HomeMy WebLinkAboutORD 5670CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING SECTION
4-1-190 OF CHAPTER 1, ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT, OF TITLE IV
(DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS) OF ORDINANCE NO. 4260 ENTITLED "CODE OF
GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON", BY
REPEALING SECTION 4-1-190 AND REPLACING IT WITH A NEW SECTION 4-1-
190, ENTITLED "IMPACT FEES", AUTHORIZING THE COLLECTION OF IMPACT
FEES FOR TRANSPORTATION, PARKS, AND FIRE PROTECTION; PROVIDING
FINDINGS AND DEFINITIONS; PROVIDING FOR THE TIME OF PAYMENT;
PROVIDING EXEMPTIONS AND CREDITS; PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT
OF IMPACT FEE ACCOUNTS, REFUNDS AND THE USE OF FUNDS PROVIDING
FOR REVIEWS AND ADJUSTMENTS OF IMPACT FEES; AUTHORIZING
INDEPENDENT FEE CALCULATIONS; AND SETTING A FEE FOR APPEALS.
WHEREAS, the Renton City Council (the "Council") finds that new growth and
development in the City of Renton (the "City") will create additional demand and need for
public facilities; and
WHEREAS, in the Revised Code of Washington ("RCW") 82.02.050(1), the Legislature has
stated that its intent is to allow the cities to require new growth and development within their
boundaries to pay a proportionate share of the cost of system improvements to serve such new
development activity through the assessment of impact fees for transportation, parks and fire
protection; and
WHEREAS, in RCW 82.02.050(2), the Legislature has authorized cities to impose impact
fees subject to the requirements of RCW 82.02.050(3) and (4); and
WHEREAS, RCW 82.020.050(1)(b) and RCW 82.020.060 provide that the City may enact
a local ordinance providing for impact fees and the limitations and/or extent that that local
ordinance can provide for the impact fees; and
1
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
WHEREAS, RCW 82.020.070(2) provides that impact fees shall be expended only in
conformance with the capital facilities plan element of the comprehensive plan; and
WHEREAS, RCW 82.02.090(3) defines "Impact Fee" as a payment of money imposed
upon development as a condition of development approval to pay for public facilities needed to
serve new growth and development, and that is reasonably related to the new development
that creates additional demand and need for public facilities, that is a proportionate share of
the cost of the public facilities, and that is used for facilities that reasonably benefit the new
development, but not a reasonable permit or application fee; and
WHEREAS, RCW 82.02.090(7) defines "Public Facilities" as public streets and roads;
publicly owned parks, open space, and recreation facilities; school facilities; and fire protection
facilities; and
WHEREAS, RCW 58.17.060(1) provides that a city shall adopt by ordinance regulations
and procedures, and appoint administrative personnel for the summary approval of short plats
and short subdivisions or alteration or vacation thereof only if the administrative personnel
make appropriate written findings consistent with RCW 58.17.110; and
WHEREAS, RCW 58.17.110(2) requires that the Council make written findings that
appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety and general welfare, including but
not limited to safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and that
the public use and interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision and dedication;
WHEREAS, the Council finds that it is in the public interest, and consistent with the
intent and purposes of the Growth Management Act, RCW 36.70A et seq., and consistent with
2
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
RCW 82.02.060(1) for the City to adopt impact fees which are uniform to the greatest extent
practicable; and
WHEREAS, the Council has determined that the City is composed of one zone for
purposes of assessing impact fees for transportation, parks and fire protection; and
WHEREAS, the City has conducted extensive research documenting the procedures for
measuring the impact of new growth and development on public facilities, and has prepared
the Rate Study which serves as the basis for the actions taken by the Council. That research is
reflected in "Rate Study for Impact Fees for Transportation, Parks and Fire Protection," City of
Renton, dated August 26, 2011 ("Rate Study"); and
WHEREAS, in developing the impact fees for public facilities contained in this ordinance,
the City has provided adjustments for past and future taxes paid or to be paid by new growth
and development, which are earmarked or proratable to the same new public facilities that will
serve the new growth and development; and
WHEREAS, the Council hereby incorporates the Rate Study into this ordinance, attached
to as Exhibit 1. The Rate Study utilizes a methodology for calculating impact fees which
incorporates, among other things, all of the RCW 82.02.060(1) impact fee requirements; and
WHEREAS, the City conducted briefings for the Planning Commission, Parks Commission
and external stakeholders;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. Section 4-1-190, Mitigation Fees, of Chapter 1, Administration and
Enforcement, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of
91
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington", is hereby repealed effective January 1,
2013, and replaced with the following language:
4-1-190 IMPACT FEES:
A. TITLE:
This section shall be hereinafter known as Impact Fees.
B. PURPOSE AND INTENT:
The purpose and intent of this section is to authorize the collection of impact
fees for transportation, parks and fire protection, and provide for certain other
matters in connection therewith.
C. FINDINGS AND AUTHORITY:
The Renton City Council (hereinafter referred to as "Council") hereby finds
and determines that development activities, including but not limited to new
residential, commercial, retail, office, and industrial development in the City of
Renton (hereinafter referred to as "City") will create additional demand and
need for system improvements in the City, and the Council finds that such new
growth and development should pay a proportionate share of the cost of system
improvements needed to serve the new growth and development.
In the "Rate Study for Impact Fees for Transportation, Parks and Fire
Protection," City of Renton, dated August 26, 2011 ("Rate Study"), hereby
incorporated by this reference, the City has documented its extensive research
concerning the procedures for measuring the impact of new developments on
public facilities.
Il
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
The Rate Study utilizes methodologies for calculating impact fees that are
consistent with the requirements of RCW 82.02.060(1). A copy of the most
current version of the Rate Study shall be kept on file by the Renton City Clerk
and will be available to the public for review.
Therefore, pursuant to Chapter 82.02 RCW, the Council adopts this section to
assess impact fees for transportation, parks and fire protection. The provisions
of this section shall be liberally construed in order to carry out the purposes of
the Council in providing for the assessment of impact fees.
D. DEFINITIONS:
The words and terms defined below shall have the following meanings for
the purposes of this section, unless the context clearly requires otherwise.
Terms otherwise not defined herein shall be defined pursuant to RCW 82.02.090,
as it exists or may be amended, or given their usual and customary meaning.
1. "Administrator" means the Administrator or designee of the
Department of Community and Economic Development.
2. "Building Permit" means an official document or certification
which is issued by the City and which authorizes the construction, alteration,
enlargement, conversion, reconstruction, remodeling, rehabilitation, erection,
demolition, moving, or repair of a building or structure or any portions thereof.
3. "Capital Facilities Plan" means the capital facilities element of the
City's Comprehensive Plan adopted pursuant to RCW 36.70A, as it exists or may
be amended, and such plan as amended.
67
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
4. "City" means the City of Renton.
5. "Council" means the Renton City Council.
6. "Department" means the City's Department of Community and
Economic Development.
7. "Development Activity" means any construction or expansion of a
building, structure; or use, any change in use of a building or structure, or any
changes in the use of land, that generates the need for additional public
facilities.
8. "Development Approval" means any written authorization from
the City of Renton which authorizes the commencement of a development
activity.
9. "Encumbered" means to reserve, set aside, or otherwise earmark
impact fees in order to pay for commitments, contractual obligations, or other
liabilities incurred for system improvements.
10. "Feepayer" is any person, collection of persons, or department or
bureau of any governmental entity or municipal corporation commencing a
development activity which creates the demand for additional system
improvements and which requires the issuance of a building permit or a permit
for a change of use. Feepayer includes an applicant for an impact fee credit.
11. "Fee Schedule" is Renton's schedule of fees and amounts to be
paid for various permits, licenses, etc. that is published, kept on file, and mad
available to the public in the office of the Renton City Clerk.
0
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
12. "Fire protection" shall mean fire protection facilities, including but
not limited to fire stations, fire apparatus, and any furnishings and equipment
that can be capitalized.
13. "Hearing Examiner" shall mean that person or persons acting as
the Renton Hearing Examiner.
14. "Impact Fee" means a payment of money imposed by the City of
Renton on development activity pursuant to this section as a condition of
granting development approval. An impact fee does not include a reasonable
permit fee, an application fee, the administrative fee for collecting and handling
impact fees, the fee for reviewing independent fee calculations, or the fee for
deferring payment of impact fees.
15. "Impact Fee Account(s)" means the separate accounting
structure(s) within the City's established accounts which structure(s) shall
identify separately earmarked funds and which shall be established for the
impact fees that are collected. The account(s) shall be established pursuant to
subsection 4-1-190M, as it exists or may be amended, and shall comply with the
requirements of RCW 82.02.070, as it exists or may be amended.
16. "Independent Fee Calculation" means the transportation impact
fee calculation, and/or economic documentation prepared by a feepayer, to
support the assessment of a transportation, parks or fire protection impact fee
other than by the use of the rates published in the City's Fee Schedule, or the
calculations prepared by the department where none of the fee categories or fee
VA
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
amounts in the City's Fee Schedule accurately describe or capture the impacts of
the development activity on public facilities.
17. "Owner" means the owner of record of real property, although
when real property is being purchased under a real estate contract, the
purchaser shall be considered the owner of the real property if the contract is
recorded.
18. "Parks" shall mean parks, open space, and recreation facilities
including but not limited to land, improvements, and any furnishings and
equipment that can be capitalized.
19. "Permit for change of use or change of use permit" means an
official document which is issued by the City which authorizes a change of use of
an existing building or structure or land.
20. "Project Improvements" means site improvements and facilities
that are planned and designed to provide service for a particular development
project, are necessary for the use and convenience of the occupants or users of
the project, and are not system improvements. No improvement or facility
included in a capital facilities plan adopted by the Council shall be considered a
project improvement.
21. "Public Facilities", for purposes of this section, means the
following capital facilities owned or operated by the City of Renton or other
governmental entities: public streets and roads, public parks, open space and
recreation facilities and fire protection facilities.
EM
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
22. "Rate Study" means the "Rate Study for Impact Fees for
Transportation, Parks and Fire Protection," City of Renton, dated August 26,
2011, or as hereinafter amended.
23. "Street or Road" means a public right-of-way and all related
appurtenances, including lawfully required off -site mitigation, which enables
motor vehicles, transit vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians to travel between
destinations. For purposes of this section, public streets and roads are
collectively referred to as "transportation."
24. "System Improvements", for purposes of this section, means
public facilities that are included in the City of Renton's capital facilities plan, and
such plan as amended, and are designed to provide service to the community at
large, in contrast to project improvements.
25. "Transportation" means public streets and roads and related
appurtenances.
E. ESTABLISHMENT OF SERVICE AREA:
1. The City hereby establishes, as the service area for impact fees,
the City of Renton, including all property located within the corporate city limits.
2. The scope of the service area is hereby found to be reasonable
and established on the basis of sound planning and engineering principles, and
consistent with RCW 82.02.060, as it exists or may be amended, as described in
the Rate Study.
F. IMPACT FEES METHODOLOGY AND APPLICABILITY:
01
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
The transportation impact fees in the City's Fee Schedule are generated
from the formulae for calculating transportation impact fees set forth in the Rate
Study. Except as otherwise provided for independent fee calculations in
subsection 4-1-190H, exemptions in subsection 4-1-1901, and credits in
subsection 4-1-1901, as they exist or may be amended, all new development
activity in the city will be charged impact fees applicable to the type of
development listed in the City's Fee Schedule.
G. COLLECTION OF IMPACT FEES:
1. The City shall collect impact fees, based on the rates in the City's
Fee Schedule, from any applicant seeking development approval from the City
for any development activity within the City, when such development activity
requires the issuance of a building permit or a permit for a change in use, and
creates a demand for additional public facilities.
2. Maximum allowable impact fees are established by the Rate
Study. The rates to be charged by the City are listed in the City's Fee Schedule.
3. When an impact fee applies to a change of use permit, the impact
fee shall be the applicable impact fee for the land use category of the new use,
less any impact fee previously paid for the land use category of the prior use.
For purposes of this provision, a change of use should be reviewed based on the
land use category provided in the Rate Study that best captures the broader use
of the property under development. Changes in use or tenancy, if consistent
with the general character of the building or building aggregations (i.e.,
10
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
"industrial park," or "specialty retail") should not be considered a change in use
that is subject to an impact fee. Further, minor changes in tenancies that are
consistent with the general character of the included structure, building, or
previous use should not be considered changes in use subject to an impact fee.
If no impact fee was paid for the prior use, the impact fee for the new use shall
be reduced by an amount equal to the current impact fee rate for the prior use.
Vacant buildings shall be assessed as if in the most recent legally established use
as shown on a locally owned business license or development permit
documents.
4. For mixed use developments, impact fees shall be imposed for the
proportionate share of each land use, based on the applicable measurement in
the impact fee rates in the City's Fee Schedule.
5. Impact fees shall be determined at the time the complete
application for a building permit or a permit for a change in use is submitted
using the impact fees then in effect. Impact fees shall be due and payable before
the building permit or permit for a change of use is issued by the City.
6. Feepayers allowed credits prior to the submittal of the complete
building permit application or an application for a permit for a change of use
shall submit, along with the complete application, a copy of the letter prepared
by the Administrator setting forth the dollar amount of the credit allowed.
Impact fees, as determined after the application of any credits, shall be collected
11
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
from the feepayer no later than the time a building permit or permit for a
change of use is issued.
7. An applicant for residential subdivision, short subdivision, or planned
unit development may defer payment of impact fees for all of the dwelling units
to be created in the development until the earlier of seven (7) calendar days
after the date of the sale of a single detached dwelling unit, condominium unit,
or a multifamily residential building or eighteen (18) months after the issuance
of the original building permit, but only if before recording the subdivision or
short subdivision, the applicant:
a. Submits to the Administrator a signed and notarized deferred
impact fee application and acknowledgement form, which includes the legal
description, tax account number, and address of each individual in the
development;
b. records at the applicant's expense a covenant and lien that
complies with the requirements of Subsection 8b i through v; and
c. pays the applicable non refundable administrative fee.
8. A building permit applicant may defer payment of impact fees for a
single detached dwelling unit, condominium unit, or all of the dwelling units in a
multifamily residential building until the earlier of the seven (7) calendar days
after the date of the sale of a single detached dwelling unit, a condominium unit
or a multifamily residential building or eighteen (18) months after issuance of
12
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
the original building permit, but only if before issuance of the building permit,
the applicant:
a. Submits to the Administrator a signed and notarized deferred
impact fee application and acknowledgement form for each single detached
dwelling unit, condominium unit or all of the dwelling units in a multifamily
residential building for which the applicant wishes to defer payment of the
impact fees;
b. Records at the applicant's expense a covenant and lien that:
i. requires payment of the impact fees to the City at the earlier
of seven (7) calendar days after the date of sale or eighteen (18) months after
issuance of the original building permit;
ii. provides that if the impact fees are paid through escrow at
closing of sale, in the absence of an agreement between the buyer and the seller
to the contrary, the impact fees shall be paid from the seller's proceeds;
iii. provides that the seller bears strict liability for the payment of
the impact fees;
iv. requires the seller or seller's agent of property subject to the
covenant and lien to provide written disclosure of the covenant and lien to a
purchaser or prospective purchaser. Disclosure of the covenant must include the
amount of impact fees payable and that the fees are to be paid to the City on the
date of sale; and
13
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
v. makes the applicant legally liable for payment of the impact
fees if the fees are not paid by the earlier of seven (7) calendar days after the
date of sale or eighteen (18) months after the building permit has been issued.
9. Payment of impact fees deferred under this subsection shall be
made by cash, escrow company check, cashier's check or certified check.
10. Upon receipt of payment of impact fees deferred under this
subsection, the City shall execute a lien release for each single detached dwelling
unit, condominium unit, or multifamily residential building for which the impact
fees have been received. Unless an agreement to the contrary is reached
between buyer and seller, the seller, at the seller's expense, shall be responsible
for recording the lien release.
11. The Department shall not issue the required building or the
permit for the change of use until the impact fees have been paid or the signed
and notarized deferred impact fee application and acknowledgement form and
deferral fee has been received and accepted by the City.
12. Not later than March 1, 2015, the Administrator shall report to
the Council on the effect of subsection 4-1-190G.6 and 4-1-190G.7, as it exists or
may be amended. The report shall include information on the number of
applications for deferral, the length of time of deferral, the amount of fees
deferred, the number of fees and amount not paid as required, and any adverse
impacts to the ability of the City to construct projects made necessary by new
14
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
development. The report shall also include recommendations for changes to
address deficiencies identified in the report.
H. INDEPENDENT FEE CALCULATIONS:
1. If, in the judgment of the Administrator, none of the fee categories or
fee amounts set forth in the City's Fee Schedule accurately describes or captures
the impacts of a new development on public facilities, the Department may
conduct independent fee calculations and the Administrator may impose
alternative fees on a specific development based on those calculations. The
alternative fees and the calculations shall be set forth in writing and shall be
mailed to the feepayer.
2. A feepayer may opt not to have the impact fees determined
according to the fee structure in the City's Fee Schedule , in which case the
feepayer shall prepare and submit to the Administrator an independent fee
calculation for the development activity for which a building permit is being
sought. The documentation submitted shall show the basis upon which the
independent fee calculation was made. An independent fee calculation shall use
the same methodology used to establish impact fees adopted pursuant to the
City's Fee Schedule, shall be limited to adjustments in trip generation rates and
lengths for transportation impact fees, persons per dwelling unit for park impact
fees, and fire incident rates for fire impact fees.
3. There is a rebuttable presumption that the calculations set forth in
the Rate Study are valid. The Administrator shall consider the documentation
F16"
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
submitted by the feepayer, but is not required to accept such documentation or
analysis which the Administrator reasonably deems to be inapplicable,
inaccurate, incomplete, or unreliable. The Administrator may require the
feepayer to submit additional or different documentation for consideration. The
Administrator is authorized to adjust the impact fees on a case -by -case basis
based on the independent fee calculation, the specific characteristics of the
development, and/or principles of fairness. The fees or alternative fees and the
calculations therefore shall be set forth in writing and shall be mailed to the
feepayer.
4. Alternative impact fees calculated pursuant to this subsection shall be
phased and reduced in the same manner and to the same extent that the impact
fees in the City's Fee Schedule are phased and reduced from the maximum
allowable impact fees in the Rate Study.
5. Determinations made by the Administrator pursuant to this section
may be appealed to the office of the Hearing Examiner under the procedures set
forth in subsection 4-1-190L.
I. EXEMPTIONS:
1. Except as provided for below, the following shall be exempted from
the payment of all transportation, parks, and fire impact fees:
a. Alteration or replacement of an existing residential structure
that does not create an additional dwelling unit or change the type of dwelling
unit.
16
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
b. Alteration or replacement of an existing nonresidential
structure that does not expand the usable space or change the existing land use.
c. Miscellaneous improvements which do not generate
increased need for public facilities, including, but not limited to, fences, walls,
residential swimming pools, and signs.
d. Demolition or moving of a structure.
e. Properties that have undergone prior State Environmental
Policy Act (SEPA) review and received a final decision that includes mitigation
requirements on the condition that the SEPA mitigation obligation has or will be
fulfilled by the time the impact fees, if applicable, would be due.
f. Low-income housing that qualifies for waived fees under the
provisions of RMC 4-1-120, as it exists or may be amended.
g. Temporary manufactured homes for medical hardships that
meet the criteria identified in RMC 4-2-240, as it exists or is amended.
2. The Administrator shall be authorized to determine whether a
particular development activity falls within an exemption identified in this
section. The Administrator's determinations shall be in writing and shall be
subject to the appeals procedures set forth in subsection 4-1-190L, as it exists or
may be amended.
J. CREDITS FOR DEDICATIONS, CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS, AND
PAST TAX PAYMENTS:
17
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
1. A feepayer may request that a credit or credits for impact fees be
awarded to him/her for the total value of system improvements, including
dedications of land and improvements, and/or construction provided by the
feepayer. Credits will be given only if the land, improvements, and/or the facility
constructed are:
a. Included within the capital facilities plan or would serve the
goals and objectives of the capital facilities plan;
b. Determined by the City to be at suitable sites and constructed
at acceptable quality;
activity; and
c. Serve to offset impacts of the feepayer's development
d. Are for one (1) or more of the projects listed in the Rate Study
as the basis for calculating the transportation impact fee.
2. For credits for dedications:
a. The Administrator shall determine if requests for credits meet
the criteria in subsection 1, above, or other applicable law. The Administrator's
determinations shall be in writing and shall be subject to the appeals procedure
set forth in subsection 4-1-190L, as it exists or may be amended
b. For each request for a credit or credits, the Administrator shall
select an appraiser or, in the alternative, the feepayer may select an
independent appraiser acceptable to the Administrator.
I
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
c. Unless approved otherwise by the Administrator, the
appraiser must be a Member of the American Institute of Appraisers and be
licensed in good standing pursuant under RCW 18.40 et. seq., as it exists or may
be amended, in the category for the property or improvement to be appraised,
and shall not have a fiduciary or personal interest in the property being
appraised.
d. The Administrator will accept or reject the appraisal and the
decision may be subject to independent review by the Hearing Examiner.
e. The feepayer shall pay the actual costs for the appraisal and
an independent review, if required, unless the Administrator determines that
payment for independent review should not be at the feepayer's expense.
f. After considering the appraisal and the review, the
Administrator shall provide the applicant with a written determination setting
forth the dollar amount of any credit, the reason for the credit, the legal
description of the real property dedicated where applicable, and the legal
description or other adequate description of the project or development to
which the credit may be applied. The feepayer must sign and date a duplicate
copy of such determination accepting the terms of the letter or certificate, and
return such signed document to the Administrator before the impact fee credit
will be awarded. The failure of the feepayer to sign, date, and return such
document within sixty (60) calendar days of the date of the determination shall
nullify the credit.
19
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
g. No credit shall be given for project improvements.
3. A feepayer may request a credit or credits for impact fees previously
awarded for past tax payments. For each request for a credit or credits for past
tax payments for transportation impact fees, the feepayer shall submit receipts
and a calculation of past tax payments earmarked for or proratable to the
particular system improvement for which credit is requested. The Administrator
shall determine the amount of credits, if any, for past tax payments for system
improvements.
4. The Administrator's determinations pursuant to this section shall be
subject to the appeals procedures set forth in subsection 4-1-190L, as it exists or
may be amended.
K. ADJUSTMENTS FOR FUTURE TAX PAYMENTS AND OTHER REVENUE
SOURCES:
Pursuant to and consistent with the requirements of RCW 82.02.060, as it
exists or may be amended, the Rate Study has provided adjustments for future
taxes to be paid by the development activity which are earmarked or proratable
to the same new public facilities which will serve the new development. The
impact fees in the City's Fee Schedule have been reasonably adjusted for taxes
and other revenue sources which are anticipated to be available to fund public
improvements.
20
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
1. The Administrator's determinations with respect to the applicability
of the impact fees to a given development activity, the availability or value of a
credit, the Administrator's decision concerning the independent fee calculation
which is authorized in subsection 4-1-190H, as it exists or may be amended, or
any other Administrator's determination pursuant to this section may be
appealed by the feepayer to the provisions of RMC 4-8-110E, as it exists or may
be amended. No building or change of use permits will be issued until the
impact fee is paid or the or the signed and notarized deferred impact fee
application and acknowledgement form and deferral fee has been received and
accepted by the City; provided, however, that the feepayer may pay the fee
under protest pending appeal to avoid delays in the issuance of building permits
or change of use permits.
2. Appeals to the Hearing Examiner shall be taken in accord with the
processes set forth in RMC 4-8-110E, as it exists or may be amended.
3. The Hearing Examiner is authorized to make findings of fact regarding
the applicability of the impact fees to a given development activity, the
availability or amount of the credit, or the accuracy or applicability of an
independent fee calculation. There is a presumption of validity of the
Administrator's determination. The feepayer has the burden of proof during any
appeal of the Administrator's determination or decision.
4. The Hearing Examiner may, so long as such action is in conformance
with the provisions of this section, reverse, affirm, modify or remand, in whole
21
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
or in part, the Administrator's determinations with respect to the amount of the
impact fees imposed or the credit awarded.
M. ESTABLISHMENT OF IMPACT FEE ACCOUNTS:
1. The City shall establish separate impact fee accounts for the
transportation, parks and fire protection impact fees collected pursuant to this
section. Funds withdrawn from the accounts must be used in accordance with
the provisions of this section and applicable state law. Interest earned on the
fees shall be retained in the accounts and expended for the purposes for which
the impact fees were collected.
2. Impact fee receipts shall be earmarked specifically and deposited in
the appropriate interest -bearing impact fee accounts.
3. Impact fees shall be expended or encumbered within ten (10) years of
receipt, unless the Council identifies in written findings extraordinary and
compelling reasons for the City to hold the fees beyond the ten (10) year period,
pursuant to RCW 82.02.070(3), as it exists or may be amended.
N. ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDELINES:
The Administrator is authorized to adopt internal guidelines for the
administration of impact fees, which may include the adoption of procedural
rules to clarify or further the procedural rules set forth in this section.
O. REFUNDS AND OFFSETS:
1. If the City fails to expend or encumber the impact fees within ten (10)
years of the date the fees were paid, unless extraordinary or compelling reasons
22
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
are established pursuant to subsection 4-1-190M, as it exists or may be
amended, the current owner of the property on which impact fees have been
paid may receive a refund of such fees. In determining whether impact fees
have been expended or encumbered, impact fees shall be considered expended
or encumbered on a first in, first out basis.
2. The City shall notify potential claimants by first-class mail deposited
with the United States Postal Service at the last known address of such
claimants. A potential claimant must be the current owner of record of the real
property against which the impact fees were assessed.
3. Owners seeking a refund of impact fees must submit a written
request for a refund of the fees to the Administrator within one (1) year of the
date the right to claim the refund arises or the date that notice is given,
whichever is later.
4. Any impact fees for which no application for a refund has been made
within this one (1) year period shall be retained by the City and expended on the
system improvements for which they were collected.
5. Refunds of impact fees under this subsection shall include any
interest earned on the impact fees by the City.
6. When the City seeks to terminate any or all components of the
impact fee program, all unexpended or unencumbered funds from any
terminated component or components, including interest earned, shall be
refunded pursuant to this section. Upon the finding that any or all fee
23
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
requirements are to be terminated, the City shall place notice of such
termination and the availability of refunds in a newspaper of general circulation
at least two (2) times and shall notify all potential claimants by first-class mail at
the last known address of the claimants. All funds available for refund shall be
retained for a period of one (1) year. At the end of one (1) year, any remaining
funds shall be retained by the City, but must be expended for the public facilities
for which the impact fees were collected. This notice requirement shall not
apply if there are no unexpended or unencumbered balances within the account
or accounts being terminated.
7. The City shall also refund to the current owner of property for which
impact fees have been paid all impact fees paid, including interest earned on the
impact fees, if the development activity for which the impact fees were imposed
did not occur; provided, however, that, if the City has expended or encumbered
the impact fees in good faith prior to the application for a refund, the
Administrator may decline to provide the refund. If within a period of three (3)
years, the same or subsequent owner of the property proceeds with the same or
substantially similar development activity, the owner can petition the
Administrator for an offset in the amount of the fee originally paid and not
refunded. The petitioner must provide receipts of impact fees previously paid for
a development activity of the same or substantially similar nature on the same
real property or some portion thereof. The Administrator `s determinations shall
M
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
be in writing and shall be subject to the appeals procedures set forth in
subsection 4-1-190L, as it exists or may be amended.
P. USE OF IMPACT FEES:
1. Pursuant to this section, impact fees:
a. Shall be used for system improvements that will reasonably
benefit the new development activity;
facilities; and
b. Shall not be imposed to make up for deficiencies in public
c. Shall not be used for maintenance or operation.
2. Impact fees may be spent for system improvements to public streets
and roads, public parks, open space and recreation facilities and fire protection
facilities as herein defined and, including, but not limited to, planning, land
acquisition, right-of-way acquisition, site improvements, necessary off -site
improvements, construction, engineering, architectural, permitting, financing,
and administrative expenses, applicable impact fees or mitigation costs, and any
other expenses which can be capitalized.
3. Impact fees may also be used to recoup system improvement costs
previously incurred by the City to the extent that new growth and development
will be served by the previously constructed improvements or incurred costs.
4. In the event that bonds or similar debt instruments are or have been
issued for the advanced provision of system improvements for which impact fees
may be expended, such impact fees may be used to pay debt service on such
25
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
bonds or similar debt instruments to the extent that the facilities or
improvements provided are consistent with the requirements of this section.
Q. REVIEW AND ADJUSTMENT OF RATES:
1. The fees and rates set forth in the Rate Study may be reviewed and
adjusted by the Council as it deems necessary and appropriate in conjunction
with the annual budget process so that adjustments, if any, will be effective at
the first of the calendar year subsequent to budget period under review.
2. As part of the budget adoption process, the fees shall be adjusted by
the same percentage change as in the most recent annual change of the
Construction Cost Index published in the Engineering News Record.
R. ADMINISTRATIVE FEES:
1. Each application for a deferral of payment of residential impact fees,
either under 4-1-190G.6 or 4-1-190G.7, shall pay a nonrefundable administrative
deferral fee of eighty-five dollars ($85.00) for each lot, single detached dwelling
unit, or condominium unit and eighty-five dollars ($85.00) for each multifamily
residential building. The fee shall be paid at the time the application for deferral
is submitted to the City.
2. Any feepayer submitting an independent fee calculation shall pay a
fee to cover the cost of reviewing the independent fee calculation. The fee shall
be five hundred dollars ($500.00), unless otherwise established by the
Administrator, and shall be paid by the feepayer prior to issuance of the
Administrator's determination.
go
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
3. Any feepayer filing an appeal of impact fees shall pay the fee set by
the City for appeals of administrative interpretations and decision. The appeal
fee shall be paid at the time of filing of the appeal.
4. Administrative fees shall be deposited into a separate administrative
fee account within the impact fee account(s). Administrative fees shall be used
to defray the City's actual costs associated with the assessment, collection,
administration and update of the impact fees.
5. Administrative fees shall not be refundable, shall not be waived, and
shall not be credited against the impact fees.
S. EXISTING AUTHORITY UNIMPAIRED:
Nothing in this section shall preclude the City from requiring the feepayer
or the proponent of a development activity to mitigate adverse environmental
impacts of a specific development pursuant to the SEPA, Chapter 43.21C RCW,
based on the environmental documents accompanying the underlying
development approval process, and/or Chapter 58.17 RCW, governing plats and
subdivisions. Compliance with this section and/or payment of fees under this
section shall not constitute evidence of a determination of transportation
concurrency.
SECTION II. Impact fees collected by the City of Renton shall be collected at a rate
that is reduced from the amounts identified in the Rate Study for Impact Fees for
Transportation, Parks and Fire Protection, City of Renton, dated August 26, 2011, attached as
Exhibit 1. Rate amounts shall be collected as follows:
►AN
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
A. Fees associated with Transportation impacts, at 33.3% of the Rate Study amount.
B. Fees associated with Parks impacts, at 66.7% of the Rate Study amount.
C. Fees associated with Fire Protection impacts, 66.7% of the Rate Study amount.
These rate amounts shall be phased in over a four (4) year period until they have reached the
full reduced amount, as indicated above. This phase in is to begin on January 1, 2013, with
annual adjustments occurring on January 1 of each year until 2016. The fee amounts and
schedule are attached as Exhibit 2.
SECTION Ill. If any portion of this section is found to be invalid or unenforceable for
any reason, such finding shall not affect the validity or enforceability of any Chapter or any
other section of this Title.
SECTION IV. This ordinance shall be effective January 1, 2013.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 8th day of October 2012.
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 8th
Appr ved as to form:
Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney
day of
Date of Publication: 10/12/2012 (summary)
ORD:1753:9/26/12:scr
Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk
October .2012.
De is Law, Ma r
04:3
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
EXHIBIT 1
RATE STUDY
FOR
IMPACT FEES
FOR
TRANSPORTATION,
PARKS,
and
FIRE PROTECTION
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
r
August 26, 2011
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................................................5
2. STATUTORY BASIS AND METHODOLOGY...................................................................................................7
3. TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES................................................................................................................15
4. PARK IMPACT FEES...........................................................................................................................................30
5. FIRE IMPACT FEES.............................................................................................................................................40
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1: IMPACT FEE RATES PER DWELLING UNIT.......................................................................................................5
TABLE 2: STREET PROJECTS ELIGIBLE FOR IMPACT FEES............................................................................................16
TABLE 3: COST OF EXISTING DEFICIENCIES.................................................................................................................19
TABLE 4: COST OF FUTURE RESERVE CAPACITY.........................................................................................................21
TABLE 5: TOTAL PROJECT COST ELIGIBLE FOR IMPACT FEES.. ....................................................................................
22
TABLE 6: GROWTH TRIPS (P.M. PEAK HOUR) ON THE STREET NETWORK.....................................................................26
TABLE 7: COST PER GROWTH TRIP..............................................................................................................................26
TABLE 8: TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE RATES PER UNIT OF DEVELOPMENT...........................................................28
TABLE 9: ASSET INVENTORY AND CAPITAL VALUE PER PERSON................................................................................31
TABLE 10: VALUE OF PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES NEEDED FOR GROWTH.................................................33
TABLE 11: INVESTMENT NEEDED IN PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES FOR GROWTH........................................34
TABLE 12: INVESTMENT IN PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES TO BE PAID BY GROWTH.....................................36
TABLE 13: GROWTH COST PER PERSON.........................................................................................................................36
TABLE14: COST PER DWELLING UNIT..........................................................................................................................37
TABLE 15: PARK IMPACT FEE PER DWELLING UNIT......................................................................................................39
TABLE 16: FIRE PROTECTION APPARATUS INVENTORY................................................................................................41
TABLE 17: FIRE AND BLS BUILDING INVENTORY........................................................................................................42
TABLE 18: ANNUALIZED APPARATUS COST.................................................................................................................43
TABLE 19: APPARATUS COST PER RESPONSE...............................................................................................................44
TABLE 20: ANNUAL FIRE AND BLS INCIDENTS............................................................................................................45
TABLE 21: FIRE INCIDENT RESPONSE BY TYPE OF APPARATUS...................................................................................45
TABLE 22: TOTAL APPARATUS COST PER FIRE INCIDENT............................................................................................46
TABLE 23: ANNUALIZED STATION COST PER SQUARE FOOT........................................................................................47
TABLE 24: STATION COST PER FIRE AND BLS INCIDENT.............................................................................................47
TABLE25: FIRE INCIDENTS............................................................................................................................................49
TABLE 26: FIRE INCIDENTS AT SPECIFIC LAND USES....................................................................................................49
TABLE 27: TRAFFIC RELATED FIRE INCIDENTS (ALLOCATED TO LAND USES)..............................................................50
TABLE 28: TOTAL ANNUAL FIRE INCIDENTS BY LAND USE..........................................................................................51
TABLE 29: ANNUAL FIRE INCIDENTS BY LAND USE.....................................................................................................52
TABLE 30: ENGINE COST OF RESPONSES TO FIRE INCIDENTS AT LAND USE CATEGORIES...........................................53
TABLE 31: LADDER COST OF RESPONSES TO FIRE INCIDENTS AT LAND USE CATEGORIES..........................................54
TABLE 32: AID VEHICLE COST OF RESPONSES TO FIRE INCIDENTS AT LAND USE CATEGORIES..................................55
TABLE 33: HAZARDOUS MATERIALS VEHICLE COST OF RESPONSES TO FIRE INCIDENTS AT LAND USE CATEGORIES.56
TABLE 34: BRUSH TRUCK COST OF RESPONSES TO FIRE INCIDENTS AT LAND USE CATEGORIES................................57
TABLE 35: STAFF VEHICLE COST OF RESPONSES TO FIRE INCIDENTS AT LAND USE CATEGORIES...............................58
TABLE 36: OTHER APPARATUS/EQUIPMENT COST OF RESPONSES TO FIRE INCIDENTS AT LAND USE CATEGORIES
....59
TABLE 37: FIRE STATION COST OF RESPONSES TO FIRE INCIDENTS AT LAND USE CATEGORIES.................................60
TABLE 38: EXAMPLE OF CALCULATION OF TOTAL CAPITAL COST FOR A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNIT ...........
60
TABLE 39: TOTAL CAPITAL COST OF RESPONSES TO FIRE INCIDENTS AT LAND USE CATEGORIES..............................61
TABLE 40: BLS INCIDENT RESPONSE BY TYPE OF APPARATUS....................................................................................62
TABLE 41: TOTAL APPARATUS COST PER BLS INCIDENT.............................................................................................63
TABLE42: BLS INCIDENTS............................................................................................................................................64
TABLE 43: BLS INCIDENTS AT SPECIFIC LAND USES....................................................................................................64
TABLE 44: TRAFFIC RELATED BLS INCIDENTS (ALLOCATED TO LAND USES)..............................................................65
TABLE 45: TOTAL ANNUAL BLS INCIDENTS BY LAND USE..........................................................................................66
TABLE 46: ANNUAL BLS INCIDENTS BY LAND USE.....................................................................................................67
TABLE 47: ENGINE COST OF RESPONSES TO BLS INCIDENTS AT LAND USE CATEGORIES...........................................68
TABLE 48: LADDER COST OF RESPONSES TO BLS INCIDENTS AT LAND USE CATEGORIES..........................................69
TABLE 49: AID VEHICLE COST OF RESPONSES TO BLS INCIDENTS AT LAND USE CATEGORIES..................................70
TABLE 50: STAFF VEHICLE COST OF RESPONSES TO BLS INCIDENTS AT LAND USE CATEGORIES...............................71
TABLE 51: OTHER APPARATUS/EQUIPMENT COST OF RESPONSES TO BLS INCIDENTS AT LAND USE CATEGORIES ....72
TABLE 52: FIRE STATION COST OF RESPONSES TO BLS INCIDENTS AT LAND USE CATEGORIES..................................73
TABLE 53: EXAMPLE OF CALCULATION OF TOTAL CAPITAL COST OF RESPONSES TO BLS INCIDENTS FORA SINGLE-
FAMILYRESIDENCE.............................................................................................................................................73
TABLE 54: TOTAL CAPITAL COST OF RESPONSES TO BLS INCIDENTS AT LAND USE CATEGORIES..............................74
TABLE 55: TOTAL COST OF RESPONSE O FIRE AND BLS INCIDENTS BY LAND USE CATEGORY....................................75
TABLE 56: FIRE IMPACT FEES BY LAND USE................................................................................................................77
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
1. INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this study is to establish the rates for impact fees in the City of
Renton, Washington for three types of public facilities authorized by RCW'
82.02.090(7). The following list provides the statutory name of each type of
public facility and in parentheses the short name used in this study for each type
of impact fee:
• public streets and roads (transportation)
• publicly owned parks, open space, and recreation facilities (parks)
• fire protection facilities (fire)
Summary of Impact Fee Rates
Impact fees are paid by all types of new development2. Impact fee rates for
new development are based on, and vary according to the type of land use.
The following table summarizes the impact fee rates for several frequently used
land use categories. Rates for other non-residential development are presented
in the sections of this study for each type of public facility.
Table 1: Impact Fee Rates per Dwelling Unit
(1)
Type of
Development
(2)
Unit
(3)
Transportation
(4)
Parks
(5)
Fire
(6)
Total
Single -Family
dwelling unit
$ 8,579.24
$ 2,740.07
$ 718.56
$ 12,037,87
Multi -Family
dwelling unit
5,592.71
2,224.29
718.56
8,535.56
Office
sq. ft.
14.82
none
0.21
15.03
Retail (shopping)
sq. ft.
9.66
none
0.88
10.54
Industrial
sq. ft,
10.72
none
0.12
10.84
Restaurant
sq, ft.
33.65
none
2.67
36.32
Impact Fees vs. Other Developer Contributions
Impact fees are charges paid by new development to reimburse local
governments for the capital cost of public facilities that are needed to serve
new development and the people who occupy or use the new development.
Throughout this study, the term "developer" is used as a shorthand expression to
describe anyone who is obligated to pay impact fees, including builders, owners
' Revised Code of. Washington (RCW) is the state law of the State of Washington.
2 The impact fee ordinance may specify exemptions for low-income housing and/or "broad
public purposes", but such exemptions must be paid for by public money, not other impact
fees. The ordinance may specify if impact fees apply to changes in use, remodeling, etc.
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 5
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
or developers.
Local governments charge impact fees for several reasons: 1) to obtain revenue
to pay for some of the cost of new public facilities; 2) to implement a public
policy that new development should pay a portion of the cost of facilities that it
requires, and that existing development should not pay all of the cost of such
facilities; and 3) to assure that adequate public facilities will be constructed to
serve new development.
The impact fees that are described in this study do not include any other forms
of developer contributions or exactions, such as: mitigation or voluntary
payments authorized by SEPA (the State Environmental Policy Act, RCW 43.21 C);
system development charges for water and sewer authorized for utilities (RCW
35.92 for municipalities, 56.16 for sewer districts, and 57.08 for water districts);
local improvement districts or other special assessment districts; linkage fees; or
land donations or fees in lieu of land.
Organization of the Study
This impact fee rate study contains five chapters:
Chapter 1 provides a summary of impact fee rates for frequently used
land use categories, and other introductory materials.
Chapter 2 summarizes the statutory requirements for developing impact
fees, and describes the compliance with each requirement.
Chapters 3 - 5 present impact fees for transportation (Chapter 3), parks
(Chapter 4), and fire (Chapter 5). Each chapter provides the
methodology that is used to develop the fees, presents the formulas,
variables and data that are the basis for the fees, and documents the
calculation of the fees. The methodology is designed to comply with the
requirements of Washington state law.
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 6
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
2. STATUTORY BASIS AND METHODOLOGY
This chapter summarizes the statutory requirements for impact fees in the State
of Washington, and describes how the City of Renton's impact fees comply with
the statutory requirements.
Statutory Requirements for Impact Fees
The Growth Management Act of 1990 (Chapter 17, Washington Laws, 1990, 1st
Ex. Sess.) authorizes local governments in Washington to charge impact fees.
RCW 82.02,050 - 82,02,090 contain the provisions of the Growth Management
Act that authorize and describe the requirements for impact fees.
The impact fees that are described in this study are not mitigation payments
authorized by the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). There are several
important differences between impact fees and SEPA mitigations. Three
aspects of impact fees that are particularly noteworthy are: 1) the ability to
charge for the cost of public facilities that are "system improvements" (Le., that
provide service to the community at large) as opposed to "project
improvements" (which are "on -site" and provide service for a particular
development); 2) the ability to charge small-scale development their
proportionate share, whereas SEPA exempts small developments; and 3) the
predictability and simplicity of impact fee rate schedules compared to the cost,
time and uncertain outcome of SEPA reviews conducted on a case -by -case
basis.
The following synopsis of the most significant requirements of the law includes
citations to the Revised Code of Washington as an aid to readers who wish to
review the exact language of the statutes.
Types of Public Facilities
Four types of public facilities can be the subject of impact fees: 1) public
transportation and roads; 2) publicly owned parks, open space and recreation
facilities; 3) school facilities; and 4) fire protection facilities (in jurisdictions that
are not part of a fire district). RCW 82,02.050(2) and (4), and RCW 82.02.090(7)
Types of Improvements
Impact fees can be spent on "system improvements" (which are typically outside
the development), as opposed to "project improvements" (which are typically
provided by the developer on -site within the development). RCW
82.02.050(3)(a) and RCW 82.02.090(6) and (9)
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 7
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Benefit to Development
Impact fees must be limited to system improvements that are reasonably
related to, and which will benefit new development. RCW 82.02.050(3)(0) and
(c). Local governments must establish reasonable service areas (one area, or
more than one, as determined to be reasonable by the local government), and
local governments must develop impact fee rate categories for various land
uses. RCW 82.02.060(6)
Proportionate Share
Impact fees cannot exceed the development's
improvements that are reasonably related to
impact fee amount shall be based on a formula
the fee) that determines the proportionate share
82.02.060(1)
Reductions of Impact Fee Amounts
proportionate share of system
the new development. The
(or other method of calculating
. RCW 82.02.050(3)(b) and RCW
Impact fees rates must be adjusted to account for other revenues that the
development pays (if such payments are earmarked for or proratable to
particular system improvements). RCW 82.02.050(1)(c) and (2) and RCW
82.02.060(1)(b) Impact fees may be credited for the value of dedicated land,
improvements or construction provided by the developer (if such facilities are in
the adopted CFP as system improvements eligible for impact fees and are
required as a condition of development approval). RCW 82.02.060(3)
Exemptions from Impact Fees
Local governments have the discretion to provide exemptions from impact fees
for low-income housing and other "broad public purpose" development, but all
such exempt fees must be paid from public funds (other than impact fee
accounts). RCW 82.02.060(2)
Developer Options
Developers who are liable for impact fees can submit data and or/analysis to
demonstrate that the impacts of the proposed development are less than the
impacts calculated in this rate study. RCW 82.02.060(5). Developers can pay
impact fees under protest and appeal impact fee calculations. RCW
82.02.060(4) and RCW 82.02.070(4) and (5). The developer can obtain a refund
of the impact fees if the local government fails to expend or obligate the
impact fee payments within 10 years, or terminates the impact fee requirement,
or the developer does not proceed with the development (and creates no
impacts). RCW 82.02.080
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 8
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Capital Facilities Plans
Impact fees must be expended on public facilities in a capital facilities plan
(CFP) element or used to reimburse the government for the unused capacity of
existing facilities, The CFP must conform to the Growth Management Act of
1990, and must identify existing deficiencies in facility capacity for current
development, capacity of existing facilities available for new development, and
additional facility capacity needed for new development. RCW 82.02.050(4),
RCW 82.02.060(7), an d RC W 82.02.070(2)
New Versus Existing Facilities
Impact fees can be charged for new public facilities (RCW 82.02.060(1)(0) and
for the unused capacity of existing public facilities (RCW 82,02,060(7) subject to
the proportionate share limitation described above.
Accounting Requirements
The local government must separate the impact fees from other monies,
expend or obligate the money on CFP projects within 10 years, and prepare
annual reports of collections and expenditures. RCW 82,02.070(1)-(3)
Compliance With Statutory Requirements for Impact Fees
Many of the statutory requirements listed above are fulfilled in Chapters 3 - 5 of
this study that present the calculation of each type of impact fee, Some of the
statutory requirements are fulfilled in other ways, as described below.
Types of Public Facilities
This study contains impact fees for three of the four types of public facilities
authorized by statute: transportation, parks and fire. This study does not contain
impact fees for schools.
In general, local governments that are authorized to charge impact fees are
responsible for specific public facilities for which they may charge such fees,
The City of Renton is legally and financially responsible for the transportation,
parks and fire facilities it owns and operates within its jurisdiction. In no case may
a local government charge impact fees for private facilities, but it may charge
impact fees for some public facilities that it does not administer if such facilities
are "owned or operated by government entities" (RCW 82,02.090 (7), Thus, a city
or county may charge impact fees for transportation, and enter into an
agreement with the State of Washington for the transfer, expenditure, and
reporting of transportation' impact fees for state roads. A city may only charge
and use impact fees on State roads if it has an agreement with the State, and
the City CFP includes the state road projects.
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 9
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Types of Improvements
The impact fees in this study are based on system improvements that are
described in Chapters 3 - 5 for each type of impact fee. No project
improvements are included in this study,
The public facilities that can be paid for by impact fees are "system
improvements" (which are typically outside the development), and "designed
to provide service to service areas within the community at large" as provided in
RCW 82,02,050(9)), as opposed to "project improvements" (which are typically
provided by the developer on -site within the development or adjacent to the
development), and "designed to provide service for a development project,
and that are necessary for the use and convenience of the occupants or users
of the project" as provided in RCW 82,02,050(6), The capital improvements costs
contained in Chapters 3 - 5 comply with these requirements.
Impact fee revenue can be used for the capital cost of public facilities. Impact
fees cannot be used for operating or maintenance expenses. The cost of public
facilities that can be paid for by impact fees include design studies,
engineering, land surveys, land and right of way acquisition, engineering,
permitting, financing, administrative expenses, construction, applicable
mitigation costs, and capital equipment pertaining to capital improvements.
Benefit to Development, Proportionate Share and Reductions of Fee Amounts
The law imposes three tests of the benefit provided to development by impact
fees: 1) proportionate share, 2) reasonably related to need, and 3) reasonably
related to expenditure (RCW 80,20,050(3)), In addition, the law requires the
designation of one or more service areas (RCW 82,02,060(6)
1. Proportionate Share.
First, the "proportionate share" requirement means that impact fees can
be charged only for the portion of the cost of public facilities that is
"reasonably related" to new development. In other words, impact fees
cannot be charged to pay for the cost of reducing or eliminating
deficiencies in existing facilities,
Second, there are several important implications of the proportionate
share requirement that are not specifically addressed in the law, but
which follow directly from the law:
Costs of facilities that will benefit new development and existing users
must be apportioned between the two groups in determining the
amount of the fee. This can be accomplished in either of two ways: (1)
by allocating the total cost between new and existing users, or (2)
calculating the cost per unit and applying the cost only to new
development when calculating impact fees.
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 10
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Impact fees that recover the costs of existing unused capacity should
be based on the government's actual cost. Carrying costs may be
added to reflect the government's actual or imputed interest expense.
The third aspect of the proportionate share requirement is its relationship
to the requirement to provide adjustments and credits to impact fees,
where appropriate. These requirements ensure that the amount of the
impact fee does not exceed the proportionate share.
The "adjustments" requirement reduces the impact fee to account for
past and future payments of other revenues (if such payments are
earmarked for, or proratable to, the system improvements that are
needed to serve new growth). Each impact fee calculated in this
study includes an adjustment that accounts for any other revenue that
is paid by new development and used by the City to pay for a portion
of growth's proportionate share of costs. This adjustment is in response
to the limitations in RCW 82.02.060 (1)(b) and RCW 82.02.050(2).
The "credit" requirement reduces impact fees by the value of
dedicated land, improvements or construction provided by the
developer (if such facilities are in the adopted CFP, identified as the
projects for which impact fees are collected, and are required as a
condition of development approval). The law does not prohibit a local
government from establishing reasonable constraints on determining
credits. For example, the location of dedicated land and the quality
and design of donated street, park or fire public facilities can be
required to be acceptable to the local government.
2. Reasonably Related to Need.
There are many ways to fulfill the requirement that impact fees be
"reasonably related" to the development's need for public facilities,
including personal use and use by others in the family or business
enterprise (direct benefit), use by persons or organizations who provide
goods or services to the fee -paying property or are customers or visitors at
the fee paying property (indirect benefit), and geographical proximity
(presumed benefit). These measures of relatedness are implemented by
the following techniques:
Impact fees are charged to properties which need (i.e., benefit from)
new public facilities. The City of Renton provides its infrastructure to all
kinds of property throughout the City, therefore impact fees have been
calculated for all types of property with one exception: park impact
fees are not calculated for non-residential property because the
dominant stream of benefits redounds to the occupants and owners of
dwelling units and there is insufficient data to document the
proportionate share of parks and recreational facilities reasonably
needed by non-residential development.
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 11
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
The relative needs of different types of growth are considered in
establishing fee amounts (i.e., different impact values for different
types of land use). Chapter 3 uses different trip generation rates for
each type of land use, Chapter 4 uses different persons per dwelling
unit, and Chapter 5 uses different emergency response rates for each
type of land use.
• Feepayers can pay a smaller fee if they demonstrate that their
development will have less impact than is presumed in the impact fee
schedule calculation for their property classification. Such reduced
needs must be permanent and enforceable (i.e., via land use
restrictions).
3. Reasonably Related to Expenditures.
Two provisions of Renton's impact fee ordinance comply with the
requirement that expenditures be "reasonably related" to the
development that paid the impact fee. First, the requirement that fee
revenue must be earmarked for specific uses related to public facilities
ensures that expenditures are on specific projects, the benefit of which
has been demonstrated in determining the need for the projects and the
portion of the cost of needed projects that are eligible for impact fees as
described in this study. Second, impact fee revenue must be expended
or obligated within 10 years, thus requiring the impact fees to be used to
benefit to the feepayer and not held by the City.
4. Service Areas for Impact Fees
Impact fees in some jurisdictions are collected and expended within
service areas that are smaller than the jurisdiction that is collecting the
fees. Impact fees are not required to use multiple service areas unless
such "zones" are necessary to establish the relationship between the fee
and the development. Because of the compact size of the City of Renton
and the accessibility of its transportation, parks and fire systems to all
property within the City, Renton's transportation, parks and fire systems
serve the entire City, therefore the impact fees are based on a single
service area corresponding to the boundaries of the City of Renton.
Exemptions
The City's impact fee ordinance addresses the subject of exemptions.
Exemptions do not affect the impact fee rates calculated in this study because
of the statutory requirement that any exempted impact fee must be paid from
other public funds. As a result, there is no increase in impact fee rates to make
up for the exemption because there is no net loss to the impact fee account as
a result of the exemption.
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 12
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Developer Options
A developer who is liable for impact fees has several options regarding impact
fees. The developer can submit data and or/analysis to demonstrate that the
impacts of the proposed development are less than the impacts calculated in
this rate study. The developer can appeal the impact fee calculation by the
City of Renton. If the local government fails to expend the impact fee
payments within 10 years of receipt of such payments, the developer can
obtain a refund of the impact fees. The developer can also obtain a refund if
the development does not proceed and no impacts are created. All of these
provisions are addressed in the City's impact fee ordinance, and none of them
affect the calculation of impact fee rates in this study.
Capital Facilities Plan
There are references in RCW to the "capital facilities plan" (CFP) as the basis for
projects that are eligible for funding by impact fees. Cities often adopt
documents with different titles that fulfill the requirements of RCW 82.02,050 et.
seq. pertaining to a "capital facilities plan". The Transportation Element, Park
Element and Capital Facilities Plan Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan
fulfill the requirements in RCW, and are considered to be the capital facilities
plan" (CFP) for the purpose of this impact fee rate study. In addition, y the City's
Capital Investment Program (CIP) section of the City's Budget provides up-to-
date and detailed information about the projects in the CFP. The City also
produces an annual update of the multi -year Transportation Improvements Plan
(TIP) All references to a CFP in this study are references to the Comprehensive
Plan elements, City CIP and TIP documents listed above.
The requirement to identify existing deficiencies, capacity available for new
development, and additional public facility capacity needed for new
development is determined by analyzing levels of service for each type of
public facility. Chapters 3 - 5 provide this analysis for each type of public facility.
New Versus Existing Facilities, Accounting Requirements
Impact fees must be spent on capital projects contained in an adopted capital
facilities plan, or they can be used to reimburse the government for the unused
capacity of existing facilities. Impact fee payments that are not expended or
obligated within 10 years must be refunded unless the City Council makes a
written finding that an extraordinary and compelling reason exists to hold the
fees for longer than 10 years. In order to verify these two requirements, impact
fee revenues must be deposited into separate accounts of the government,
and annual reports must describe impact fee revenue and expenditures. These
requirements are addressed by Renton's impact fee ordinance, and are not
factors in the impact fee calculations in this study.
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 13
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Data Sources
The data in this study of impact fees in Renton, Washington was provided by the
City of Renton, unless a different source is specifically cited.
Data Rounding
The data in this study was prepared using computer spreadsheet software. In
some tables in this study, there may be very small variations from the results that
would be obtained using a calculator to compute the same data. The reason
for these insignificant differences is that the spreadsheet software was allowed
to calculate results to more places after the decimal than is reported in the
tables of these reports. The calculation to extra places after the decimal
increases the accuracy of the end results, but causes occasional minor
differences due to rounding of data that appears in this study.
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 14
Company
Rote Study for Impact Fees - City of Renton
3. TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES
Impact fees for transportation begin with the list of projects in the Transportation
Element and Capital Facilities Plan Element of City's Comprehensive Plan and
the City's CIP and TIP (which are the "CFP", as noted in Chapter 2). The projects
in these elements are analyzed to identify capacity costs attributable to new
development. The costs are apportioned between existing deficiencies (if any)
and growth capacity, The capacity costs for growth are further apportioned to
eliminate the cost of future reserve capacity. The costs are adjusted to reflect
other sources of revenue that reduce the cost of the facility that is to be paid by
impact fees. The eligible costs are divided by the growth in trips to calculate the
cost per growth trip. The cost per growth trip is applied to the unique trip
generation rates for each type of land use. The amount of the fee is
determined by charging each fee -paying development for cost of the number
of growth trips that it generates.
These steps are described below in the formulas, descriptions of variables, tables
of data, and explanation of calculations of transportation impact fees.
Formula T-1: Transportation Projects Eligible for Impact Fees
The City has many projects in its transportation plan. Only those that add
capacity to the streets in order to maintain the City's adopted standard for level
of service are eligible for impact fees.
T-1, All Capital
Projects
Non -Capacity
Projects or Not
Needed for Level
of Service
Projects Eligible for
Impact Fees
There is one variable that requires explanation: (A) street capacity projects, and
needed for level of service.
Variable (A): Street Capacity Projects
RCW 82.02.050 (4)(c) requires identification of public facility improvements
needed to serve new development. Projects in the Transportation Element and
Capital Facilities Plan Element, the CIP and TIP, and previously constructed
projects are not eligible for impact fees if they do not add capacity to the City's
current street system. .
In addition, capacity projects that are not needed for level of service are also
not eligible for impact fees, For each capacity project, the future traffic volume
(the amount of traffic on the street) was compared to the current capacity of
the street (the amount of traffic the street is designed to carry without
exceeding the adopted level of service standard). If the future volume is
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 15
Company
Rate Study for lmpoct Fees • City of Renton
greater than the current capacity, the project is needed in order to increase the
capacity to serve the future volume, and the project is included in the impact
fee, If, however the future volume is less than the current capacity, the City
does not need the project for level of service, therefore the project is not eligible
for impact fees3.
A similar analysis was conducted of level of service for previously constructed
projects eligible for "reimbursement" impact fees. RCW 82.02.050 (4)(b) requires
this analysis of the additional demands placed on existing public facilities by
new development.
Table 2 lists the transportation projects that are eligible for impact fees. projects
1 - 13 are new projects that will be built in the future, Projects A - C were
completed by the City and they have unused capacity that is available to serve
new development ("reimbursement projects" )4.
Table 2: Street Projects Eligible for Impact Fees
(1) (2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
# Street
From
To
Description
New Projects
Widen existing 2-lane
roadway to provide 4 lanes
1 156th Ave SE
NE 4th St
SE 143rd St
with left turn lanes at
intersection and two-way left
turn lane where needed.
2 Benson Road
South 26th St
South 31st St
Arterial widening
Widen Carr Road between
105th Ave SE and 109th Ave
SE to provide an additional
EB lane; at the 108th Ave SE
intersection, widen the Carr
Road EB approach to provide
3 Carr Rd/ Benson Rd (SR 515)
intersection
2left turn lanes and 3 thru
lanes; at the 108th Ave SE
intersection, widen the WB
approach to provide 2 left
turn lanes, a separate right
turn lane, 2 WB lanes, and 3
EB lanes; widen the 108th SE
approach at the Carr Road
3 The City may have other reasons to build the project, and the project may provide additional
capacity, but the project cannot be included in the impact fee if it is not needed for level of
service,
4 RCW 82.02.060(7) authorizes the City to impose impact fees for system improvement costs
previously incurred by the City to the extent that new growth and development will be served
by the previously constructed improvements. RCW 82.02,060 (1)(d) authorizes the cost of
existing public facilities improvements in the calculation of impact fees.
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 16
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
#
Street
From
To
Description
intersection to provide a
separate right turn lane;
widen Benson Drive (SR515)
between Carr Road
intersection and 108th Way
SE (old Benson Road) to
provide a separate NB right
turn lane
Add turn lanes at Talbot
4
Carr Road Central
West of Talbot
Road
108th PI
intersection; Widen to add EB
lane between Talbot and
Benson
New SR 167 SB Off -ramp;
West of Talbot
new collector -distributor road;
5
Carr Road West
Lind Avenue
Road
Add EB lane between Lind
and Talbot
6
Grady Way
Talbot Road
Rainier Ave
Arterial improvements
Widen existing roadway to
provide dual SB left turn
lanes on Lk Washington Blvd
approach to Logan Ave/
Garden Ave/ N Park Dr
Coulon Park
intersection and a NB left turn
7
Lake Washington Blvd
Park Ave N
Entrance
lane on Lk Washington Blvd
approach to Coulon Park
Entrance intersection; install
new traffic signal at Lk WA
Blvd/ Coulon Park Entrance
intersection
Widen existing roadway to
8
Lind Ave SW
SW 16th St
SW 43rd St
provide center two-way left
turn lane
Widen roadway to provide an
Logan Ave N/ Garden Ave N/
additional EB left turn lane on
9
Lk Washington Blvd
Intersection
EB Logan approach at Lk WA
Blvd intersection
Widen existing 4-lane
roadway to provide additional
10
Maple Valley Hwy (SR 169)
Park entrance
East City Limits
lane in each direction; traffic
operations improvements at
intersections
New 4-lane roadways with
11
Park Ave N Extension
Logan Ave N
1200 ft north of
Logan
center left turn lane where
needed
EB lane Shattuck -Talbot,
12
South 7th Street
. Rainier Ave S
S Grady Way
signal @ Shattuck & Talbot
13
SW 27th Street/Strander
Oakdale
West Valley Hwy
New 5 lane arterial
Boulevard Connection
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 17
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
(1)
(2) (3)
(4)
(5)
#
Street From
To
Description
Reimbursement Projects (Impact Fee Reimburses Local Revenues)
A
Duvall Sunset
North City limits
Reconstructed to 5 lane road
B
Logan 6th
Garden
New 3-5 lane road and 2
signals
C
SR 169 (Maple Valley Hwy) 1-405
Park entrance
Added one lane in each
direction
Formula T-2: Eligible Cost of Projects Needed for Level of Service
A project that is needed for level of service is eligible for impact fees, but some
of the project's costs may not be eligible for impact fees. Ineligible costs include
the cost of existing deficiencies, and the value of extra ("reserve") capacity
beyond that needed by new development,
Cost of Projects Costs Not Growth's Share of
T-2. Eligible for - Eligible for = Eligible Cost
Impact Fees Impact Fee
There are two new variables that require explanation: (B) costs of projects, and
(C) costs not eligible for impact fee.
Variable (B): Costs of Projects
The costs in this study are the same costs of the projects in the Transportation
Element and Capital Facilities Plan Element and the CIP and TIP. The costs of
street projects used in this study include the full cost of the project, including
engineering, right of way, and construction costs, The cost of street projects
does not include any costs for interest or other financing. If the City decides in
the future to borrow money for transportation, the carrying costs for financing
can be added to the costs in this study, and the impact fee can be
recalculated to include such costs.
Variable (C): Costs Not Eligible for Impact Fee
Costs that are eligible for impact fees must meet the statutory requirement to be
growth's proportionate share of projects that are reasonably needed to serve
growth. Two aspects of a project that do not meet this requirement include
existing deficiencies, and reserve capacity in excess of that needed by growth,
These elements will be analyzed in a series of tables below,
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 18
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
EXISTING DEFICIENCIES
RCW 82,02,050 (4)(a) requires an analysis of deficiencies in public facilities
serving existing development. Table 3 contains the analysis of deficiencies for
future and reimbursement projects (projects previously constructed). Existing
deficiencies are determined by comparing existing traffic volume to existing
capacity of each street that is planned for improvement, If current traffic
exceeds current capacity, the "excess" traffic is the number of deficient trips.
The deficient trips are divided by the amount of new capacity to be added in
order to calculate the percent of the project that will make up for existing
deficiencies. The deficiency percentage is multiplied times the project costs to
calculate the portion of the project cost that is attributable to existing
deficiencies. The portion of the total $224.8 million of eligible projects that is for
existing deficiencies equals $3,870,236 (1,7% of the total cost).
Table 3: Cost of Existing Deficiencies
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
Existing
2008
(Deficiency)
Capacity
2008
Existing
Increase
% of
Cost of
Before
Traffic
(Deficiency)
in
Increased
Existing
#
Name of Project
Total Cost
Project
Volume
Or Reserve
Capacity
Capacity
Deficiency
New Projects
1
156th Ave SE:
$13,202,000
1,400
1,127
274
1,400
0.00%
$ 0
NE 4th St to SE 143rd St
2
Benson Road
4,500,000
1,600
1,559
42
1,600
0.00%
0
South 26th St to South
31 st St
3
Carr Rd/ Benson Rd (SR
23,391,000
6,400
5,701
699
800
0.00%
0
515)
intersection
4
Carr Road Central
32,488,500
3,200
2,776
424
1,600
0.00%
0
West of Talbot Road to
108th PI
5
Carr Road West
11,696,400
3,200
3,527
(327)
1,200
27.25%
3,187,269
Lind Avenue to West of
Talbot Rd
6
Grady Way
3,000,000
3,200
3,324
(124)
800
15.54%
466,250
Talbot Road to Rainier
Ave
7
Lake Washington Blvd
548,238
1,300
1,483
(183)
1,300
14.08%
77,175
Park Ave N to Coulon
Park Entrance
8
Lind Ave SW
3,500,000
2,400
1,362
1,039
800
0.00%
0
SW 16th St to SW 43rd
St
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 19
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
(1) (2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
Existing
2008
(Deficiency)
Capacity
2008
Existing
Increase
% of
Cost of
Before
Traffic
(Deficiency)
in
Increased
Existing
# Name of Project
Total Cost
Project
Volume
Or Reserve
Capacity
Capacity
Deficient
9 Logan Ave N/ Garden
Ave N/
2,683,492
2,800
2,904
(104)
2,000
5.20%
139,542
Lk Washington Blvd
Intersection
10 6 je Valley Hwy (SR
83,693,292
3,550
2,714
836
1,775
0.00%
0
Park entrance to East
City Limits
11 Park Ave N Extension
5,000,000
0
0
0
1,300
0.00%
0
Logan Ave N to 1200 ft
north
12 South 7th Street
7,000,000
1,760
1,323
437
400
0.00%
0
Rainier Ave S to S Grady
Way
13 SW 27th St/Strander
9,000,000
0
0
0
3,200
0.00%
0
Connection
Oakdale to West Valley
Hwy
Subtotal: New Projects
199,702,922
3,870,236
Reimbursement Projects (Impact Fee Reimburses
Local
Revenues
A Duvall
8,190,713
1,714
1,673
41
1,829
0.00%
0
Sunset to North City
limits
B Logan
8,583,652
0
0
0
3,520
0.00%
0
6th to Garden
C SR 169 (Maple Valley
8,306,708
3,600
3,293
307
1,800
0.00%
0
1-405 to Park entrance
Subtotal: Reimbursement
25,081,073
0
Projects
Total All Projects
224,783,995
3,870,236
FUTURE RESERVE CAPACITY
Capacity in excess of trips generated by growth is considered future reserve
capacity. It may eventually be used by growth that occurs after the planning
horizon of the Transportation Element and Capital Facilities Plan Element, and it
may be repaid in part by fufure impact fees, but it is not eligible to be included
in the impact fees calculated in this study. Table 4 presents the analysis of future
reserve capacity for future and reimbursement projects (projects previously
constructed). The amount of future reserve capacity is determined by
comparing the total capacity of the improved street to the forecast of traffic
volume of the end of the planning period. The amount by which future
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 20
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
capacity exceeds future traffic volume is the number of future reserve capacity
trips. The future reserve capacity trips are divided by the amount of new
capacity to be added in order to calculate the percent of the project that will
be future reserve capacity. The future reserve capacity percentage is multiplied
times the project costs to calculate the portion of the project cost that is
attributable to future reserve capacity. The portion of the total $224.8 million of
eligible projects that is for future reserve capacity equals $82,428,993 (36.7% of
the total cost).
Table 4: Cost of Future Reserve Capacity
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
2030
Future
Capacity
2030
Post 2030
Reserve
Cost of
When
Traffic
(Deficiency)
% of
Future
#
Name of Project
Total Cost
Complete
Volume
Or Reserve
Increase
Reserve
New Projects
1
156th Ave SE:
$13,202,000
2,800
1,728
1,072
76.57%
$10,108,960
NE 4th St to SE 143rd St
2
Benson Road
4,500,000
3,200
2,046
1,154
72.13%
3,245,625
South 26th St to South 31st
St
3
Carr Rd/ Benson Rd (SR
23,391,000
7,200
6,853
347
43.38%
10,145,846
515)
intersection
4
Carr Road Central
32,488,500
4,800
3,596
1,204
75.23%
24,440,828
West of Talbot Road to
108th PI
5
Carr Road West
11,696,400
4,400
4,476
(76)
0.00%
0
Lind Avenue to West of
Talbot Rd
6
Grady Way
3,000,000
4,000
4,787
(787)
0.00%
0
Talbot Road to Rainier Ave
7
Lake Washington Blvd
548,238
2,600
1,885
715
55.00%
301,531
Park Ave N to Coulon Park
Entrance
8
Lind Ave SW
3,500,000
3,200
2,516
684
85.55%
2,994,141
SW 16th St to SW 43rd St
9
,o/gan Ave N/ Garden Ave
2,683,492
4,800
4,637
163
8.15%
218,705
Lk Washington Blvd
Intersection
10
Maple Valley Hwy (SR 169)
83,693,292
5,325
4,806
519
29.26%
24,489,129
Park entrance to East City
Limits
11
Park Ave N Extension
5,000,000
1,300
2,288
(988)
0.00%
0
Logan Ave N to 1200 ft
north
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 21
Company
Rote Study for impoct Fees • City of Renton
(1) (2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
2030
Future
Capacity
2030
Post 2030
Reserve
Cost of
When
Traffic
(Deficiency)
% of
Future
# Name of Project
Total Cost
Complete
Volume
Or Reserve
Increase
Reserve
12 South 7th Street
7,000,000
2,160
2,100
60
15.05%
1,053,500
Rainier Ave S to S Grady
Wee
13 SW 27th St/Strander
9,000,000
3,200-
3,073
127
3.97%
357,188
Connection
Oakdale to West Valley
Hwy
Subtotal: New Projects
199,702,922
77,355,451
Reimbursement Projects (Impact Fee Reimburses Local
Revenues
A Duvall
8,190,713
3,543
2,465
1,078
58.93%
4,826,762
Sunset to North City limits
B Logan
8,583,652
3,520
3,419
101
2.87%
246,780
6th to Garden
C SR 169 (Maple Valley Hwy)
8,306,708
5,400
6,342
(942)
0.00%
0
1-405 to Park entrance
Subtotal: Reimbursement
25,081,073
5,073,542
Projects
Total All Projects
224,783,995
82,428,993
COST ELIGIBLE FOR IMPACT FEES
Table 5 begins with the total cost of projects needed for growth. The columns to
the right repeat the costs of existing deficiencies (from Table 3), and future
reserve capacity (from Table 4). These costs are subtracted from the total cost
of each project to calculate the remaining cost of each project that is eligible
for impact fees. The total eligible cost is $138,484,767 which is 61.6% of the
$224.8 million total cost of eligible projects.
Table 5: Total Project Cost Eligible for Impact Fees
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
2008-2030
Cost of
Cost of
Project Cost
Existing
Future
Eligible for
#
Name of Project
Total Cost
Deficiency
Reserve
Impact Fees
New Projects
1
156th Ave SE:
$13,202,000
$ 0
$10,108,960
$ 3,093,040
NE 4th St to SE 143rd St
2
Benson Road
4,500,000
0
3,245,625
1,254,375
South 26th St to South 31 st St
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 22
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
(1) (2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
2008-2030
Cost of
Cost of
Project Cost
Existing
Future
Eligible for
# Name of Project
Total Cost
Deficiency
Reserve
Impact Fees
3 Carr Rd/ Benson Rd (SR 515)
23,391,000
0
10,145,846
13,245,154
intersection
4 Carr Road Central
32,488,500
0
24,440,828
8,047,672
West of Talbot Road to 108th PI
5 Carr Road West
11,696,400
3,187,269
0
8,509,131
Lind Avenue to West of Talbot Rd
6 Grady Way
3,000,000
466,250
0
2,533,750
Talbot Road to Rainier Ave
7 Lake Washington Blvd
548,238
77,175
301,531
169,532
Park Ave N to Coulon Park
Entrance
8 Lind Ave SW
3,500,000
0
2,994,141
505,859
SW 16th St to SW 43rd St
9 Logan Ave N/ Garden Ave N/
2,683,492
139,542
218,705
2,325,246
Lk Washington Blvd Intersection
10 Maple Valley Hwy (SR 169)
83,693,292
0
24,489,129
59,204,163
Park entrance to East City Limits
11 Park Ave N Extension
5,000,000
0
0
5,000,000
Logan Ave N to 1200 ft north
12 South 7th Street
7,000,000
0
1,053,500
5,946,500
Rainier Ave S to S Grady Way
13 SW 27th St/Strander Connection
9,000,000
0
357,188
8,642,813
Oakdale to West Valley Hwy
Subtotal: New Projects
199,702,922
3,870,236
77,355,451
118,477,235
Reimbursement Projects (Impact Fee Reimburses Local Revenues)
A Duvall
8,190,713
0
4,826,762
3,363,951
Sunset to North City limits
B Logan
8,583,652
0
246,780
8,336,872
6th to Garden
C SR 169 (Maple Valley Hwy)
8,306,708
0
0
8,306,708
1-405 to Park entrance
Subtotal: Reimbursement Projects
25,081,073
0
5,073,542
20,007,532
Total All Projects
224,783,995
3,870,236
82,428,993
138,484,767
Reduction for RCW 82.02.050(2) @ 3%
of eligible cost
-4,154,543
Growth's Share of Eligible Cost
134,330,224
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 23
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees - City of Renton
The final step in Table 5 is to further reduce the cost that is needed by new
development in order to implement a conservative interpretation of RCW
82.02.050(7) which provides that "...the financing for system improvements to
serve new development ... cannot rely solely on impact fees." The statute
provides no further guidance, and "not rely solely" could be anything between
0.1 % and 99.9%, thus additional analysis is presented below.
As noted previously, the total cost of all eligible projects is $224.8 million, and
only 1.7% of that is for existing deficiencies. Because the future reserve capacity
equals 36.7% of total costs, the City will be required to pay for those costs, and
may or may not eventually recoup those costs from development that occurs
after the 2030 planning horizon for the transportation improvements. Arguably
the 1.7% and the 36.6% that will be paid by the City provide sufficient
compliance with the requirement to "not rely solely on impact fees." However,
in the event that the intent of the statute is more narrowly construed to mean
that the City should "not rely solely on impact fees" for the $138,484,767 cost
that is eligible for impact fees, an additional 3% reduction ($4,154,543) is taken
at the end of Table 5, leaving a net total cost of growth's share of $134,330,224.
This amount will be used as the basis for the remaining calculations of the
transportation impact fee for Renton.
No other reduction is warranted for other revenues that the City may obtain for
transportation capital improvements. Grant revenue is primarily regional in
nature, and will be used by the City for the portion of the eligible $134 million
that is attributable to external traffic that comes from development that does
not pay impact fees to Renton. Any other local revenue would be used first to
pay the $4,154,839 for the 3% reduction, then for the 1.7% for existing
deficiencies, and lastly for the 36.7% for future reserve capacity, In other words,
there are no other revenues that would be subject to the "adjustment"
provisions of RCW 82.02.060(1)(b).
If a developer believes that significant prior payments were made by their
property that meet the criteria of RCW 82.02.060(1)(b), the applicant can submit
supporting information and request a special review to reduce their impact fee
by the amount of such prior payments made by their property and used for the
same system improvements that are the basis of the impact fee (i.e., those listed
in Tables 2 - 5).
Formula T-3: Growth Trips on the Street Network
The growth of trips on Renton's streets and roads is calculated from data
produced by the City's traffic model:
Future Current Growth
T-3, P.M. Peak Hour - P.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour
Trips Trips - Trips
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 24
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
There is one new variable used in formula 3 that requires explanation; (D) p.m.
peak hour trips on the network of streets and roads.
Variable (D): P.M. Peak Hour Trips
Renton's traffic model can count the total number of trips on all the City's streets
and roads during the busiest hour (i.e., "p.m. peak hour). Measuring traffic
during the p.m, peak hour is a common practice among Washington cities
because they are concerned about congestion and the level of service during
the time of heaviest traffic volumes.
The City's traffic model can count p.m. peak hour trips currently on the system.
The model can also use future population and employment data to estimate
the p.m. peak hour trips at future points in time.
The City's long-range transportation planning horizon is the year 2030, therefore
the "future" p.m, peak hour trips are for the year 2030 (and the City's
transportation improvement projects are selected to address the increased trips
through 2030).
Table 6 shows a total of 45,880 trips in 2008. In 2030 the total is estimated to be
63,750 trips. The difference between the 2008 and 2030 trips is 17,870 growth
trips. The growth trips will be divided into the cost of growth to calculate the
cost per growth trip.
One other feature of the trip data is noteworthy. Some of the trips begin and or
end outside the City. Renton's transportation impact fee only applies to
development inside the City, so it will be useful to know how many growth trips
will be paying the impact fee, and how many will not.
Information about "inside" and "outside" trips is available from Renton's traffic
model. It identifies the starting point (i.e., "origin") and the ending point (i.e.,
"destination") of each trip. In the summary of trip ends in Table 6 each trip end
is either inside the City of Renton (i.e., "internal") or outside the City (i.e.,
"external").
The trip data is reported in Table 6 for all four combinations; internal - internal
means a trip that starts and ends inside the City. External - external is a trip that
begins and ends outside the City limits without stopping in Renton. These are
also called "through trips". The trips that have one end in the City and the other
end outside the City are internal -external or external -internal. The column
showing internal growth trips includes all of the internal -internal, one-half of the
internal -external and external -internal, and none of the external -external trips.
The column showing external growth trips counts the opposite end of all trips.
The sum of the internal and the external trips is the total growth trips. This data
will be used outside this study to estimate the costs that will be paid by impact
fees and the cost that will be paid by other sources of revenue. Those estimates
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 25
Company
Rote Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
are for financial planning purposes, but do not affect the calculation of the
impact fee rates in this study.
Table 6: Growth Trips (p.m. peak hour) on the Street Network
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
Internal
External
Origin -
2008
2030
Growth
Growth
Growth
Destination
Trips
Trips
Trips
Trips
Trips
internal - internal
6,150
9,200
3,050
3,050
0
internal - external
15,265
21,010
5,745
2,873
2,873
external - internal
12,618
17,815
5,197
2,599
2,599
external - external
11,847
15,725
3,878
0
3,878
Total
45,880
63,750
17,870
8,521
9,349
Formula T-4: Cost per Growth Trip
The cost per growth trip is calculated by dividing growth's share of eligible costs
of projects needed for growth by the number of growth trips;
T-4, Growth's Share _ Growth's Trips on = Cost Per
of Eligible Cost the Street Network Growth Trip
There are no new variables used in formula 4.
Calculation of Cost per Growth Trip
Table 7 shows the calculation of the cost per growth trip by dividing the $134.3
million of eligible cost of street projects (from Table 5) by the 17,870 growth trips
(from Table 6). The result is the cost per trip of $7,517.08.
Table 7: 'Cost per Growth Trip
(1) (2)
Item Amount
Growth's Share of Eligible Costs $ 134,330,224
P.M. Peak Hour Growth Trips 17,870
Cost per PM Peak Growth Trip 7,517.08
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 26
Company
Rote Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Formula T-5: Impact Fee Rates For Specific Land Uses
The impact fee rate for each category of land use is determined by multiplying
the cost per growth trip times the number of trips generated per unit of
development of each category of land use:
Cost Per Trip Generation Impact Fee Rate Per
T-5, Growth Trip x Rate per Unit of = Unit of Development
Development
The formula uses different trip generation rates for different types of land uses
(i.e., single family houses, office buildings, etc.). There is one new variable used
in formula 5 that requires explanation: (E) trip generation rates.
Variable (E): Trip Generation Rates.
Trip generation rates measure the impact on the street and road network by
different types of land uses. For example, office buildings average 1.49 p.m.
peak hour trips per 1,000 square feet of office, but industrial buildings average
only 0.97 p.m. peak hour trips per 1,000 square feet of industrial space.
This rate study uses the data reported in Trip Generation, compiled and
published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). The report is currently
in its 8th edition. The report is a summary of data from hundreds of surveys of trip
origins and destinations conducted throughout the United States. The data is
reported on several variables (i.e., type of land use, units of development,
number of employees, hour of day, etc.). The data used in this impact fee rate
study is for trips generated during the p,m. peak hour, since that is the same
basis the City uses to analyze the City's traffic conditions.
Impact fee rates are calculated in this study for many frequently used types of
land use (i.e., dwellings, industrial, offices, retail, restaurants, etc.). Impact fees
can be calculated for other land uses not listed in this rate study by referring to
the data in the ITE report referenced above.
Trip generation data is reported initially as the total number of trips leaving and
arriving at each type of land use. This impact fee rate study makes two
adjustments to trip generation rates reported in ITE's Trip Generation, 8th edition.
The first adjustment is to reduce the number of trips that are incidental attractors
and generators of trips. For example, if a person leaves work to return home of
the end of the work day, the place of employment is the origin, and the home is
the destination. But if the person stops enroute to run an errand at a store, the
ITE data counts the stop at the store as a new destination (and a new origin
when the person leaves the store to continue to their home). In reality, the work -
to -home trip was going to occur regardless of the incidental stop, therefore the
store should not be charged with an additional trip on the street system. The
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 27
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
measurement for this adjustment is the number of "pass -by" trips that stop at the
store instead of "passing by." In Table 8, these trips are eliminated by counting
only the trips that are truly "new" trips (i.e., a person made a special trip to the
store). The adjustment is shown in Table 8 as "Percent New Trips."
The second adjustment is the "Trip Length Factor." Not all trips are the same
length. Longer trips are considered to have a greater impact than shorter trips.
The ITE report's trip generation data is adjusted by a factor that compares the
average trip length of each type of development to the average trip length
factor of 1.0 for all trips. Some land uses have factors greater than 1.0 (i.e.,
industrial trips are factored at 1.47 because their trips are 47% longer than
average) while other land uses have factors less than 1.0 (i.e., 24-hour
convenience markets trips are factored at 0.44 because their trips are only 44%
the length of an average trip). Trip length data is compiled from studies
prepared by a number of local governments and consultants.
Calculation of Impact Fee Rates for Specific Land Uses
Table 8 shows the calculation of impact fee rates for frequently used categories
of land use that are listed in columns 1 and 2. The ITE trip rate in column 3 is
multiplied times the percent new trips in column 4, and the result is multiplied
times the trip length factor in column 5. Column 6 reports the net new trips that
are the result of these calculations. The impact fee rates in column 7 are
calculated by multiplying the net new trips from column 6 times the $7,517.08
cost per growth trip (from Table 7, and repeated in the column heading of
column 7).
Table 8: Transportation Impact Fee Rates Per Unit of Development
(1) (2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
ITE
%
Trip
ITE
Trip
New
Length
Net New Trips Per
Impact Fee Per Unit @
Code ITE Land Use Category
Rate
Trips
Factor
Unit of Measure
$7,517.08 per Trip
110 Light Industrial
0.97
100%
1.47
1.43 1,000 sq ft
10.72 per sq ft
140 Manufacturing
0.73
100%
1.47
1 1.07 1,000 sq ft
8.07 per sq ft
151 Mini -warehouse
0.26
100%
1.47
0.38 1,000 sq ft
2.87 per sq ft
210 Single family House
1.01
100%
1.13
1.14 dwelling
8,579.24 per dwelling
220 Apartment
0.62
100%
1.20
0.74 dwelling
5,592.71 per dwelling
230 Condominium
0.52
100%
1.15
0.60 dwelling
4,495.21 per dwelling
240 Mobile Home
0.59
100%
1.09
0.64 dwelling
4,834.23 per dwelling
251 Senior Housing - Attached
0.16
100%
0.93
0.15 dwelling
1,118.54 per dwelling
310 Hotel
0.59
100%
1.28
0.76 room
5,676.90 per room
320 Motel
0.47
100%
1.28
0.60 room
4,522.28 per room
420 Marina
0.19
100%
0.97
0.18 berth
1,385.40 per boat berth
444 Movie Theater
3.80
85%
0.73
2.36 1,000 sq ft
17.72 per sq ft
492 Health/Fitness Club
3.53
75%
1.00
2.65 1,000 sq ft
19.90 per sq ft
530 High School
0.97
80%
1.00
0.78 1,000 sn ft
5.83 per sq ft
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 28
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
(1) (2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
ITE
%
Trip
ITE
Trip
New
Length
Net New Trips Per
Impact Fee Per Unit @
Code ITE Land Use Category
Rate
Trips
Factor
Unit of Measure
$7,517.08 per Trip
560 Church
0.55
100%
1.20
0.66 1,000 sq ft
4.96 per sq ft
610 Hospital
1.14
80%
1.28
1.17 1,000 sq ft
8.78 pers ft
620 Nursing home
0.22
100%
0.87
0.19 bed
1,438.77 per bed
710 General Office
1.49
90%
1.47
1.97 1,000 sq ft
14.82 per sq ft
720 Medical office
3.46
75%
1.40
3.63 1,000 sq ft
27.31 per sq ft
820 Shopping Center
3.73
65%
0.53
1.28 1,000 sq ft
9.66 pers ft
932 Restaurant: sit-down
11.15
55%
0.73
4.48 1,000 sq ft
33.65 per sq ft
933 Fast food, no drive -up
26.15
50%
0.67
8.76 1,000 sq ft
65.85 pers ft
934 Fast food, w/ drive -up
33.84
51%
0.62
10.70 1,000 sq ft
80.43 per sq ft
944 Gas station
13.87
40%
0.56
3.11 pump
23,354.67 per pump
945 Gas station w/convenience
13.38
45%
0.53
3.19 pump
24,967.98 per pump
850 Supermarket
10.50
65%
0.67
4.57 1,000 sq ft
34.37 pers ft
851 Convenience market-24 hr
52.41
45%
0.44
10.38 1,000 sq ft
78.01 per sq ft
912 Drive-in Bank
25.82
55%
0.47
6.67 1,000 sq ft
50.17 per sq ft
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 29
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
4. PARK IMPACT FEES
Impact fees for parks, open space, and recreation facilities begin with an
inventory and valuation of the existing assets in order to calculate the current
investment per person. The current investment per person is multiplied times the
future population to identify the value of additional assets needed to provide
growth with the same level of investment as the City owns for the current
population. The future investment is reduced by the amount of specific revenues
to determine the net investment needed to be paid by growth. Dividing the net
investment by the population growth results in the investment per person that
can be charged as impact fees. A final adjustment reduces the impact fee
amount to match the investments listed in the City's adopted Capital
Investment Program. The amount of the impact fee is determined by charging
each fee -paying development for impact fee cost per dwelling multiplied times
the number of dwelling units in the development.
These steps are described below in the formulas, descriptions of variables, tables
of data, and explanation of calculations of park impact fees.
Formula P-1: Park and Recreation Capital Value Per Person
The capital investment per person is calculated by dividing the value of the
asset inventory by the current population.
Value of Parks & Current Capital Value
P-1. Recreation _ Inventory Population - Per Person
There is one variable that requires explanation: (A) value of parks and recreation
inventory
Variable (A): Value of Parks and Recreation Inventory
The value of the existing inventory of parks, open space and recreation facilities
is calculated by determining the value of park land, amenities and buildings
The sum of all of the values equals the current value of the City's park and
recreation system.
The values in this study come from a variety of sources, depending on the type
of the park or recreation facility. The land values are from King County's land
assessment data base. Most of the valuations of the park amenities are from the
City's cost records. Values of a few amenities are based on information from
vendors or costs in other Washington cities. The values of the following amenities
were determined by special studies: Coulon Park, Henry Moses Aquatic Center,
grandstand and bridge, and all park system buildings. The value of amenities
does not include land because the facilities are customarily located at a park.
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 30
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
The costs of new parks and recreation facilities in this rate study do not include
any costs for interest or other financing. If borrowing is used to "front fund" the
costs that will be paid by impact fees, the carrying costs for financing can be
added to the costs, and the impact fee can be recalculated to include such
costs.
Table 9 lists the inventory of park land and amenities that make up the existing
City of Renton park system. Each item is listed in column 1, the unit of
measurement in column 2, the inventory in column 3, and the average cost per
unit in column 4, The value of the park land or amenity is shown in Column 5,
The total value for the current existing inventory of park land and amenities is
$204,664,604. That value is divided by the current population of 84,928 to
calculate the capital value of $2,409.62 per person.
Table 9: Asset Inventory and Capital Value per Person
(1)
(2)
(3)
(5)
(4)
Average Cost
Type of Park or Facility
Unit
Inventory
Per Unit
Capital Value
Land Value
Neighborhood Park
acre
141.53
129,783
$18,368,188
Community Park
acre
129.54
229,463
29,724,637
Regional Park (Coulon Memorial)
acre
27.69
1,089,094
30,157,013
Open Space Park
acre
612.55
71,728
43,936,986
Special Use Park
acre
2.75
903,586
2,484,862
Land Value Subtotal
$124,671,686
Park Amenity
Ballfield
field
9
310,000
$2,790,000
Ballfield, Complete & Lighted
field
4
710,000
2,840,000
Basketball Court, Half
court
3
125,000
375,000
Basketball Court, Full
court
7
190,000
1,330,000
Basketball Court, Lighted
court
3
240,000
720,000
Boardwalk Trail
linear feet
1,300
700
910,000
Boathouse Pier
pier
1
1,538,030
1,538,030
Boathouse Pier Wood Floats
float
2
154,750
309,500
Kennydale Beach Pier, Bulkhead, Logboom
pier
1
548,930
548,930
Land - Passive / Landscaped
acre
75
196,020
14,701,500
Multi -Purpose Field
acre
7
196,020
1,372,140
Multi -Purpose Trail, 12' wide, Paved
mile
3.5
443,520
1,552,320
Park Bridge
bridge
4
5,993,575
Parking Lot
acre
18.5
305,000
5,642,500
Pedestrian Trail, 8' wide, AC Paved
mile
3
295,680
887,040
Pedestrian Trail, 8' wide, Brick Paved
linear feet
1,735
120
208,200
Picnic Shelter
shelter
7
55,000
385,000
Henderson,
Young &
August 26, 2011
Page 31
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
(1)
(2)
(3)
(5)
(4)
Average Cost
Type of Park or Facility
Unit
Inventory
Per Unit
Capital Value
Play Equipment
lot
19
110,000
2,090,000
Skateboard Park, lighted
park
1
500,000
500,000
Soccer Field, All -Weather Surface
field
1
340,000
340,000
Tennis Court
court
9
165,000
1,485,000
Tennis Court, Lighted
court
8
210,000
1,680,000
Volleyball Court, Sand
court
2
45,000
90,000
Park Amenity Subtotal
$48,288,735
Coulon Park Amenities
Restaurant
building
2
$509,509
Picnic Gallery
shelter
1
323,673
Picnic Shelter
shelter
4
289,908
Bathhouse/Restroom
building
1
356,289
Restroom
building
2
259,676
Waterwalk, Small Boat Dock, Picnic Pads
waterwalk
4
4,390,025
Deck & Bulkhead @ Ivar's
deck
1
2,067,000
Boat Launch (8 lane)
launch
1
1,111,835
Sail Club Launch, Wood Float
launch
1
1,088,500
Bridge
bridge
5
1,110,250
Fishing Pier & Shelter
pier
1
457,938
Log Boom
boom
1
702,750
Coulon Park Amenities Subtotal
$12,667,353
Buildings
Activity Center
building
5
$979,425
Neighborhood Center
building
2
2,490,064
Renton Community Center
building
1
5,062,334
Carco Theater
building
1
1,998,806
Henry Moses Aquatic Center
building
1
3,966,232
Renton Senior Activity Center
building
1
2,742,035
Liberty Park Community Bldg.
building
1
569,716
Cedar River Boathouse
building
1
430,534
Kennydale Beach Bathhouse
building
1
81,466
Grandstand
structure
1
630,925
Greenhouse
building
1
65,293
Buildings Subtotal
$19,016,830
Total Capital Value
$204,644,604
2010 Population
84,928
Capital Value per Person
$2,409.62
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 32
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Formula P-2: Value Needed for Growth
Impact fees must be related to the needs of growth, as explained in Chapter 2.
The first step in determining growth's needs is to calculate the total value of
parks and recreational facilities that are needed for growth. The calculation is
accomplished by multiplying the investment per person (from Table 9) times the
number of new persons that are forecast for the City's growth.
Capital Value Population Value Needed
P-2. per Person x Growth - for Growth
There is one new variable used in formula 2 that requires explanation; (B)
forecasts of future population growth.
Variable (B): Forecast Population Growth
As part of the City of Renton long-range planning process, including its
Comprehensive Plan pursuant to the Growth Management Act, the City
prepares forecasts of future growth. During the next 6 years the City expects
3,486 additional dwelling units with an average of 2.2 persons per dwelling unit.
This will bring 7,669 additional people to Renton.
Table 10 shows the calculation of the value of parks and recreational facilities
needed for growth. Column 1 lists the current capital value per person from
Table 9, Column 2 shows the growth in population that is forecast, and Column 3
is the total value of parks and recreational facilities that is needed to serve the
growth that is forecast for Renton.
Table 10: Value of Parks and Recreational Facilities Needed for Growth
(1)
(2)
(3)
Capital
Forecast
Value
Value
Population
Needed
per Person
Growth
for Growth
$ 2,409.62
7,669
$ 18,479,412
Table 10 shows that Renton needs parks and recreational facilities valued at
$18,479,412 in order to serve the growth of 7,669 additional people who are
expected to be added to the City's existing population. The future investment
needed for growth will be $18,479,412 unless the City has existing reserve
capacity in its parks and recreational facilities or other unused assets.
Formula P-3. Investment Needed for Growth
The investment needed for growth is calculated by subtracting the value of any
existing reserve capacity and any existing balance in the impact fee account
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 33
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
from the total value of parks and recreational facilities needed to serve the
growth.
Value
Value of
Uncommitted Investment
P-3. Needed
Existing
Balance in = Needed for
for
Reserve
Impact Fee Growth
Growth
Capacity
Account
There are two new variables used in formula 3 that require explanation: (C)
value of existing reserve capacity of parks and recreational facilities, and (D)
the uncommitted balance in the impact fee account.
Variable (C): Value of Existing Reserve Capacity
The value of reserve capacity is the difference between the value of the City's
existing inventory of parks and recreational facilities, and the value of those
assets that are needed to provide the level of service standard for the existing
population. Because the capital value per person is based on the current assets
and the current population, there is no reserve capacity (i.e., no unused value
that can be used to serve future population growth)5.
Variable (D): Uncommitted Balance in Impact Fee Account
Any unexpended and uncommitted balance in the park impact fee account is
an asset that can be used to increase the value of park and recreation assets,
thus reducing the amount that needs to be invested for future growth.
Table 11 shows the calculation of the investment in parks and recreational
facilities that is needed for growth. Column 1 lists the value of parks and
recreational facilities needed to serve growth (from Table 10), Column 2 shows
the value of existing reserve capacity, and Column 3 is the remaining investment
in parks and recreational facilities that is needed to serve the growth. Column 4
subtracts the balance in the impact fee account, producing the net investment
needed for growth shown in Column 5.
Table 11: Investment Needed in Parlcs and Recreational Facilities for Growth
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
Value of
Value
Existing
Investment
Balance
Net Investment
Needed
Reserve
Needed
In Impact
Needed
for Growth
Capacity
for Growth
Fee Account
for Growth
$ 18,479,412
$ 0
$ 18,479,412
$ 1,100,000
$ 17,379,412
5 Also, the use of the current assets and the current population means there is no existing
deficiency. This approach satisfies the requirements of RCW 82.02.050(4) to determine whether
or not there are any existing deficiencies in order to ensure that impact fees are not charged for
any deficiencies.
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 34
Company
Rote Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Table 11 shows that Renton needs to invest $17,379,412 in additional parks and
recreational facilities in order to serve future growth. The future investment in
parks and recreational facilities that needs to paid by growth may be less that
$17,379,412 if the City has other revenues it invests in its parks and recreational
facilities.
Formula P-4. Investment to be Paid by Growth
The investment to be paid by growth is calculated by subtracting the amount of
any revenues the City invests in infrastructure for growth from the total
investment in parks and recreational facilities needed to serve growth.
Investment City Investment
P-4. Needed for - Investment = to be Paid
Growth for Growth by Growth
There is one new variable used in formula 4 that requires explanation: (E)
revenues used to fund the City's investment in projects that serve growth.
Variable (E): City Investment of Non -Impact Fee Revenues
The City of Renton has historically used a combination of state grants and local
revenues to pay for the cost of park and recreational capital facilities. The City's
plan for the future is to continue using grant revenue and limited local revenues
to pay part of the cost of parks and recreational facilities needed for growth.
A detailed analysis of the City's CIP indicates that estimated local revenues will
pay for 11,92% of park projects that add "capacity" to the park system for new
development by increasing the value of park and recreation assets.
Revenues that are used for repair, maintenance or operating costs are not used
to reduce impact fees because they are not used, earmarked or prorated for
the system improvements that are the basis of the impact fees. Revenues from
past taxes paid on vacant land prior to development are not included because
new capital projects do not have prior costs, therefore prior taxes did not
contribute to such projects.
The other potential credit that reduces capacity costs (and subsequent impact
fees) are donations of land or other assets by developers or builders. Those
reductions depend upon specific arrangements between the developer and
the City of Renton. Reductions in impact fees for donations are calculated on a
case by case basis at the time impact fees are to be paid.
Table 12 shows the calculation of the investment in parks and recreational
facilities that needs to be paid by growth. Column 1 lists the investment in parks
and recreational facilities needed to serve growth (from Table 11), column 2
shows the value of City investment for growth from grants and some local
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 35
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
revenues, and column 3 is the remaining investment in parks and recreational
facilities that will be paid by growth.
Table 12: Investment in Parks and Recreational Facilities to be Paid by Growth
(1)
(2)
(3)
Investment
City
Investment
Needed
Investment
to be Paid
for Growth
for Growth
by Growth
$ 17,379,412
$ 2,071,626
$ 15,307,786
Table 12 shows that growth in Renton needs to pay $17,379,412 for additional
parks and recreational facilities to maintain the City's standards for future
growth. The City expects to use $2,071,626 in grant and local revenue towards
this cost (calculated at 11.92% of $17,379,412 needed, for growth), and the
remaining $15,307,786 will be paid by growth.
Formula P-5: Growth Cost Per Person
The growth cost per person is calculated by dividing the investment in parks and
recreational facilities that is to be paid by growth by the amount of population
growth.
Investment - Growth = Growth Cost
P-5. to be Paid Population per Person
by Growth
There are no new variables used in formula P-5. Both variables were developed
in previous formulas.
Calculation of Investment to be Paid by Growth
Table 13 shows the calculation of the cost per person of parks and recreational
facilities that needs to be paid by growth. Column 1 lists the investment in parks
and recreational facilities needed to be paid by growth (from Table 12), column
2 shows the growth population (see Variable B, Formula 2, above), and column
3 is the growth cost per person.
Table 13: Growth Cost per Person
(1)
(2)
(3)
Investment
Growth
to be Paid
Growth
Cost
by Growth
Population
per Person
$ 15,307,786
7,669
$ 1,996.06
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 36
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Table 13 shows that cost per new person for parks and recreational facilities that
will be paid by growth is $1,996.06. The amount to be paid by each new
dwelling unit depends on the number of persons per dwelling unit, as described
in the next formula.
Formula P-6: Cost per Dwelling Unit
The cost per dwelling unit is calculated by multiplying the growth cost per
person by the number of persons per dwelling unit.
Growth Cost Persons per _ Cost per
P-b. per Person x Dwelling Unit - Dwelling Unit
There is one new variable used in formula 6 that requires explanation: (F)
average number of persons per dwelling unit.
Variable (F): Persons per Dwelling Unit
The number of persons per dwelling unit is the factor used to convert the growth
cost of parks and recreational facilities per person into growth cost per new
dwelling unit. The data for calculating the persons per dwelling unit comes from
the Washington Office of Financial Management's 2010 Population Worksheet
for the City of Renton.
Table 14 shows the calculation of the parks and recreational facilities cost per
dwelling unit. Column 1 lists the types of dwelling units, column 2 shows the
average persons per dwelling unit, and column 3 is the cost per dwelling unit
calculated by multiplying the number of persons per dwelling unit times the
growth cost of $1,996.06 per person from Table 13.
Table 14: Cost per Dwelling Unit
(1)
Type of
Dwelling
Unit
(2)
Average
Persons per
Dwelling Unit
(3)
Cost
per Dwelling Unit @
$1,996.06 per Person
Single Family
2.55
$ 5,089.95
Multi -Family: 2 units
2.07
4,131.84
Multi -Family: 3 or 4 units
1.97
3,932.24
Multi -Family: 5 or more units
1.73
3,453.18
Mobile Home
1.81
3,612.87
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 37
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Formula P-7: Impact Fee per Dwelling Unit
The impact fee per dwelling unit is calculated by adjusting the cost per dwelling
unit to limit it to an amount consistent with the projects that will add capacity
(asset value) in Renton's adopted CIP compared to the total investment that
would be needed to maintain the current value per person,
P-7, Cost Per Adjustment for _ Impact Fee Per
Dwelling Unit CIP Project Value Dwelling Unit
There is one new variable used in formula 7 that requires explanation: (G) CIP
adjustment per dwelling unit,
Variable (G): Adjustment for CIP Project Value
As noted in Chapter 2, impact fees must be based on the Capital Facilities Plan
(CFP) of the City. The details of Renton's CFP appear in the Capital Investment
Program (CIP) portion of the City's budget, A detailed review of the CIP
identified specific projects that will increase the value of park and recreation
assets, thus providing additional capacity for new development, If the value of
the specific projects is equal to, or greater than the value needed for growth
there is no adjustment to the cost per dwelling unit. However, if the value of the
capacity projects is less than the value needed for growth, the cost per dwelling
unit must be reduced to account for the difference.
The 2011-2016 CIP contains 5 projects that increase the asset value of the park
system6, The total value of the 5 projects is $9,948,000. However, Table 10
calculated that the value needed for growth is $18,479,412. The difference
between the value of the 5 projects and the value needed for growth is
$8,531,412, which is 46,17% of the value needed for growth. As a result, the cost
per dwelling unit must be reduced by 46,17% in order to limit the impact fee to
the amount that will be spent by the City for projects that serve growth.
Table 15 (on the next page) shows the calculation of the parks and recreational
facilities impact fee per dwelling unit. Column 1 lists the types of dwelling units,
column 2 shows the cost per dwelling unit from Table 14, column 3 shows the
amount of the adjustment (calculated at 46,17% of the cost per dwelling unit),
and column 4 is the impact fee per dwelling unit after subtracting the
adjustment from the cost per dwelling unit,
6 Henry Moss Aquatic Center, Grant Matching Program, Black River Riparian Forest, Regis Park
Athletic Field Expansion, Park Master Planning Implementation, and King County Proposition 2
Capital Expenditure Levy Fund.
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 38
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees
Table 15: Park Impact Fee per Dwelling Unit
of Renton
(1)
Type of
Dwelling Unit
(2)
Cost per
Dwelling Unit
(3)
Adjustment to
Match CIP
(4)
Impact Fee per
Dwelling Unit
Single Family
$ 5,089.95
$ 2,349.88
$ 2,740.07
Multi -Family: 2 units
4,131.84
1,907.55
2,224.29
Multi -Family: 3 or 4 units
3,932.24
1,815.40
2,116.84
Multi -Family: 5 or more units
3,453.18
1,594.24
1,858.95
Mobile Home
3,612.87
1,667.96
1,944.91
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 39
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
5. FIRE IMPACT FEES
Impact fees for fire protection facilities begin with an inventory of fire apparatus
and stations and the number of emergencies they responded to. Next is an
analysis of the capital cost of fire protection apparatus and stations including
calculation of the capital cost per response. The emergency responses are
summarized according to the types of land uses that received responses, and
incident rates are calculated to quantify the average number of emergency
responses per unit of development for each type of land use. The costs per
response and the response incident rates are used to calculate the number and
cost of responses to fire incidents and to BLS incidents (basic life support medical
responses) at each type of land use. The fire and BLS cost per unit of
development are combined to calculate the total cost per unit of
development. The total cost is adjusted for payments of other and the result is
the fire impact fee rates for the City of Renton.
These steps are described below in the formulas, descriptions of variables, tables
of data, and explanation of calculations of fire impact fees.
The need for fire protection facilities is influenced by a variety of factors, such as
response time, call loads, geographical area, topographic and manmade
barriers, and standards of the National Fire Protection Association, and the
National Commission on the Accreditation of Ambulance Services. For the
purpose of quantifying the need for fire and BLS apparatus and stations to serve
growth this study uses the ratio of apparatus and stations to incidents. The
current ratio provides acceptable levels of service to current residents and
businesses. As growth occurs, more incidents will occur, therefore more
apparatus and stations will be needed to maintain standards.
Formula F-1: Inventory and Emergency Responses
The City of Renton owns a variety of fire apparatus (i.e., fire engines, ladder
trucks, aid vehicles, etc.). Each vehicle responds to many emergencies. The
average number of emergency responses per apparatus is used as one element
in calculating the cost per emergency response.
F-1 . Emergency _ Fire = Responses per
Responses Apparatus Apparatus
There are three variables that require explanation: (A) fire apparatus, (B)
emergency responses, and (C) fire stations.
Variable (A): Fire Apparatus
The term "fire apparatus" applies to vehicles that the City of Renton uses for two
categories of emergency responses: fire emergencies and medical
emergencies. The medical emergencies will be referred to in this study as "BLS"
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 40
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
because the Renton Fire Department provides Basic Life Support (BLS) responses
and is typically the first responder to medical emergencies in Renton.
Advanced Life Support (ALS) is provided by King County. ALS costs are not
included in Renton's fire impact fee. Table 16 contains a list of each type of
primary fire apparatus and the number of each type. Renton also has several
older "reserve" apparatus that are dispatched as needed when a primary
apparatus is out of service for repairs or maintenance. The reserve apparatus
are not routinely dispatched and are excluded from the impact fee analysis
because they are not used frequently enough to have a material effect on the
cost of providing fire protection facilities.
Variable (B): Emergency Responses
The total annual responses for each type of apparatus is also shown in Table 16.
The average number of emergency responses for each type of apparatus is
calculated by dividing the number of annual emergency responses by the
number of units making those runs. In many cases, more than one apparatus is
dispatched to an emergency incident. The number and type of apparatus
dispatched to each incident varies depending on the type and severity of the
incident.
During 2010, Renton's 50 primary response apparatus were dispatched a total of
16,545 times to 12,421 emergency incidents (many times the seriousness of an
incident requires that more than one unit respond). Using the existing ratio of
apparatus and station space per incident maintains the current level of service
and avoids any existing deficiency or unused reserve capacity, This approach
satisfies the requirements of RCW 82.02.050(4) to determine whether or not there
are any existing deficiencies or reserve capacity in order to ensure that impact
fees are not charged for any deficiencies or reserve capacity (other than
reimbursement fees).
Table 16: Fire Protection Apparatus Inventory
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
Average
Primary
Annual
Emergency
Apparatus
Emergency
Responses
Type of Apparatus
Inventory
Responses
Per Unit
Primary Career Service Response Units:
Engine
5
8,713
1,743
Ladder
1
1,048
1,048
Aid Vehicle
6
5,825
971
Hazardous Materials Vehicle
1
4
4
Brush Truck
1
15
15
Staff Vehicles
28
909
32
Other A aratus/E ui mene
8
31
4
Total Primary Apparatus
50
16,545
Other apparatus and equipment include 4 specialized trailers and a dive boat.
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 41
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Variable (C): Fire Stations
The City of Renton provides fire and BLS services out of 6 stations. Table 17 lists
the 6 stations and the square footage of fire stations and support facilities (i.e.,
EOC, shop, and tower). Table 17 also shows the total fire and BLS incidents, and
the average square footage of fire station per incident (calculated by dividing
the total square footage of all fire stations by the number of annual fire and BLS
incidents). The total incidents from stations (Table 17) is less than the total
incidents from apparatus (Table 16) because more than one apparatus
responds to many calls, but often one station is the source of all the apparatus
responding to a call.
Table 17: Fire and BLS Building Inventory
(1)
Station
(2)
Fire
District Station
Inventory
(Square Feet
(3)
Annual
Incidents
(4)
Square Feet
Per
Incident
11 -Mill Ave. S.
14,000
12 - Kirkland Ave. NE
13,200
12 - EOC
4,000
13 - 108th Ave. SE
24,400
13 - Shop
4,600
14 - Lind Ave. S.
13,050
14 - Tower
3,780
16 - 156th Ave. SE
9,760
17 - SE Petrovitsky Rd.
9,500
Total
96,290
12,421
7.75
Formula F-2: Annual Cost Per Apparatus
Formulas F-2 through F-4 are needed to calculate the apparatus cost per fire
incident. The first step in this calculation is to identify and annualize the cost of
each type of apparatus using formula F-2. The capital cost per apparatus is
based on the cost of primary response apparatus and major support
equipment. The annualized capital cost per apparatus is determined by
dividing the capital cost of each type of apparatus by its useful life:
F-2 Fire Apparatus _ Useful Life = Annual Cost per
Cost Apparatus
There are two variables that require explanation: (D) fire apparatus cost, and (E)
useful life.
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 42
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Variable (D): Fire Apparatus Cost
Table 18 shows the annualized cost for each type of primary apparatus listed in
Table 16. The cost per apparatus includes the vehicle, fire and BLS equipment,
and communication equipment. The apparatus and equipment costs in Table
18 represent current costs to purchase a new fully equipped apparatus.
Variable (E): Useful Life
Table 18 also shows the number of years of useful life of each type of apparatus.
The annualized cost is calculated by dividing each apparatus cost by the useful
life of that apparatus.
Table 18: Annualized Apparatus Cost
�1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
Useful Life
Total Cost
of
Annual
Per
Component
Cost
Apparatus
Apparatus
Years
Col. 2 / Col. 3
Engine
$ 494,531
10
$ 49,453.10
Ladder
1,004,968
20
50,248.40
Aid Vehicle
200,000
7
28,571.43
Hazardous Materials Vehicle
50,000
30
1,666.67
Brush Truck
30,000
30
1,000.00
Staff Vehicles
27,183
10
2,718.30
Other Apparatus/Equipment
41,142
10.2
4,033.53
Formula F-3: Cost Per Apparatus Per Fire or BLS Incident
The second step in calculating the apparatus cost per fire incident is formula F-3.
The capital cost per fire or BLS incident is calculated for each apparatus by
dividing the annualized cost per apparatus by the total annual incidents (both
fire and BLS) each type of apparatus responds to. Each type of apparatus is
analyzed separately because the number and type of apparatus responding to
an incident varies depending on the type and severity of the incident.
Annual Cost Annual Annual Apparatus
F-3. Per Apparatus _ Responses Per = Cost Per Response
Apparatus
There are no new variables used in formula F-3. Both variables were developed
in previous formulas.
In Table 19 the cost per emergency response is calculated for each type of
apparatus. Table 19 shows the annualized cost of one of each type of
apparatus (from Table 18) and the average annual emergency responses for
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 43
Company
Rote Study for lmpoct Fees • City of Renton
each type of apparatus (from Table 16). Each apparatus cost per response is
calculated by dividing the annualized cost of that type of apparatus by the
total number of annual responses for the same type of apparatus.
Table 19: Apparatus Cost per Response
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
Average
Annual
Apparatus Cost
Annual
Responses
Per
Apparatus
Per
Response
Type of Apparatus
Cost
Apparatus
Col. 2= Col. 3
Engine
$ 49,453.10
1,743
$ 28.38
Ladder
50,248.40
1,048
47.95
Aid Vehicle
28,571.43
971
29.43
Hazardous Materials Vehicle
1,666.67
4
416.67
Brush Truck
1,000.00
15
66.67
Staff Vehicles
2,718.30
32
83.73
Other Apparatus/Equipment
4,033.53
4
1,040.91
Formula F-4: Total Apparatus Cost Per Fire Incident
The third step in calculating the apparatus cost per fire incident is formula F-4.
The total apparatus cost per fire incident is calculated by multiplying the
apparatus cost per response by the percent of fire incidents each type of
apparatus responds to. This calculation accounts for the fact that multiple
apparatus are dispatched to many incidents, and that some apparatus are only
dispatched to specific types of incidents. The result of this calculation is a
weighted average total cost of apparatus per fire incident.
M
Apparatus Apparatus
Cost Per x Percent of Fire
Response Responses
Apparatus Cost Per
Fire Incident
There is one new variable that requires explanation: (F) apparatus percent of fire
responses.
Variable (F); Apparatus Percent of Fire Responses
The next step in calculating the apparatus cost per fire incident is to identify the
annual number of incidents that Renton's Fire Department responds to.
Emergency incidents are separated into two categories: Fire and BLS. Table 20
lists the annual number of fire and BLS incidents responded to during 2010,
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 44
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Table 20: Annual Fire and BLS Incidents
(1) (2)
Average
Annual
Type of Incident Emergency Incidents
Fire 2,931
Rescue 9,490
Total Annual Incidents 12,421
Different types of fire emergencies need different types or combinations of
apparatus, As a result, the usage of apparatus varies among the types of
apparatus. This variance is an important factor in determining the cost per
incident. The percent of fire responses by each type of apparatus is calculated
in Table 21 by dividing the annual fire responses for each type of apparatus by
the total annual fire incidents from Table 20. The result of the calculation in Table
21 is the percent of fire incidents responded to by each type of apparatus. For
example, engines provided 2,979 responses to the 2,931 fire incidents, equaling
101.6% of all fire incidents. Another way to understand this data is that one
average fire incident involved 1.016 engines, therefore the cost of responding to
a fire incident includes 101.6% of the cost of an engine. Other apparatus
typically respond to only some of the incidents. Ladder trucks, for example,
respond to 18.0% of fire emergency incidents, therefore the cost to respond to
the average fire incident includes 18% of a ladder truck.
Table 21: Fire Incident Response By Type of Apparatus
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
Percent of Annual
Total Annual
Fire Related
Fire -Related
Annual
Incidents
Responses for
Fire -Related
Dispatched To
Type of Apparatus
Apparatus
Incidents
Col 2 / 2,931
Engine
2,979
101.6%
Ladder
529
18.0%
Aid Vehicle
547
18.7%
Hazardous Materials Vehicle
4
0.1 %
Brush Truck
15
0.5%
Staff Vehicles
594
20.3%
Other Apparatus/Equipment
13
0.4%
Total
4,681
2,931
The final step in calculating the apparatus cost per fire incident is shown in Table
22. The cost per response for each type of apparatus (from Table 19) is
multiplied by the percent of fire incidents dispatched to (from Table 21) resulting
in the total apparatus cost per fire incident.
The "bottom line" in Table 22 is the apparatus cost per fire incident of $65.49. In
other words, every fire incident "uses up" $65.49 worth of apparatus.
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 45
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Table 22: Total Apparatus Cost Per Fire Incident
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
Annual
Apparatus
Percent Of
Cost Per
Apparatus
Fire
Fire
Cost Per
Incidents
Incident
Type of Apparatus
Response
Dispatched To
Col. 2 * Col. 3
Engine
$ 28.38
101.6%
$ 28.84
Ladder
47.95
18.0%
8.65
Aid Vehicle
29.43
18.7%
5.49
Hazardous Materials Vehicle
416.67
0.1 %
0.57
Brush Truck
66.67
0.5%
0.34
Staff Vehicles
83.73
20.3%
16.97
Other Apparatus/Equipment
1,040.91
0.4%
4.62
Total
65.49
Formula F-5: Annual Station Cost
The annual station cost is determined by dividing the station capital cost by its
useful life.
Station Cost Annual Station
F-5, Per Square - Useful Life = Cost Per Square
Foot Foot
There is one new variable that requires explanation: (G) station cost per square
foot.
Variable (F): Station Cost per Square Foot
Table 23 calculates the average annualized fire station cost per square foot.
The cost per square foot is based on the average cost of the most recently
constructed station (Station 12, built in 2003). The costs include land, building,
furnishings and equipment.
The useful life represents the length of time the station will last before it needs to
be replaced. The annualized cost is calculated by dividing the estimated cost
per square foot by the average useful life. The "bottom line" of Table 23 is an
annualized station cost of $ 11.78 per square foot.
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 46
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Table 23: Annualized Station Cost Per Square Foot
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
Annual
Building
Building
Cost
Useful
Cost Per
Per
Life
square Foot
Type of Cost
Square Foot
Years
Col. 2 = Col. 3
Land
$ 74.43
Building, Furnishings and Equipment
405.08
Cost of Borrowing
109.54
Total
589.05
50
$11.78
Formula F-6: Station Cost Per Fire and BLS Incident
The station cost per fire and BLS incident is calculated by multiplying the annual
station cost per square foot by the station square feet per fire and BLS incident.
Annual Station
F-6. Cost Per
Square Foot
Station Square
Feet Per Fire
X and BLS
Incident
Annual Station
Cost Per Fire and
BLS Incident
There are no new variables used in formula F-6. Both variables were developed
in previous formulas,
This calculation is shown in Table 24: the station cost per square foot (from Table
23) is multiplied times the station square feet per incident (from Table 17). The
result is the station cost of $ 91,33 per fire and BLS incident. In other words, each
fire and BLS incident "uses up" $91.33 worth of fire station.
Table 24: Station Cost Per Fire and BLS Incident
(1)
(2)
(3)
Annualized
Annual
Building Cost Per
Building
Square Feet
Fire and Rescue
Cost Per
Per
Incident
Square Foot
Incident
Col. 1 * Col. 2
$ 11.78
7.75
$ 91.33
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 47
Company
Rote Study for impoct Fees • City of Renton
Formula F-7: Annual Fire Incident Rate Per Unit Of Development
The annual fire incident rate per unit of development (i.e., dwelling unit or
square foot of non-residential development) is calculated by dividing the total
annual fire incidents to each type of land use by the number of dwelling units or
square feet of non-residential development for that type of land use.
Annual
Emergency Fire
F-7, Incidents at
Each Type of
Land Use
Number of
Dwelling Units
or Square Feet
of Each Type
of Land Use
Annual Fire
Incidents Per Unit
of Development
There are two variables that require explanation: (H) annual emergency fire
incidents at land use types, and (1) number of dwelling units or square feet.
Variable (H): Annual Emergency Fire Incidents at Land Use Types
The emergency incident data comes from the City's dispatch records and the
data showing dwelling units and square feet of non-residential development is
from King County's property records for the City of Renton.
The database identifies each incident by occupancy type such as residences,
office or retail. The land use categories in this study were created by combining
the numerous occupancy types into broad land use categories for impact fees,
such as residences, office, retail, restaurant and industrial/manufacturing.
During 2010, Renton's Fire Department responded to 2,931 fire incidents. Of the
2,931 fire incidents, 2,570 were traceable to a type of development (i.e., the
incident occurred at a specific property address, such as a residence or
business) or they were traffic -related (occurred on a roadway). Of the 2,570 fire
incidents analyzed, 2,040 occurred at a specific property and 530 were traffic -
related. The records for the remaining 361 fire incidents did not allow the
incident to be traced to either a specific land use or a traffic -related incident,
therefore these 361 incidents are apportioned to land uses and traffic on the
same basis as the 2,570 incidents that are traceable. Table 25 shows the
allocation of the 361 incidents without land use designations to the property and
traffic categories using the same percentage as the 2,570 incidents for which a
location was identifiable. Thus 287 of the 361 fire incidents were allocated the
some as the incidents at identifiable lands uses, and the other 74 fire incidents
were allocated the same as the traffic -related incidents.
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 48
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Table 25: Fire Incidents
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
Incidents
Incidents
Identifiable
Not Identifiable
Total
Incident Location
By Location
By Location
Incidents
Total
2,570
361
2,931
At Properties
2,040
287
2,327
% of Total
79.38%
79.38%
79.38%
In Roads and Streets
530
74
604
% of Total
20.62%
20.62%
20.62%
There are four tables on the following pages that present the allocation of fire
incidents among types of land use: Table 26 shows the fire incidents that were
identifiable by land use type, Table 27 shows the fire incidents that were traffic -
related. Table 28 combines the fire incident data (land use and traffic), and
Table 29 shows the fire incident rate per unit of development.
Table 26 shows the distribution of the 2,040 fire incidents that are traceable to a
land use along with the percent distribution of these 2,040 incidents. In column 4
the total 2,327 fire incidents to land use (2,040 traceable + 530 allocated) is
allocated among the land use types using the percent distribution column. The
result is the total annual fire incidents at each of the land use types.
Table 26: Fire Incidents At Specific Land Uses
(1)
Land Use
(2)
Annual
Fire
Incidents
Identifiable
To
Land Use
(3)
Percent
Of All
Fire
Incidents
Identifiable
To Land Use
(4)
Allocate
2,327
Incidents
To Land Uses
Col. 3 x 2,327
RESIDENTIAL
1,373
67.30%
1,566
NONRESIDENTIAL
Hotel/Motel/Resort
31
1.52%
35
Medical Care Facility
29
1.42%
33
Commercial:
Office
39
1.91 %
44
Medical/Dental Office
17
0.83%
19
Retail
191
9.36%
218
Leisure Facilities
82
4.02%
94
Restaurant/Lounge
28
1.37%
32
Industrial/Manufacturing
78
3.82%
89
Institutions:
Church/Non-Profit
25
1.23%
29
Education
131
6.42%
149
Special Public Facilities
16
0.78%
18
Total
2,040
2,327
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 49
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Variable (l): Number of Dwelling Units or Square Feet
The traffic -related fire incidents are allocated to land uses on the basis of the
amount of traffic generated by each type of land use. In Table 27, the number
of dwelling units and square feet of non-residential construction in the City of
Renton is multiplied times the number of trips that are generated by each land
use type as reported in the 8th Edition of Trip Generation by the Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE). (The trip rates in are one-half of ITE's trip rates in
order to account for the trips each land use generates while excluding the
"return" trip). The result is the total trips associated with each land use type. The
percent of trips associated with each land use type is calculated from the total
of all trips.
In the final calculation in Table 27 the total 604 annual fire incidents that are
traffic -related (530 traceable + 74 allocated) is allocated among the land use
types using the percent of trips generated.
Table 27: Traffic Related Fire Incidents (Allocated to Land Uses)
(1)
Land Use
(2)
Renton
Units
Of
Development
(3)
ITE Trip
Generation
Rate / 2
Per D.U.
or
Per Unit Of
Development
(4)
Total
Trips
Col.2*Col.3
(5)
Percent
Of
Trips
Generated
(6)
Annual
604
Traffic Related
Fire Incidents
Per Unit Of
Development
Col. 5 * 604
RESIDENTIAL
53,889
d.u.
4.23228
228,073
41.27%
249
NONRESIDENTIAL
Hotel/Motel/Resort
675,098
sq.ft.
0.00446
3,011
0.54%
3
Medical Care Facility
505,735
sq.ft.
0.00825
4,172
0.75%
5
Commercial:
Office
6,771,692
sq.ft.
0.00551
37,312
6.75%
41
Medical/Dental Office
916,863
sq.ft.
0.00551
5,052
0.91 %
6
Retail
7,415,594
sq.ft.
0.02147
159,213
28.81 %
174
Leisure Facilities
851,359
sq.ft.
0.01541
13,119
2.37%
14
Restaurant/Lounge
358,466
sq.ft.
0.06358
22,791
4.12%
25
Industrial/Manufacturing
15,081,742
sq.ft.
0.00349
52,635
9.52%
58
Institutions:
Church/Non-Profit
1,044,126
sq.ft.
0.00456
4,761
0.86%
5
Education
2,854,937
sq.ft.
0.00645
18,414
3.33%
20
Special Public Facilities
291,913
sq.ft.
0.01396
4,075
0.74%
4
Total
552,630
100.00%
604
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 50
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Table 28 summarizes the results of the analysis of fire incidents. The total annual
fire incidents is a combination of the fire incidents allocated among direct
responses to land use categories (from Table 26) and the allocation of traffic -
related incidents based on trip generation rates (from Table 27).
Table 28: Total Annual Fire Incidents By Land Use
(1)
Land Use
(2)
Annual
Fire
Incidents
Direct to
Land Use
(3)
Annual
Traffic Related
Fire Incidents
By Land Use
(4)
Total
Annual
Fire incidents
By
Land Use
RESIDENTIAL
1,566
249
1,815
NONRESIDENTIAL
Hotel/Motel/Resort
35
3
39
Medical Care Facility
33
5
38
Commercial:
Office
44
41
85
Medical/Dental Office
19
6
25
Retail
218
174
392
Leisure Facilities
94
14
108
Restaurant/Lounge
32
25
57
Industrial/Manufacturing
89
58
147
Institutions:
Church/Non-Profit
29
5
34
Education
149
20
170
Special Public Facilities
18
4
23
Total
2,327
604
2,931
The final step in determining the annual fire incident rate per unit of
development is shown in Table 29. The total annual fire incidents for each type
of land use (from Table 28) are divided by the number of dwelling units or square
feet of structures to calculate the annual incident rate per dwelling unit or
square foot. The units of development are the same as was used to determine
traffic -related incidents (see Table 27).
The results in Table 29 show how many times an average unit of development
has a fire incident to which the City of Renton responds. For example, a
residence has an average of 0.0336863 fire -related incidents per year. This is the
same as saying that 3.3% of single family/duplexes have a fire -related incident in
a year. Another way of understanding this information is that an average single
family/duplex would have a fire -related incident once every 30 years.
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 51
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Table 29: Annual Fire Incidents By Land Use
(1)
Land Use
(2)
Tota I
Annual
Fire
Incidents To
Land Use
(3)
Units
Of
Development
(4)
Annual
Unit of
Fire Incidents
Per
Development
RESIDENTIAL
1,815
53,889
d.u.
0.0336863
per dwelling unit
NONRESIDENTIAL
Hotel/Motel/Resort
39
675,098
sq.ft.
0.0000572
per sq ft
Medical Care Facility
38
505,735
sq.ft.
0.0000744
per sq ft
Commercial:
Office
85
6,771,692
sq.ft.
0.0000126
per sgft
Medical/Dental Office
25
916,863
sq.ft.
0.0000272
per sq ft
Retail
392
7,415,594
sq.ft.
0.0000529
per sq ft
Leisure Facilities
108
851,359
sq.ft.
0.0001267
per sq ft
Restaurant/Lounge
57
358,466
sq.ft.
0.0001586
per sq ft
Industrial/Manufacturing
147
15,081,742
sq.ft.
0.0000097
per sq ft
Institutions:
Church/Non-Profit
34
1,044,126
sq.ft.
0.0000323
per sq ft
Education
170
2,854,937
sq.ft.
0.0000594
per sq ft
Special Public Facilities
23
291,913
sq.ft.
0.0000778
per sq ft
Total
2,931
Formula F-8: Fire Incident Capital Cost Per Unit Of Develoament
The capital cost of fire incidents per unit of development is determined by
multiplying the annual fire incidents per unit of development (from Table 29)
times the annual capital cost per fire incident of each type of apparatus (from
Table 22) and fire station (from Table 24), then multiplying that result times the
useful life of the apparatus or fire station.$
Annual Fire
Annual
Useful Life
Fire Incident
Incidents Per
F-8. X
Cost Per
Of
Capital Cost
Unit Of
Fire X
Apparatus -
Per Unit Of
Development
Incident
or Station
Development
There are no new variables
used in formula
F-8. All three
variables were
developed in previous formulas.
e Some fire impact fees are calculated for the economic life of the property paying the impact
fee, rather than the useful life of the apparatus and stations that provide the fire protection.
Both methods meet the legal requirements for impact fees. The method used in this rate study
charges impact fees for the first of each type of apparatus and station needed for new
development, but subsequent replacements of apparatus and stations are funded by other
revenues available to the City of Renton.
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 52
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
In Tables 30 - 37 on the following pages, each fire incident rate (from Table 29) is
multiplied by the annual capital cost per fire incident. The result is then
multiplied times the useful life of the apparatus or station to calculate the
capital cost per unit of development for each type of apparatus and station.
For example, residential units average 0.0336863 fire incidents per year (i.e., 3.3%
of a fire incident per year). In Table 30, multiplying this incident rate times the
annual capital cost of an engine ($28.84 from Table 22) per incident indicates a
cost of $0.9716 per dwelling unit to provide it with fire engines for one year.
Since an engine lasts 10 years, the residential dwelling needs to pay for 10 times
the annual rate, for a total of $9.7164.
Table 30: Engine Cost Of Responses to Fire Incidents at Land Use Categories
(1)
Land Use
(2)
Unit of
Development
(3)
Annual Fire
Incident Rate
(4)
Engine
Cost @
$ 28.84
per Incident
(5)
Engine
Life Cost @
10
Year Life
RESIDENTIAL
per dwelling unit
0.0336863
$ 0.9716
$ 9.7164
NONRESIDENTIAL
Hotel/Motel/Resort
per sq ft
0.0000572
0.0017
0.0165
Medical Care Facility
per sq ft
0.0000744
0.0021
0.0215
Commercial:
Office
per sq ft
0,0000126
0.0004
0.0036
Medical/Dental Office
per sq ft
0.0000272
0.0008
0.0078
Retail
per sq ft
0.0000529
0.0015
0.0152
Leisure Facilities
per sq ft
0.0001267
0.0037
0.0365
Restaurant/Lounge
per sq ft
0.0001586
0.0046
0.0458
Industrial/Manufacturing
per sq ft
0,0000097
0.0003
0.0028
Institutions:
Church/Non-Profit
per sq ft
0.0000323
0.0009
0.0093
Education
per sq ft
0.0000594
0.0017
0.0171
Special Public Facilities
per sq ft
0.0000778
0.0022
0.0224
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 53
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Table 31 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for a ladder truck
responding to fire incidents. The incident rate (from Table 29) is multiplied by the
ladder's capital cost per fire incident ($8.65 from Table 22). The result is then
multiplied times the 20-year useful life of a ladder truck to calculate the capital
cost per unit of development for ladder trucks.
Table 31: Ladder Cost Of Responses to Fire Incidents at Land Use Categories
(1)
Land Use
(2)
Unit of
Development
(3)
Annual Fire
Incident Rate
(4)
Ladder
Cost @
$ 8.65
per Incident
(5)
Ladder
Life Cost @
20
Year Life
RESIDENTIAL
per dwelling unit
0.0336863
$ 0.2915
$ 5.8302
NONRESIDENTIAL
Hotel/Motel/Resort
per sq ft
0.0000572
0.0005
0.0099
Medical Care Facility
per sq ft
0.0000744
0.0006
0.0129
Commercial:
Office
per sq ft
0.0000126
0.0001
0.0022
Medical/Dental Office
per sq ft
0.0000272
0.0002
0.0047
Retail
per sq ft
0.0000529
0.0005
0.0091
Leisure Facilities
per sq ft
0.0001267
0.0011
0.0219
Restaurant/Lounge
per sq ft
0.0001586
0.0014
0.0275
Industrial/Manufacturing
per sq ft
0.0000097
0.0001
0.0017
Institutions:
Church/Non-Profit
per sq ft
0.0000323
0.0003
0.0056
Education
per sq ft
0.0000594
0.0005
0.0103
Special Public Facilities
per sq ft
0.0000778
0.0007
0.0135
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 54
Company
Rote Study for Impact Fees - City of Renton
Table 32 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for aid vehicles
responding to fire incidents. The incident rate (from Table 29) is multiplied by the
tender's capital cost per fire incident ($5.49 from Table 22). The result is then
multiplied times the 7-year useful life of an aid vehicle to calculate the capital
cost per unit of development for aid vehicles.
Table 32: Aid Vehicle Cost Of Responses to Fire Incidents at Land Use Categories
(1)
Land Use
(2)
Unit of
Development
(3)
Annual Fire
Incident Rate
(4)
Aid Vehicle
Cost @
$ 5.49
per Incident
(5)
Aid Vehicle
Life Cost @
7
Year Life
RESIDENTIAL
per dwelling unit
0.0336863
$ 0.1850
$ 1.2951
NONRESIDENTIAL
Hotel/Motel/Resort
per sq ft
0.0000572
0.0003
0.0022
Medical Care Facility
per sq ft
0.0000744
0.0004
0.0029
Commercial:
Office
per sq ft
0.0000126
Medical/Dental Office
per sq ft
0.0000272
0.0001
0.0010
Retail
per sq ft
0.0000529
0.0003
0.0020
Leisure Facilities
per sq ft
0.0001267
0.0007
0.0049
Restaurant/Lounge
per sq ft
0.0001586
0.0009
0.0061
Industrial/Manufacturing
per sq ft
0.0000097
0.0001
0.0004
Institutions:
Church/Non-Profit
per sq ft
0.0000323
0.0002
0.0012
Education
per sq ft
0.0000594
0.0003
0.0023
Special Public Facilities
per sq ft
0.0000778
0.0004
0.0030
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 55
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Table 33 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for a hazardous
materials vehicle's response to fire incidents. The incident rate (from Table 29) is
multiplied by the hazardous materials vehicle's capital cost per fire incident
($0.57 from Table 22). The result is then multiplied times the 30-year useful life of
a hazardous materials vehicle to calculate the capital cost per unit of
development for hazardous materials vehicles.
Table 33: Hazardous Materials Vehicle Cost Of Responses to Fire Incidents at
Land Use Categories
(1)
Land Use
(2)
Unit of
Development
(3)
Annual Fire
Incident Rate
(4)
Hazardous
Materials
Vehicle
Cost @
$ 0.57
per Incident
(5)
Hazardous
Materials
Vehicle
Life Cost @
30
Year Life
RESIDENTIAL
per dwelling unit
0.0336863
$ 0.0192
$ 0.5747
NONRESIDENTIAL
Hotel/Motel/Resort
per sq ft
0.0000572
0.0000
0.0010
Medical Care Facility
per sq ft
0.0000744
0.0000
0.0013
Commercial:
Office
per sq ft
0.0000126
0.0000
0.0002
Medical/Dental Office
per sq ft
0.0000272
0.0000
0.0005
Retail
per sq ft
0.0000529
0.0000
0.0009
Leisure Facilities
per sq ft
0.0001267
0.0001
0.0022
Restaurant/Lounge
per sq ft
0.0001586
0.0001
0.0027
Industrial/Manufacturing
per sq ft
0.0000097
0.0000
0.0002
Institutions:
Church/Non-Profit
per sq ft
0.0000323
0.0000
0.0006
Education
per sq ft
0.0000594
0.0000
0.0010
Special Public Facilities
per sq ft
0.0000778
0.0000
0.0013
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 56
Company
Rote Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Table 34 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for a brush truck's
response to fire incidents. The incident rate (from Table 29) is .multiplied by the
brush truck's capital cost per fire incident ($0.34 from Table 22). The result is then
multiplied times the 30-year useful life of a brush truck to calculate the capital
cost per unit of development for brush trucks.
Table 34: Brush Truck Cost Of Responses to Fire Incidents at Land Use Categories
(1)
Land Use
(2)
Unit of
Development
(3)
Annual Fire
Incident Rate
(4)
Brush Truck
Cost @
$ 0.34
per Incident
(5)
Brush Truck
Life Cost @
30
Year Life
RESIDENTIAL
per dwelling unit
0.0336863
$ 0.0115
$ 0.3448
NONRESIDENTIAL
Hotel/Motel/Resort
per sq ft
0.0000572
0.0000
0.0006
Medical Care Facility
per sq ft
0.0000744
0.0000
0.0008
Commercial:
Office
per sq ft
0.0000126
0.0000
0.0001
Medical/Dental Office
per sq ft
0.0000272
0.0000
0.0003
Retail
per sq ft
0.0000529
0.0000
0.0005
Leisure Facilities
per sq ft
0.0001267
0.0000
0.0013
Restaurant/Lounge
per sq ft
0.0001586
0.0001
0.0016
Industrial/Manufacturing
per sq ft
0.0000097
0.0000
0.0001
Institutions:
Church/Non-Profit
per sq ft
0.0000323
0.0000
0.0003
Education
per sq ft
0.0000594
0.0000
0.0006
Special Public Facilities
per sq ft
0.0000778
0.0000
0.0008
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 57
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Table 35 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for staff vehicles
responding to fire incidents. The incident rate (from Table 29) is multiplied by the
staff vehicle capital cost per fire incident ($16.97 from Table 22). The result is
then multiplied times the 10-year useful life of a staff vehicle to calculate the
capital cost per unit of development for staff vehicles.
Table 35: Staff Vehicle Cost Of Responses to Fire Incidents at Land Use
Categories
(1)
Land Use
(2)
Unit of
Development
(3)
Annual Fire
Incident Rate
(4)
Staff Vehicle
Cost @
$ 16.97
per Incident
(5)
Staff Vehicle
Life Cost @
10
Year Life
RESIDENTIAL
per dwelling unit
0.0336863
$ 0.5716
$ 5.7163
NONRESIDENTIAL
Hotel/Motel/Resort
per sq ft
0.0000572
0.0010
0.0097
Medical Care Facility
per sq ft
0.0000744
0.0013
0.0126
Commercial:
Office
per sq ft
0.0000126
0.0002
0.0021
Medical/Dental Office
per sq ft
0.0000272
0.0005
0.0046
Retail
per sq ft
0.0000529
0.0009
0.0090
Leisure Facilities
per sq ft
0.0001267
0.0022
0.0215
Restaurant/Lounge
per sq ft
0.0001586
0.0027
0.0269
Industrial/Manufacturing
per sq ft
0.0000097
0.0002
0.0016
Institutions:
Church/Non-Profit
per sq ft
0.0000323
0.0005
0.0055
Education
per sq ft
0.0000594
0.0010
0.0101
Special Public Facilities
per sq ft
0.0000778
0.0013
0.0132
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 58
Company
Rote Study for lmpoct Fees • City of Renton
Table 36 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for other
apparatus/equipment's response to fire incidents. The incident rate (from Table
29) is multiplied by the other apparatus/equipment's capital cost per fire
incident ($4.62 from Table 22). The result is then multiplied times the 10.2-year
useful life of other apparatus/equipment to calculate the capital cost per unit of
development for other apparatus/equipment.
Table 36: Other Apparatus/Equipment Cost Of Responses to Fire Incidents at
Land Use Categories
(1)
Land Use
(2)
Unit of
Development
(3)
Annual Fire
Incident Rate
(4)
Other
Apparatus/
Equipment
Cost @
$ 4.62
per Incident
(5)
Other
Apparatus/
Equipment
Life Cost @
10.2
Year Life
RESIDENTIAL
per dwelling unit
0.0336863
$ 0.1555
$ 1.5863
NONRESIDENTIAL
Hotel/Motel/Resort
per sq ft
0.0000572
0.0003
0.0027
Medical Care Facility
per sq ft
0.0000744
0.0003
0.0035
Commercial:
Office
per sq ft
0.0000126
0.0001
0.0006
Medical/Dental Office
per sq ft
0.0000272
0.0001
0.0013
Retail
per sq ft
0.0000529
0.0002
0.0025
Leisure Facilities
per sq ft
0.0001267
0.0006
0.0060
Restaurant/Lounge
per sq ft
0.0001586
0.0007
0.0075
Industrial/Manufacturing
per sq ft
0.0000097
0.0000
0.0005
Institutions:
Church/Non-Profit
per sq ft
0.0000323
0.0001
0.0015
Education
per sq ft
0.0000594
0.0003
0.0028
Special Public Facilities
per sq ft
0.0000778
0.0004
0.0037
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 59
Company
Rote Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Table 37 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for fire stations that
house fire apparatus. The fire incident rate (from Table 29) is multiplied by the
fire station's capital cost per fire and BLS incident ($91,33 from Table 24), The
result is then multiplied times the 50-year useful life of a fire station to calculate
the capital cost per unit of development for fire stations.
Table 37: Fire Station Cost Of Responses to Fire Incidents at Land Use Categories
(1)
Land Use
(2)
Unit of
Development
(3)
Annual Fire
Incident Rate
(4)
Fire Station
Cost @
$ 91.33
per Incident
(5)
Fire Station
Life Cost @
50
Year Life
RESIDENTIAL
per dwelling unit
0.0336863
$ 3.0765
$ 153.8260
NONRESIDENTIAL
Hotel/Motel/Resort
per sq ft
0.0000572
0.0052
0.2614
Medical Care Facility
per sq ft
0.0000744
0.0068
0.3398
Commercial:
Office
per sq ft
0.0000126
0.0012
0.0575
Medical/Dental Office
per sq ft
0.0000272
0.0025
0.1241
Retail
per sq ft
0.0000529
0.0048
0.2414
Leisure Facilities
per sq ft
0.0001267
0.0116
0.5786
Restaurant/Lounge
per sq ft
0.0001586
0.0145
0.7243
Industrial/Manufacturing
per sq ft
0.0000097
0.0009
0.0444
Institutions:
Church/Non-Profit
per sq ft
0.0000323
0.0029
0.1475
Education
per sq ft .
0.0000594
0.0054
0.2712
Special Public Facilities
per sq ft
0.0000778
0.0071
0.3552
Table 38 combines the capital costs of all types of apparatus and station (from
Tables 30 - 37) to show the total capital cost of responses to fire incidents for one
unit of residential development.
Table 38: Example of Calculation of Total Capital Cost for A Single -Family
Residential Unit
(1)
Cost Component
(2)
Cost
(3)
Source
Engine
$ 9.7164
Table 30
Ladder
5.8302
Table 31
Aid Vehicle
1.2951
Table 32
Hazardous Materials Vehicle
0.5747
Table 33
Brush Truck
0.3448
Table 34
Staff Vehicle
5.7163
Table 35
Other Apparatus/Equipment
1.5863
Table 36
Station
153.8260
Table 37
Total
178.8898
This example is repeated for each land use to combine its capital costs of all
types of apparatus and station in Table 39.
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 60
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Table 39: Total Capital Cost Of Responses to Fire Incidents at Land Use
Categories
(1)
Land Use
(2)
Unit of
Development
(3)
Fire Incident
Life Cost
of All
Apparatus
and Station
RESIDENTIAL
per dwelling unit
$ 178.89
NONRESIDENTIAL
Hotel/Motel/Resort
per sq ft
0.30
Medical Care Facility
per sq ft
0.40
Commercial:
Office
per sq ft
0.07
Medical/Dental Office
per sq ft
0.14
Retail
per sq ft
0.28
Leisure Facilities
per sq ft
0.67
Restaurant/Lounge
per sq ft
0.84
Industrial/Manufacturing
per sq ft
0.05
Institutions:
Church/Non-Profit
per sq ft
0.17
Education
per sq ft
0.32
Special Public Facilities
per sq ft
0.41
Formula F-9: Cost Per Apparatus Per Fire or BLS Incident
The annual cost per type of apparatus is the same as in Table 18. The cost per
apparatus per fire or BLS incident is the same as Table 19.
Formula F-10: Apparatus Cost Per BLS Incident
The calculation of apparatus cost per BLS incident is similar to the calculation of
costs per fire incident in Table 22. The total apparatus cost per BLS incident is
calculated by multiplying the cost per apparatus per response by the percent of
BLS incidents each type of apparatus responds to. This calculation accounts for
the fact that multiple apparatus are dispatched to many incidents, and that
some apparatus are only dispatched to specific types of incidents, The result of
this calculation is a weighted average total cost of apparatus per BLS incident,
Apparatus Apparatus Apparatus Cost Per
F-10. Cost Per x Percent of BLS = BLS Incident
Response Responses
There are no new variables used in formula F-10. The first variable is identical to
the data from Table 19, and the second variable concerning the percent of BLS
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 61
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
responses works identically to Variable F, but using BLS responses instead of fire
responses.
Different types of BLS emergencies need different types or combinations of
apparatus. As a result, the usage of apparatus varies among the types of
apparatus. This variance is an important factor in determining the cost per
incident. The percent of BLS responses by each type of apparatus is calculated
in Table 40 by dividing the annual BLS responses for each type of apparatus by
the total annual BLS incidents from Table 20. The result of the calculation in Table
40 is the percent of BLS incidents responded to by each type of apparatus. For
example, engines provided 5,734 responses to the 9,490 BLS incidents, equaling
60.4% of all BLS incidents. Another way to understand this data is that one
average BLS incident involved 0,604 engines therefore the cost of responding to
an BLS incident includes 60.4% of the cost of an engine.
Table 40: BLS Incident Response By Type of Apparatus
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
Percent of Annual
Total Annual
BLS Related
BLS
Annual
Incidents
Responses for
BLS
Dispatched To
Type of Apparatus
Apparatus
Incidents
Col 2 /9490
Engine
$ 5,734
60.4%
Ladder
519
5.5%
Aid Vehicle
5,278
55.6%
Hazardous Materials Vehicle
0
0.0%
Brush Truck
0
0.0%
Staff Vehicles
315
3.3%
Other Apparatus/Equipment
18
0.2%
Total
11,864
9,490
The final step in calculating the apparatus cost per BLS incident is shown in Table
41. The cost per response for each type of apparatus (from Table 19) is
multiplied by the percent of BLS incidents dispatched to (from Table 40) resulting
in the total apparatus cost per BLS incident. The "bottom line" in Table 41 is the
apparatus cost per BLS incident of $40.04. In other words, every BLS incident
"uses up" $40.04 worth of apparatus.
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 62
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Table 41: Total Apparatus Cost Per BLS Incident
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
Annual
Apparatus
Percent Of
Cost Per
Apparatus
BLS
BLS
Cost Per
Incidents
Incident
Type of Apparatus
Response
Dispatched To
Col. 2 * Col. 3
Engine
$ 28.38
60.4%
$ 17.15
Ladder
47.95
5.5%
2.62
Aid Vehicle
29.43
55.6%
16.37
Hazardous Materials Vehicle
416.67
0.0%
0.00
Brush Truck
66.67
0.0%
0.00
Staff Vehicles
83.73
3.3%
2.78
Other Apparatus/Equipment
1,040.91
0.2%
1.97
Total
40.89
Formula F-11: Station Cost per Fire and BLS Incident
The station cost per BLS incident is the same as Table 24. The formula is the some
as Formula F-6.
Formula F-12: Annual BLS Incident Rate Per Unit Of Development
Formula F-12 is the same as Formula F-7. The annual BLS incident rate per unit of
development is calculated using the same methodology as described for fire
incidents in Tables 25 - 29.
There are no new variables used in formula F-12. The variables are identical to
those used in Formula F-7, but using BLS incidents instead of fire incidents.
During 2010, Renton's Fire Department responded to 9,490 BLS incidents. Of the
9,490 BLS incidents 9,371 were traceable to a type of development (i.e., the
incident occurred at a specific type of property such as a residence or business)
or they were traffic -related (occurred on a roadway) and were included in the
following detailed analysis of incidents to land uses. Of the 9,371 BLS incidents
analyzed 7,944 occurred at a specific property and 1,421 were traffic -related.
The remaining 119 BLS incidents were not traceable to either a specific property
or a traffic -related incident, therefore these 119 are apportioned to land uses
and traffic on the same basis as the 9,371 incidents that are traceable. Table 42
shows the allocation of the 119 incidents without land use designations to the
property and traffic categories using the same percentage as the 9,371
incidents for which a location was identifiable. Thus 101 of the 119 BLS incidents
were allocated the same as the incidents at identifiable lands uses, and the
other 18 BLS incidents were allocated the same as the traffic -related incidents.
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 63
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Table 42: BLS Incidents
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
Incidents
Incidents
Identifiable
Not Identifiable
Total
Incident Location
By Location
By Location
Incidents
Total
9,371
119
9,490
At Properties
7,944
101
8,045
% of Total
84.77%
84.77%
84.77%
In Roads and Streets
1,427
18
1,445
% of Total
15.23%
15.23%
15.23%
There are four tables that present the allocation of BLS incidents among types of
land use: Table 43 shows the BLS incidents that were identifiable by land use
type, Table 44 shows the BLS incidents that were traffic -related. Table 45
combines the BLS incident data (land use and traffic), and Table 46 shows the
BLS incident rate per unit of development.
Table 43 shows the distribution of the 7,944 BLS incidents that are traceable to a
land use along with the percent distribution of these 7,944 incidents. In column 4
the total 8,045 BLS incidents to land use (7,944 traceable + 101 allocated) is
allocated among the land use types using the percent distribution column. The
result is the total annual BLS incidents at each of the land use types.
Table 43: BLS Incidents At Specific Land Uses
(1)
Land Use
(2)
BLS
Incidents
Identifiable
To
Land Use
(3)
Percent
Of All BLS
Incidents
Identifiable
To Land Use
(4)
Allocate
8,045
BLS Incidents
To Land Uses
Col. 3 x 8,045
RESIDENTIAL
5,448
68.58%
5,517
NONRESIDENTIAL
Hotel/MoteI/Resort
82
1.03%
83
Medical Care Facility
788
9.92%
798
Commercial:
Office
113
1.42%
114
Medical/Dental Office
198
2.49%
201
Retail
510
6.42%
516
Leisure Facilities
199
2.51%
202
Restaurant/Lounge
78
0.98%
79
Industrial/Manufacturing
81
1.02%
82
Institutions:
Church/Non-Profit
29
0.37%
29
Education
163
2.05%
165
Special Public Facilities
255
3.21 %
258
7,944
100.00%
8,045
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 64
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
The traffic -related BLS incidents are allocated to land uses on the basis of the
amount of traffic generated by each type of land use. In Table 44, the number
of dwelling units and square feet of non-residential construction in Renton is
multiplied times the number of trips that are generated by each land use type in
the same manner as Table 27, The result is the total trips associated with each
land use type. The percent of trips associated with each land use type is
calculated from the total of all trips.
In the final calculation in Table 44 the total 1,145 annual BLS incidents that are
traffic -related (1,427 traceable + 18 allocated) is allocated among the land use
types using the percent of trips generated.
Table 44: Traffic Related BLS Incidents (Allocated to Land Uses)
(1)
Land Use
(2)
Renton
Units
Of
Development
(3)
ITE Trip
Generation
Rate 12
Per D.U.
or
Per Unit Of
Development
(4)
Total
Trips
Col.2*Col.3
(5)
Percent
Of
Trips
Generated
(6)
Allocate
1,445
Traffic -Related
BLS
Incidents By
Land Use
Col 5 * 1,445
RESIDENTIAL
53,889
d.u.
4.23228
228,073
41.27%
596
NONRESIDENTIAL
Hotel/Motel/Resort
675,098
sq.ft.
0.00446
3,011
0.54%
8
Medical Care Facility
505,735
sq.ft.
0.00825
4,172
0.75%
11
Commercial:
Office
6,771,692
sq.ft.
0.00551
37,312
6.75%
98
Medical/Dental Office
916,863
sq.ft.
0.00551
5,052
0.91 %
13
Retail
7,415,594
sq.ft.
0.02147
159,213
28.81%
416
Leisure Facilities
851,359
sq.ft.
0.01541
13,119
2.37%
34
Restaurant/Lounge
358,466
sq.ft.
0.06358
22,791
4.12%
60
Industrial/Manufacturing
15,081,742
sq.ft.
0.00349
52,635
9.52%
138
Institutions:
Church/Non-Profit
1,044,126
sq.ft.
0.00456
4,761
0.86%
12
Education
2,854,937
sq.ft.
0.00645
18,414
3.33%
48
Special Public Facilities
291,913
sq.ft.
0.01396
4,075
0.74%
11
552,630
100.00%
1,445
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 65
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Table 45 summarizes the results of the analysis of BLS incidents. The total annual
BLS incidents is a combination of the BLS incidents allocated among direct
responses to land use categories (from Table 43) and the allocation of traffic -
related incidents based on trip generation rates (from Table 44),
Table 45: Total Annual BLS Incidents By Land Use
�1)
Land Use
(2)
Annual
BLS Incidents
Direct to
Land Use
(3)
Annual
Traffic Related
BLS Incidents
By Land Use
(4)
Total
Annual
BLS Incidents
By
Land Use
RESIDENTIAL
5,517
596
6,114
NONRESIDENTIAL
Hotel/Motel/Resort
83
8
91
Medical Care Facility
798
11
809
Commercial:
Office
114
98
212
Medical/Dental Office
201
13
214
Retail
516
416
933
Leisure Facilities
202
34
236
Restaurant/Lounge
79
60
139
Industrial/Manufacturing
82
138
220
Institutions:
Church/Non-Profit
29
12
42
Education
165
48
213
Special Public Facilities
258
11
269
Total
8,045
1,445
9,490
The final step in determining the annual BLS incident rate per unit of
development is shown in Table 46. The total annual BLS incidents for each type
of land use (from Table 45) are divided by the number of dwelling units or square
feet of structures to calculate the annual BLS incident rate per dwelling unit or
square foot. The units of development are the same as was used to determine
traffic -related incidents (see Table 44). The results in Table 46 show how many
times an average unit of development has an BLS incident to which the City of
Renton responds, For example, a residential unit has an average of 0.1134479
BLS incidents per year. This is the same as saying that 11,3% of all residential
dwellings have an BLS incident in a year. Another way of understanding this
information is that an average residential dwelling unit would have a BLS
incident once every 8.8 years.
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 66
Company
Rote Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Table 46: Annual BLS Incidents By Land Use
(1)
Land Use
(2)
Total
Annual
BLS
Incidents To
Land Use
(3)
Units
Of
Development
(4)
Annual BLS
Unit of
Incidents per
Development
RESIDENTIAL
6,114
53,889
0.1134479
per dwelling unit
NONRESIDENTIAL
Hotel/Motel/Resort
91
675,098
0.0001347
per sq ft
Medical Care Facility
809
505,735
0.0015995
per sq ft
Commercial:
Office
212
6,771,692
0.0000313
per sq ft
Medical/Dental Office
214
916,863
0.0002331
per sq ft
Retail
933
7,415,594
0.0001258
per sq ft
Leisure Facilities
236
851,359
0.0002770
per sq ft
Restaurant/Lounge
139
358,466
0.0003866
per sq ft
Industrial/Manufacturing
220
15,081,742
0.0000146
per sq ft
Institutions:
Church/Non-Profit
42
1,044,126
0.0000401
per sq ft
Education
213
2,854,937
0.0000747
per sq ft
Special Public Facilities
269
291,913
0.0009211
per sq ft
Total
9,490
Formula F-13: BLS Incident Capital Cost Per Unit Of Development
The capital cost of BLS incidents per unit of development is determined by
multiplying the annual BLS incidents per unit of development (from Table 45)
times the annual capital cost per BLS incident of each type of apparatus (from
Table 41) and fire station (from Table 24), then multiplying that result times the
useful life of the apparatus or fire station.9
Annual BLS
Annual
Useful Life
BLS Incident
Incidents Per
Cost Per
Of
Capital Cost
X
F-13. Unit Of
BLS
X Apparatus
- Per Unit Of
Development
Incident
or Station
Development
There are no new variables used in formula F-13. The variables are identical to
those used in Formula F-8, but using BLS incident rates and costs instead of fire
incident rates and costs.
In Tables 47 - 52 on the following pages, each BLS incident rate (from Table 45) is
multiplied by the annual capital cost per BLS incident. The result is then
multiplied times the useful life of the apparatus or station to calculate the
9 Footnote 8 applies to formula F-13 as well as F-8.
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 67
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
capital cost per unit of development for each type of apparatus and station.
This series of tables does not include the cost for a hazardous materials vehicle
or brush truck because, as shown in Table 40, they do not respond to BLS
incidents, therefore the apparatus cost per BLS incident for these two types of
apparatus is zero in Table 41.
Table 47 calculates the BLS related capital costs of an engine per unit of
development. For example, residential units average 0.1134479 BLS incidents
per year (i.e., 11.3% of a BLS incident per year). Multiplying this times the annual
capital cost of $17.15 per incident (from Table 41) produces the result that it
costs $1.9453 per dwelling unit to provide it with engines for one year. Since the
engine lasts 10 years, the residential dwelling needs to pay for 10 times the
annual rate, for a total of $19.4529,
Table 47: Engine Cost Of Responses to BLS Incidents at Land Use Categories
(1)
Land Use
(2)
Unit of
Development
(3)
Annual BLS
Incident Rate
(4)
Engine
Cost @
$ 17.15
per Incident
(5)
Engine
Life Cost @
10
Year Life
RESIDENTIAL
per dwelling unit
0.1134479
$ 1.9453
$ 19.4529
NONRESIDENTIAL
Hotel/Motel/Resort
per sq ft
0.0001347
0.0023
0.0231
Medical Care Facility
per sq ft
0.0015995
0.0274
0.2743
Commercial:
Office
per sq ft
0.0000313
0.0005
0.0054
Medical/Dental Office
per sq ft
0.0002331
0.0040
0.0400
Retail
per sq ft
0.0001258
0.0022
0.0216
Leisure Facilities
per sq ft
0.0002770
0.0047
0.0475
Restaurant/Lounge
per sq ft
0.0003866
0.0066
0.0663
Industrial/Manufacturing
per sq ft
0.0000146
0.0002
0.0025
Institutions:
Church/Non-Profit
per sq ft
0.0000401
0.0007
0.0069
Education
per sq ft
0.0000747
0.0013
0.0128
Special Public Facilities
per sq ft
0.0009211
0.0158
0.1579
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 68
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees - City of Renton
Table 48 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for ladder trucks
responding to BLS incidents. The incident rate (from Table 46) is multiplied by the
ladder truck's capital cost per BLS incident ($2.62 from Table 41). The result is
then multiplied times the 20-year useful life of a ladder truck to calculate the
capital cost per unit of development for ladder trucks.
Table 48: Ladder Cost Of Responses to BLS Incidents at Land Use Categories
(1)
Land Use
(2)
Unit of
Development
(3)
Annual BLS
Incident Rate
(4)
Ladder
Cost @
$ 2.62
per Incident
(5)
Ladder
Life Cost @
20
Year Life
RESIDENTIAL
per dwelling unit
0.1134479
$ 0.2975
$ 5.9496
NONRESIDENTIAL
Hotel/Motel/Resort
per sq ft
0.0001347
0.0004
0.0071
Medical Care Facility
per sq ft
0.0015995
0.0042
0.0839
Commercial:
Office
per sq ft
0.0000313
0.0001
0.0016
Medical/Dental Office
per sq ft
0.0002331
0.0006
0.0122
Retail
per sq ft
0.0001258
0.0003
0.0066
Leisure Facilities
per sq ft
0.0002770
0.0007
0.0145
Restaurant/Lounge
per sq ft
0.0003866
0.0010
0.0203
Industrial/Manufacturing
per sq ft
0.0000146
0.0000
0.0008
Institutions:
Church/Non-Profit
per sq ft
0.0000401
0.0001
0.0021
Education
per sq ft
0.0000747
0.0002
0.0039
Special Public Facilities
per sq ft
0.0009211
0.0024
0.0483
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 69
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Table 49 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for aid vehicles
responding to BLS incidents. The incident rate (from Table 46) is multiplied by the
aid vehicle's capital cost per BLS incident ($16,37 from Table 41). The result is
then multiplied times the 7-year useful life of an aid vehicle to calculate the
capital cost per unit of development for aid vehicles.
Table 49: Aid Vehicle Cost Of Responses to BLS Incidents at Land Use Categories
(1)
Land Use
(2)
Unit of
Development
(3)
Annual BLS
Incident Rate
(4)
Aid Vehicle
Cost @
$ 16.37
per BLS Incident
(5)
Aid Vehicle
Life Cost @
7
Year Life
RESIDENTIAL
per dwelling unit
0.1134479
$ 1.8569
$ 12.9982
NONRESIDENTIAL
Hotel/Motel/Resort
per sq ft
0.0001347
0.0022
0.0154
Medical Care Facility
per sq ft
0.0015995
0.0262
0.1833
Commercial:
Office
per sq ft
0.0000313
0.0005
0.0036
Medical/Dental Office
per sq ft
0.0002331
0.0038
0.0267
Retail
per sq ft
0.0001258
0.0021
0.0144
Leisure Facilities
per sq ft
0.0002770
0.0045
0.0317
Restaurant/Lounge
per sq ft
0.0003866
0.0063
0.0443
Industrial/Manufacturing
per sq ft
0.0000146
0.0002
0.0017
Institutions:
Church/Non-Profit
per sq ft
0.0000401
0.0007
0.0046
Education
per sq ft
0.0000747
0.0012
0.0086
Special Public Facilities
per sq ft
0.0009211
0.0151
0.1055
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 70
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Table 50 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for staff vehicles
responding to BLS incidents, The incident rate (from Table 46) is multiplied by the
staff vehicle's capital cost per BLS incident ($2,78 from Table 41). The result is
then multiplied times the 10-year useful life of a staff vehicle to calculate the
capital cost per unit of development for staff vehicles.
Table 50: Staff Vehicle Cost Of Responses to BLS Incidents at Land Use
Categories
(1)
Land Use
(2)
Unit of
Development
(3)
Annual BLS
Incident Rate
(4)
Staff Vehicle
Cost @
$ 2.78
per BLS Incident
(5)
Staff Vehicle
Life Cost @
10
Year Life
RESIDENTIAL
per dwelling unit
0.1134479
$ 0.3153
$ 3.1531
NONRESIDENTIAL
Hotel/Motel/Resort
per sq ft
0.0001347
0.0004
0.0037
Medical Care Facility
per sq ft
0.0015995
0.0044
0.0445
Commercial:
Office
per sq ft
0.0000313
0.0001
0.0009
Medical/Dental Office
per sq ft
0.0002331
0.0006
0.0065
Retail
per sq ft
0.0001258
0.0003
0.0035
Leisure Facilities
per sq ft
0.0002770
0.0008
0.0077
Restaurant/Lounge
per sq ft
0.0003866
0.0011
0.0107
Industrial/Manufacturing
per sq ft
0.0000146
0.0000
0.0004
Institutions:
Church/Non-Profit
per sq ft
0.0000401
0.0001
0.0011
Education
per sq ft
0.0000747
0.0002
0.0021
Special Public Facilities
per sq ft
0.0009211
0.0026
0.0256
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 71
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees - City of Renton
Table 51 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for other
apparatus/equipment responding to BLS incidents. The incident rate (from
Table 46) is multiplied by the other apparatus/equipment's capital cost per BLS
incident ($1.97 from Table 41). The result is then multiplied times the 10.2-year
useful life of other apparatus/equipment to calculate the capital cost per unit of
development for other apparatus/equipment.
Table 51: Other Apparatus/Equipment Cost Of Responses to BLS Incidents at
Land Use Categories
(1)
Land Use
(2)
Unit of
Development
(3)
Annual BLS
Incident Rate
(4)
Other
Apparatus/
Equipment
Cost @
$ 1.97
per BLS Incident
(5)
Other
Apparatus/
Equipment
Life Cost @
10.2
Year Life
RESIDENTIAL
per dwelling unit
0.1134479
$ 0.2240
$ 2.2846
NONRESIDENTIAL
Hotel/Motel/Resort
per sq ft
0.0001347
0.0003
0.0027
Medical Care Facility
per sq ft
0.0015995
0.0032
0.0322
Commercial:
Office
per sq ft
0.0000313
0.0001
0.0006
Medical/Dental Office
per sq ft
0.0002331
0.0005
0.0047
Retail
per sq ft
0.0001258
0.0002
0.0025
Leisure Facilities
per sq ft
0.0002770
0.0005
0.0056
Restaurant/Lounge
per sq ft
0.0003866
0.0008
0.0078
Industrial/Manufacturing
per sq ft
0.0000146
0.0000
0.0003
Institutions:
Church/Non-Profit
per sq ft
0.0000401
0.0001
0.0008
Education
per sq ft
0.0000747
0.0001
0.0015
Special Public Facilities
per sq ft
0.0009211
0.0018
0.0186
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 72
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
Table 52 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for fire stations that
house BLS apparatus. The BLS incident rate (from Table 46) is multiplied by the
fire station's capital cost per fire and BLS incident ($91.33 from Table 24). The
result is then multiplied times the 50-year useful life of a fire station to calculate
the capital cost per unit of development for fire stations.
Table 52: Fire Station Cost of Responses to BLS Incidents at Land Use Categories
(1)
Land Use
(2)
Unit of
Development
(3)
Annual BLS
Incident Rate
(4)
Fire Station
Cost @
$ 91.33
per Incident
(5)
Fire Station
Life Cost @
50
Year Life
RESIDENTIAL
per dwelling unit
0.1134479
$ 10.3610
$ 518.0517
NONRESIDENTIAL
Hotel/Motel/Resort
per sq ft
0.0001347
0.0123
0.6150
Medical Care Facility
per sq ft
0.0015995
0.1461
7.3040
Commercial:
Office
per sq ft
0.0000313
0.0029
0.1430
Medical/Dental Office
per sq ft
0.0002331
0.0213
1.0645
Retail
per sq ft
0.0001258
0.0115
0.5744
Leisure Facilities
per sq ft
0.0002770
0.0253
1.2649
Restaurant/Lounge
per sq ft
0.0003866
0.0353
1.7655
Industrial/Manufacturing
per sq ft
0.0000146
0.0013
0.0665
Institutions:
Church/Non-Profit
per sq ft
0.0000401
0.0037
0.1829
Education
per sq ft
0.0000747
0.0068
0.3410
Special Public Facilities
per sq ft
0.0009211
0.0841
4.2063
Table 53 combines the capital costs of all types of apparatus and station (from
Tables 47 - 52) to show the total capital cost of responses to BLS incidents for
one unit of residential development.
Table 53: Example of Calculation of Total Capital Cost Of Responses to BLS
Incidents for a Single -Family Residence
(1)
Cost Component
(2)
Cost
(3)
Source
Engine
$ 19.4529
Table 47
Ladder
5.9496
Table 48
Aid Vehicle
12.9982
Table 49
Staff Vehicle
3.1531
Table 50
Other Apparatus/Equipment
2.2846
Table 51
Station
518.0517
Table 52
Total
561.8901
This example is repeated for each land use to combine its capital costs of all
types of apparatus and stations in Table 54.
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 73
Company
Rote Study for lmpoct Fees • City of Renton
Table 54: Total Capital Cost Of Responses to BLS Incidents at Land Use
Categories
(1) (2) (3)
BLS Incident
Life Cost
of All
Unit of Apparatus
Land Use Development an Station
RESIDENTIAL
per dwelling unit
$ 561.89
NONRESIDENTIAL
Hotel/Motel/Resort
per sq ft
0.67
Medical Care Facility
per sq ft
7.92
Commercial:
Office
per sq ft
0.16
Medical/Dental Office
per sq ft
1.15
Retail
per sq ft
0.62
Leisure Facilities
per sq ft
1.37
Restaurant/Lounge
per sq ft
1.91
Industrial/Manufacturing
per sq ft
0.07
Institutions:
Church/Non-Profit
per sq ft
0.20
Education
per sq ft
0.37
Special Public Facilities
per sq ft
4.56
Formula F-14: Fire and BLS Cost Per Unit Of Development
The fire and BLS costs per unit of development (from tables 39 and 54) are
combined to determine the total fire and BLS cost per dwelling unit or non-
residential square foot.
Fire Incident
F-14. Capital Cost
Per Unit of
Development
BLS Incident
+ Capital Cost
Per Unit of
Development
Fire and BLS Cost
Per Unit Of
Development
There are no new variables used in formula F-14. Both variables were developed
in previous formulas and tables.
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 74
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
In Table 55 the fire and BLS costs per unit of development (from Tables 39 and
54) are added together to determine the combined total fire and BLS cost per
dwelling unit or non-residential square foot.
Table 55: Total Cost of Response o Fire and BLS Incidents by Land Use Category
(1)
Land Use
(2)
Unit of
Development
(3)
Fire Incident
Life Cost
of All
Apparatus
an Station
(4)
BLS Incident
Life Cost
of All
Apparatus
an Station
(5)
Fire and BLS
Life Cost
of All
Apparatus
and Station
Col. 3 + Col. 4
RESIDENTIAL
per dwelling unit
$ 178.89
$ 561.89
$ 740.78
NONRESIDENTIAL
Hotel/Motel/Resort
per sq ft
0.30
0.67
0.97
Medical Care Facility
per sq ft
0.40
7.92
8.32
Commercial:
Office
per sq ft
0.07
0.16
0.22
Medical/Dental Office
per sq ft
0.14
1.15
1.30
Retail
per sq ft
0.28
0.62
0.90
Leisure Facilities
per sq ft
0.67
1.37
2.04
Restaurant/Lounge
per sq ft
0.84
-1.91
2.76
Industrial/Manufacturing
per sq ft
0.05
0.07
0.12
Institutions:
Church/Non-Profit
per sq ft
0.17
0.20
0.37
Education
per sq ft
0.32
0.37
0.69
Special Public Facilities
per sq ft
0.41
4.56
4.98
Formula F-15: Adjustments and Impact Fees
The final step in determining the fire services impact fee is to reduce the cost per
dwelling unit or non-residential square foot by subtracting any credits for other
revenue from existing and new development that the City of Renton will use to
pay for part of the cost of the same fire protection facilities that are the basis of
the impact fee, and any adjustment to comply with RCW 82,02.050(7).
Fire and BLS Adjustment Impact Fee
F-15, Cost Per Unit of - For Revenue = Per Unit Of
Development Credits Development
There is one new variable that requires explanation: (J) adjustment for revenue
credits.
Variable (J): Adjustment for Revenue Credits
Renton does not have dedicated revenues for fire stations and apparatus,
therefore there is no adjustment for future payments of other revenues that are
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 75
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
used to pay for the same new fire stations and apparatus that are required to
serve the new development. The only revenue sources to be included in the
adjustment are those that are used for fire services facilities capacity expansion
according to law and local policy or practice.
Adjustments are not given for other payments that are not used for new fire
services facilities needed for new development. Such an adjustment would
extend to payments of all taxes for all purposes to all forms of governments,
which contradicts the well -established system of restricting fees, charges, and
many taxes for specific public facilities and services70- Adjustments are not given
for revenues that are used for repair, maintenance or operating costs because
impact fees are not used for such expenses.
The final step in Table 56 (on the next page) is to further reduce the impact fees
that would be charged to new development in order to implement RCW
82.02.050(7) which provides that "...the financing for system improvements to
serve new development ... cannot rely solely on impact fees." The statute
provides no further guidance, and "not rely solely" could be anything between
0.1 % and 99.9%.
10 RCW 82.02.060(1)(b) requires an adjustment for revenue credits to be given only for
"...payments made or reasonably anticipated to be made by new development to pay for
particular system improvements in the form of user fees, debt service payments, taxes, or other
payments earmarked for or proratable to the particular system improvement (emphasis
added);"
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 76
Company
Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton
The adjustment of 3% used in Table 56 is the same adjustment percent used for
transportation impact fees. Table 56 shows the cost per dwelling unit or non-
residential square foot from Table 55, the 3% adjustment, and the impact fee
after the adjustment is subtracted from the full cost.
Table 56: Fire Impact Fees By Land Use
i1)
Land Use
(2)
Total
Fire and
BLS
Cost of
Impact of
Development
(3)
Credit
Adjustment @
3.00%
(4)
Fire and BLS
Impact Fee
Per
Unit of
Development
Col. 2 - Col. 3
RESIDENTIAL-
$ 740.78
$ 22.22
$ 718.56
per dwelling unit
NONRESIDENTIAL
Hotel/Motel/Resort
0.97
0.03
0.94
per square foot
Medical Care Facility
8.32
0.25
8.07
per square foot
Commercial:
Office
0.22
0.01
0.21
per square foot
Medical/Dental Office
1.30
0.04
1.26
per square foot
Retail
0.90
0.03
0.88
per square foot
Leisure Facilities
2.04
0.06
1.98
per square foot
Restaurant/Lounge
2.76
0.08
2.67
per square foot
Industrial/Manufacturing
0.12
0.00
0.12
per square foot
Institutions:
Church/Non-Profit
0.37
0.01
0.36
per square foot
Education
0.69
0.02
0.66
per square foot
Special Public Facilities
4.98
0.15
4.83
per square foot
Henderson,
Young & August 26, 2011 Page 77
Company
ORDINANCE NO. 5670
EXHIBIT 2
Phase -in Schedule and Impact Fee Rates
Transportation Impact Fees by Land Use
(Fee rates listed here do not reflect annual Construction Cost Index adjustments or Council adjustments.)
Fee Until 0110112013 0110112014 0110112015 0110112016
Land Use Cateaory Unit of Measure 1213112012 Base Fee Base Fee Base Fee Base Fee
Light Industrial
per sq ft
$0.52
no change
$1.54
$2.55
$3.57
Manufacturing
per sq ft
$0.29
no change
$1.09
$1.89
$2.69
Mini -warehouse
per sq ft
$0.12
no change
$0.40
$0.68
$0.96
Single family house
per dwelling
$717.75
no change
$1,430.72
$2,143.70
$2,856.89
Apartment
per dwelling
$498.75
no change
$953.25
$1,407.74
$1,862.37
Condominium
per dwelling
.$435.75
no change
$789.44
$1,143,12
$1,496,91
Mobile home
per dwelling.
$374.25
no change
$786.06
$1,197.87
$1,609.80
Senior housing - attached
per dwelling
$278.25
no change
$309.65
$341.06
$372.47
Hotel
per room
$612.75
no change
$1,038.59
$1,464.44
$1,890.41
Motel
per roam
$422.25
no change
$783.44
$1,144.62
$1,505,92
Marina
per boat berth
$222.00
no change
$301.77
$381.54
$461.34
Movie theater
per sq ft
$0.29
no change
$216
$4.03
$5.90
Health/fitness club
per sq ft
$2.47
no change
$186
$5.24
$6.63
High school
per sq ft
$0.97
no change
$1.29
$1.62
$1.94
Church
per sq ft
$0.68
no change
$1.00
$1.33
$1.65
Hospital
per sq ft
$1.24
no change
$1.80
$2.36
$2.92
Nursing home
per bed
$177.75
no change
$278.19
$378.64
$479.11
General office
per sq ft
$0.83
no change
$2.20
$3.57
$4.94
Medical office
per sq ft
$2.71
no change
$4.84
-$6.97
$9.09
Shopping center
per sq ft
$3.22
no change
no change
no change
no change
Restaurant: sit-down
per sq ft
$9.54
no change
$10.10
$10.65
$11.21
Fast food, no drive -up
per sq ft
$32.90
$21.93
no change
no change
no change
Fastfood, w/ drive -up
per sq ft
$37.20
$26.78
no change
no change
no change
Gas station
per pump
$12,642.00
$7,777.11
no change
no change
no change
Gas station w/ convenience
per pump
$12,208.50
$8,314.34
no change
no change
no change
Supermarket
per sq ft
$7.67
no change
$8.93
$10.19
$11.45
Convenience market-24 hr
per sq ft
$55.35
$25.98
no change
no change
no change
Drive-in bank
per sq ft
$11.11
no change
$12.98
$14.84
$16.71
Park Impact Fees by Land Use
(Fee rates listed here do not reflect annual Construction Cost Index adjustments or Council adjustments.)
Fee Until 0110112013 0110112014 0110112015 0110112016
Land Use Cateaory Unit of Measure 1213112012 Fee Fee Fee Fee
Single family
per dwelling unit
$530.76
no change
$963.01
$1,395.25
$1,827.63
Multi -family: 2 units Jper
dwelling unit
$530.76
no change
$848.34
$1,165.92
$1,483.60
Multi -family: 3 or 4 units
per dwelling unit
$354.51
no change
$706.95
$1,059.3.9
$1,411.93
Multi -family: 5 or more units
per dwelling unit
$35451
no change
$649,62
$944.72
$1,239.92
Mobile homeI
per dwelling unit 1
$354.51 1
no change 1
$668.73
1 $982.94
1 $1,297.25
Phase -in Schedule and Impact Fee Rates
Fire Impact Fees by Land Use
(Fee rates listed here do not reflect annual Construction Cost Index adjustments or Council adjustments.)
Fee Until 0110112013 0110112014 0110112015 0110112016
Land Use Cateaory Unit of Measure 1213112012 Fee Fee Fee Fee
Residential - single family
per dwelling unit
$488.00
$479.28
no change
no change
no change
Residential - multi -family
per dwelling unit
$388.00
no change
$418.42
$448.85
$479.28
Hotel/motel/resort
per sq ft
$0.52
no change
$0.56
$0.59
$0.63
Medical care facility
per sq ft
$0.52
no change
$2.14
$3.76
$5.38
Office
per sq ft
$0.52
$0.14
no change
no change
no change
Medical/dental office
per sq ft
$0.52
no change
$0.63
$0.73
$0.84
Retail
per sq ft
$0.52
no change
$0.54
$0.56
$0.59
Leisure facilities
per sq ft
$0.52
no change
$0.79
$1.05
$1.32
Restaurant/lounge
per sq ft
$0.52
no change
$0.94
$1.36
$1.78
Industrial/manufacturing
per sq ft
$0.52
$0.09
no change
no change
no change
Church/non-profit
per sq ft
$0.52
$0.24
no change
no change
no change
Education
per sq ft
$0.52
$0.44
no change
no change
no change
Special public facilities
per sq ft 1
$0.52 1
no change 1
$1.42 1
$232
$3.22