Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrd 1177 Increase Notice of Appeal for TUMF - 15 days to 90 days ���--� CITY OF PALM DESERT � � � _�. __ PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT � , _ ` STAFF REPORT � � , � � � � REQUEST: Increase Notice of Appeal Period for the Transportation Uni rm � Mitigation Fee (TUMF) �? �' � � � � � SUBMITTED BY: Mark Greenwood, P.E., Director of Public Works � � u; � � � ,.�:a �' DATE: December 11, 2008 � �� � � � CONTENTS: Ordinance No. 1��� Amending Ordinance No. 573 ,� Ordinance No. 573 �-� � � Recommendation: � -J Waive further reading and pass to second reading. Discussion: The original TUMF Model Ordinance, prepared in coordination with the adoption of the original Measure A period beginning in July, 1989, included a section on the recommended appeal process that provided for an applicant who disputes the TUMF fee to file a written notice of appeal with the CVAG Executive Committee within 15 days of the imposition of the fee. The appeal process further provides that the Executive Committee must decide the appeal by a majority vote and within 60 days of the filing of the appeal. A version of the model ordinance was adopted by each of the TUMF collecting jurisdictions, including the City of Palm Desert, and the 15-day appeal period is currently in effect. Any change to this appeal period requires each jurisdiction to amend its TUMF ordinance in order to become effective. During the discussion of a recent TUMF appeal hearing by the CVAG Technical Advisory Committee, a question was raised as to whether the CVAG TUMF appeal period was in conformance with state law. The California Government Code presently provides that a protest of the imposition of certain fees may be filed within 90 days of the imposition of those fees on a development project. The Government Code section further provides that each local agency shall provide to the project applicant a notice in writing at the time of imposition of the fees that the 90-day approval period in which the applicant may protest has begun. Adopt Ordinance Amending TUMF Appeal Period December 11, 2008 Page 2 of 2 Given that it might be argued that the CVAG TUMF appeal process language conflicts with the California Government Code, it seems appropriate for CVAG to amend its appeal process by increasing the TUMF notice of appeal period from 15 days to 90 days. Fiscal Impact Statement: The lengthening of the notice of appeal period should not cause any delay in the receipt of TUMF fees imposed on development projects. The amendment of the TUMF ordinances by each of the TUMF-collecting jurisdictions may entail legal fees and staff time costs. Prepared By: Department Head iCQ�,�-i.�_ ��..�� Debra Lee Mark Greenwo d, P.E. Management Analyst Director of Public Works Appro,�al: ^ ;; /� �"���N `�` Homer Croy Carlos L. rtega ACM for De opment Services City Manager G:\PubWorks\Staff Reports�2008\December 11\Ot Revise TUMF Appeal Period from 15 days to 90 days\staff report TUMF appeal period.docx ORDINANCE NO. 11�� AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 573, INCREASING THE NOTICE OF APPEAL PERIOD FOR THE TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE (TUMF) FROM 15 DAYS TO 90 DAYS FROM IMPOSITION OF THE FEE. The City Council of the City of Palm Desert does hereby ordain as follows: Section 1. That Section 3.44.060 of the Code of the City of Palm Desert, California, being the same is hereby amended to read as follows: "3.44.060 Appeal process. A. An applicant who disputes the fee may file a written notice of appeal with the Executive Committee of CVAG within 90 days of imposition of the fee. The Executive Committee of CVAG must decide the appeal by majority vote and within sixty days of the filing of the appeal." Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the passage and adoption hereof and is hereby directed to publish this Ordinance in the Desert Sun, a newspaper of general circulation, circulated in the City of Palm Desert, California, and shall be in full farce and effect thirty(30) days after its adoption. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, at its regular meeting this l lth day of December, 2008, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JEAN M. BENSON, MAYOR ATTEST: RACHELLE D. KLASSEN, CITY CLERK ' DJE11/1 ORDINANCE N0. 573 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING A TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM HIITIGATION FEE. SECTION 1. WHEREAS the City Council o� the City of Palm Desert makes the following findings: (1) The City Council of the City of the Palm Desert � finds that future development within the City of Palm Desert and within the Coachella Valley t� the �►ear 2010 will result in traffic volumes in excess of capacity on the regional system of streets, arterials and highways now existing. (2) The City Council finds that failure to expand the capacity of the existing circulation system will cause unacceptable levels of congestion on the streets and arterials of the regional system. (3) The City Council also finds and declares that in the absence of this Ordinance imposing a fair-share traffic fee upon new development, existing and future sources of revenue are inadequate to fund substantial portions of the regional transportation system improvements needed to avoid unacceptable levels of congestion and related adverse impacts. (4) The City Council finds that exactions from development will contruct only a portion of the local and regional facilities and that the adoption of this Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee ordinance will raise the additional revenues needed to construct the improvements to accommodate traffic that will be generated by development of land within the City and within the Coachella Valley. (5) The City Council also finds that the Coachella Valley Area Transportation Study has determ�ned the extent to which the new development of land will generate traffic volumes impacting the roadway system and that this Ordinance establishes a fair and equitable method for distributing the unfunded costs of transportation improvements nPcessary to accommodate the traffic volumes generated by such develvpment. -1- DJE11/1 � � . (6) The City Council further finds that the regional transportation improvements and the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee established by this Ordinance are based on the findings of the 1987 Coachella Va11ey Area Transportation Study whose policy-committee members represented all nine cities in the Coachella Valley and Riverside County. This Study has established that growth in the year 2010 will affect the entire regional transportation system and therefore the area of impact for future development is the entire Coachella Valley as defined in this Ordinance. The Study made the following additional findings: (a) Population and employment within the Coachella Valley is expected to double by the year 2010 and would cause Levels of Service E and F (as defined in the National Academy of Sciences 1964 Highway Capacity Manual and as updated in the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209) on existinq streets and arterials. � (b) The Coachella Va11ey Area Transportation S:tudy shows that by the year 2010 the Coachella Valley will increasingly become a more integrated and inter-dependent region where 92$ of all daily trips will stay within the Valley, most as inter-city trips for both residents and visitors. (c) The 1987 Coachella Valley Area Transportation Study modeled and evaluated the effect of projected growth to the year 2010 on all major streets and highways in the Coachella Valley and found that without expansion, the transportation system would �uffer severe congestion . Further, the Study showed that the recommended transportation improvements would accommodate the tra�'fic anticipated in the year 2010 at the desired Level of Service C. (d) In the year 2010 , according to the Coachella valle� Area Transportation Study, the Valley will remain a self-contained community where jobs and the labor force are well-balanced. The increase in inter-city travel, however, will result in an increase in average trip length. (e) Existing and future sources cf public revenues are insufficient to fund all the needed transportation improvements. (f) The revenues genera�e�3 by this Transportation Mitigation Fee will pro�Tide the additional funds necessar� -2-- DJE11/1 to construct the transportation improvements anc provide the additional capacity needed by the year 2010 to accommodate the traffic generated by the development of land in the City and in the Coachella Valley. (g) The Transportation Mitigation Fee is a fair and equitable method of distributing the cost of transportation impravements among the developments which will generate the increased traffic. (7) The Cit1� Council adopts all findings and incorporates by reference all findings contained in the following Reports/Studies, attached hereto as Exhibits: . Coachella Valley Area Transportation Study, dated December, i987, Exhibit A herein; . Transportation Qniform Mitigation Fee Ordinance Report, dated June, 1988, Exhibit B herein; . . Transportation Expenditure Plan: Scope and Cost Review, May, 1988 by Bechtel Civil, Inc. , Exhibit C herein; . Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) , 3rd Edition, Exhibit D herein, with the exception as referenced in this Ordinance, Section 2 (6) . SECTION 2. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, does hereby add to Title 3 Revenue and Finance, of the Municipal Code of the City of Palm Desert, Chapter 3.44 . Transportation Uniform t4itigation Fees as follows: "CHAPTER 3.44 TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE 3.44 .010 Definitions. (1) ' Coachella Valley' means those combined boundaries of the Palm Springs Unified School District, Desert Sands Unified School District and that part of the Coachella Unified School District within Riverside County. (2) ' Reg�enal System' means those streets, arterials, -3- DJE11/1 � and road improvements named in this Ordinance as the Regional System as set forth ir. Section 9 or as may subsequently be amended. (3) The ' Coachella Valley Area Transportation Study' means that repart published by the Southern California Association of Governments and dated December, 1987 , attached hereto as Exhibit A, or as subsequently amended by the entities/jurisdictions of the Coachella Valley Association of Governments. (4) 'Average Weekday Trips' means the average number of daily vehicle trips to or from a designated land use Monday through Friday. (5) 'Change of Use' means any change in the use of an existing building which results in the increase of vehicular trips. (6) 'Trip Generation Rate' means the number of average � � weekday trips generated b� a particuZar land use. The Trip Generation Rate for each of the followinq land-use categories shall be the rate published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) , 4th edition, or as revised, as noted in Section VII : "Trip Generation Land Use Code" , attached hereto as Exhibit D, calculated upon the measurement herein specified. If a developer is required to prepare a traffic study, the trip-generation rate shall be as determined by that traffic s�udy and approved by the appropriate general purpose government, but in no case may the rates be less than the ITE rates calculated upon the measurment as herein specified. Trip-generation rates sha11 be calculated based upon the following measurement: Residential Single-family, Multi-family, Condominiums, Planned Unit Developments, and Mobile homes shall be calculated per dwelling unit. Lodqinq Hotels, Resort Hote's, and Motels shall be calculated per room. Restaurants :o��; turno��er, sit-down , high turnover, and dri��e-throuah shall be calculated per 1000 sq. feet gross floor area. -4- " DJE11/1 Retail Stand-alone convenience store and Shopping centers, sha'_1 be calculated per 1000 gross square feet. Office Space Office space shall be calculated per 1000 square feet of gross floor area. Banks Walk-in, with drive-through, Savings & Loan and Savings & Loan with drive-through shall be calculated per 1000 gross square feet. Liqht Industry/ManufacturinQ Industrial . Park and manufacturing shall be . . calculated per 1000 gross square feet. Medical Hospitals shall be calculated per 1000 gross square feet. Recreation Golf Courses independent of hotPls shall be calculated per parking space; Racquet clubs shall be calculated per court. Convention Centers Shall be calculated per 1000 gross square feet. (6) 'Development' means any activity which requires discretionary or ministerial action by the City resulting in the issuance of. grading, building, plumbing, mechanical, or electrical permits, or certificates of occupancy issued by the City to construct, or change the use of, a building or property. . Where development applies to an enlargement of an existing building, or a change of use of an existing ' -5- D�TE11/1 building which results in increased vehicle trips, the average weekday trips shall be only the additional trips in excess of those associa*ed with the existing use. (7) 'The Coachella Va11e1 Association of Governments ' , hereinafter CVAG, means the legal entity which will manage and administer the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 3 . 44 . 020 Applicability. The provis�ons of this Ordinance shall apply only to new development yet to receive final discretionary approval and or issuance of a building permit or other development right and to any reconstruction or new use of existing buildings that results in change of use and generates additional vehicular trips. , • 3 .44.030 EStablishmer,t of Transportation Mitigation Fee. (1) There is herPby established a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee, the proceeds of �,rhich shall be placed in the trust fund established by CVAG and used to construct the transportation improvements and provide the additional capacitl needed by the year 2010 to accommodate the traffic generated by the development of land in the City and in the Coachella Valley. (2) The amount of the mitigation fee shall be based on the trip generation rate and as recommended by CVAG. The Council shall adopt by resolution the fee amount recommended by CVAG or may adopt a higher �ee amount. The Executive Commit�ee of CVAG shall annually review and, if necessary, amend the amount of the recotnmended mitigation fee to insure that it is a fair and equitable method of distributing the costs of the improvements necessary to accomodate traffic volumes generated by future growth. (3) The Council shall annually review and, if neces- sary, amend the amount of the mitigation fee to insure that it is a �air and equitable method of distributing the costs of the improvements necessary to accomodate traffic volumes generated by future growth. If the amount of the recommended mitigation fee is amended by CVAG pursuant to CVAG's annual review, the Counci.� shall amend its fee amount in accord or in an amount greater. -6- DJE11/1 (4) No Tract map, parcel map, conditiona� use permit, land use permit or other entitlement shal'_ be approved unless payment of the mitigation fee is a condition of approval for any such entitlement. The mitigation �ee shall be paid to the Cit��. (5) No building or similar permit, certificate of occupancy or business license reflecting a change of use shall be issued unless the applicant has paid the mitigation fee. (6) Mitigation fees shall be imposed and collected by the City and S�Q11 be transm=tted to CVAG to be placed in the Coachella Valie�� Transportation Mitigation Trust Fund. All interest or other .earnings of the Fund shaZl be credited to the Fund. 3.44 .040 EYemptions. _ The following dev.elopments are exempted from payment of the fee� require� b� this Ordinance: (2) Low and lower-income residential housing, including single-family homes, apartments, and mobile homes built for those �ahose income is no more than 80$ of the median income in the San Bernardino-Riverside Standard rietropolitan Statistical Area and as determined and approved by the legislative body or its designee. The sales or rental price shall not exceed the affordability criteria as established under HUD Section 8 guidelines. (2) Public buildings, public schools, and public facilities unless they are primarily for lease to private, for-profit enterprises. (3) Buildings used for religious purposes but excluding other commercial properties or businesses owned by a religious institution. (4) The recenstruction of any building so long as the reconstructed building both continues a use of the same category as the prior use and generates the same or fewer trips as the original building and reconstruction commences within one (1) �ear from destruction of the building. 3 . 44. 050 Credits. (1) Where a developer inproves those regional streets - 1- DJE11/1 ' identified in Section 9 of this Ordinance beyond the requirements established in Section 6 (2) , the developer shall receive a credit against the Transportation Uniform Mitiqation Fee. To receive a credit, the developer shall obtazn in advance an agreement with CVAG pursuant to CVAG' s rules and regulations. That credit shall be an amount equal to the actual engineering and construction costs incurred at the time of the development to the extent that CVAG has included those costs in its estimated cost of constructing the regional system. (2) The tees required by this Ordinance shall be in addition to any fees, conditions or exactions for on-site and off-site improvements imposed upon projects pursuant to state and local laws, ordinances, or administrative policy which may authorize the imposition of conditions, fees or exactions on development and the developer shall not be entitled to any credits for such fees, conditions or � exactions. (3) If a developer constructs, or is required by the City to construct, any portion of the regional network as identified in Section 9 of this Ordinance in excess of that � required to meet standard street requirements as provided by local ordinances, municipal codes, and the City' s General � Plan, the developer shall be entitled to a credit for the cost of such excess c.onstruction. All such construction on the regional network must have the approval of CVAG as to plans and detailed costs estimates. (4) Should the credit exceed the applicant' s total fee, the difference may be credited against any of the applicant' s future development within five (5) years which would be subject to the fee. The credit may not be refunded in cash. (5) Should a developer provide improvements which benefit adjacent undeveloped land, the developer may be reimbursed for a proportionate share of the cost of such improvements contingent upon future fees contributed from other benefited developments and pursuant to special agreements made in advance with CVAG and in accordance with CVAG' s rules and regulations. 3 . 44. 060 A eal Process. An applicant who disputes the fee may file a written notice of appeal with the Executive Committee of CVAG within -3- DJE11/1 15 days of imposition of tlie fee. The EYecutiv� Committee of CVAG must decide ttie appeal by ma;ority vote and withir, 60 days of the filinC of the appeal. 3 . 44 . 0?0 Severability. If any c+ne or nore of the terms , provisions, or sections of this Ordinance shall to any extent be adjudged invalid, unenforceable, voidable for any reason whatsoever by a court of cor�petent ;urisdiction, each and al1 of the remaining terms, �rovisions, and sections of this Ordinance shall not be affected thereby and shall be valid and enforceable. 3. 44.080 �,ist of Projects on the Regional System. The following transportation projects are those which when completed will together mitigate the traffic impacts of future growth in tt�e ��ear 2010 throughout the Coachella Valley. The. fol'_owing �list of projects shall be annually � reviewed and may be amended from time to time by CVAG. Freeway InteYchar,ges: Gene Autry at I-10 Ramon at I-10 Monterey at I-10 Cock at I-10 Washington at I-10 Jefferson at I-10 Avenue 56 at Highway 86 Ra�lroad Crossings South of I-10 Gene Autry Trial Famon Monterey Cook Washington Avenue 56 Major Primary Arterial (involving multiple jurisdictions) Mid-Valley Parkway (by segment) Gene Autry Trail/Palm Drive Ger.e Autry to rionterey Palm S�rings Bypass (Whitewater Bypass) -9- DJE11/1 Gene Autry/Palm Drive (North of PS Bypass) Ramon Gerald Ford Frank Sinatra . Monterey Cook Country Club 48th Ave. Madison Jefferson Fred Waring Drive 52nd Ave. Date Palm Drive Vista Chino Washington Bob Hope Avenue 56 BRIDGES ACROSS WHITEWATER (Widening or New Bridge) Gene Autry Ramon Frank Sinatra � Monterey Cook E1 Dorado Madison Washington Jefferson Fred Waring Drive (2 bridges) Vista Chino Country Club BRIDGES OVER OTHER CHANNELS 48th at All American (2 bridges) Madison (2 bridges) Jefferson (3 bridges) Washington (La 'Quinta Evac Channel) 52nd at P.11 American Canal Avenue 56 at Coachella Valley Storm Channel (widen) Ramon Road at Aaristo Channel The Uniform Transportation Mitigation Fee shall be solely used toward funding the engineering and construction of, and purchasing right-of-��ay for, these Regional Slstem project and any other Purpose consistent with this Ordinance. The Fee may not be used �or system maintenance. � -10- DJElI/1 CVAG shall annually establish prioriti�s for the Regional System projects based on the criteria set forth in the Uniform Transportation Mitigation Fee Ordinance Report, Section 4 . 3 , Exhibit B. " SECTION 3 . EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after adoption with the following exception: the portion of this ordinance which imposes a fee upon a single family or multi-family development prOject shall be effective sixty {60) days after adoption. SECTION 4 . PUBLICATION. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this ordinance ar.d shall cause the same to be published once in the Palm Desert Post, a newspaper of general circulation , printed, published and circulated within the City of Palm Desert. Adopted this 25th day of MaY , l9gg, b� the following vote: AYES: Benson , Crites, Kelly, Snyder, Wilson NOES: None ABSENT: None ; � � ���� �tnl-�-�SON, Mayor C ' y of Palm Desert, California ATTEST: ' /� ` I . � 9 - SHEILA GILLIG N, City C " rk City of Palm �esert, a ifornia _Fw �'=,��ictil:i.0 BY RE�OLUTION #,D��_S�� --11- .__ " ��'� f�ATED: �,_/ Ordinance No. 573 EXHIBIT A Coachella Valley Area Transportation Study, dated December, 1987 EXHIBIT B Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Ordinance Report dated June, 1988 EXHIBIT C Transportation Expenditure Plan: Scope and Cost Review, May, 1988, by Bechtel Civil, Inc. EXHIBIT D Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) , 3rd Edition, with the exception as referenced in this Ordinance, Section 2(6) ALL EXHIBITS LISTED ABOVE ARE ON FILE IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE