Task Responsibility General Plan Costs Future General Plan Preparation General Plan Preparation Consultant Professional Services $600,000-$900,000 Environmental Impact Report Consultant Professional Services $400,000-$500,000 Community Outreach In-house Staff and Consultant $50,000 Professional Services Administration and In-House Staff(assumed as 15 $157,500-$210,000 Productions percent of Consultant Contract) Future Annual Review and In-House Staff $100,000 Five Year Review Housing Element Update In-house Staff and Consultant $80,000-$125,000 Professional Services Subtotal $1,337,500-$1,735,000 Current and Future General Plan Maintenance Oyster Point Plan In-house Staff and Consultant $60,000 (Planning) Professional Services $125,000 (Geotechnical Analysis) Lindenville Plan and In-house Staff and Consultant $150,000 environmental document Professional Services East of 101 Area Plan update In-house Staff and Consultant $225,000 and environmental document Professional Services El Camino & Chestnut Plan In-house Staff and Consultant $175,000 and environmental document Professional Services Zoning Ordinance Update In-house Staff and Consultant $275,000 Professional Services Downtown Transit Village In-house Staff and Consultant $125,000 Plan Professional Services Subtotal $1,065,000 Total $2,402,500 - $2,800,000 Sources: The costs listed above are estimates only, based on discussions with consultants companies and Staff's recent experience managing similar projects. The amount of the services may increase over time. Exhibit A Subject: General Plan Maintenance Fee Report Date: July 11, 2007 Page 4 Estimated Valuation Factor to Determine the Fee Table 2 shows the total combined valuation for commercial and residential properties from the fiscal year ending in June 1997 to the fiscal year ending in June 2005. The potential revenues from the new Fee would vary according to the percentage, listed below. The average of the combined valuation over the nine year period is approximately $185 million; however, the table also indicates that the building permit valuations are cyclical, with five fiscal years below $165 million and four fiscal years over $200 million. As noted above, the City experienced unprecedented development and growth during this period, primarily in the East of 101 area due to growth in the R&D/Office market. ]', hI 2 P' I Y; B 'ld' P 't V; I t' a e : lsea ear Ul Inf! erml a ua IOns Total Combined Valuation Rates Fiscal Residential & Year Commercial 0.0015 0.0025 0.0033 0.0050 Valuation 1997 $105,001,522 $157,502.28 $262,503.81 $346,505.02 $ 525,007.61 1998 $131,827,390 $197,741.09 $329,568.48 $435,030.39 $ 659,136.95 1999 $160,583,691 $240,875.54 $401,459.23 $529,926.18 $ 802,918.46 2000 $202,248,677 $303,373.02 $505,621.69 $667,420.63 $1,011,243.39 2001 $293,353,906 $440,030.86 $733,384.77 $968,067.89 $1,466,769.53 2002 $282,675,865 $424,013.80 $706,689.66 $932,830.35 $1,413,379.33 2003 $162,992,146 $244,488.22 $407,480.37 $537,874.08 $ 814,960.73 2004 $112,940,152 $169,410.23 $282,350.38 $372,702.50 $ 564,700.76 2005 $211,271,900 $316,907.85 $528,179.75 $697,197.27 $1,056,359.50 Source: The City of South San Francisco, California, Comprehensive Annual Reports, 2002 - 2005. Average of Valuations 0.0015 0.0025 0.0033 0.0050 from 1997 to 2005 $184,766,138.78 $277,149.21 $461,915.35 $609,728.26 $923,830.69 Fee Calculation and Basis City staffhas developed a Fee designed to recover the cost of preparing the General Plan, as well as its maintenance and including other policy documents necessary to make findings and determinations in the development process. Staff estimates that the consultant and in-house staff costs associated with the preparation of the General Plan, environmental impact report, and implementing documents would be $2.8 million dollars. (See Table 1) The proposed Fee is calculated by dividing the anticipated costs for preparing the General Plan and associates implementation programs ($2.8 million dollars) by a ten-year period, which results in need to set aside $280,000 per year. As Table 2 shows, the Valuation Rate of 0.0015, Exhibit A Subject: General Plan Maintenance Fee Report Date: July 11,2007 Page 5 if applied to the appropriate building permits for new residential, residential additions and non- residential projects, would result in the necessary level of revenue annually. Minor building permits that constitute minor alterations on residential properties (such as a roof replacement and a new water heater) would not be subject to the fee. Based on the Average of Valuations at the bottom of Table 2, the proposed Fee could generate $277,149.21 annually or $2.8 million dollars in ten years. The proposed Fee would be consistent with Government Code Section 66014, as it does not exceed the estimated reasonable costs for preparing and maintaining the General Plan. The following example illustrates how the proposed Fee would be applied to a specific project. The calculation would apply to all new residential projects, residential additions and non- residential projects. Sample Project UBC Construction Valuation Size of project @ $107/s.f. = $214,000 Valuation Factor 0.0015 General Plan Maintenance Fee $321.00 New Single Family Residential Unit - 2,000 s.f. x = Fiscal Impact The new Fee represents a source of revenue to compensate the City for the costs of preparing and maintaining the General Plan. The Fee would go into a special account to fund the future General Plan update and the associated professional services, in-house staffproject management, community outreach programs, noticing, brochures, and several public meetings. The costs for administering the Fee program are included in the estimated costs to prepare the General Plan update. Thus, the new Fee would offset the financial impact on the City's General Fund. Currently, the Planning Division uses in-house staff and the General Fund budget to undertake the following important tasks: · Implement economic development programs, including staff support for the Bio 2007 International Convention in Boston, MA, design and printing of marketing materials, and preparation of an updated economic analysis of the biotechnology cluster. · Processes current planning applications, particularly those within the Redevelopment Area and for commercial and industrial properties. · Provides staff support to the Redevelopment Agency. · Coordinates planning activities and projects with actions of other City departments. · Oversees and coordinates changes to the City's General Plan; reviews, prepares comments, and reports on a variety oflong-range and ongoing projects. To supplement staffs work, the City currently relies on a limited amount of professional services to prepare environmental documents, Zoning Ordinance updates, the Oyster Point Marina Concept Plan, the updated the East of 101 Transportation Fee, and entitlements for the Terrabay Exhibit A Subject: General Plan Maintenance Fee Report Date: July 11, 2007 Page 6 Phase III project. The City requires private developers to pay for consultant services for a specific project. However, City sponsored projects, such as the South San Francisco BART Transit Village Plan, are funded through the General Fund budget. Benefits to the City and Property Owners The proposed General Plan Maintenance Fee would assist both the City and property owners. A legally adequate and current general plan benefits those who wish to develop property in the City and property owners who apply for various entitlements to use their property, in part because the City cannot approve development without a determination that it is consistent with a legally adequate general plan. Moreover, property owners benefit from land use planning, including a general plan that is based on current land uses, circulation, housing, and other important elements of the City's development.