Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 11/30/2004 - UPDATE ON STREET OVERSIZING FEES DATE: November 30, 2004 STUDY SESSION ITEM
STAFF: Matt Baker FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
The Street Oversizing Program continues to be a financially viable program for constructing
transportation infrastructure in newly-developing areas. Periodic recalculations of the Street
Oversizing fee schedule are necessary to ensure that fee revenues will be sufficient to pay for the cost
of future improvements that the program will be constructing.
At the March 23,2004 Study Session,staff presented two revisions to the Street Oversizing Program
for consideration. The first was a routine update required to recover costs. The second was a fairly
significant change of direction for the program for capturing new development's proportional share
of upgrading existing intersections to current standards. The 46%fee increase proposed with these
revisions did not receive majority support. (See attached Study Session Discussion Summary)
At the present time, staff is requesting Council consider only routine revisions to the Street
Oversizing Program. Staff is proposing a 13.8%increase to the Street Oversizing Fee. The increase
consists of two elements:
• A 3.6% increase for inflation of construction costs
• A 10.2% increase to pay for recently adopted changes to the City's Master Street Plan.
These routine updates are required to recover costs and keep the program solvent.
Capital Expansion Fees are updated annually for inflation. This year,the Street Oversizing Program
has experienced a 3.6% increase in costs of construction.
The recently adopted East Mulberry Plan tripled the lane miles of arterial and collector streets
required to serve the zoning and density proposed in this planning area. The Street Oversizing fees
have been recalculated to recover these increased costs.
A more detailed explanation of these revisions is included in the attached November 30,2004 update
memorandum. A listing of proposed fee rates is also included for reference.
The Street Oversizing Program is a one-time impact fee on development, and is used to mitigate the
impacts of new development on the transportation network. Impact fees cannot be used to correct
existing deficiencies in the transportation system.
November 30, 2004 Page 2
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
Staff is seeking direction on the following questions:
• Does Council have any questions or concerns about the inflation adjustment that is proposed
to the Street Oversizing fees?
• Does Council have any questions or concerns about the routine adjustment for the East
Mulberry Plan that is proposed to the Street Oversizing fees?
• Shall staff bring the recommended increases to the Street Oversizing Capital Expansion Fees
to Council for formal consideration at the December 7t' City Council meeting?
ATTACHMENTS
A. March 23, 2004 Study Session Discussion Summary
B. November 30, 2004 Street Oversizing Fee Update Memorandum
C. Proposed 2005 Street Oversizing Fees
March 26, 2004
To: Mayor Ray Martinez and City Council Members
Thru: John Fischbach, City Manager
Ron Phillips, Director of Transportation Services
Cam McNair, City Engineer
From: Matt Baker, Street Oversizing Program Manager
RE: March 23, 2004, Study Session Discussion Summary-
Street Oversizing Fee Update
Attendees: Mayor Ray Martinez, Mayor Pro Tem Bill Bertschy, Councilmembers Karen
Weitkunat, David Roy, Eric Hamrick and Kurt Kastein.
Staff was seeking direction on the following issues:
Does Council have any questions or concerns about the routine adjustments that are proposed
to the Street Oversizing fees?
What are Council's comments regarding the idea of expanding the Street Oversizing Fee to
recover new developments'proportional share of intersection improvement costs in established
areas of the City?
• Staff presented two revisions to the Street Oversizing Program for consideration. The first was a
routine update required to recover costs and keep the program solvent. The second is a fairly
significant change of direction for the program— an expansion of the cost recovery of the program
into older areas of town, for capturing development's proportional share of upgrading existing
intersections to current standards.
1. The recently adopted East Mulberry Plan tripled the miles of arterial and collector streets
required to serve the zoning and density proposed in this planning area. The Street Oversizing
fees are proposed to be increased to recover these increased costs. Periodic recalculations of
the Street Oversizing fee schedule are necessary to ensure that fee revenues will be sufficient
to pay for the cost of improvements that the program will be constructing.
2. Staff also presented a Street Oversizing Program adjustment to recover costs for the
proportional share of the costs of intersection standards improvements. This expansion of the
cost recovery calculation is a significant change of direction for the Street Oversizing
Program, but would help pay for upgrading intersections in established areas of town to meet
current standards for all modes of transportation. Staff is looking at this revision in
conjunction with proposed Capital Improvement Program funding for intersection
improvements.
Council was split over both proposals, expressing concern that the Street Oversizing Fees could
be raised by as much as 46%.
•
Next Steps:
Questions and comments raised:
1) There was some support for looking at how the City intersection standards would be applied
to intersection improvements in established areas of town. In retrofit situations such as this,
compromises are sometimes made in lane widths, sidewalk placement, utility locations and
median design. A more detailed analysis and preliminary engineering of each of the proposed
improvement intersections may reduce the proposed fee increase. Staff will continue to refine
the analysis and cost estimates.
2) Staff was asked to provide information on the maintenance cost of the City's street network at
build-out of the roadway system. Assuming that build-out occurs by 2025, and that the
number of street miles increases from 460 in 2004 to 830 at full build-out of the street
network, the pavement management need would be $14,360,000 per year in today's dollars.
It currently costs about $17,300 per year per mile to maintain our street system. The 2004
budget for Pavement Management is $7,528,891.
3) Staff was asked about Loveland's transportation impact fee program and if it was similar to
ours. In talking with David Mockeman, Engineering Manager for the Public Works
Department at the City of Loveland, their impact fee program covers almost exactly the same
types and levels of improvements, including street widths, sidewalks, bike lanes and medians.
Their current fee of$2,962 per dwelling unit was adopted in 2001 and currently remains in
effect. Mr. Klockeman indicated that the fee schedule would be reviewed for possible
adjustment this year.
4) Staff was asked to provide a comparison between the historical population increases in Fort
Collins and increases in the Street Oversizing Fee since it's inception in 1979. The population
of Fort Collins was 65,092 in 1979 and has grown to an estimated 134,128. Data is from the
City's Advanced Planning Department. The increase in population during this period is
• 106%. The initial Street Oversizing Fee adopted in 1979 was $213 per dwelling unit.
However, Council at that time decided to adopt this artificially lower fee than the
recommended fee of$480, in order to phase in this new program over a three year period to
minimize the impact on new development. However,the fledgling Street Oversizing Fund
promptly went $1 million in debt due to the fees being too low to recover the obligated costs.
In order to use an accurate comparison in this memo, the initial recommended fee rather than
the adopted fee is used for comparison. Assuming a yearly inflation of 3.5% and correcting
the 1979 fee to 2004 dollars indicates the Street Oversizing Fee has increased 83% in real
dollars.
•
gaTransportation Services
Engineering Department
ity of Fort Collins MEMORANDUM
November 30, 2004
To: Mayor and City Council Members
Through: Darin Atteberry, City Manager
Ron Phillips,Director, Transportation Services
Don Bachman, Director, Transportation Operations
Cam McNair, City Engineer
From: Matt Baker, Street Oversizing Program Manager
RE: Street Oversizing Fee Update
Staff is proposing a 13.8% increase to the Street Oversizing Fee. The increase consists of two
elements: (1) a 3.6% increase for inflation, and (2) a 10.2% increase for recently adopted changes to
the City's Master Street Plan. Periodic routine recalculations of the Street Oversizing fees are
necessary to ensure that fee revenues will be sufficient to pay for the costs of improvements that the
program will be constructing in the future.
• • Construction costs have increased. Staff is recommending a 3.6% increase to keep pace with
inflation.
• The recently adopted East Mulberry Plan tripled the amount of arterial and collector roadway
required to serve the zoning and density proposed in this planning area.
• The recently adopted Transportation Master Plan reclassified several street segments as a
result of computer modeling of the transportation network. Several streets were downgraded
in classification and a few were upgraded.
Staff is proposing a recalculation of Street Oversizing fees to include these changes. The overall
result is a 13.8%increase in Street Oversizing fees.
Inflation of Construction Costs:
All of the City's Capital Expansion fees, including the Street Oversizing Fees, are adjusted annually
for inflation. The Street Oversizing Fees are typically indexed to the Denver region's Construction
Cost Index,published in the Engineering News Record (ENR). This index is showing a 9.5%
increase for 2004,mainly due to material price increases for steel, wood and fuel. However, staff
also tracks actual construction cost pricing for each project and reimbursement in the Street
Oversizing Program, and we have experienced a 3.6% increase in construction costs this year. Staff
is recommending that fees be increased to recover this 3.6% inflation amount,based on our actual
• experience rather than the Denver region's index of 9.5%.
281 North College Avenue • P.O.Box 580 • Fort Collins,CO 80522-0580 • (970)221-6605 • FAX(970)221-6378
www.fcgov.com
East Mulberry Plan Revisions:
The East Mulberry Plan area is from Mulberry Street on the south, to (but not including)Vine Drive
on the north; and from Lemay Avenue to I-25. The adopted plan looked at the transportation
network needed to support the land uses indicated by the City's Structure Plan. A significant
amount of arterial and collector streets were added. The previous amount of lane miles in the area
was 17.61. This increased to 62.13 lane miles with the adoption of the plan,more that tripling the
amount of street improvements that will be necessary. In the Street Oversizing analysis of these
improvements, existing County developments were not included,both for the street improvements
adjacent to these areas and trip destinations to these areas. However, the recalculation still indicates
that a 10.2% increase to the Street Oversizing fees is warranted. A sampling of the fee changes
needed to support the East Mulberry Plan is shown in the table below.
Transportation Master Plan Revisions:
Staff also analyzed the reclassification of streets adopted with the recent Transportation Master Plan
update. Several street segments were downgraded. A few street segments were upgraded, the most
significant being Carpenter Road rising to a six-lane Major Arterial. However,the net effect of these
roadway classification changes was insignificant in the overall recalculation of the Street Oversizing
fees. The Transportation Master Plan revisions did not increase the fees.
• Summary
Capital Expansion Fees are annually adjusted for inflation. This year staff is recommending a 3.6%
increase to offset the effects of increased construction costs.
Changes in City Land Use Regulations and Transportation Plans require revising the Street
Oversizing Program to bring it in line with the new requirements, and to capture the actual costs of
the collector and arterial street system that are attributable to growth.
The Street Oversizing fees have undergone routine recalculations in the past in response to changes
in the City's land use plan:
• The Mountain Vista Sub Area Plan adopted in 1999 added significant street miles to the
City's Master Street Plan and required a fee increase to recover costs.
• The Fossil Lake expansion of the City's GMA in 2000 added some street miles, but also
increased the amount of developable land in the City, resulting in a decrease in fees.
The recently adopted East Mulberry Plan and the adoption of the Transportation Master Plan Update
made changes to the future funding obligations of the Street Oversizing Program. Fees should be
increased to recover costs. Street Oversizing must recover the costs of growth in order to continue to
be a financially viable program for constructing transportation infrastructure in newly-developing
areas.
• A matrix of the proposed revisions, included in this routine recalculation of the Street Oversizing
fees, is shown below:
" current Fee Inflahovo ' EasIullierry' . Progose 'Fey;;I"
Residential $2,006/d.u. $72/d.u. $204/d.u. $2,282/d.u.
Light $1.43/s.f. $0.5/s.f. $0.14/s.f. $1.62/s.f.
Industrial
Office $3.35/s.f. $0.12/s.f. $0.34/s.f. $3.81/s.f.
Retail $4.98/s.f. $0.18/s.f. $0.51/s.f. $5.67/s.f.
3.6% thane 10.2% increase 13.8% increase
Staff is recommending adoption of these routine fee adjustments to the Street Oversizing Program.
Backeround
The City of Fort Collins' policy is to require new development to pay for the growth-related impacts
on public facilities. The Street Oversizing Impact Fee was enacted in 1979, and significant revisions
were made in 1988 and 1996. Additional impact fees for Fire, Police, Library, General Government
• and Community Parks were adopted in 1996.
Impact fees are one-time payments that fund the development or expansion of public facilities
needed to accommodate new development. The intent is for new development to pay for its
"proportionate share"of the capital costs of additional infrastructure capacity. Specific costs have
been identified using local data and current dollars. There are over 150 miles of arterial and
collector street improvements needed in the City's transportation network to accommodate new
development within the Growth Management Area Boundary. These improvements will be needed
to serve new growth. The cost to complete the Arterial and Collector street network(including bike
lanes and pedestrian ways), through build-out, in the Growth Management Area, has been estimated
by an analysis of the adopted Master Street Plan. Included in these infrastructure costs are bus bays
and shelters, commuter bicycle lanes, sidewalks and ADA ramps, and other improvements that
increase the capability of the streets as multi-modal transportation corridors. The level of
improvement is based on the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards originally adopted in
1996 and updated in 1998, 2001 and 2002.
The Street Oversizing Program uses the impact fees it collects to fund the construction of arterial and
collector streets in order to mitigate the impacts of new development. Increasing the functional
capacity of existing improved streets can be viewed as correcting"existing deficiencies" in public
facilities and not as a need created by new development. Impact fees are specifically restricted from
correcting existing deficiencies. These improvements are traditionally funded in Fort Collins by
sales taxes.
• ' "d.u."=Dwelling Unit.
2 "s.f"=Square Foot.
Proposed 2005 Street Oversizing Fee Schedule
Average
Weekday Transportation
Vehicle Trips Impact Fee Rate
Residential Per Housina Unit
SF Detached 9.55 $2,282 per D.0
MF and Other Housing 6.59 $1,574 per D.0
Hotel/Motel 8.70 $2,078 per Room
Apartment 6.12 $1,462 per D.0
Retirement Community 3.30 $788 per D.0
Assisted Living 4.52 $1,080 per D.0
Congregate Care Facility 2.15 $514 per D.0
Residential Condominium 5.86 $1,400 per D.0
Duplex 7.18 $1,715 per D.0
Townhome 5.86 $1,400 per D.0
Mobile Home 4.92 $1,175 per D.0
Average
Weekday
Vehicle Trips
Non Residential Per 1,000 Sa.Ft.
Comm/Shopping Center
1000K GLA 32.09 $4.46 Per Sq. Ft.
500K GLA 38.65 $5.38 Per Sq. Ft.
• 200K GLA 54.50 $7.58 Per Sq. Ft.
50K GLA 91.65 $8.77 Per Sq. Ft.
Movie Theater 77.79 $10.82 Per Sq. Ft.
Fitness/Racquet Club 17.14 $2.56 Per Sq. Ft.
Day Care 79.26 $4.63 Per Sq. Ft.
Government Office 68.93 $10.31 Per Sq. Ft.
Post Office 86.78 $12.98 Per Sq. Ft.
Building Materials/Lumber 39.71 $5.52 Per Sq. Ft.
Specialty Retail 40.68 $5.67 Per Sq. Ft.
Discount Club 41.80 $5.82 Per Sq. Ft.
Nursery(Garden Center) 36.08 $5.40 Per Sq. Ft.
Sit Down Restaurant 130.34 $12.47 Per Sq. Ft.
Fast Food Restaurant w/Driveup 496.12 $28.99 Per Sq. Ft.
Car Sales 37.50 $5.61 Per Sq. Ft.
Service Station 168.56 /pump $9,850.63 Per Pump
Wholesale Tire Store 20.36 $3.05 Per Sq. Ft.
Self Service Car Wash 5.79 /stall $338.37 Per Stall
Supermarket 111.51 $10.67 Per Sq. Ft.
Convenience Market 737.99 $43.13 Per Sq. Ft.
Furniture Store 5.06 $1.18 Per Sq. Ft.
Bank 189.95 $10.32 Per Sq. Ft.
Drive-In Bank 265.21 $15.50 Per Sq. Ft.
Insurance Building 11.45 $1.71 Per Sq. Ft.
Manufacturing 3.85 $0.90 Per Sq. Ft.
• Warehousing 4.96 $1.16 Per Sq. Ft.
Light Industrial 6.97 $1.62 Per Sq. Ft.
Mini-Warehouse 2.50 $0.58 Per Sq. Ft.
Page 1
• Business Park 14.37 $3.36 Per Sq. Ft.
General Office
200K GFA 11.54 $2.70 Per Sq. Ft.
50K GFA 16.31 $3.81 Per Sq. Ft.
10K GFA 24.39 $5.70 Per Sq. Ft.
Recreational 3.64 /ac $850.88 Per Acre
City Park 3.66 /ac $855.56 Per Acre
Golf Course 5.04 /ac $1,178.15 Per Acre
Elementary School 1.02 /student $238.43 Per Student
Church/Synagogue 9.11 $2.13 Per Sq. Ft.
Library 54.00 $12.62 Per Sq. Ft.
Hospital 16.78 $3.92 Per Sq. Ft.
Nursing Home 2.60 /bed $607.07 Per Bed
Medical Clinic 31.45 $7.35 Per Sq. Ft.
Note: Rate calculation for each item based on the product of Number of Weekday Trips, Trip Adjustment
Factor, and Cost Per Unit of Trip.
•
•
Page 2