HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-10-06; City Council; 14877; Regional Development Impact Fees. .
2 E 2 P
. . p 2 g z
CITY OF CARLSBAD - AGEi3A BILL
AB# /+873 =I
REQUEST TO SPEAK ON
MTG. 1 O/6/98 REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
DEPT. CM
DEPT. HD.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Receive presentation from Mr. Jerry Harmon on the subject of regional development impact
fees.
ITEM EXPLANATION:
Mr. Jerry Harmon has asked to address the City Council on the subject of regional
development impact fees.
EXHIBITS:
1. Memo from Mr. Jerry Harmon dated g/8/98.
El9/68/1998 13:23 7688399128
September 801, 1998
PAGE 81
To: Carlsbad Ci
ak about Regional Development Impact Fees
I would like to address your City Council on the subject of “Regional Impact
Fees” and request time on your agenda for this subject. This proposal
directly affects your city and will be the subject of an agenda item at
SANDAG at their regular meeting on Friday September 25th.
It would be most timely to speak to your City Council before the SANDAG
meeting so X request time on your agenda for Tuesday September 15th if at
all possible. Otherwise I would like to appear on September 22nd.
Thank you for your consideration. ‘You may respond by phone to my home
760-480-9483 or mail to 1021 Madison, Escondido 92027.
RESOLUTION NUMBER
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA SUPPORTING A STUDY TO DETERMINE
THE DOLLAR AMOUNT FOR A REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT
IMPACT FEE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE THE ADDITIONAL
FINANCING TO IMPLEMENT TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS
WITHIN THE I-5, I-15 AND HIGHWAY S 78 AND 76 CORRIDORS.
WHEREAS, every city in San Diego County has enacted Development
Impact Fees to cause new population growth to pay its fair share of capital
improvement costs; and
WHEREAS, it is projected that this region will increase in population by at
least l,OOO,OOO persons within the next twenty years and will require
additional freeway lanes, interchanges, mass transit, and other capital
improvements; and
WHEREAS, in addition to transportation improvements the region will
require new courts, jails, county health, safety, and welfare facilities,
libraries, parks, and educational facilities; and
WHEREAS, presently no REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
are collected to cause future population growth to pay its fair share of the
future REGIONAL capital improvements; and
WHEREAS, the City Council deems this action to be in the public interest
for health, safety, and welfare to approve in concept a study to determine a
dollar amount for new REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Carlsbad,
California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true.
2. That the City Council approves in concept a study to determine the
dollar amount of a REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
required to provide the additional financing needed to implement traffic
management solutions within the I-5, I-l 5, Highway 78and 76 corridors, and
3. The RDIF dollar amount for all other regional capital requirements.
‘. .
Projected Approved or Partially
Approved Residential Housing Units
As of 4116198
Community
Escondido
San Marcos
Vista
Oceanside
Carlsbad
Valley Center
Number of Units
1,500
3,400 ??? . .
2,boo
6,785
Orchard Ranch
Woods Valley Ranch
Christopher Hill
Santa Fe Valley
4s Ranch
Sabre Springs
Sub Area 1
Black Mnt Ranch North
Black Mnt Ranch South
Sub Area 3
Sub Area 4
400
590
400
1,200
4,965
500
5,000
1,100
5,000
2,800
Grand Total 35,640
- w**-r *A* &A&..- u UUL.-A”--b Y c .-_.-. *, -& -. “W,
Thursday
-I:-’ July 23, 1998
.Developers
agree to pay
millions to
ease traffic
lea1 is unprecedented; -15 would benefit most
‘:y Kathryn Balint T4FF WRITER
RANCH0 BERNARD0 - Yayne Hill and Dennis Moser prob- .bly won’t win any popularity con- ests among fellow developers. That’s because yesterday they rommitted to do something no de- :eloper in San Diego County has lone before: pay millions for free- yays and mass transit. All told, they’ve agreed to chip in aore than $43 million to ease con- Testion on Interstate 15 between rate routes 78 and 163, and to omplete state Route 56, which will
mnect I- 15 in Ranch0 Pefiasquitos +xh Interstate 5 in Carmel Valley. The unprecedented gesture - while it might not win friends in the uilding industry - might win over xstrated North County commut- rs. who say the more than 10,000 .omes the developers propose will nly further congest freeways. The developers’ announcement :as made at a meeting of Citizens o Improve I-15, a group formed by ian Diego Councilwoman Barbara Varden. whose 5th District in-
:udes Ranch0 Bernardo. Hill, project manager for the pro- osed Black Mountain Ranch devel- pment north of Ranch0 Pefiasqui- 2s. said his company will come up _
with.$10.3 million to improve I-15, $13.2 million for state Route 56 and $1.5 million for mass transit. Moser, vice president of the company that is proposing the 4s Ranch development west of Ranch0 Bernardo, pledged $17.2 million to- ward I-15 and $1 million for mass
transit. The money is contingent on vot- ers in the city of San Diego approv- ing Black Mountain Ranch in No- vember, and on the county Board of Supervisors giving the green light to 4s Ranch this year. “It’s basically self-serving, be- cause if the freeway doesn’t work, we’re not going to sell houses,” Hill
said.
See TRAFFIC otl Page A-20
Traffic
Offers are contingent on approval of projects
Continuedfrom A-l
Moser said the contributions “go way beyond anything in the past.”
“‘I think all the citizens on the I-15 corridor are the recipients of the benefits,” he said.
Warden and county Supervisor Pam Slater said the companies will be bound by contracts to ensure payment, and are not being given any development concessions for agreeing to pay the money. How it will be spent, however, was unclear yesterday. The state Department of Transportation has not decided where the money will fit into 1-15’s future. “The deal was just made between the developers and the city and the
: -- i ‘,: ‘2 ‘.:..:I .‘, p f ;: ZT =, c: ‘y, , ’
..,a ‘. I . . 32
- , 6 I . . _ A,.’ a0
@J
I
42
/
1
P :: 1 .- n
5 i t,, i 6 i
L
,I
,
REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
We need to establish “Regional Development Impact Fees.” Every city in
San Diego County has “development fees”, as a source of income to pay for
capital improvements that will be needed as our populations increase in
accordance with our General Plans. The average fees per single family
house in the region are approximately $20,000. However, no fees for
capital improvements are collected for: courts and jails, transportation, open
space and recreation, health facilities, social service facilities, etc.
We expect an increase in population of l,OOO,OOO people in San Diego
County within the next twenty years. Question, where should we get the
money to pay for the capital improvements to meet the needs of the
additional one million people? Current public policy responds to that
question by expecting voters to pass bond issues or have their sales taxes
increased if they hope to maintain their quality of life standards. It is time
to expand an already successful policy of making population growth pay its
way by now collecting Regional Development Impact Fees in every city
in the county at the same time we collect our respective city development
fees.
We have a proven model that works for cities; we should expand it to the
region. Further, we have a proven model that works to administer those
new fees. For ten years SANDAG has served as The Regional
Transportation Commission to administer fees collected as a half-cent sales
tax for transportation. We need to establish a “Regional Capital
Improvement Commission”, which could be SANDAG, to do the same
work for other needed infrastructure. We collect development fees each
time we issue a building permit in every city, and at the county permit
counters. We could collect an additional fee to meet the needs of new courts
and jails, new regional roads, freeways (the half-cent sales tax has a sunset
clause in ten years), open space and recreational facilities, health facilities,
and other needed regional capital improvements. This would remove the
tax burden from existing taxpayers and make new population growth pay its
fair share.
To determine the amount of the new regional fee, our local elected
representatives should first determine what our quality of life standards are ’
‘, .
going to be at the regional level. For example, what should the number of
courts and jails per 1000 population be, level of service on our regional
roads and freeways, open space and recreational acreage per capita, etc?
Once these standards are determined professionals can then calculate the
revenue needed to build the necessary capital improvements to keep up with
the demands of population growth. It will then be. up to elected officials to
run government like a business and set,public policies that will protect the
quality of life and pocket books of existing residents and businesses as we
continue to increase our population. This can then be done without asking
existing taxpayers to pass new bond issues or increase their sales taxes, gas
taxes, or other taxes.
This new policy would make population growth pay its fair share. If we
were not dramatically increasing our population, then existing policies
would be sufficient. But, when we realize we must plan to add another
population increment equal to the size of the city of San Diego in this region
within the next twenty years then we need to up date our policies to make
them fair to existing taxpayers.
Jerry C. Harmon
Escondido Council member
Candidate, 5* Supervisorial District
Fee4
REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
DO NOT INCREASE THE PRICE OF HOUSING
All cities in San Diego County have been collecting development impact
fees for the past twenty years. However, no fees have been collected to
make new population growth pay its fair share for county-wide needs such
as freeways, courts, jails, open space, etc. To do this we need new public
policy to collect Regional Development Impact Fees.
Developers have opposed development impact fees since they were first
discussed in the early 1970’s. Then they said if such fees were imposed that
it would stop growth. In 1978 when proposition 13, the property tax
limitation initiative was passed by the voters, the developers had no choice
and began paying development fees to help make new population growth
pay its fair share.
To minimize the amount they would pay they hired public relations firms to
advance the argument that new fees would increase the price of new homes.
At first glance this seems like a reasonable argument until one stops to
analyze its flawed logic. It is true “development fees” cost someone but it is
not primarily the homebuyer, contrary to popular belief. Consider the
following questions and (answers):
1. Does the market place determine the price of housing? (Yes.)
2. In a free enterprise society, do developers sell their finished product for
whatever price the market will allow? (Yes)
3. If there were zero development fees, would developers still sell their
product for what ever the market would allow? (Of Course.)
4. There are five components of housing costs:
I. Cost of material
II. Cost of labor
III. Profit, and overhead
IV. Development Fees
V. Cost of land
If material, labor, profit, and fees are basic market driven costs of
housing, what will an increase in “Development Fees” do to the value of
raw land? (Lower it.)
5. So isn’t it true that the person who owns the raw land is ultimately the
one who will absorb most of the cost of development fees? (Yes, Unless
the developer made a bad business decision and over paid for the land!)
Remember, without roads, freeways, schools, courts, jails, water, etc. the
value of raw land is minimal.
6. Do you believe therefore, that we should modify the way we pay for
capital improvements? Shouldn’t we collect “development fees” up front
rather than waiting for schools, roads, freeways, courts, jails, etc. to become
over crowded. Wouldn’t this be better than asking all taxpayers to increase
their taxes to “catch up” with the needed capital improvements even if this
means that it will decrease the value of undeveloped land? (If you value
your quality of life and your property values and want to minimize your
taxes, the answer is YES! If you own undeveloped land and want to get the
most profit possible from the sale of your land the answer is NO!)
The above policy would make population growth pay its fair share. There is
no moral or ethical problem placing the costs of future capital
improvements on raw land owners, in my opinion, because land is not worth
what the market has valued it at due to the out of date public policies which
burden existing taxpayers with unfair costs. If we were not dramatically
increasing our population, then existing policies would be sufficient. But,
when we realize we must plan to add another population increment equal to
the size of the city of San Diego in this region within the next twenty years
then we need to up date our policies to make them fair to existing taxpayers.
Jerry C. Harmon
Escondido Council member
Candidate, 5* Supervisorial District
)’ . .
.
s m mm E
KS
E ‘C 0
8% L
SE
ym
0 03
s ‘f p S’
, Petition for Responsible Development
By the cities of Carlsbad, Escondido, Oceanside, San Marcos, Vista, San Diego, Poway,
Encinitas, Solana Beach, De1 Mar, and the County of San Diego.
m Traffic on local freeways (I-15, I-5,78) is becoming intolerable. m
Approximately 30,000 to 40,000 more homes are in the process of being
approved in North County. This translates to 300,000 to 400,000 more trips per
day on our roads and freeways.
We, the existing residents, believe that only after improvements have been
made on our freeways to relieve this traffic congestion should building permits
for new developments over four units be issued by the above named cities and
the County of San Diego.
1 All signers of this petition must be registered to vote in the County of San Diego. 1
NAME ADDRESS
TELEPHONEC ) CITY CA, ZIP
NAME
p TELEPHONE( )
ADDRESS
CITY CA, ZIP
A NAME ADDRESS
TELEPHONE( ) CITY CA, ZIP
p NAME R , TELEPHONE( )
ADDRESS
CITY CA, ZIP
T ADDRESS
cl TELEPHONE( ) CITY CA, ZIP I
i
,
A NAME ADDRESS
n -1