HomeMy WebLinkAboutPH 1 TRANSP MGT FEES 05-06-91jATE:
TO:
FROM:
APRIL 16, 1991
WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER
CONGESTION MANAGEMENT TEAM
PUBLIC HEARING N0. 1
5-6-91
Inter - Com
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 91-49 ESTABLISHING TRANSPORTATION DEMAND
MANAGEMENT FEES FOR SPECIFIED NEW DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council, at their meeting of May 6,
1991, adopt Resolution No. 91-49 establishing Transportation Demand
Management Fees for Specified New Development Projects.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
On April 15, 1991, the City Council approved Ordinance No. 1062 by
adopting Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Requirements for
Specified New Development Projects. This ordinance is a part of
the overall requirements of the County -wide Congestion Management
Program (CMP) mandated by the State, and will take effect on May
15, 1991.
Ordinance No. 1062 specifies certain actions which must be taken by
developers of non-residential projects with employment projections
of 100 or more. More specifically, provisions of the ordinance
require the submittal of a Trip Reduction/TDM Strategy Plan and an
Annual Compliance Report to the City.
In addition, to administer review of each report and additional
enforcement of the ordinance, the ordinance provides a mechanism
for collection of certain fees for recovery of City costs and
penalties by resolution of the City Council, as follows:
1. A Trip Reduction/TDM Strategy Plan Review Fee at the time
of initial project application.
2. A subsequent Annual Compliance Report Fee at the time
that each Trip Reduction/TDM Strategy Report is
submitted.
3. A penalty fee if the Annual Report is not submitted
within 30 days following written notice from the City
Traffic Engineer or his/her designee.
4. A penalty fee if an initial Trip Reduction/TDM Strategy
Plan or subsequent Annual Report modification is not
implemented as approved by the City Traffic Engineer or
his/her designee.
TDM Fees Memorandum
Page 2
5. If non-compliance or reasonable progress is not completed
or remedied following requested modification by the City,
the City may impose a Performance Penalty Fee.
6. An applicant may request a variance from certain
Facility Standards contained in the ordinance upon
submittal of a written request to the City Community
Development Department and accompanied by a fee.
7. Any decision made by the City Traffic Engineer may be
appealed to the Planning Commission upon submittal of a
written request to the City of Tustin Community
Development Department and accompanied by a fee.
ANALYSIS
An in-depth analysis has been conducted by staff to determine the
internal organizational roles and staff activities required to
implement the Transportation Demand Management Program, in order to
determine the appropriate review, penalty, variance, and appeal
fees.
Based upon this analysis, it was determined that the review fees
should be based upon the direct labor costs and overhead
anticipated to be incurred during the review process. This
mechanism would enable the City to recover direct expenses
associated with implementation of the program, thereby placing the
financial burden directly upon each development project. The labor
costs utilized for this analysis are included as Attachment I. As
a second step in the analysis, staff estimated the actual average
number of productive hours that would be spent on each specific
type of review required by Ordinance No. 1062 (see Attachment II).
As noted in Attachment II, hours were then multiplied by hourly
rates and City overhead costs to determine the justified cost of
review and processing of each action required. Based on this
analysis, the following review fees are recommended:
Recommended
Type of Review Fee
TDM Strategy Plan 450
Annual Compliance Report 850
Late Submittal Fee 580
TDM Ordinance Variance or Appeal Fee 385
It is also recommended that the above fees adjust annually in
accordance with adjustments to the Consumer Price Index.
TDM Fees Memorandum
Page 3
Pursuant to Ordinance No. 1062, a Performance Penalty Fee would
also be established at the time of the initial Trip Reduction/TDM
Strategy Plan Review, in accordance with the formula established by
resolution of the City Council. The Performance Penalty Fee would
be equal to the estimated cost of implementation of the Trip
Reduction/TDM program submitted for each individual project or the
cost per vehicle trip to be reduced (the performance requirement)
multiplied by the number of vehicle trips in excess of the
performance requirement. It is also recommended that the
Performance Penalty Fee amount be adjusted annually in accordance
with the previous year's Consumer Price Index adjustment.
If during the Annual Compliance Report Review it is determined that
the established Trip Reduction/TDM objectives have not been met,
the City will notify the property owner in writing. The property
owner would then have 30 days to respond with a written plan to
meet the established performance requirement within 180 days. At
the end of the 180 day period, the property owner would be required
to pay a Performance Penalty Fee in proportion to the number of
peak hour vehicle trips in excess of the performance requirement.
The Performance Penalty Fees would be deposited into an isolated
account specifically earmarked for transportation system
improvements.
An example of how the Penalty Fee formula would work is included as
Attachment III.
CONCLUSION
As stated earlier, an in-depth analysis was conducted by staff in
order to determine the most appropriate fees for the Trip
Reduction/TDM Program. The fees presented in this report will
assist in mitigating the actual costs and impacts that the various
TDM program requirements will have on the City.
Christine A. Shine eton
Assistant City Manager
CAS:RSL:lmh:tdmitem
Attachments
Robert S. Ledendecker
Director of Public Works/
City Engineer
ATTACHMENT I
Comprehensive Personnel Cost Analysis
for Certian Administrative
Review and Enforcement Actions Required
by Ordinance 1062
Public Works Department Costs
No. Title Hourly Rate
1. Secretary $15.80
2. Assoc. Civil Eng. 26.89
3. Transportation Eng. 26.89
4. Eng. Svcs. Mgr. 35.04
5. Dir. of PW/City Eng. 40.27
ommunity Development Department Costs
Benefits
$4.11
6.99
6.99
9.11
10.47
Total Cost
Per Man -Hour
$19.91
33.88
33.88
44.15
50.74
Total Cost
No.
Title Hourly Rate
Benefits
Per Man -Hour
6.
Dir. of Cmmty. Dvlp.
42.07
10.94
53.01
7.
Assistant Directbr
32.41
8.43
40.84
8.
Senior Planner
26.65
6.93
33.58
9.
Assoc. Planner
21.73
5.65
27.38
10.
Dept. Clerk
13.60
3.54
17.14
ATTACHMENT II
Review Fee Analysis
The following matrices have been developed based upon the personnel data
contained in Attachment I and an analysis of the identified specific tasks
required during the review, evaluation and approval process for the Trip
Reduction/TDM Strategy Plan Review, the Annual Compliance Report Review, and
Late Submittal Review, variances and appeals:
TR/TDM Strategy
Plan
Review -
Estimate of
Costs
1.5
2.0
1.0
Task Man Hours
By Position
Number
1
2
3 4
5
Tasks
6.0
2.0 0.25
3.0
2.0
Receipt/Processing
1.5
$19.91
33.88
33.88
Plan Review & Analysis
1.5
2.0 1.0
Report Preparation
2.0
0.5
2.5 1.0
0.25
Total Man-hours
3.5
2.0
4.5 2.0
0.25
Cost per Man-hour
$19.91
33.88
33.88 44.15
50.74
Costs by Position $69.69 67.76 152.46 88.30 12.69
ital Estimate of Direct Labor Costs (All Positions) $390.90
..ty Overhead (14%) 55.00
Recommended TR/TDM Strategy Plan Review Fee $450.00
Annual Compliance Report Review - Estimate of Costs
Tasks
Receipt/Processing
Report Review & Analysis
Existing Document Review
Site Review
Report Preparation
Total Man-hours
Cost per Man-hour
Task Man Hours By Position Number
1 2 3 4 5
0.5
1.5
2.0
1.0
0.5
1.5
4.0
2.5
0.5
6.0
2.0 0.25
3.0
2.0
12.5
4.0 0.25
$19.91
33.88
33.88
44.15 50.74
Costs by Position $59.73 67.76 423.50 176.60 12.69
Total Estimate of Direct Labor Costs (All Positions) $740.28
City Overhead (14%) 105.00
Recommended Annual Compliance Report Review Fee $850.00
ATTACHMENT II (CONTINUED)
Late Submittal Fee - Estimate of Costs
Task Man Hours By Position Number
1 2 3 4 5
Tasks
Review for
Preparation of Late Notice
1.0
0.5
2.0
0.25
Receipt/Processing
1.5
0.25
Plan Routing/Coord. 0.25
0.5 0.5 0.25
Plan Review & Analysis
1.5
2.0
1.0
Report Preparation
2.0
0.5
2.5
1.0
0.25
Total Man-hours
4.5
2.5
6.5
2.25
0.25
Cost per Man-hour
$19.91
33.88
33.88
44.15
50.74
Costs by Position
$89.60
84.70
220.22
99.34
12.69
Total Estimate of Direct Labor Costs
(All
Positions)
0.5
$506.55
City Overhead (14%)
.75
Hearing Attendance
0.25
0.25
71.00
Recommended Late Submittal
Fee
0.5 0.5 1.0
0.25 1.5
5.0
$580.00
Late Submittal Fee - Estimate of Costs
Task Man Hours By Position Number
1 3 4 6 7 8 9
10
Tasks
Review for
Completeness
0.25
0.50
0.25
Plan Routing/Coord. 0.25
0.5 0.5 0.25
Hearing
Notice
0.25
0.25
0.25
Mailing
1.0
0.50
Posting
0.25
Commission or
Council Report
Preparation
0.5
1.0
3.0
.75
Hearing Attendance
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
Total Man-hours 0.25
0.5 0.5 1.0
0.25 1.5
5.0
2.25
Cost per Man-hour $15.80
26.89 35.04 42.07
32.41 26.65
21.73
13.60
Costs by Position $9.95 16.94 22.01 53.01 10.21 56.25 136.90 38.57
Total Estimate of Direct Labor Costs (All Positions) $337.84
City Overhead (140) 47.30
Recommended TDM Variance and Appeal Fee $385.00
ATTACHMENT III
Performance Penalty Fee
"An Example"
The "ABC" Company submits a Trip Reduction/TDM Strategy Plan with a
projection of 1,500 vehicle trips based on trip generation projections of the
Institute of Traffic Engineers. Thus, to meet the Average Vehicle Ridership
(AVR) goal of 1.5, The "ABC" Company must decrease vehicle trips by 500,
making the performance requirement 1,000 vehicle trips. It is also
determined by the City during this initial review that the Trip Reduction/TDM
program would cost $20,000 to implement.
The Performance Penalty Fee for this project is then set at $20,000 or the
cost per vehicle trip to be reduced ($20,000 divided by 500), which in this
case equals $40.00, multiplied by the number of vehicle trips in excess of
the performance requirement. This amount will adjust yearly in accordance
with the previous year's Consumer Price Index adjustment.
One year later, The "ABC" Company receives their Annual Compliance Report
Review. It has been determined that they are not complying with the
performance requirement and are notified in writing. The "ABC" Company must
then submit, within 30 days, a plan to meet the performance requirement with
180 days. At the end of the 180 day period, The "ABC" Company must submit a
-ised Annual Compliance Report which is then reviewed by the City. Upon
iew, it is determined that the performance requirement is exceeded by 327
vehicle trips. Therefore, The "ABC" Company's Performance Penalty Fee (E in
the example below) is calculated as follows:
Performance Penalty Fee Formula
A = Cost of Trip Reduction/TDM Program
set during initial review
B = Number of vehicle trips to be
reduced
C = A/B = Performance Penalty Fee per
vehicle trip in excess of the
performance requirement
D = Number of vehicle trips in excess
of performance requirement
E = CxD = Total Performance Penalty Fee
to be assessed
The "ABC" Company
$20,000/500
$40 x 327
$20,000
500
$40
327
$13,080.00