Supervisors approve
changes to TIF ordinance
By Joe
Naiman
The Alpine Sun
Under a plan approved 3-2, by the San Diego County Board of
Supervisors, some Transportation Impact Fee charges will
increase while others will decrease.
Since an ordinance amendment is involved, a second
reading and adoption is required. The Jan. 30 action approved
the first reading, and the introduction of the ordinance and
second reading is scheduled for Feb. 27.
The motion also directed the county’s Chief
Administrative Officer to work on issues brought forward during
the public comments, particularly a spending plan, credits for
frontage improvements, and a potential oversight committee.
“It’s important to continue the work to see how we can
make this better,” said Supervisor Dianne Jacob. “It’s not
perfect today, what we have before us.”
All five supervisors sought a reduction in the TIF
charges for commercial and industrial development, but
revenue-neutrality considerations led to the elimination of
credits for frontage improvement. Supervisor Bill Horn’s
substitute motion to continue the hearing for 60 days was
defeated on a 3-2 vote with Ron Roberts supporting Horn on the
substitute motion and Jacob, Greg Cox, and Pam Slater-Price
seeking quicker action.
Jacob, Cox, and Slater-Price supported the final motion
with Horn and Roberts in opposition.
“I’m sure we’re going to be taking an additional look
at it,” Cox said.
“I just think there’s some language in here that has
some very, very serious implications,” Horn said. “I do think
this is an issue that has to be addressed.”
In April 2005 the San Diego County Board of Supervisors
adopted a Transportation Impact Fee ordinance in order to comply
with state law and provide funding for the construction of
transportation facilities needed to support the increased
traffic generated by new development. The TIF ordinance was
expected to help small developers who could address their
projects’ impacts easier with a single check rather than with a
comprehensive cumulative impact study.
Prior to a 2002 court case, the California
Environmental Quality Act allowed exemptions for relatively
small “de minimus” cumulative traffic impacts, but after the
exemptions were declared invalid CEQA was changed to require all
traffic impacts to be addressed and mitigated.
The change in the CEQA law held up about 300 projects
in the unincorporated area due to the difficulty of developers
to fund the required traffic studies as well as the road
improvements. In some cases the road improvements exceeded the
actual cost of the project.
“I don’t think any of us actually wanted to adopt a TIF
fee in the first place,” Jacob said.
Since the adoption of the TIF ordinance, citizens and
local community groups as well as applicants and developers have
expressed concern that the industrial and commercial fees are
too high, producing a heavy strain on economic growth and
development in unincorporated communities.
“This board got stampeded into doing something that was
ill-conceived,” Roberts said. “An enormous amount of damage has
been done.”
In November 2007 the supervisors requested that county
staff address specific issues and return to the board in 60 days
with recommendations to change the TIF program to encourage
commercial and industrial development in unincorporated San
Diego County.
“The results of that study highlight an improved
program,” Jacob said. “These changes, they should encourage, not
hinder, industrial development in the unincorporated area.”
The TIF assessment itself would be reduced by an
average of 40 percent for commercial and industrial projects,
although the elimination of frontage credits offsets that
savings for many projects. The adjustment for residential
projects would range from a reduction in 28 percent to an
increase of 3.5 percent.
If approved during the second reading, the TIF for a
single-family detached residential unit in Alpine would be
$5,526, which consists of $1,812 for local improvements, $3,294
for regional impacts, and $150 for freeway ramps. The Central
Mountain and Mountain Empire areas each carry total costs of
$2,198 to account for $2,195 of regional impacts and $3 for
freeway ramps.
Multi-family attached homes, condominiums and
apartments, lodging including hotel rooms and timeshare units,
and accessory apartments (granny flats) will be charged at 67
percent of the single-family dwelling fee for each unit.
Mobilehomes, agricultural labor housing, and retirement
communities will be assessed at 33 percent of the single-family
dwelling rate for each unit, and congregate care facilities for
residents unable to care for themselves will pay 20 percent of
the single-family dwelling cost for each unit.
Alpine’s general commercial rate will be $9,235 per
1,000 square feet, which covers $5,426 in local costs, $3,342 in
regional impacts, and $467 for freeway ramps. The Central
Mountain and Mountain Empire rates will be $5,075 to cover
$5,066 of regional costs and $9 for freeway ramps.
If a project’s building plan check fees are paid on or
before Feb. 29, regardless of whether the building permit has
been obtained prior to the effective date of the ordinance
update, the builder has the option of paying the existing TIF
rate or the new rate.
The exemptions to the TIF charges were also expanded to
specify conversions from apartments to condominiums, tenant
improvements to an existing facility including changes of
occupancy or use, minor expansions of up to 1,000 square feet,
uncovered outdoor restaurant seating, fuel tanks and gas pumps,
and permitted home businesses such as child care.
If the second reading and adoption is approved Feb. 27,
the revised ordinance will take effect April 28.
“I just really think there needs to be more discussion
here,” Horn said.
“The idea of an oversight committee would be a good
one,” Slater-Price said.
“All we did is stop building. We didn’t improve the
roads,” Roberts said. “This thing needs an overhaul.”
Roberts noted that the state law requiring mitigation
of cumulative impacts allows for numerous options. “We went down
the wrong path,” he said.
“We’re going to have no development if we continue
this,” Horn said.
Roberts said that the fees were based on theoretical
scenarios. “None of it worked,” he said. “It’s wrong in the
housing. It’s wrong in the commercial. It’s wrong in the
industrial. It’s just plain wrong.”
 E-mail
the Editor
|
|
