Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 2007.033 NE Benefit AreaTOWN OF MARANA, ARIZONA NORTHEAST BENEFIT AREA RESIDENTIAL ROADWAY IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS FINAL REPORT C L "A 6460W.FOUR BARRELCT. 'TUCSON, AZ 85743 TOWN OF MARANA, ARIZONA NORTHEAST BENEFIT AREA RESIDENTIAL ROADWAY IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS Prepared for: Town of Marana Town Manager's Office 11555 W. Civic Center Dr Marana, AZ 85653 Prepared by: Curtis Lueck & Associates 5460 W. Four Barrel Ct. Tucson, AZ 85743 FINAL .REPORT June 26, 2007 CLA Project # 2006.02 NOTICE This study has been prepared using available traffic data and forecasts, as well as limited field data collected specifically for this study. it is intended for use in making a determination regarding the transportation infrastructure needs of the study area. It is not intended for use as a design document, nor does it represent a standard or specification. The document is copyrighted by Town of Marana, AZ and by Curtis Lueck & Associates, 5450 W. Four Barrel Court, Tucson, AZ 85743, telephone 5207438748. All rights are reserved pursuant to United States copyright law. The document may not be reproduced digitally or mechanically, in whole or In part, without the prior written approval of the Town of Marana or CLA, except as noted in the following. (1) Limned quotations may be made, for technical purposes only, as long as proper citation to the authors is provided. (2) Governmental agencies to which this report is submitted for review may make limited copies for internal use, and to fulfill public requests under the Freedom of Information Act. Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION...................................................................:............................................ 1 Purposeof the Report....................................................................................................... 1 Methodology......................................................................................................................1 Recommendations............................................................................................................ 2 2. DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA........................................................................... 3 TheNortheast Marana Benefit Area................................................................................. 3 3. FUTURE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK..................................................................... 8 4. ROADWAY COSTS AND IMPACT FEE CALCULATION..............................................10 ImpactFee Analysis........................................................................................................ 10 SensitivityAnalysis...................................................................................................10 Recommended Fee Structure.........................................................................................10 List of Exhibits Exhibit 1 Existing Study Area Conditions..........................................................................4 Exhibit 2 Future Study Area Conditions............................................................................5 Exhibit 3A Summary of Socioeconomics (Based on Marana Plans) ....................... ........... 6 Exhibit 3B Summary of Socioeconomics (Based on PAG TAZ's)......................................7 Exhibit 3C Summary of Differences.....................................................................................7 Exhibit Traffic Forecasts.................................................................................................8 Exhibit 5 Demand -Based Facility Needs...........................................................................9 Exhibit 6 Roadway Cost and Impact Fee Summary ...................................................... 11 Exhibit 7 Recommended Northeast Benefit Area Fees. ................................................ 12 Purpose of the Report The Town of Marana is considering implementing a roadway impact fee for residential development' in the northeast area of the community. The area is bounded by an east -west projection of Lambert Lane on the south, the CAP canal and 1-10 on the west, and the Town limits on the east and north. There are two other existing benefit areas already in place. The South Benefit Area includes the portion of the Town south of Lambert Lane. The Northwest Benefit Area encompasses the rapidly growing Old Town Marana area. Adding this third area will result in the entire Town being covered by residential impact fees for roadways. According to Arizona Revised Statutes, impact fees can only be used for new capacity required to support new development. (§9-463.05, see Appendix) The fees can not be used to cure current deficiencies or for non -capacity improvements, and there must be a "nexus" or connection between where the fees are collected and how they are used. Marana's impact fee program is based on "equivalent demand units" or EDUs, which is the amount of roadway capacity needed for or consumed by the new traffic generated by a typical single family detached residence. Multi -family housing units and age restricted communities generate less traffic and pay a proportionately lower impact fee. This report documents the results of a micro -simulation of future traffic volumes associated with future land uses and transportation system improvements in Marana's Northeast sub -region. The analysis is performed for the 2030 horizon year, which is considered the "buildout" horizon for the area. It is based on the future land use and transportation elements provided by Town staff, the Town's adopted General Plan, and changes to the General Plan currently proposed by staff. The calculation of the fee is based on residential traffic impacts only; impacts from non-residential uses are excluded from the fee. The report provides future roadway needs and associated capital costs, and documents the assumptions and parameters used in the analysis. These costs are used to provide the consultant's recommendations for a roadway development impact fee for the Northeast Benefit Area. Analytical Method The traffic analysis uses the Quick Response System II (QRSII) travel demand model that was originally developed by CLA more than 10 -years ago for the Town's Dove Mountain Transportation Study. CLA has maintained the model and updated the software over the years, adding new development and roadways, and recalibrating the model with recorded traffic data as it becomes available. A major model update was performed for this report. The original buildout model has been expanded to include planned and potential development surrounding the primary study area including Pinal County and unincorporated Pima County because of their influence on travel patterns in the study area. The land uses along the Tangerine Corridor were also updated to conform to new plans provided by Town staff. This includes an east -west band two-mile wide stretching from 1-10 to the east Town limits and centered on Tangerine Road Tucson, Arizona NORTHEAST BENEFIT AREA - RESIDENTIAL ROADWAY IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS The output from the travel demand model was used to determine roadway cross- section requirements, which are then reflected in project capital costs. Roadway improvements are defined at the horizon year, and improvement costs are then estimated for the new and expanded roadway segments. The costs are expressed in constant 2006 dollars. These capital costs are then used to calculate the gross and net Northeast Benefit Area impact fee per EDU, which is also in 2006 dollars. The Town will need to index the fee to inflation or make periodical adjustments to keep pace with ever increasing construction costs. We also compared the socio-economic information coded into the model based on Marana's plans with the information used by the Pima Association of Governments in its travel demand modeling for the Regional Transportation Plan. The differences are identified and explained in the text. Recommendations Based on our analysis of residential traffic impacts, we recommend that the Town adopt a fee structure for residential development in the Northeast Benefit Area as follows: Single Family, not age -restricted: $6,872 Multi -Family, not age -restricted: $4,826 Single Family, age -restricted: $4,187 Multi -Family, age -restricted: $2,499 The Town should also provide for annual indexing or periodic fee adjustment to account for inflation and other changes in construction costs. We recommend using the Engineering News Record's Construction Cost Index for this purpose. If the Town chooses to adopt a roadway impact fee for the Northeast Benefit Area, ARS §9-463.05 (C) establishes a schedule of notification and public hearing requirements that the Town must follow. © 2007 Curtis Lueck & Associates Page 2 C L A Tucson, Arizona NORTHEAST BENEFIT AREA -RESIDENTIAL ROADWAY IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS The Northeast Marana Benefit Area The Benefit Area is bounded by 1-10/CAP canal on the west, Lambert Lane (extended) on the south, and the Town limits on the North and east. This benefit area encompasses about 31,600 acres and now contains about 4,500 homes. We estimate that the businesses in the subregion currently employ about 150 people. At buildout, the area is projected to contain roughly 14,115 homes, 35,300 residents, and 5,000jobs. This area is the primary focus of the study, although the travel demand model extends significantly beyond these boundaries. Much of the study area is now undeveloped, vacant property. The existing development in this focus area is now mostly residential with some commercial/light industrial uses. Dove Mountain, a master,planned community in the benefit area, was approved in the early 1990's and is over 50 percent complete at this time. Other approved commercial and residential uses in the study area are in various phases of planning and development. Town staff anticipates revisions to the General Plan incorporating a band of undeveloped land two miles wide, and centered along Tangerine Road. Some of this land is State-owned, and it is expected to be sold for urban development in the coming years. This area is considered a major growth corridor because of the transportation infrastructure planned for Tangerine Road area, and due to possible lessening of environmental restrictions regarding the cactus ferruginous pygmy ow1.2 Exhibit 1 illustrates existing conditions in the study area and includes all of the planned development and existing land uses in and surrounding the focus area. The map shows that a large portion of the study area is owned by the State of Arizona, particularly between 1-10 and Dove Mountain Blvd. The Town's planning staff provided preliminary future land use estimates for a two-mile corridor extending one mile each side of Tangerine Road within the focus area. These land uses and the planned future roadway system were coded into the future (buildout conditions) model. The future conditions, including new planned major roadways are illustrated in Exhibit 2. The map in Exhibit 2 indicates subregions of the Northeast Area that were used by the planning department to estimate future densities. Exhibit 3A summarizes land uses in the study area by subregion and compares the current residential uses and densities to the future condition. Based on the Town's land use plans, the summary shows that there are currently about 3,372 housing units in the study area and about 14,113 are projected in the area at buildout, for an increase of 10,741. These forecasts were used in the fee calculations. Exhibit 3B summarizes the socio -economics for the study area based on the transportation analysis zones (TAZs) in PAG's travel demand model, which utilizes the Towns sub -allocation of the State -generated population and employment forecasts. These forecasts must be used by PAG, but are not mandatory for the Town. This table shows that about 9,453 homes would be added to the study area, compared to 10,741 using the Town's plans. Exhibit 3C shows there is a difference of 1288 homes, or about 14%, which we consider reasonably close given the disparate forecasting methods. Since there are fewer projected homes in PAG's forecasts, using them would result in a higher impact fee than using the Town's forecasts. ] The owl was recently de -list by the USEPA, and its habitat area is no longer restricted by the owl's presence. However, the Tucson, Arizona NORTHEAST BENEFIT AREA -RESIDENTIAL ROADWAY IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS Exhibit 1 Existing Study Area Conditions Cemmercia€ InsMUGanat P-velepmeN �...�'o°-k�� C Tl FFA 51�1�.vMtdP✓..n`�557."a-4,v� 4., > W ; 'l S }' iT� hY') l i1S�.�.,..vaa �aw.a�.�C'y�i''k:S rawl4 .Y,}tix.eFS+@'+`n . �� Curtis &Associates Page 4 L ^ ©2007 son Tuccson,, Arizona NORTHEAST BENEFIT AREA -RESIDENTIAL ROADWAY IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS Exhibit 2 Future Study Area Conditions G iangwlne HiNs It LaEa Sevilla1 Jj Saguaro Et Ra'xh KyCascade L+ The Foothills-.� k t �.1wre s,a.� "• �+ Ne,y. � ?5-13&%°A�li�`��E3 '� Yd'iAi O s�lE7 � c > .c % v ,� y-T.v`ey..G-. '� "sEi� -aua.a rnw.- 3� xEh t[Bed# „ , z S HE6 a a '^`" " "'°` a '"7 NE { 151 I1�. wPoj+a-a,ev Q} �W 11 I! ���.I I�I� 5 „�, +a 2 �.f �+:. A b• 1 4 � "Pk' F ! � "`V?k �y �• S 1 e 1Se �s-x7,�,� ! �dtag'aYi Vkak �`!p�!�s� j Curtis Lueck & Associates Page 5 L 02007 _Tucson,.Arizona NORTHEAST BENEFIT AREA -RESIDENTIAL ROADWAY IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS Exhibit 3A Summary of Socioeconomics (Based on Marana Plans) Planned Development Areas Existing housing units are platted lots as of this study date Unplanned Acreage 1 290 1 363 1 Housing Units Area Specific Plan Planned Existing NEA Dove Mountain Total Project) 5,000 2,950 NE B Tortolita Vistas 150 0 NEC Tan erine/Thorn dale Specific Plan 115 0 NE D Tangerine Crossing 347 0 NE E Sky Ranch 365 365 NE F Tangerine Ride 61 0 NEG Tangerine Hills 25 0 NE H Sonoran Preserve 29 0 NE I Casa Sevilla 34 0 NE J Saguaro Ranch 180 0 NE K Cascada In Focus Area 641 0 NEL The Foothills 200 0 TOTAL 80 7,147 3,315 Existing housing units are platted lots as of this study date Unplanned Acreage Areas zo 21, and 22 estimated at .25 homes/acre In Planning Area/Outside Existing Town Limits NE 9 lResidential C L ^ 1 290 1 363 1 0 Ho sing Units TAZ Land Use Acres Planned Existing NE 1 Residential 270 912 0 NE 2 Residential 110 748 0 NE 3 Commercial 75 0 0 NE 4 Commercial 220 0 0 NE 5 Preserve 1460 0 0 NE 6 Residential 895 3,021 0 NE 7 Residential 40 50 0 NE 8 Residential 205 154 0 NE 12 Residential 40 30 2 NE 13 Residential 80 60 2 NE 14 Residential 20 5 0 NE 15 Residential 400 100 0 NE 16 Residential 622 1,028 0 NE 17 Residential 140 473 0 NE 18 Industrial 210 0 0 NE 19 Industrial 100 0 0 NE 20 - Residential 1 300 1 75 17 NE 21 Residential 600150 11 NE 22 Residential 640 160 25 TOTAL 6,966 1 57 Areas zo 21, and 22 estimated at .25 homes/acre In Planning Area/Outside Existing Town Limits NE 9 lResidential C L ^ 1 290 1 363 1 0 NE 10 Residential 1 580 1 725 1 0 NE 11 Residential 40 50 0 TOTAL 1,138 1 0 02007 Curtis Lueck & Associates Page 6 Tucson, Arizona NORTHEAST BENEFIT AREA -RESIDENTIAL ROADWAY IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS Exhibit 3B Summary of Socioeconomics (Based on PAG TAZ's) Exhibit 3C Summary of Differences 2005 Data 2030 Data Growth TAZ Population Dwelling Units Personal Dwelling Unit Population Dwelling Units erson Dwelling Unit Population Dwelling Units 658 26 11 2.39 26 11 2.40 0 0 670 309 107 2.89 1,578 548 2.88 1,269 441 673 0 0 0.00 902 365 2.47 902 365 687 24 10 2.40 418 174 2.40 394 164 689 190 59 3.22 1,663 515 3.23 1,473 456 692 0 0 0.00 1,370 548 2.50 1,370 548 696 139 44 3.16 1,094 345 3.17 955 301 697 0 0 0.00 2,710 1,097 2.47 2,710 1,097 703 104 43 2.42 742 304 2.44 638 261 710 407 169 2.41 1,918 799 2.40 1,510 630 713 24 10 2.40 420 175 2.40 396 165 720 282 97 2.91 792 272 2.91 509 175 731 2,544 1,151 2.21 8,579 3,882 2.21 6,036 2,731 761 42 17 2.47 5,340 2,136 2.50 5,298 2,119 Total 4,0921,718 2.06 27,551 11,171 2.62 23,459 9,453 Exhibit 3C Summary of Differences Tucson, Arizona Summary of Dwelling Units Basis 2005 2030 Increase Marana Plans 3372 14113 10741 PAG 1718 11171 9453 Difference 1654 2942 1288 % Difference 196% 126% 114% Tucson, Arizona i NORTHEAST BENEFIT AREA -RESIDENTIAL ROADWAY IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS 3. Future Transportation The buildout model was run with the planned and projected land uses and roadways shown in the map in Exhibit 2, above. The results of the model run identify the i roadway capacity needs at buildout of the area. The projected average daily traffic (ADT) and required capacity based on maintaining LOS D are shown in Exhibit 4 future Transportation Network. Exhibit 4 Traffic Forecasts Travel Lanes Required: Capacity @ LOS D (ADT) 1 travel Lane each direction 0-15,600 2. travel lanes each direction 15,501-30,600 One Mile 3320. 3 travel lanes each direction 30,601-.46,100 4travel lanes each direction > 46,100 A = Segment Identifier 9 °os�, c � Moore Road .9 y 3450 2320 .2255 g IF M O 0 63435 44090 43570 Tangerine Road I JK n L ory o e 2v E yysa 9.a H A ��� Q 130 0 11035 D a m Caminj dearte m q C n vra Vail yRoad 3 s n. m 10 H t' 32970 i:. - 31015 Lambert Lae C tea ca R g > '+1 oae Linda Vista Blvd n C 0 B A0 U c m Some of the traffic on these roadways merely passes through from outside of the Study Area. We were able to extract this information from the model output to analyze impacts from within the area. Exhibit 5 summarizes the area roadways included in the travel demand model. The table identifies the roadway segment volumes and required cross section based on forecasts. The table also provides the estimated daily trips generated from within the focus area and the proportion of those trips to the total These trips have either an origin or destinafion, or both, in the study area, therefore through trips are excluded. The capacity costs to accommodate through traffic would be funded with UM02007 Curtis Lueck & Associates Page 8 Tucson, Arizona NORTHEAST BENEFIT AREA -RESIDENTIAL ROADWAY IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS other sources available from the Regional Transportation Authority, Pima Association of Governments, or other Town of Marana funds. The table does not include two traffic interchanges, which are addressed separately in the fee calculations. Note that segments of Tangerine Road and Lambert Lane identified as needing eight through lanes will be capped at six through lanes. The segments near 1-10, where demand is the greatest, would have auxiliary lanes to accommodate turning movements. Exhibit 5 Demand -Based Facility Needs oegmerne m ovi.0 fo be funded with Northeast Area impact fee. * Eight -lane arterials are impracticable and will be capped at six -lanes. C L ^ 02007 Curtis Lueck & Associates Page.9 Tucson, Arizona Forecasts Including Land Uses in Tangerine Development Corridor Without Tangerine Belt Development Cross Focus Percent Cross Total Trips Section Area Trips Focus Total Trips Section Link ROADWAY SEGMENT on Link Required on Link Arearrotal on Link Required A New Link btw Tangerine/Lambert 15,650 4 Lanes 8,950 57% 4,150 2 Lanes B Twin Peaks✓Linda Vista a/c WB Frontage Road 40,400 6 Lanes 3,250 8% 14,100 2 Lanes C Camino de Manana s/o Lambert Road 14,300 2 Lanes 3,150 22% 27,000 4 Lanes D Camino its Manana n/o Lambert 18,550 4 Lanes - 6,000 32% 27,150 4 Lanes E Camino de Manana s/o Tangerine Road 11,050 2 Lanes 4,350 39% 20,300 4 Lanes F Dove Mountain Blvd n/o tangerine 28,200 4 Lanes 21,250 75% 40,200 6 Lanes G Lambert Lane w/o Cmo its Manana 30,050 4 Lanes 6,300 21% 43,500 6 Lanes H Lambert Lane e/o Cmo its Manana 31,300 6 Lanes 4,850 15% 59,200 8 Lanes* I Tangerine Road w/o Dove Mountain Blvd 63,350 8 Lanes* 30,350 48% 42,650 6 Lanes J Tangerine Rd e/o Dove Mountain Blvd 44,250 6 Lanes 14,150 32% 17,300 4 Lanes K Tangerine Road w/o Thomydale Road 46,950 8 Lanes* 13,300 28% 20,450- 4 Lanes L Tangerine Rd e/o Thornydale Road 44,350 6 Lanes 11,100 25% 44,700 6 Lanes M Thomydale Road n/o Tangerine Road 15,150 2 Lanes- 7,400 49% 16,850 4 Lanes N Thomydale Road s/o Tangerine Road 21,100 1 4 Lanes 1 7,450 1 35% 1 9,650 1 2 Lanes oegmerne m ovi.0 fo be funded with Northeast Area impact fee. * Eight -lane arterials are impracticable and will be capped at six -lanes. C L ^ 02007 Curtis Lueck & Associates Page.9 Tucson, Arizona NORTHEAST BENEFIT AREA -RESIDENTIAL ROADWAY IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS 4. Roadway Costs and Impact Fee Calculation We analyzed the costs for new roadway construction for the Northeast Benefit Area needed to serve additional travel demand associated with the area. The Town identified the major roadway projects to be funded by the fee; not all of the necessary capacity projects shown in Exhibit 5 are included. The capital costs for the identified roadway projects are based on unit costs by facility type, and are an approximation, not a precise engineering estimate. These costs are $1.9 million per lane mile, as derived from recent experience in the region and from Town projects set for construction. The cost for new and reconstructed service interchanges is $45 million each. We then factored the costs to attribute an appropriate portion to the benefit area, based on the link -by -link analysis.. As mentioned; the balance of the project costs would need to come from other sources such as the RTA or State Highway Users Revenue Fund (HURF) allocations to the Town. The data and calculations are all summarized in Exhibit 6. Residential Impact Fee Analysis Roadway impact fees can be derived in two ways. The first is based on the cost of new roadway capacity needed for new development; the second is based on the capacity consumed by new development. For this study, we used the second strategy, which is consistent with Town policy in the other two benefit areas. Using the capital cost method, there would be 10,741 new homes paying for $79 million (or 34%) of the total $230 million in capital costs for the defined projects. The gross fee would be $7,372 per EDU. Since each new home would also be contributing some funding indirectly through gas taxes, we credited $500 against the gross fee, resulting in a net fee of $6,872 per EDU. The calculations are summarized in Exhibit 6. Note that roadway life cycle costs also include operation and maintenance. These O&M costs are deliberately excluded from our analysis because impact fees can not be used legally for these purposes. The Town will pay for new facility O&M costs using HURF and other federal, State, and local revenue sources available to the Town, just as they do for existing roadways. Additionally, the Town will pay the capital and O&M costs associated with nonresidential growth. Sensitivity Analysis We also conducted a sensitivity analysis of the fee implications associated with the Town's vision for the Tangerine Road growth corridor. The analysis removes most of the growth in the two-mile wide belt, redefines the funded improvements, and recalculates the fee. The results, summarized in the appendix, show that the fee would be slightly higher than the recommended fee with the growth corridor. Recommended Fee Structure The traffic impact of residential development varies by the type and density of the development. Marana, like other jurisdictions, uses a fee structure that considers both density and age restrictions. These are derived from the Institute of Transportation Engineers trip generation rates for the various categories of development, except as noted in the Exhibit 7. is Lueck & Assoc Tucson, Arizona I I � W LL -a E Q IL V FL 0 LL N O. 'S W 8 H `u Q E O: F m E W E 7 Q W N � d y LL Q ~ 0 'p F LL O. Z E W 00 J N F' Y t' 0 W U 0 O Z Z O a a V ap N t+ L X W -a E c V FL 0 N E 'S 8 `u c E O: 2 a m E m E y �.'� m 'p F .Foo O Y y o N a U Ur 00 J N F' t' U 0 O N V Po aw 0 oo a O 0 O 0 O 0 0. o0 0 0 r a �H m w o n O c O O n a m o n uoi i. r v i>iA�'i ry[ (O W t N N N N_ 1 m wC ry O O O O O O O �r`m g,x^ a 0 m 1U O N O. O O Q yC y0: N N frj V at ID 1� OI E'. W wFES tUFp V V m i a� m o e a L Em m m rn a Q c m V N N Z Z C J O 6 c a yocg. a A a a m a m m m m $Q mm_ me m Z.. Z Q�f V m a a O C D a J c N Q Q 'm. E —m a 'a o m 12 �. om w a � ` \ r Y� .dN p CN E c c. V V` o IT o crn v y y[ ry a Ga K ¢ a V m ay dly J QZC Qd O c ` a i .E 9 9 1 U goo 3 H I- 5 3 -a W FL 0 N 'S 8 `u LL O: 2 a m E m y m N w N ¢a 00 J N F' t' U 0 O N V and at least fourteen days prior to the scheduled date of adoption of the new or increased fee by the governing body. A development fee assessed pursuant to this section shall not be effective until ninety days after its formal adoption by the governing body of the municipality. Nothing in this subsection shall affect any development fee adopted prior to July 24, 1982. D. Each municipality that assesses development fees shall submit an annual report accounting for the collection and use of the fees. The annual report shall include the following: 1. The amount assessed by the municipality for each type of development fee. 2. The balance of each fund maintained for each type of development fee assessed as of the. beginning and end of the fiscal year. 3. The amount of interest or other earnings on the monies in each fund as of the end of the fiscal year. 4. The amount of development fee monies used to repay (a) Bonds issued by the municipality to pay the cost of a capital improvement project that is the subject of a development fee assessment. (b) Monies advanced by the municipality from funds other than the funds established for development fees in order to pay the cost of a capital improvement project that is the subject of a development fee assessment. 5. The amount of development fee monies spent on each capital improvement project that is the subject of a development fee assessment and the physical location of each capital improvement project. 6. The amount of development fee monies spent for each purpose other than a capital improvement project that is the subject of a development fee assessment. E. Within ninety days following the end of each fiscal year, each municipality shall submit a copy of the annual report to the city clerk. Copies shall be made available to the public on request. The annual report may contain financial information that has not been audited. F. A municipality that fails to file the report required by this section shall not collect development fees until the report is filed. i i I i Exhibit 7 Recommended Northeast Benefit Area Fees i i i 1: Tnp Generation base on ITE Categories 210, 200, 251, and 252 2: Trip rates for single family, age restricted residential based on special studies prepared for tharana. 3: EDU = equivalent demand unit from a single family detached, non -age restricted residence. 4: Net Fee per EDU = 6,872 © 2007 Curtis Lueck & Associates Page 12 Tucson, Arizona Average Daily Trip Generation Residential Type Not A e Restricted (1) Age Restricted (1,2) Single Family Detached 9.57 5.83 Multi -Family 6.72 3.48 EDU by Land Use Type (3) Not Age Restricted Age Restricted ` Single Family Detached 1.00 0.61 Multi -Family 0.70 0.36 Roadway Impact Fee by Land Use Type (4) Not Age Restricted Age Restricted Single Family Detached $6 872 $4,87 Multi -Family 1: Tnp Generation base on ITE Categories 210, 200, 251, and 252 2: Trip rates for single family, age restricted residential based on special studies prepared for tharana. 3: EDU = equivalent demand unit from a single family detached, non -age restricted residence. 4: Net Fee per EDU = 6,872 © 2007 Curtis Lueck & Associates Page 12 Tucson, Arizona APPENDIX 9-463.05. Development fees; imposition by cities and towns; annual report A. A municipality may assess development fees to offset costs to the municipality associated with providing necessary public services to a development. B. Development fees assessed by a municipality under this section are subject to the following requirements: 1. Development fees shall result in a beneficial use to the development. 2. Monies received from development fees assessed pursuant to this section shall be placed in a separate fund and accounted for separately and may only be used for the purposes authorized by this section. Interest earned on monies in the separate fund shall be credited to the fund. 3. The schedule for payment of fees shall be provided by the municipality. The municipality shall provide a credit toward the payment of a development fee for the required dedication of public sites and improvements provided by the developer for which that development fee is assessed. The developer of residential dwelling units shall be required to pay development fees when construction permits for the dwelling units are issued. 4. The amount of any development fees assessed pursuant to this section must bear a reasonable relationship to the burden imposed upon the municipality to provide additional necessary public services to the development. The municipality, in determining the extent of the burden imposed by the development, shall consider, among other things, the contribution made or to be made in the future in cash or by taxes, fees or assessments by the property owner towards the capital costs of the necessary public service covered by the development fee. 5. If development fees are assessed by a municipality, such fees shall be assessed in a non-discriminatory manner. 6. In determining and assessing a development fee applying to land in a community facilities district established under title 48, chapter 4, article 6, the municipality shall take into account all public infrastructure provided by the district and capital costs paid by the district for necessary public services and shall not assess a portion of the development fee based on the infrastructure or costs. C. A municipality shall give at least sixty days' advance notice of intention to assess a new or increased development fee and shall release to the public a written report including all documentation that supports the assessment of a new or increased development fee. The municipality shall conduct a public hearing on the proposed new or increased development fee at any time after the expiration of the sixty day notice of intention to assess a new or increased development fee W W LL F Q Ca 6 a LL 0 c I W d Q E CL E W d 1 0 UJ MY LU Im W Q N Z R W m i+ H 3 N LQ ysj r 0 Z Z CQ 6 C a C T E a # E o .� 5 j s E rn � D c Qc c a a � K C � Z N O N O O O O O O >1 � N O M � N at N s b N i4 Yi f�S. k� 0 O. O O �j W t00 tOD G h U 6 a Q F N a a �- m 9 d K C J O L Cpu a G N u m m m T m Z z P°a V� � m c v Y3 w a 12 c C :Eo m @ @ N a w Q Q W..: rt �ti Y Lam �r a O O m PE or m c me a :� a3i ,w m m m `m E