HomeMy Public PortalAbout2015-09-23 minutes %WEI CP REGULAR MEETING
0 ' AB 1600 Traffic Impact Fee Program
�II�� %,
- Working Group
a w►� �+s�" �
•'•61'4, at*" Minutesoss
••1069 r:a;- /na•f4
September 23, 2015, 3:00 p.m.
Town Hall -Administrative Center
10183 Truckee Airport Road, Truckee, CA
1. CALL TO ORDER— Becky Bucar called the meeting to order at 3:06 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL BY INTRODUCTION
Leslie Suen, LSC Transportation Consultants; Pat Davison, Contractors Association of Truckee
Tahoe; Gordon Shaw, LSC Transportation Consultants; Dale Creighton, SCO Engineering and
Planning; Annie Rosenfeld, Tahoe Donner Association; Todd Rivera, Tahoe Truckee Unified
School District; Alex Heyman, Community Member; Patrick Flora, Council Member, Town of
Truckee; Becky Bucar, Engineering Manager, Town of Truckee; Dan Wilkins, Public Works
Director/Town Engineer, Town of Truckee; John McLaughlin, Community Development Director,
Town of Truckee; and Bonnie Thompson, Administrative Technician, Town of Truckee.
Absent:Jennifer Jennings,Truckee Trails Foundation;Alexis 011ar, Mountain Area Preservation;
Ted Owens, Tahoe Forest Health System; and John Falk, Tahoe Sierra Board of Realtors.
3. PUBLIC COMMENT—none.
4. Approve Minutes from the June 23, 2015 meeting.
The group consensus was to approve the minutes.
5. Final Project List
Becky Bucar and Gordon Shaw presented from the PowerPoint and the handouts and answered
questions (presentation and handouts on file with the Town Clerk).
The group discussed:
• Contractors Association of Truckee Tahoe (CATT) handout:
o Pat Davison, discussed the handout she provided.
• CATT hired Development Planning & Financing Group, Inc. to assess the
cost allocations for the Pioneer Trail and Bridge Street Connector.
• They recommended 35/65% split for the funding of the connector, and this
is the official CATT position.
• CATT sees the importance of building the connector, just disagrees with
the funding split.
o The majority of the Town roadway system includes excess capacity which will also
be used by traffic generated by future development.Applying the philosophy above,
should future development reimburse the community for the roads that are already
built?
o Cannot go back in time to reimburse past payers.
' o It is possible to make an exception starting now.
• The connector is a policy decision:
o The connector needs to be considered in relationship to the whole town.
o Does the amount of the fee reduce the ability to construct?
• Land use assumptions:
o If we assumed only 80% of the build-out growth occurred,there would be 20%less
development, we would still need to build the extension and there would be less
developers to spread the cost over.
o CATT asked for a chart that explains that for their members.
• Residents can argue that if no new development occurred we would not need the road,so
why should the general fund pay for it?
• Tahoe Donner residents have been paying for Traffic Impact Fees(TIF)for years and that
has built other roads, so why shouldn't they get the connector?
• If the reserve capacity is something that the public needs to pay for, does development
need to pay the Town for the reserve capacity that they are using on other roads?
o GATT is not advocating that each road be reconsidered by that logic.
• How does the TIF compare as the percentage of your home today or 30 years ago?
• Can the same logic be applied to other projects?
• Other options to add capacity to DPR without widening it?
6. Draft Fee Calculation
The group discussed:
• Proposed new fee in Table 4 is $5,702 which is less than current fee of$5,926.
• Using CATT's suggested percentage, the fee would be about$4,500.
• So the spread is from $4,500 to $5,702 for building a house.
• Staff will provide the dollar value of the fees for past projects for the Council meeting.
7. Traffic Impact Fee Calculations for Individual Land Uses
Gordon Shaw continued presenting from the handouts and answered questions.
8. Inclusion of Eastern Nevada County in Program
Becky Bucar continued presenting from the PowerPoint and answered questions.
The group discussed:
• Staff plans to ask Nevada County to adopt the same TIF for specific areas in
unincorporated Nevada County because new residents would be using the Town's
infrastructure.
• Hirshdale Hill, which is in Nevada County, needs shoulders.
o As the Town adds traffic it increases trips on that road, so it is legitimate for the
Town to collect fees for Nevada County.
o In return, Nevada County would adopt our fee for the unincorporated area to pay
for our infrastructure.
• Nevada County is updating their program now so it could be passed in six months
assuming the Council and the Board of Supervisors are agreeable.
• Include a contingency that if Nevada County decides not to build the shoulders,the project
is removed from the list.
• How would the fees be paid?
o Town has an agreement with Placer County that fees are neutral and we do not cut
checks.
o The Town and Nevada County would likely write each other checks.
9. Next Steps
Draft Fee Program Report to Council:
• Staff will compile a draft report and allow member to respond to staff by email.
• Comments would be incorporated before the final draft goes to Council.
• The group could meet again if needed.
• A draft could be circulated in November.
• Staff plans to go to Council in December to adopt the new fee program.
10. ADJOURNMENT 4:49 p.m. Bonnie Thompson,Administrative Technician for
Judy Price,Town Clerk
111
1