Loading...
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 FORTHE 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(l)(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 ofthe 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; and WHEREAS, the Council finds that it is in the public interest, and consistent with the intent and purposes ofthe 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 3 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 ofthe 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. 4 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. 5 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 ofthe Renton City Clerk. 6 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 7 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 ofthe 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. 8 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: 9 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 4-1-190J, 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 ofthe 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 muitifamily 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 ofthe dwelling units in a muitifamily 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 muitifamily 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 muitifamily 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 ofthe 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 ofthe 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 muitifamily 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 15 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 ofthe capital facilities plan; b. Determined by the City to be at suitable sites and constructed at acceptable quality; c. Serve to offset impacts of the feepayer's development activity; and 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. 18 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. L APPEALS: 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-llOE, 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-llOE, 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 ofthe 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 ofthe 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 ofthe 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 ofthe 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 24 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; b. Shall not be imposed to make up for deficiencies in public facilities; and 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 muitifamily 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. 26 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 ofthe 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: 27 ORDINANCE NO. 5670 A. Fees associated with Transportation impacts, at 33.3% ofthe Rate Study amount. B. Fees associated with Parks impacts, at 66.7% ofthe Rate Study amount. C. Fees associated with Fire Protection impacts, 66.7% ofthe 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 III. 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 t 2rjl2. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE IVIAYOR this 8th day of October , 2012. Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney v..- 5t Date of Publication: 10/12/2012 (summary) ORD:1753:9/26/12:scr * 28 ORDINANCE NO. 5670 EXHIBIT 1 RATE STUDY FOR IMPACT FEES FOR TRANSPORTATION, PARKS, and FIRE PROTECTION CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON 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 TABLE 14: 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 TABLE 25: 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 TABLE 42: 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 FOR A SINGLE- FAMILY RESIDENCE 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 RCW1 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 0) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Type of Total Development Unit Transportation Parks Fire 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 1 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 5 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 fo comply with the requirements of Washington state law. Henderson, Young & Company August 26, 2011 Page 6 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" (i.e., 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 7 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)(a) 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. RCW82.02.060(6) Proportionate Share Impact fees cannot exceed the development's proportionate share of system improvements that are reasonably related to the new development. The impact fee amount shall be based on a formula (or other method of calculating the fee) that determines the proportionate share. RCW 82.02.050(3)(b) and RCW 82.02.060(1) Reductions of Impact Fee Amounts 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). RCW82.02.060(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). RCW82.02.080 Henderson, Young & Company August 26, 2011 Page 8 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), and RCW 82.02.070(2) New Versus Existing Facilities Impact fees can be charged for new public facilities (RCW 82.02.060(1)(a) 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 9 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 (RCW82.02,060(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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 10 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 (l)(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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 11 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 12 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, 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 13 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 14 Rate 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. 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 T-1. All Capital Projects Non-Capacity Projects or Not Needed for Level of Service Projects Eligible for Impact Fees Henderson, Young & Company August 26, 2011 Page 15 Rate Study for Impact 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) # Street (3) From (4) To (5) Description New Projects 1 156th Ave SE NE 4th St SE 143rd St Widen existing 2-lane roadway to provide 4 lanes 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 3 Carr Rd/ Benson Rd (SR 515) intersection 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 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 (l)(d) authorizes the cost of existing public facilities improvements in the calculation of impact fees. Henderson, Young & Company August 26, 2011 Page 16 Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton (1) # (2) Street (3) From (4) To (5) 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 4 Carr Road Central West of Talbot Road 108th PI Add turn lanes at Talbot intersection; Widen to add EB lane between Talbot and Benson 5 Carr Road West Lind Avenue West of Talbot Road New SR 167 SB Off-ramp; new collector-distributor road; Add EB lane between Lind and Talbot 6 Grady Way Talbot Road Rainier Ave Arterial improvements 7 Lake Washington Blvd Park Ave N Coulon Park Entrance Widen existing roadway to provide dual SB left turn lanes on Lk Washington Blvd approach to Logan Ave/ Garden Ave/ N Park Dr intersection and a NB left turn lane on Lk Washington Blvd approach to Coulon Park Entrance intersection; install new traffic signal at Lk WA Blvd/ Coulon Park Entrance intersection 8 Lind Ave SW SW 16th St SW 43rd St Widen existing roadway to provide center two-way left turn lane 9 Logan Ave HI Garden Ave HI Lk Washington Blvd Intersection Widen roadway to provide an additional EB left turn lane on EB Logan approach at Lk WA Blvd intersection 10 Maple Valley Hwy (SR 169) Park entrance East City Limits Widen existing 4-lane roadway to provide additional lane in each direction; traffic operations improvements at intersections 11 Park Ave H Extension Logan Ave N 1200 ft north of Logan New 4-lane roadways with center left turn lane where needed 12 South 7th Street Rainier Ave S S Grady Way EB lane Shattuck-Talbot, signal @ Shattuck & Talbot 13 SW 27th Street/Strander Boulevard Connection Oakdale West Valley Hwy New 5 lane arterial Henderson, Young & Company August 26, 2011 Page 17 Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) # Street From Jo 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) I-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. Growth's Share of Cost of Projects Costs Not T-2. Eligible for - Eligible for = Impact Fees Impact Fee w 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 18 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) Name of Project (3) Total Cost (4) 2008 Capacity Before Project (5) 2008 Traffic Volume (6) Existing (Deficiency) Or Reserve (7) Increase in Capacity (8) Existing (Deficiency) %of Increased Capacity (9) Cost of Existing Deficiency New Projects 1 156th Ave SE: NE4th SttoSE 143rd St $13,202,000 1,400 1,127 274 1,400 0.00% $ 0 2 Benson Road South 26th St to South 31st St 4,500,000 1,600 1,559 42 1,600 0.00% 0 3 Carr Rd/ Benson Rd (SR 515) intersection 23,391,000 6,400 5,701 699 800 0.00% 0 4 Carr Road Central West of Talbot Road to 108th PI 32,488,500 3,200 2,776 424 1,600 0.00% 0 5 Carr Road West Lind Avenue to West of Talbot Rd 11,696,400 3,200 3,527 (327) 1,200 27.25% 3,187,269 6 Grady Way Talbot Road to Rainier Ave 3,000,000 3,200 3,324 (124) 800 15.54% 466,250 7 Lake Washington Blvd Park Ave N to Coulon Park Entrance 548,238 1,300 1,483 (183) 1,300 14.08% 77,175 8 Lind Ave SW SW 16th St to SW 43rd St 3,500,000 2,400 1,362 1,039 800 0.00% 0 Henderson, Young & Company August 26, 2011 Page 19 Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton (D (2) # Name of Project (3) Total Cost (4) 2008 Capacity Before Project (5) 2008 Traffic Volume (6) Existing (Deficiency) Or Reserve (7) Increase in Capacity (8) Existing (Deficiency) %of Increased Capacity (9) Cost of Existing Deficiency q Logan Ave HI Garden Ave N/ 2,683,492 2,800 2,904 (104) 2,000 5.20% 139,542 Lk Washington Blvd Intersection 1f1 Maple Valley Hwy (SR IU 169) 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 Connection Oakdale to West Valley Hwy 9,000,000 0 0 0 3,200 0.00% 0 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 Hwy) 8,306,708 3,600 3,293 307 1,800 0.00% 0 I-405 to Park entrance Subtotal: Reimbursement Projects 25,081,073 0 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 future 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 at the end of the planning period. The amount by which future Henderson, Young & Company August 26, 2011 Page 20 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) 2030 (5) (6) (7) Future (8) # Name of Project Total Cost Capacity When Complete 2030 Traffic Volume Post 2030 (Deficiency) Or Reserve Reserve %of Increase Cost of Future Reserve New Projects 1 156th Ave SE: NE4th St to SE 143rd St $13,202,000 2,800 1,728 1,072 76.57% $10,108,960 2 Benson Road South 26th St to South 31st St 4,500,000 3,200 2,046 1,154 72.13% 3,245,625 3 Carr Rd/ Benson Rd (SR 515) intersection 23,391,000 7,200 6,853 347 43.38% 10,145,846 Carr Rd/ Benson Rd (SR 515) intersection 4 Carr Road Central West of Talbot Road to 108th PI 32,488,500 4,800 3,596 1,204 75.23% 24,440,828 5 Carr Road West Lind Avenue to West of Talbot Rd 11,696,400 4,400 4,476 (78) 0.00% 0 6 Grady Way Talbot Road to Rainier Ave 3,000,000 4,000 4,787 (787) 0.00% 0 7 Lake Washington Blvd Park Ave N to Coulon Park Entrance 548,238 2,600 1,885 715 55.00% 301,531 8 Lind Ave SW SW 16th St to SW 43rd St 3,500,000 3,200 2,516 684 85.55% 2,994,141 9 Logan Ave HI Garden Ave HI Lk Washington Blvd Intersection 2,683,492 4,800 4,637 163 8.15% 218,705 10 Maple Valley Hwy (SR 169) Park entrance to East City Limits 83,693,292 5,325 4,806 519 29.26% 24,489,129 11 Park Ave N Extension Logan Ave N to 1200 ft north 5,000,000 1,300 2,288 (988) 0.00% 0 Henderson, Young & Company August 26, 2011 Page 21 Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton (1) (2) # Name of Project (3) Total Cost (4) 2030 Capacity When Complete (5) 2030 Traffic Volume (6) Post 2030 (Deficiency) Or Reserve (7) Future Reserve %of Increase (8) Cost of Future 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 Connection 9,000,000 3,200-3,073 127 3.97% 357,188 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 I-405 to Park entrance Subtotal: Reimbursement Projects 25,081,073 5,073,542 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) # Name of Project (3) Total Cost (4) Cost of Existing Deficiency (5) Cost of Future Reserve (6) 2008-2030 Project Cost Eligible for Impact Fees New Projects 1 156th Ave SE: $13,202,000 $ 0 $10,108,960 $ 3,093,040 NE4th SttoSE 143rd St 2 Benson Road 4,500,000 0 3,245,625 1,254,375 South 26th St to South 31st St Henderson, Young & Company August 26, 2011 Page 22 Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton (D (2) # Name of Project (3) Total Cost (4) Cost of Existing Deficiency (5) Cost of Future Reserve (6) 2008-2030 Project Cost Eligible for 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 Park Ave N to Coulon Park Entrance 548,238 77,175 301,531 169,532 8 Lind Ave SW 3,500,000 0 2,994,141 505,859 SW16th SttoSW 43rd St 9 Logan Ave HI Garden Ave HI 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 I-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 eliqible cost -4,154,543 Growth's Share of Eligible Cost 134,330,224 Henderson, Young & Company August 26, 2011 Page 23 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: T-3, Future P.M. Peak Hour Trips Current P.M. Peak Hour Trips Growth P.M. Peak Hour Trips Henderson Young & Company August 26, 2011 Page 24 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 25 Rate 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: T4 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 26 Rate 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 lmpact Fee Rate Per Growth Trip * = ™°> 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 at 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 27 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) ITE Code ITE Land Use Category (3) ITE Trip Rate (4) % New Trips (5) Trip Length Factor (6) Net New Trips Per Unit of Measure (7) Impact Fee Per Unit @ $7,517.08 per Trip 110 Light Industrial 140 Manufacturing 0.97 0.73 100% 100% 1.47 1.47 1.43 1,000 sq ft 1.07 1,000 sq ft 10.72 persqft 8.07 per sq ft 151 Mini-warehouse 210 Single family House 0.26 1.01 100% 100% 1.47 1.13 0.38 1,000 sq ft 1.14 dwelling 2.87 per sq ft 8,579.24 per dwelling 220 Apartment 230 Condominium 0.62 0.52 100% 100% 1.20 1.15 0.74 dwelling 0.60 dwelling 5,592.71 per dwelling 4,495.21 per dwelling 240 Mobile Home 251 Senior Housing - Attached 0.59 0.16 100% 100% 1.09 0.93 0.64 dwelling 0.15 dwelling 4,834.23 per dwelling 1,118.54 per dwelling 310 Hotel 320 Motel 0.59 0.47 100% 100% 1.28 1.28 0.76 room 0.60 room 5,676.90 per room 4,522.28 per room 420 Marina 444 Movie Theater 0.19 3.80 100% 85% 0.97 0.73 0.18 berth 2.36 1,000 sq ft 1,385.40 per boat berth 17.72 persqft 492 Health/Fitness Club 530 High School 3.53 0.97 75% 80% 1.00 1.00 2.65 1,000 sq ft 0.78 1,000 sq ft 19.90 persqft 5.83 per sq ft Henderson, Young & Company August 26, 2011 Page 28 Rate Study for Impact Fees * City of Renton (D (2) ITE Code ITE Land Use Category (3) ITE Trip Rate (4) % New Trips (5) Trip Length Factor (6) Net New Trips Per Unit of Measure (7) Impact Fee Per Unit @ $7,517.08 per Trip 560 Church 610 Hospital 0.55 1.14 100% 80% 1.20 1.28 0.66 1,000 sq ft 1.17 1,000 sq ft 4.96 per sq ft 8.78 persqft 620 Nursing home 710 General Office 0.22 1.49 100% 90% 0.87 1.47 0.19 bed 1.97 1,000 sq ft 1,438.77 per bed 14.82 persqft 720 Medical office 820 Shopping Center 3.46 3.73 75% 65% 1.40 0.53 3.63 1,000 sq ft 1.28 1,000 sq ft 27.31 per sq ft 9.66 per sq ft 932 Restaurant: sit-down 933 Fast food, no drive-up 11.15 26.15 55% 50% 0.73 0.67 4.48 1,000 sq ft 8.76 1,000 sq ft 33.65 per sq ft 65.85 per sq ft 934 Fast food, wl drive-up 944 Gas station 33.84 13.87 51% 40% 0.62 0.56 10.70 1,000 sq ft 3.11 pump 80.43 per sq ft 23,354.67 per pump 945 Gas station w/convenience 850 Supermarket 13.38 10.50 45% 65% 0.53 0.67 3.19 pump 4.57 1,000 sq ft 24,967.98 per pump 34.37 per sq ft 851 Convenience market-24 hr 912 Drive-in Bank 52.41 25.82 45% 55% 0.44 0.47 10.38 1,000 sq ft 6.67 1,000 sq ft 78.01 persqft 50.17 persqft Henderson, Young & Company August 26, 2011 Page 29 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. P-, TecreatbnS& . - Capita, Value 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 30 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) Type of Park or Facility (2) Unit (3) Inventory (4) Average Cost Per Unit (5) 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) Type of Park or Facility (2) Unit (3) Inventory (4) Average Cost Per Unit (5) 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 32 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. p 9 Capital Value Population = Value Needed per Person 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 33 Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton from the total value of parks and recreational facilities needed to serve the growth, P-3. Value Needed for Growth Value of Existing Reserve Capacity Uncommitted Balance in Impact Fee Account Investment Needed for Growth 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 Parks 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 34 Rate 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. 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 P-4. Investment Needed for Growth City Investment for Growth Investment to be Paid by Growth Henderson, Young & Company August 26, 2011 Page 35 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 36 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. p , Growth Cost Persons per = Cost per per Person 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 37 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. 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. P-7. Cost Per Dwelling Unit Adjustment for CIP Project Value Impact Fee Per Dwelling Unit Henderson, Young & Company August 26, 2011 Page 38 Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton Table 15: Park Impact Fee per Dwelling Unit (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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 39 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. 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" F-1. Emergency Responses Fire Apparatus Responses per Apparatus Henderson, Young & Company August 26, 2011 Page 40 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 Apparatus/Equipment7 8 31 4 Total Primary Apparatus 50 16,545 7 Other apparatus and equipment include 4 specialized trailers and a dive boat. Henderson, Young & Company August 26, 2011 Page 41 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) (2) (3) (4) Fire District Station Square Feet Inventory Annual Per Station (Square Feet) Incidents 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: P_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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 42 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) Useful Life (4) 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. F-3. Annual Cost Per Apparatus Annual Responses Per Apparatus Annual Apparatus Cost Per Response 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 43 Rate Study for Impact 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. Apparatus Apparatus . , ~ , n F-4. Cost Per x Percent of Fire = Apparatus Cos Per Response Responses Mre lnciaenT 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 44 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) (1) 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 45 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 v 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 46 Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton Table 23: Annualized Station Cost Per Square Foot (1) (2) (3) (4) (1) 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 1° S P!?FS ANNUAL STATION F-6. Cost Per x ™H m? = Cost Per Fire and Square Foot incident BLS lncident 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 47 Rate Study for Impact 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. There are two variables that require explanation: (H) annual emergency fire incidents at land use types, and (I) 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 same as the incidents at identifiable lands uses, and the other 74 fire incidents were allocated the same as the traffic-related incidents. F-7. Annual Emergency Fire 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 Henderson, Young & Company August 26, 2011 Page 48 Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton Table 25: Fire Incidents (1) Incident Location (2) Incidents Identifiable By Location (3) Incidents Not Identifiable By Location (4) Total 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) (2) (3) (4) Annual Percent Fire Of All Allocate Incidents Fire 2,327 Identifiable Incidents Incidents To Identifiable To Land Uses Land Use Land Use To Land Use (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 (I): 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) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) ITE Trip Annual Generation 604 Rate / 2 Traffic Related Renton Per D.U. Percent Fire Incidents Units or Total Of Per Unit Of Of Per Unit Of Trips Trips Development Land Use Development Development (Col.2*Col.3) Generated (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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 50 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) (2) (3) (4) Annual Total Fire Annual Annual Incidents Traffic Related Fire Incidents Direct to Fire Incidents By Land Use Land Use By Land Use 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 51 Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton Table 29: Annual Fire Incidents By Land Use (1) (2) (3) (4) Total Annual Fire Units Annual Fire Incidents Incidents To Of Per Land Use Land Use Development Unit of 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 sq ft 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 Development 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.8 F-8. Annual Fire Incidents Per Unit Of Development Annual Cost Per Fire Incident Useful Life Of Apparatus or Station Fire Incident Capital Cost Per Unit Of Development There are no new variables used in formula F-8. developed in previous formulas. All three variables were 8 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 52 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) (2) (3) (4) (5) Engine Engine Cost© Life Cost @ Unit of Annual Fire $ 28.84 10 Land Use Development Incident Rate per Incident 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 53 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) (2) (3) (4) (5) Ladder Ladder Cost @ Life Cost @ Unit of Annual Fire $ 8.65 20 Land Use Development Incident Rate per Incident 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 54 Rate 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) (2) (3) (4) (5) (1) Aid Vehicle Aid Vehicle Cost© Life Cost © Unit of Annual Fire $5.49 7 Land Use Development Incident Rate per Incident 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 55 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) (2) (3) (4) (5) Hazardous Hazardous Materials Materials Vehicle Vehicle Cost© Life Cost © Unit of Annual Fire $ 0.57 30 Land Use Development Incident Rate per Incident 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 56 Rate 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) (2) (3) (4) (5) Brush Truck Brush Truck Cost® Life Cost @ Unit of Annual Fire $0.34 30 Land Use Development Incident Rate per Incident 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 57 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) (2) (3) (4) (5) Staff Vehicle Staff Vehicle Cost @ Life Cost @ Unit of Annual Fire $ 16.97 10 Land Use Development Incident Rate per Incident 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 58 Rate Study for Impact 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) (2) (3) (4) (5) Other Other Apparatus/ Apparatus/ Equipment Equipment Cost® Life Cost @ Unit of Annual Fire $4.62 10.2 Land Use Development Incident Rate per Incident 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 59 Rate 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) (2) (3) (4) (5) Fire Station Fire Station Cost @ Life Cost @ Unit of Annual Fire $ 91.33 50 Land Use Development Incident Rate per Incident 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) (2) (3) Cost Component Cost 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 60 Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton Table 39: Total Capital Cost Of Responses to Fire Incidents at Land Use Categories (1) (2) (3) Fire Incident Life Cost of All Unit of Apparatus Land Use Development 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. c m APP^tus D Apparatus Apparatus Cost Per F-10. Cost Per x Percent of BLS KK Response Responses BLS Incident 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 61 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 62 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 same 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 63 Rate Study for Impact Fees • City of Renton Table 42: BLS Incidents (1) Incident Location (2) Incidents Identifiable By Location (3) Incidents Not Identifiable By Location (4) Total 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) (2) (3) (4) BLS Percent Allocate Incidents Of All BLS 8,045 Identifiable Incidents BLS Incidents To Identifiable To Land Uses Land Use Land Use To Land Use (Col. 3 x 8,045) RESIDENTIAL 5,448 68.58% 5,517 NONRESIDENTIAL Hotel/Motel/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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 64 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) (2) (3) (4) . (5) (6) I (1) ITE Trip Allocate Generation 1,445 Rate / 2 Traffic-Related Renton Per D.U. Percent BLS Units or Total Of Incidents By Of Per Unit Of Trips Trips Land Use Land Use Development Development (Col.2*Col.3) Generated (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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 65 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) (2) (3) (4) Total Annual Annual Annual BLS Incidents Traffic Related BLS Incidents Direct to BLS Incidents By Land Use Land Use By Land Use 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 66 Rate Study for Impact Fees » City of Renton Table 46: Annual BLS Incidents By Land Use (1) (2) (3) (4) Total Annual BLS Units Incidents To Of Annual BLS Incidents per Land Use Land Use Development Unit of 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 F-13. Annual BLS Incidents Per Unit Of Development Annual Cost Per BLS Incident Useful Life Of Apparatus or Station BLS Incident Capital Cost Per Unit Of 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 67 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) (2) (3) (4) (5) Engine Engine Cost® Life Cost @ Unit of Annual BLS $ 17.15 10 Land Use Development Incident Rate per Incident 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 68 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) (2) (3) (4) (5) (1) Ladder Ladder Cost© Life Cost @ Unit of Annual BLS $2.62 20 Land Use Development Incident Rate per Incident 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 69 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) (2) (3) (4) (5) Aid Vehicle Aid Vehicle Cost @ Life Cost @ Unit of Annual BLS $ 16.37 7 Land Use Development Incident Rate per BLS Incident 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 70 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) (2) (3) (4) (5) (1) Staff Vehicle Staff Vehicle Cost @ Life Cost @ Unit of Annual BLS $2.78 10 Land Use Development Incident Rate per BLS Incident 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 71 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) (2) (3) (4) (5) Other Other Apparatus/ Apparatus/ Equipment Equipment Cost© Life Cost @ Unit of Annual BLS $ 1.97 10.2 Land Use Development Incident Rate per BLS Incident 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 72 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) (2) (3) (4) (5) (1) Fire Station Fire Station Cost© Life Cost © Unit of Annual BLS $ 91.33 50 Land Use Development Incident Rate per Incident 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) (2) (3) Cost Component Cost 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 73 Rate Study for Impact 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. F-14. Fire Incident 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 74 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) (2) (3) (4) (5) (1) Fire and BLS Fire Incident BLS Incident Life Cost Life Cost Life Cost of All of All of All Apparatus Unit of Apparatus Apparatus and Station Land Use Development an Station an 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 persq 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 75 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 services10. 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 76 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 (1) (2) (3) (4) (1) Total Fire and BLS Fire and Impact Fee BLS Per Cost of Credit Unit of Impact of Adjustment @ Development Land Use Development 3.00% (Col. 2 - Col. 3) RESIDENTIAL $ 740.78 $ 22.22 $718.56 per dwelling unit NONRESIDENTIAL per square foot 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 & Company August 26, 2011 Page 77 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 01/01/2013 01/01/2014 Base Fee 01/01/2015 Base Fee 01/01/2016 Base Fee Land Use Category Unit of Measure 12/31/2012 Base Fee 01/01/2014 Base Fee 01/01/2015 Base Fee 01/01/2016 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 room $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 persq ft $0.29 no change $2.16 $4.03 $5.90 Health/fitness club per sq ft $2.47 no change $3-86 $5.24 $6.63 High school per sq ft $0.97 no change $1.29 $1.62 $1.94 Church persqft $0.68 no change $1.00 $1.33 ' $1.65 Hospital persq 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 persqft $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 persqft $32.90 $21.93 no change no change no change Fast food, w/ d rive-u p persqft $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 persq 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 01/01/2013 01/01/2014 01/01/2015 01/01/2016 Land Use Category Unit of Measure 12/31/2012 Fee Single family per dwelling unit $530.76 no change $963.01 $1,395.25 $1,827.63 Mutti-famiiy: 2 units per 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 $354.51 no change $649.62 $944.72 $1,239.92 Mobile home per dwelling unit $354.51 no change $668.73 $982.94 $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 01/01/2013 01/01/2014 01/01/2015 01/01/2016 Land Use Category Unit of Measure 12/31/2012 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 persqft $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 persq ft $0.52 no change $0.63 $0.73 $0.84 Retail persq 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/iounge per sq ft $0.52 no change $0.94 $1.36 $1.78 Industrial/manufacturing persq ft $0.52 $0.08 no change ho change no change Church/non-profit per sq ft $0.52 $0.24 no change no change no change Education persqft $0.52 $0.44 no change no change no change Special public facilities persqft $0.52 no change $1.42 $2.32 $3.22 .