THREE RIVERS LEVEE FEE NEXUS STUDY

Transcription

1 HEARING REPORT THREE RIVERS LEVEE FEE NEXUS STUDY Prepared for: Yuba County Prepared by: Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. April 25, 2006 Fee Adopted May 16, 2006, as Amended by Ordinances and County Counsel Fee Effective Immediately by Urgency Ordinance EPS #13579 S A C R A M E N T O 2150 River Plaza Drive, Suite 400 Sacramento, CA phone: fax: B E R K E L E Y phone: fax: D E N V E R phone: fax:

2 CONTACT INFORMATION April 25, 2006 This fee nexus study was prepared by Economic & Planning Systems, Inc., (EPS) a firm specializing in real estate economics, regional economics, public finance, and land use policy. The report (EPS Project #13579) was commissioned by Yuba County. Tim R. Youmans served as principal in charge and oversaw all aspects of the assignment. Seth Wurzel served as project manager and conducted the fee nexus study. The analyses, opinions, recommendations, and conclusions of this report are EPS s informed judgment based on market and economic conditions as of the date of this report. Changes in the market conditions or the economy could change or invalidate the conclusions contained herein. The contents of this report are based, in part, on data from secondary sources. While it is believed that these sources are accurate, EPS cannot guarantee their accuracy. The findings herein are based on economic considerations and, therefore, should not be construed as a representation or as an opinion that government approvals for development can be secured. Conclusions and recommended actions contained in this report should not be relied on as sole input for final business decisions regarding current and future development and planning, nor utilized for purposes beyond the scope and objectives of the current study. Questions regarding the information contained herewith should be directed to: Tim R. Youmans or Seth Wurzel Principal in Charge Project Manager ECONOMIC & PLANNING SYSTEMS, INC River Plaza Drive, Suite 400 Sacramento, CA (916) Phone (916) Facsimile

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... 1 Overview... 1 Organization of Report... 3 Purpose of the Study... 3 Authority... 3 II. THREE RIVERS LEVEE FEE... 5 Purpose of the Program... 5 Three Rivers Levee Fees... 6 Implementation... 9 Levee Funding Obligation for CFD III. LAND USE Planned and Existing Land Uses IV. COST ALLOCATION AND FEE CALCULATION Facility Costs Cost Allocation V. IMPLEMENTATION Fee Collection, Exemptions, and adjustments Reimbursements and Fee Credits Fee Credit/Reimbursement for Construction of Facilities Financing Cost Adjustment and Periodic Fee Review Fee Administration VI. AB 1600 NEXUS FINDINGS Authority Purpose of Fee Use of Fees Relationship between Use of Fees and Type of Development... 35

4 Relationship between Need for Facility and Type of Project Relationship between Amount of Fees and Cost of or Portion of Facility Attributed to Development on Which Fee Is Imposed Appendices Appendix A: Three Rivers Levee Fee Example Calculation Appendix B: Local Share of Cost Calculations Appendix C: Total Value Index Calculations Appendix D: Land Use Calculations Appendix E: List of Potential Projects Appendix F: Large Lot Parcel Gross Developable Acreage Example Calculation

5 LIST OF MAP AND TABLES Map 1 Lands Benefited by TRLIA Program...2 Table 1 Table 2 Plumas Zone Fee per Gross Developable Acre for Planned Development...7 Linda Zone Fee per Gross Developable Acre for Planned Development...8 Table 3 Land Use Plumas Zone...10 Table 4 Land Use Linda Zone...11 Table 5 Total Levee Improvement Cost Calculation...17 Table 6 Table 7 Table 8 Land Value Index Three Rivers Levee Improvement Benefit Area...19 Building Value Index Three Rivers Levee Improvement Benefit Area...20 Total Value Index Three Rivers Levee Improvement Benefit Area...22 Table 9 Adjusted Acreage Calculation Plumas Zone...23 Table 10 Adjusted Acreage Calculation Linda Zone...24 Table 11 Average Cost Calculation Three Rivers Levee Improvement Benefit Area...25 Table 12 Cost by Land Use Plumas Lake Zone...26 Table 13 Cost by Land Use Linda Zone...27

6 I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OVERVIEW Economic & Planning Systems, Inc., (EPS) has prepared this Three Rivers Levee Fee Nexus Study (Nexus Study) on behalf of Yuba County (County). This Nexus Study provides the basis for levee improvement impact fees (Three Rivers Levee Fees) to ensure that new development pays its proportionate share of the levee improvement costs associated with the Three Rivers Levee Improvement Authority (TRLIA) levee improvement program. TRLIA is a joint powers authority made up of County and Reclamation District 784 for the sole purpose of improving the levees providing flood protection in Southern County. A series of levee improvements are needed to provide additional flood protection to the Plumas Lake Specific Plan (PLSP) area, the North Arboga Study Area (NASA), the East Linda Specific Plan (ELSP) Area, and other neighboring areas, collectively the Benefit Area. The Technical Memorandum prepared for TRLIA, with the subject Lands Benefited by TRLIA Program, dated November 3, 2005 by MBK Engineers, describes the methodology for determining the lands benefiting from levees and also provides a map showing those lands. The Benefit Area referenced in this study reflects the lands described in the MBK Memorandum. Specifically, the Benefit Area is those lands that receive flood protection benefit from the levees holding back floodwaters on the following waterways: Yuba River, Feather River, Bear River and Western Pacific Interceptor Canal. The levee improvements will directly benefit existing and future development in the Benefit Area. Two zones of benefit have been defined in the Benefit Area and are shown in Map 1. The Plumas Lake Zone is the area that benefits from all levee improvements along the Yuba, Feather and Bear Rivers and Western Pacific Interceptor Canal. It is located in the southern most portion of County and is experiencing the largest amount of growth in the Benefit Area. The Linda Zone is the area north of the County Airport and south of the Yuba River. This zone comprises the remainder of the Benefit Area. This zone benefits from improvements along the Yuba River. The Nexus Study establishes the required nexus between the projected new development in the Benefit Area and the necessary levee improvements to be funded by the development impact fees. 1 P:\13000\13579 RD 784 Levee Financing Plan\ Nexus Study Update\Report\13579 FINAL.doc

7 ONSTOTT RD FEATHER RIV BLVD CLARK AVE PLUMAS ST FORTYMILERD MARKET ST GRIFFITH AVE SWANSON RD ³ PEASE RD QUEENS AVE NORTHGATE DR LIVE OAK BLVD Marysville HST 24TH ST 18TH ST JACK SLOUGH RD JOHNSON AVE 22ND ST 17TH ST HALL ST CHEIM BLVD GLEN ST HAMMONTON SMRTVL R BRIDGE ST FRANKLIN RD GRAY AVE FORBES AVE Yuba City BST PARK AVE MAIN ST PERCY AVE SUTTER ST 2ND ST JST 5TH ST CST Yuba River YUBA ST GARDEN AVE RIVERSIDE DR SIMPSON LN RUPERT AVE LINDA AVE HAMMONTON RD NORTH BEALE RD RICHLAND RD BUNCE RD LINCOLN RD WINSHIP RD GRAND AVE JONES RD LINDHURST AVE SMITH RD PHILLIPS RD BOGUE RD Feather River ERLE RD 7TH AVE RAILROAD AVE OLIVEHURST AVE 11TH AVE POWERLINE RD BARRY RD MC GOWAN PKWY RANCHO RD ARBOGA RD Benefit Area SOUTH BEALE RD GARDEN HWY ALGODON RD PLUMAS ARBOGA RD OLD FORTY MILE RD Western Pacific Interceptor Canal WHEATLAND RD WHEATLAND RD Bear River BEAR RIVER DR RIO OSO RD Map 1 Legend PLEASANT GROVE RD Yuba Linda River Zone Feather River Both Plumas YubaLake and Feather Zone Rivers Lands Benefited by TRLIA Program 0 3,000 6,000 Scale in Feet Monday, December 12, :33:48 AM R:\Working\Koller\Tustison\depth files from Corps\Lands Benefited by TRLIA Program.mxd

8 Hearing Report April 25, 2006 ORGANIZATION OF REPORT The report is divided into five chapters including this Executive Summary. Chapter I describes the findings and Three Rivers Levee Fees. Chapter II describes the land uses in Plumas Lake and Linda Zones. Chapter III provides the cost allocations and the fee calculation. Chapter IV describes fee implementation. Chapter V provides the nexus findings for the Three Rivers Levee Fees. This report includes six appendices. Appendix A shows an example of the Three Rivers Levee Fee calculation and recalculation. Appendix B provides costs estimates for the levee improvement program and shows the calculations determining the local share of costs attributable to each zone of benefit. Appendix C shows the valuation assumptions used for cost allocation. Appendix D provides detail on the land use calculations. Appendix E provides a list of potential projects participating in this fee program. Appendix F provides an example map and example calculation of GDA for a Large Lot Parcel. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY The purpose of this study is to establish the nexus between new development occurring in the Benefit Area, as shown in Map 1, and the appropriate share of the costs for the levee infrastructure required to provide an adequate level of flood protection. After establishing the nexus, this study calculates the Three Rivers Levee Fees to be levied on new development based on the proportionate share of the benefit received from the improved levee system, by land use category. AUTHORITY This Nexus Study has been prepared to establish a development impact fee program in accordance with the guidelines as codified in California Government Section et seq. This code section sets forth the procedural requirements for establishing and collecting development impact fees. These procedures require that a reasonable relationship, or nexus, must exist between a governmental exaction and the purpose of the condition. Specifically, each local agency imposing a fee must perform each of the following steps: Identify the purpose of the fee; Identify how the fee is to be used; 3 P:\13000\13579 RD 784 Levee Financing Plan\ Nexus Study Update\Report\13579 FINAL.doc

9 Hearing Report April 25, 2006 Determine how a reasonable relationship exists between the fee s use and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed; Determine how a reasonable relationship exists between the need for the public facility and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed; and Demonstrate a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of public facility or portion of the public facility attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed. 4 P:\13000\13579 RD 784 Levee Financing Plan\ Nexus Study Update\Report\13579 FINAL.doc

10 II. THREE RIVERS LEVEE FEE PURPOSE OF THE PROGRAM TRLIA has determined that the local share of levee improvement costs to provide adequate flood protection, including costs associated with the issuance of bonds, is approximately $199.4 million (2006$). To provide the financing for these improvements and to meet the required construction schedule, TRLIA will form a Community Facilities District (CFD) that will be made up of willing participants in the summer of This CFD will be called Three Rivers Levee Improvement Authority Community Facilities District (South County Area) (CFD ). As a result of including only those willing participants, it is likely that the boundaries of CFD will not exactly match the boundaries of the Benefit Area. Numerous undeveloped properties will not initially participate in CFD (nonparticipating properties). While the County will require that all new development projects in the Benefit Area requiring a subdivision map annex to CFD as a condition of approval, it may not be possible to fulfill this condition on all development projects. The purpose of the Three Rivers Levee Fee is to ensure that all properties that are developing in the Benefit Area, whether participating in CFD or not, fund their proportionate share of the levee improvements. This Nexus Study sets the area of benefit as the area shown as the flood plain in Map 1. The area was defined by performing computerized hydrologic modeling of levee breaches for various inundation scenarios. As a result of this modeling, the hydraulic engineers have determined which specific levee improvements benefited specific areas. The resulting inundation area is divided into two portions based on the benefit of specific sets of levee improvement projects. The benefit areas are defined as the Plumas Lake Zone and the Linda Zone and are shown in Map 1. Any new development occurring outside CFD s boundary but inside either benefit zone will be subject to that zone s respective Three Rivers Levee Fee. A second purpose of the Three Rivers Levee Fee is to provide reimbursement to those providing the initial local share of funding. Participants in the CFD will be required to pay special taxes in excess of their proportionate share of levee improvements to cover the proportionate share of levee improvements costs of those not participating in the CFD. Revenue generated from this fee program will be used to reimburse that excess funding amount. A third purpose of the Three Rivers Levee Fee is to provide protection against higher than anticipated levee improvement costs. The construction proceeds provided by CFD will be based on engineers cost estimates at the time CFD is formed. 5 P:\13000\13579 RD 784 Levee Financing Plan\ Nexus Study Update\Report\13579 FINAL.doc

11 Hearing Report April 25, 2006 Since the maximum special taxes in CFD will be fixed, it will be difficult for TRLIA to fund additional levee improvement costs based on actual construction requirements if they are in excess of current estimates. The Three Rivers Levee Fee can be adjusted to account for actual construction costs. This mechanism will help provide additional assurance that the levee improvement program will be fully funded. As stated earlier, CFD will be designed to fully cover the local funding requirement for the necessary levee improvements based on current cost estimates. It is the intent of CFD to sell bonds that will be backed by the obligations of participants in the CFD. In is also the intent for TRLIA to sell other bonds backed by the impact fee obligations of non participating properties. The bonds sold that are backed by non participating properties will be serviced by revenue from the impact fee described in this study (Impact Fee Bonds). This fee program will provide a mechanism that will generate revenue to pay off the non participating properties share of levee costs. Since there is no guarantee of the amount of the development that will occur in the Benefit Area and subsequently no guarantee of the amount of development paying the fee, there is no guarantee as to the timing of fee revenue or that this fee program will be able to pay off the entire levee cost obligation of non participating properties. In turn, this means that bonds sold or other financing vehicles serviced by revenue from this impact fee program will not have predictable payment dates and may never be completely paid off. THREE RIVERS LEVEE FEES Tables 1 and 2 show a schedule by payment period of the Three Rivers Levee Fees for residential and nonresidential land uses. Tables 1 and 2 show the fees for the Plumas Lake Zone and Linda Zone respectively. The fee is charged against the gross developable acreage for a development project. The Three Rivers Levee Fee for each Gross Developable Acreage (GDA) is the allocated cost of levee improvements, plus financing costs, and includes an administrative charge of 3 percent. Although the Three Rivers Levee Fees are a companion funding mechanism to the CFD, the development projects paying the Three Rivers Levee Fees are not subject to the financing and security provisions of the CFD. As a result, development projects paying the Three Rivers Levee Fees will be paying a fee that includes a proportionate allocation of construction costs, formation and administrative costs, and financing costs. The financing costs reflect the current arrangements expected to be made by those CFD participants advancing funds through the purchase of Impact Fee Bonds. The reflected terms on these bonds include a compounding interest charge and an early call 6 P:\13000\13579 RD 784 Levee Financing Plan\ Nexus Study Update\Report\13579 FINAL.doc

12 DRAFT Table 1 Plumas Zone Fee per Gross Developable Acre (GDA) for Planned Development Plumas Zone Item Residential Single and Multifamily Nonresidential Retail/Office/ Commercial Industrial per GDA per GDA per GDA Allocated Cost per Gross Developable Acre [1] $72,655 $116,758 $59,341 Interest Rate Calculation 5-Year Treasury Rate [2] 4.79% 4.79% 4.79% Interest Rate Premium 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% Stated Annual Interest Charge on Bond [3] 8.79% 8.79% 8.79% Compounding Periods per Year [4] Call Premium Charge [5] % 3.00% 3.00% 3.00% % 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% % 1.00% 1.00% 1.00% 2009 & Beyond - 0% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Administration Fee [6] 3.00% 3.00% 3.00% Example Fee Amount Jul-2006 $77,079 $123,869 $62,955 Jan-2007 $79,686 $128,058 $65,083 Jul-2007 $83,188 $133,686 $67,944 Jan-2008 $85,993 $138,193 $70,235 Jul-2008 $89,772 $144,267 $73,321 Jan-2009 $92,790 $149,116 $75,786 Jul-2009 $96,868 $155,670 $79,117 Jan-2010 $101,125 $162,511 $82,594 Jul-2010 $105,570 $169,654 $86,224 Jan-2011 $110,209 $177,110 $90,014 Jul-2011 $115,053 $184,894 $93,970 Jan-2012 $120,110 $193,020 $98,100 Jul-2012 $125,388 $201,503 $102,411 Jan-2013 $130,899 $210,359 $106,912 Jul-2013 $136,652 $219,605 $111,611 Jan-2014 $142,658 $229,256 $116,516 Jul-2014 $148,928 $239,332 $121,637 Jan-2015 $155,473 $249,851 $126,983 Jul-2015 $162,306 $260,832 $132,564 Jan-2016 $169,440 $272,295 $138,390 Source: EPS "fee_summ_p" [1] See Table 12. Includes bond issuance costs. [2] Reflects 5-Year Constant Maturity UST Rate for Mar 29, This rate will change over time and be updated every 6 months. See Appendix A. [3] Fee includes an 8.79% compounding Interest cost to offset financing charges. [4] Interest is compounded semi-annually in Jan and July to mirror the coupon payments of the bonds sold backed by the revenue generated by the fee. The impact fee is updated 3 months before the coupon date to account for the processing of levee fees and paydown of bonds. [5] Fee includes a 3%/2%/1% declining early payoff penalty associated with the financing of the levee improvements. [6] Fee includes an administrative fee associated with costs of maintaining fee program. Prepared by EPS Rivers Levee Impact Fee R2.xls

13 DRAFT Table 2 Linda Zone Fee per Gross Developable Acre (GDA) for Planned Development Linda Zone Item Residential Single & Multifamily Nonresidential Retail/Office/ Commercial Industrial per GDA per GDA per GDA Allocated Cost per Gross Developable Acre [1] $10,029 $16,117 $8,191 Interest Rate Calculation 5-Year Treasury Rate [2] 4.79% 4.79% 4.79% Interest Rate Premium 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% Stated Annual Interest Charge on Bond [3] 8.79% 8.79% 8.79% Compounding Periods per Year [4] Call Premium Charge [5] % 3.00% 3.00% 3.00% % 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% % 1.00% 1.00% 1.00% 2009 & Beyond - 0% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Administration Fee [6] 3.00% 3.00% 3.00% Example Fee Amount Jul-2006 $10,640 $17,098 $8,690 Jan-2007 $11,107 $17,850 $9,072 Jul-2007 $11,483 $18,453 $9,379 Jan-2008 $11,988 $19,265 $9,791 Jul-2008 $12,392 $19,914 $10,121 Jan-2009 $12,936 $20,789 $10,566 Jul-2009 $13,371 $21,488 $10,921 Jan-2010 $13,959 $22,432 $11,401 Jul-2010 $14,572 $23,418 $11,902 Jan-2011 $15,213 $24,448 $12,425 Jul-2011 $15,882 $25,522 $12,971 Jan-2012 $16,580 $26,644 $13,541 Jul-2012 $17,308 $27,815 $14,136 Jan-2013 $18,069 $29,037 $14,758 Jul-2013 $18,863 $30,313 $15,406 Jan-2014 $19,692 $31,646 $16,083 Jul-2014 $20,557 $33,037 $16,790 Jan-2015 $21,461 $34,488 $17,528 Jul-2015 $22,404 $36,004 $18,299 Jan-2016 $23,389 $37,587 $19,103 Source: EPS "fee_summ_l" [1] See Table 12. Includes bond issuance costs. [2] Reflects 5-Year Constant Maturity UST Rate for Mar 29, This rate will change over time and be updated every 6 months. See Appendix A. [3] Fee includes an 8.79% compounding Interest cost to offset financing charges. [4] Interest is compounded semi-annually in Jan and July to mirror the coupon payments of the bonds sold backed by the revenue generated by the fee. The impact fee is updated 3 months before the coupon date to account for the processing of levee fees and paydown of bonds. [5] Fee includes a 3%/2%/1% declining early payoff penalty associated with the financing of the levee improvements. [6] Fee includes an administrative fee associated with costs of maintaining fee program. Prepared by EPS Rivers Levee Impact Fee R2.xls

14 Hearing Report April 25, 2006 premium. The early call premium will be a sliding scale premium of 3 percent/ 2 percent/1 percent declining each fiscal year after the adoption of the fee. The premium will be charged on top of the financing charges. The interest charges will compound semi annually to match the expected call dates on the bonds sold. The amount of the interest charge is a function of the expected interest rate on the Bonds. The rate for a particular bond will be a fixed rate determined at the time of bond issuance and is expected to be 400 basis points above the Constant Maturity 5 Year US Treasury Note. There will be multiple bond issues based on the timing of cash flow needs for the levee improvement program. Therefore, there will be different interest rates on outstanding Impact Fee Bonds. It is expected that the Three Rivers Levee Fees will be updated semiannually to reflect the varying interest rates of the Constant Maturity 5 Year US Treasury Note. Appendix A, Table A 1 provides an example of the fee calculation to reflect the compounding interest charges, the varying interest rates on outstanding bonds and the applicable early call premium charges. IMPLEMENTATION Fees are calculated on a GDA basis. For residential development, GDA excludes major dedicated public land uses such as major arterials, major collectors, drainage, utilities corridors, parks, and schools. GDA is the acreage of large lot parcels for residential development that includes all interior roads and minor public facilities but excludes all public areas outside of the large lot parcels. GDA is essentially the area shown on the Tentative Map for the Large Lot Parcel. Appendix F provides a graphic of the GDA and provides an example calculation of the GDA. Acres listed as planned residential in the land use Tables 3 and 4 include only GDA. For purposes of fee calculation and estimation, the acreage shown on the Tentative Map for developable acreage excludes major roads and other public uses but include internal roads. It shall be a requirement of the small lot final map to provide a calculation of GDA for purposes of fee calculation. For nonresidential land uses, which includes Retail/Office/Commercial and Industrial land uses, the developable acreages used to determine the acreages in Tables 3 and 4 utilize assumptions for floor area ratios. Therefore, the acres listed as planned nonresidential include only developable acres; hence the fees are calculated on a comparable GDA basis. 9 P:\13000\13579 RD 784 Levee Financing Plan\ Nexus Study Update\Report\13579 FINAL.doc

15 DRAFT Table 3 Land Use - Plumas Zone Land Use Acreage Planned Development Residential [1] 2,364.0 Retail/Office/Commercial [2] 61.9 Industrial 0.0 Public Use Acres [3] Subtotal Planned Development 3,098.4 Existing Development Developed Residential Rural SF 16.6 Urban SF 58.3 Two or More per Lot 1.0 Mobile Home 0.0 Residential Assigned to Ag/Open Space 1,183.2 Developed Industrial Developed Retail/Commercial 43.9 Vacant Land Uses Vacant Residential Vacant Industrial Vacant Retail/Commercial 0.0 Public Use/Other [3] 2,697.8 Agriculture Land/Open Space 8,047.4 Subtotal Existing Development 13,129.3 Total Acres 16,227.7 [1] Includes multifamily residential. [2] Retail/Office/Commercial and Industrial acreage is derived from the Plumas Lake Specific Plan. Some acres in the Specific Plan have been developed and are counted in Existing Development. [3] Includes public land uses such as drainage, major roads, etc. "landuse_p" Source: Yuba County Assessor's Office, July 2005 CD-DATA Assessor's Parcel Tax Roll Prepared by EPS Rivers Levee Impact Fee R2.xls

16 DRAFT Table 4 Land Use - Linda Zone Land Use Acreage Planned Development Residential [1] Retail/Office/Commercial [2] 2.5 Industrial 0.0 Public Use Acres [3] 98.4 Subtotal Planned Development Existing Development Developed Residential Rural SF 51.9 Urban SF Two or More per Lot 13.8 Mobile Home 1.3 Residential Assigned to Ag/Open Space 2,224.7 Developed Industrial 94.3 Developed Retail/Commercial Vacant Land Uses Vacant Residential Vacant Industrial Vacant Retail/Commercial 0.0 Public Use/Other [3] 1,220.0 Agriculture Land/Open Space 13,029.9 Subtotal Existing Development 18,113.8 Total Acres 18,628.5 [1] Includes multifamily residential. [2] Retail/Office/Commercial and Industrial acreage is derived from the the East Linda Specific Plan for the Edgewater Project. [3] Includes public land uses such as drainage, major roads, etc. "landuse_l" Source: Yuba County Assessor's Office, July 2005 CD-DATA Assessor's Parcel Tax Roll Prepared by EPS Rivers Levee Impact Fee R2.xls

17 Hearing Report April 25, 2006 CHANGES IN THE FEE The development impact fee presented in this Nexus Study is based on the best available cost estimates, estimates of public funding, cost of financing and land use information at this time. If costs change significantly in either direction, or if other funding to construct the facilities becomes available, the fees should be adjusted accordingly. Similarly, should the cost of financing change the increasing or decreasing the costs of the program, the fees should be adjusted accordingly. TRLIA will annually conduct a review of the fee program and determine if adjustments are necessary. Should changes in the fee program be deemed necessary, TRLIA will revise the nexus study and fees. LEVEE FUNDING OBLIGATION FOR CFD CFD PARTICPANTS Participants in CFD will be required to pay their proportionate share obligation of the levee improvements plus an additional amount to cover the cash required to finish the levee improvements through a collection of special taxes. The additional amount represents the obligations for levee improvements of the non participants in CFD Participants will be required to pay these obligations on a GDA basis for the acreage accounted for in an approved final map before the map s recordation. Participants in the CFD will have the opportunity to pass all or a portion of the levee obligation represented by CFD bonds on to the final land user (including homeowners) through the use of traditional Mello Roos special tax bonds. It should be noted that participants in CFD will only be able to pass on to the ultimate land user that portion of CFD special taxes that represents their proportionate share of their levee obligation. Since CFD participants are paying their levee obligation through special taxes, they will not be required to pay any Three Rivers Levee Fees. CFD NON PARTICPANTS Table E 1 in Appendix E provides a list of known land areas in the benefit area that may potentially not participate in CFD These areas have at least tentative maps that have been submitted yet may not be approved and may not have a condition of final approval that requires them to participate in a levee funding CFD. The land areas have the following options for meeting their levee funding obligation: They can participate in the CFD at formation and have the option of passing some or all of the burden for levee improvements funded with CFD bond proceeds on to the ultimate land user; 12 P:\13000\13579 RD 784 Levee Financing Plan\ Nexus Study Update\Report\13579 FINAL.doc

18 Hearing Report April 25, 2006 They can wait to join the CFD through annexation, and pay their avoided taxes, any applicable penalties, plus interest to the participants in CFD that paid an additional amount to cover for the non participants levee obligation at the time the cash was needed. In effect, this will reimburse CFD current participants. Those that annex into the CFD will have the opportunity to pass some or all of their levee obligation funded with CFD bond proceeds on to the ultimate land user; or Land areas that do not join the CFD are subject to the applicable Three Rivers Levee Impact Fee. NEW DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS The County will require that all new projects currently without an approved Tentative Map in the Benefit Area be required to participate in CFD to satisfy their levee improvement funding obligation. The County will enforce this requirement through the use of tentative map approval conditions. As a result of this requirement to participate, these new development projects will be required to pay a fair of their levee obligations as determined by TRLIA plus an additional amount to cover the levee funding obligations of those not participating in CFD These participants will have the opportunity to pass their share of the levee improvement funding obligation funded with CFD bond proceeds onto the ultimate landowner. LEVEE FEE OBLIGATION The CFD Special Tax obligations will be either passed on to the landowners, in whole or in part, or paid in cash at the time of Final Map recordation. Once a CFD participant has recorded their final map and satisfied their levee obligation, they are not obligated to pay any future levee improvement costs associated with this set of levee improvements. Similarly, the Three Rivers Levee Fee will be paid before the recordation of a small lot subdivision final map or before the issuance of a building permit for new construction. Once the Three Rivers Levee Fee has been paid, those paying are not obligated to pay any future levee improvement cost increases associated with this levee capital improvement program. It is anticipated, however, that there will be a levee maintenance program and those that may be subject to this fee may also be required to participate in this program. 13 P:\13000\13579 RD 784 Levee Financing Plan\ Nexus Study Update\Report\13579 FINAL.doc

19 III. LAND USE The Benefit Area of the TRLIA s program is approximately 35,000 acres of land in the County. The boundary for the Plumas Lake Zone includes the area benefiting from Yuba River, Feather River, Bear River and Western Pacific Interceptor Canal levee improvements and the boundary for the Linda Zone includes the area benefiting from only those improvements along the Yuba River. PLANNED AND EXISTING LAND USES For purposes of this cost allocation, the following land use categories are used: Planned Development Residential Retail/Office/Commercial Industrial Public Use Acres Existing Development Developed Residential Rural SF Urban SF Two or more for each lot Mobile Home Taxable Residential Land Assigned to Ag/Open Space Developed Industrial Developed Retail Vacant Residential Vacant Industrial Vacant Retail Agriculture Public Use/Other 14 P:\13000\13579 RD 784 Levee Financing Plan\ Nexus Study Update\Report\13579 FINAL.doc

20 Hearing Report April 25, 2006 All land use categories are allocated a cost that represents a share of benefit from the improvements to the levee system. Only future residential, industrial, and retail development will be assessed Three Rivers Levee Fees. Table 3 outlines the current and planned development that is located in the Plumas Lake Zone. Table 4 outlines the current and planned development in the Linda Zone. Developable acres in the Benefit Area include future development of residential and nonresidential land uses. 15 P:\13000\13579 RD 784 Levee Financing Plan\ Nexus Study Update\Report\13579 FINAL.doc

21 IV. COST ALLOCATION AND FEE CALCULATION This chapter describes the cost allocation methodology and provides the calculation of the Three Rivers Levee Fees. The methodology for calculating the fees is summarized below. 1. Determine acreage for the area of benefit in each zone, 2. Determine the acreage of existing current land uses in each zone, 3. Determine the cost of necessary levee improvements allocable to each zone, 4. Adjust acreage in each zone of benefit by the Total Value Index for allocation purposes, 5. Allocate the cost of levee improvements on a per acre basis to the area of benefit in each zone, and 6. Adjust the allocated cost by the financing charges on an annual basis and determine the fee for land uses for the levee improvements in each zone. FACILITY COSTS The local share of the necessary levee improvements that benefit the Plumas Lake Zone and the Linda Zone are shown in Table 5. MBK Engineering and TRLIA provided levee improvement cost estimates in April of Appendix B provides the detailed breakdown of how the levee improvement costs are allocated to each zone. The total local share of levee improvement costs shown in Table 5 is estimated to be approximately $199.4 million. This estimate includes Impact Fee Bond issuance costs of $3.9 million, and represents the expected costs for the issue of the Impact Fee Bonds. These bond issuance costs do not include capitalized interest, reserve funds or ongoing interest costs. Interest expense costs will accrue and compound annually as the Impact Fee Bonds funding the CFD non participant share remain outstanding. COST ALLOCATION The purpose of allocating improvement costs among the various land uses is to provide an equitable method of funding required infrastructure. The key to the apportionment of the cost of public improvements to different land uses is the assumption that the benefits derived from public facilities and services are related to land use type and that such benefits can be stated in relative terms for all non public land uses. Only by 16 P:\13000\13579 RD 784 Levee Financing Plan\ Nexus Study Update\Report\13579 FINAL.doc

22 DRAFT Table 5 Total Levee Improvement Cost Calculation Item Source Cost (2006$) Plumas Lake Zone Costs Local Share of Costs Table B-5 $188,946,302 Bond Issuance Costs [1] $3,778,926 Plumas Zone Improvement and Financing Costs on Bonds $192,725,228 Linda Zone Costs Local Share of Costs Table B-5 $6,531,952 Bond Issuance Costs [1] $130,639 Total Improvement and Financing Costs on Bonds $6,662,591 Total Cost $199,387,819 Source: Technical Memorandum by EPS February 24, "cost" [1] Estimated by EPS and Assumed to be 2% of Levee Costs. Prepared by EPS Rivers Levee Impact Fee R2.xls

23 Hearing Report April 25, 2006 relating the benefit received from facilities and services to land use types can a reasonable nexus, or relationship, be established for the apportionment of costs to that land use. TOTAL VALUE INDEX The levee improvement cost allocations to the land use categories are based on the total value of each land use. This methodology is based on a similar analysis performed for Assessment District No. 2 in Sacramento and Sutter Counties for the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency (SAFCA). SAFCA is the local agency levying capital assessments for flood control purposes on a land use basis in those areas. Each category is defined by a value index providing a value relationship of land use categories as compared to the value of a new single family home. Thus, a ratio is established between existing development and development that is slated to occur in the Benefit Area. All values are on a per acre basis and are provided by assessor s parcel records obtained from the County Assessor s Office. Two property related categories of benefit are examined: land values and building improvement values. LAND VALUE Table 6 shows the Land Value Index for all land uses in the Benefit Area. The Land Value Index reflects land valuation, comparing all land use categories to new residential development. These values represent assessed values for parcels of land and do not represent current market values. The values are based on land value alone, exclusive of building improvements. Appendix C shows how land valuation calculations were derived for all land use categories. BUILDING IMPROVEMENT VALUE Table 7 shows the Building Improvement Index for all land uses. The Building Improvement Index reflects building improvement valuation, comparing all land use categories to new residential development. These values represent assessed values for the building structures and improvements and do not represent current market values. Appendix C shows how building valuation calculations were derived for all land use categories. 18 P:\13000\13579 RD 784 Levee Financing Plan\ Nexus Study Update\Report\13579 FINAL.doc

24 DRAFT Table 6 Land Value Index - Three Rivers Levee Improvement Benefit Area Land Use Land Value per Gross Developable Acre Land Use Index [1] Planned Residential Development [2] $376, Developed Residential Rural SF $14, Urban SF $135, Two or more per lot $19, Mobile Home $14, Developed Industrial $8, Developed Retail/Commercial $33, Vacant Residential $98, Vacant Industrial $17, Vacant Retail/Commercial $ Public Use/Other [3] $30, Agriculture Land/Open Space $1, Source: Yuba County Assessor's Office, July 2005 CD-DATA Assessor's Parcel Tax Roll, Seevers, Jordan, Ziegenmeyer. [1] The Land Use Index is derived by dividing the total value of each land use category by the land value of the New Residential category. [2] Uses an average Finished Lot Valuation based on comparable sales of $94,000 and assumes 4 units per acre. [3] "Other" category includes public land uses such as drainage, well sites, etc. "land_val" Prepared by EPS Rivers Levee Impact Fee R2.xls 4/25/2006

25 DRAFT Table 7 Building Value Index - Three Rivers Levee Improvement Benefit Area Land Use Building Improvement Value per Acre [1] Building Improvement Index [2] Planned Residential Development [3] $1,224, Developed Residential Rural SF $49, Urban SF $459, Two or more per lot $52, Mobile Home $16, Developed Industrial $40, Developed Retail/Commercial $83, Vacant Residential $1, Vacant Industrial $37, Vacant Retail/Commercial $ Public Use/Other [4] $14, Agriculture Land/Open Space $ Source: Yuba County Assessor's Office, July 2005 CD-DATA Assessor's Parcel Tax Roll, The Gregory Group "bldg_value" [1] Excludes Land Value. [2] The Building Improvement Index is derived by dividing the total value of each land use category by the land value of the New SF Residential category. [3] Assumes an average selling price of $400,000 per home less the value of land and 4 units per acre. [4] "Other" category includes public land uses such as drainage, well sites, etc. Prepared by EPS Rivers Levee Impact Fee R2.xls 4/25/2006

26 Hearing Report April 25, 2006 TOTAL VALUE Table 8 shows the value of land for each acre and value of building improvements for each acre. Values are shown as a percentage of the total valuation for the land category. As a general rule, one quarter of total value usually is derived from the land and the remainder is derived from the building. Total Value calculations for the Benefit Area are consistent with this guideline. The Total Value Index represents the total benefit each land use receives as compared to new residential development. The Total Value Index will be used to set the adjustment factor for the Three Rivers Levee Fees. As appraisals are not available for future Retail/Office/Commercial or Industrial land uses for the Benefit Area, valuation estimates from comparable projects in South Sutter County are used as a proxy to estimate the Total Value Index for these land uses. Tables 9 and 10 show the adjusted acres for all land uses in the Plumas Lake Zone and Linda Zone respectively. This table multiplies the existing acres by the Total Value Index to calculate adjusted acres. The adjusted acres then are used to allocate costs. COST FOR EACH ACRE The total average cost for each residential acre is shown in Table 11. The total cost for the levee improvements plus bond issuance costs is expected to be $199.4 million; $192.7 million for the Plumas Lake Zone and $6.7 million for the Linda Zone. This amount then is divided by the adjusted acres in each zone that are subject to the fee. Thus, the total average cost allocated for each residential acre will be $72,655 for the Plumas Zone and $10,029 for the Linda Zone. The total average cost for each acre for each zone is then adjusted by the Total Value Index for each land use to get the adjusted cost by land use. The adjusted cost by land use for each zone is shown in Tables 12 and 13 for the Plumas Lake and Linda zones respectively. 21 P:\13000\13579 RD 784 Levee Financing Plan\ Nexus Study Update\Report\13579 FINAL.doc

27 DRAFT Table 8 Total Value Index - Three Rivers Levee Improvement Benefit Area Land Use Land Value per Acre Percent Contribution to Total Value Value of Building Improvements per GDA Percent Contribution to Total Value Value of Other Improvements per GDA Percent Contribution to Total Value Total Value Total Value Index [1] 22 Reference: Table 6 Table 7 Planned Development Residential $376, % $1,224, % $0 0.0% $1,600, Retail/Office/Commercial [2] $2,571, Industrial [3] $1,306, Existing Development Developed Residential Rural SF $14, % $49, % $ % $64, Urban SF $135, % $459, % $35 0.0% $595, Two or more per lot $19, % $52, % $1, % $73, Mobile Home $14, % $16, % $4, % $35, Developed Industrial $8, % $40, % $1, % $49, Developed Retail/Commercial $33, % $83, % $51 0.0% $117, Vacant Residential $98, % $1, % $0 0.0% $99, Vacant Industrial $17, % $37, % $0 0.0% $55, Vacant Retail/Commercial $0 0.0% $0 0.0% $0 0.0% $ Public Use/Other [4] $30, % $14, % $0 0.0% $45, Agriculture Land/Open Space $1, % $ % $ % $3, Source: Yuba County Assessor's Office, July 2005 CD-DATA Assessor's Parcel Tax Roll "total_value" [1] Value Ratio is derived by dividing the total value of each land use category by the land value of the New Residential category. [2] New Retail/Office/Commercial valuation estimates are based on development in South Sutter County. [3] New Industrial valuation estimates are based on industrial development in South Sutter County and assume a.4 FAR. [4] "Other" category includes public land uses such as drainage, well sites, etc. Prepared by EPS Rivers Levee Impact Fee R2.xls 4/25/2006

28 DRAFT Table 9 Adjusted Acreage Calculation - Plumas Zone Land Use Acreage [1] Total Value Index [2] Adjusted Acreage Planned Development Residential 2, ,364.0 Retail/Office/Commercial Industrial Public Use Acres [3] Existing Development Developed Residential Rural SF Urban SF Two or More per Lot Mobile Home Residential Assigned to Ag/Open Space 1, Developed Industrial Developed Retail/Commercial Vacant Land Uses Vacant Residential Vacant Industrial Vacant Retail/Commercial Public Use/Other [3] 2, Agriculture Land/Open Space 8, Total 16, ,652.6 Source: Yuba County Assessor's Office, July 2005 CD-DATA Assessor's Parcel Tax Roll "fee_landuse_p" [1] See Table 3. [2] See Table 8. [3] Includes public land uses such as drainage, major roads, well sites, etc. Prepared by EPS Rivers Levee Impact Fee R2.xls

29 Table 10 Adjusted Acreage Calculation - Linda Zone DRAFT Land Use Acreage [1] Total Value Index [2] Adjusted Acreage Planned Development Residential Retail/Office/Commercial Industrial Public Use Acres [3] Existing Development Developed Residential Rural SF Urban SF Two or More per Lot Mobile Home Residential Assigned to Ag/Open Space 2, Developed Industrial Developed Retail/Commercial Vacant Land Uses Vacant Residential Vacant Industrial Vacant Retail/Commercial Public Use/Other [3] 1, Agriculture Land/Open Space 13, Total 18, Source: Yuba County Assessor's Office, July 2005 CD-DATA Assessor's Parcel Tax Roll "fee_landuse_l" [1] See Table 4. [2] See Table 8. [3] Includes public land uses such as drainage, major roads, well sites, etc. Prepared by EPS Rivers Levee Impact Fee R2.xls

30 DRAFT Table 11 Average Cost Calculation - Three Rivers Levee Improvement Benefit Area Levee Cost Item Source Calculation Plumas Zone Adjusted Acreage Subject to the Fee Table 9 2,652.6 Total Cost for Plumas Zone Levee Improvements Table 5 $192,725,228 Total Plumas Zone Average Cost per Adjusted Acre $72,655 Linda Zone Adjusted Acreage Subject to the Fee Table Total Cost for Linda Zone Levee Improvements Table 5 $6,662,591 Total Linda Zone Average Cost per Adjusted Acre $10,029 Source: EPS "fee" Prepared by EPS Rivers Levee Impact Fee R2.xls

31 DRAFT Table 12 Cost by Land Use - Plumas Lake Zone Item Cost per Adjusted Acre Total Value Index [1] Allocated Cost per Acre Plumas Lake Levee Fee per Acre [2] Average Cost per Adjusted Acre $72,655 Planned Development Residential $72,655 See Table 1 Nonresidential Retail/Office/Commercial [3] $116,758 See Table 1 Industrial [4] $59,341 See Table 1 Public Acres $2,043 NA Existing Development Developed Residential Rural SF $2,932 NA Urban SF $27,020 NA Two or More per Lot $3,319 NA Mobile Home $1,598 NA Residential Assigned to Ag/Open Space $0 NA Developed Industrial $2,235 NA Developed Retail/Commercial $5,315 NA Vacant Land Uses Vacant Land Residential $4,536 NA Vacant Land Industrial $2,502 NA Vacant Land Retail $0 NA Public Use/Other $2,043 NA Agriculture Land/Open Space Use $157 NA Source: EPS "fee_sched_p" [1] See Table 8 [2] The Fee is not applicable to Public Acres or Existing Development. [3] New Retail/Office/Commercial valuation estimates are based on development in Sutter County. [4] New Industrial valuation estimates are based on industrial development in Sutter County and assume a.40 FAR. Prepared by EPS Rivers Levee Impact Fee R2.xls

32 DRAFT Table 13 Cost by Land Use - Linda Zone Item Cost per Adjusted Acre Total Value Index [1] Allocated Cost per Acre Plumas Lake Levee Fee per per Acre [2] Average Cost per Adjusted Acre $10,029 Planned Development Residential $10,029 See Table 2 Nonresidential Retail/Office/Commercial [3] $16,117 See Table 2 Industrial [4] $8,191 See Table 2 Public Acres $282 NA Existing Development Developed Residential Rural SF $405 NA Urban SF $3,730 NA Two or More per Lot $458 NA Mobile Home $221 NA Residential Assigned to Ag/Open Space $0 NA Developed Industrial $308 NA Developed Retail/Commercial $734 NA Vacant Land Uses Vacant Land Residential $626 NA Vacant Land Industrial $345 NA Vacant Land Retail $0 NA Public Use/Other $282 NA Agriculture Land/Open Space Use $22 NA Source: EPS "fee_sched_l" [1] See Table 8 [2] The Fee is not applicable to Public Acres or Existing Development. [3] New Retail/Office/Commercial valuation estimates are based on development in Sutter County. [4] New Industrial valuation estimates are based on industrial development in Sutter County and assume a.40 FAR. Prepared by EPS Rivers Levee Impact Fee R2.xls

33 V. IMPLEMENTATION The Three Rivers Levee Fees presented in this Nexus Study are based on the best development cost estimates, administrative cost estimates, and land use information available at this time. This fee program also has a financing component that is subject to a varying interest rate. Therefore, the fee program is expected to be updated as new Impact Fee Bonds are issued and the impact of the varying interest rate is known. In addition to interest rate adjustments, the Three Rivers Levee Fees should be updated to reflect any significant changes to costs, type or amount of project development, if other funding becomes available, or any revisions to the underlying assumptions in the program change. After the fees presented in this report are established, the County should conduct annual reviews of levee improvement costs and other assumptions used as the basis of this Nexus Study. Based on these reviews, the County may make adjustments to the Three Rivers Levee Fees. The cost estimates presented in this report are in 2006 dollars. Since the costs are financed up front by the participants of the CFD, the County should not need to adjust the costs and fees for inflation. The cost of the financing will be added and capitalized as outlined in this chapter. FEE COLLECTION, EXEMPTIONS, AND ADJUSTMENTS All new residential development occurring in the Benefit Area shall pay their respective Three Rivers Levee Fee before recording a small lot residential final map or receipt of a building permit, except as they may annex to CFD or, as specifically exempted herein. All new nonresidential development will pay the Three Rivers Levee Fee before receipt of a building permit or special use permit, which ever comes first. As stated previously, it shall be a requirement of the small lot final map to provide a calculation of GDA for purposes of fee calculation. Appendix F provides an example calculation and further explanation of the acreage to be included when determining GDA. For purposes of fee collection at building permit, the acreage noted on the parcel map will be used for determination of the fee. Any development that also was subject to CFD special tax and has paid all applicable taxes would be exempt from the Three Rivers Levee Fees. Three Rivers Levee Fees will be collected to make sure that all development pays their proportionate share of levee improvement costs. Fee revenue may be used for any of the following purposes, not listed in any particular order or priority: 28 P:\13000\13579 RD 784 Levee Financing Plan\ Nexus Study Update\Report\13579 FINAL.doc

34 Hearing Report April 25, 2006 Construction of levee and environmental improvements, Land condemnation, Reimburse public funding or other sources loaning money to TRLIA or the County for levee improvements, Reimburse other property owners for levee improvement funding advanced in excess of their own property s obligation, Pay down Impact Fee Bonds purchased by builders that were used to finance the non participants share of levee improvement costs, Pay down CFD Mello Roos bonds to accelerate the retirement of debt, Be reserved for future construction or financing needs, Cover unanticipated construction costs related to the levee system on a pay asyou go basis, Cover costs required to attain a 200 year level of flood protection, or Reimburse developers in CFD who have paid the Special Taxes. EXEMPTIONS FROM THE FEES The following land uses are exempt from the fee: Existing residential, industrial, retail development Vacant residential, industrial, or retail land until developed Agriculture land Other land Agriculture land slated to become new development will no longer be exempt once a Final Map is issued. Other land includes public use land uses such as drainage canals, detention ponds, open space, well sites, and railroad right of way. With written approval from the County, any or all portions of the proposed fees may be waived if it can be determined that a proposed project will not derive permanent benefit for which the fees are collected. Written fee waivers may be available on a case by case basis for certain temporary structures such as a mobile home used for construction management purposes. 29 P:\13000\13579 RD 784 Levee Financing Plan\ Nexus Study Update\Report\13579 FINAL.doc

35 Hearing Report April 25, 2006 ADJUSTMENTS AND REDUCTIONS TO THE FEES The County may reduce the Three Rivers Levee Fees for applicable properties under certain circumstances, such as economic development, economic hardship and other community benefit purposes. Any reduction in the fees will be based on the County s independent analysis and review of the particular property. REQUIRED SHORTFALL PROVISION Adjustments or reduction in the fees would result in a shortfall in revenue needed to reimburse the holders of the Impact Fee Bonds. In the event the County determines that a reduction or adjustment in the fee is warranted, the County will seek alternative sources of funding to pay for the loss in revenue because of the adjustment/reduction in the fee. At the time the alternative source becomes available, the County will seek to make the appropriate payment for the Impact Fee Bonds based on the current fee amount. This will attempt to allow for the appropriate adjustment to compensate for accruing and compounding interest charges. REIMBURSEMENTS AND FEE CREDITS As is typical with development impact fee programs, many of the public infrastructure facilities are needed before adequate revenues from the fee collection would be available to fund such improvements. Consequently, some type of private funding is necessary to pay for the public improvements when they are needed. This private financing may be in the form of land secured bonds, bonds secured by a pledge of future fees, developer equity, direct construction of the facility, or other form of private financing. When this circumstance occurs, development impact fee programs need a mechanism to address situations in which developers advance fund or construct public facilities normally funded by the fee program. To address this issue, the Nexus Study enables fee credits and reimbursements to return funds originally provided in the form of advance levee improvement funds. Developers would first obtain fee credits, up to their fair share requirement for a levee section, and then await reimbursement from fee revenue collections from other fee payers. To obtain reimbursements, developers must enter into a reimbursement agreement with the County or purchase fee backed bonds from TRLIA. Before a Final Map is recorded, developers will have to submit a written request documenting levee improvements and 30 P:\13000\13579 RD 784 Levee Financing Plan\ Nexus Study Update\Report\13579 FINAL.doc

36 Hearing Report April 25, 2006 specifying the level of fee credits. When funds are available in each fee component, reimbursements or payments of fee backed bonds will be paid monthly, quarterly, semiannually, or as otherwise determined by the County. As noted, reimbursement will be paid only after the County accepts the public facility improvements. It is important to note that reimbursements are payable solely from the Three Rivers Levee Fees and are not an obligation of any other funding source (e.g., General Fund). There will be no credit given for the administration portion of the total fee charged for each acre. FEE CREDIT/REIMBURSEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF FACILITIES Although no plans currently exist for developers to construct any portion of the levee system, should the event arise in which a developer/builder is asked to do so, the following procedures will be followed. Fee credit/reimbursements for constructing levee improvements will be provided under this condition: The value of any developerinstalled improvements for reimbursement/fee credit purposes shall not exceed the total cost estimate (as adjusted for inflation) used to establish the amount of the fee or actual costs if the fees are updated to include actual costs. When all criteria are met, fee credits may be taken against fees on the approval of improvement plans. To obtain fee credits, the public facility projects must meet all criteria, and developers must apply to the County before issuance of the Final Map associated with the subdivision map. The County maintains the flexibility to allocate fee credits in a manner it chooses. Fee credits granted shall be on an acreage basis. FINANCING COST ADJUSTMENT AND PERIODIC FEE REVIEW The proposed Three Rivers Levee Fees will be adjusted semi annually by the County to account for the financing of construction and acquisition costs. It is expected to be updated semi annually in January and July of each calendar year or periodically about 90 days before the time the calls associated with Impact Fee Bonds are capitalized. The fees also will be subject to periodic updates based on changes in developable land, levee cost estimates, or outside funding sources. The County will review the costs and fees annually to determine if any updates to the fees are warranted. During the annual reviews, the following aspects will be analyzed: Changes to the required facilities listed in the Nexus Study; Changes in the cost to update or administer the fees; 31 P:\13000\13579 RD 784 Levee Financing Plan\ Nexus Study Update\Report\13579 FINAL.doc

37 Hearing Report April 25, 2006 Changes in annual financing costs; Changes in assumed land uses; and Changes in other funding sources. Any changes to the Three Rivers Levee Fees based on the periodic update will be presented to the County Board of Supervisors for approval before an increase of the fees. FEE ADMINISTRATION FEE COLLECTION For Residential Single Family Development, the Three Rivers Levee Fees will be collected before recordation of the small lot final map or building permit. Nonresidential property and multifamily fees will be paid at building permit or special use permit, which ever comes first. The amount of GDA assigned to each developable parcel should be calculated and assigned to parcels based on the GDA identified on the approved tentative map. The applicable fee is based on the location and type of the property paying the fee. The location of the property determines the appropriate zone of benefit based on Map 1. In the event the location of property cannot be determined using Map 1, TRLIA will use its best efforts and all available information to determine the appropriate zone of benefit for the property paying the fee. According to Government Code Section 66006, the County is required to deposit, invest, account for, and expend the fees in the prescribed manner. FIVE YEAR REVIEW The fifth fiscal year following the first deposit into the fee account or fund, and annually thereafter, the County is required to make all the following findings about that portion of the account or fund remaining unexpended: Identify the purpose for which the fee is to be used; Demonstrate a reasonable relationship between the fee and the purpose for which it is charged; 32 P:\13000\13579 RD 784 Levee Financing Plan\ Nexus Study Update\Report\13579 FINAL.doc

38 Hearing Report April 25, 2006 Identify all sources and amounts of funding anticipated to complete financing in incomplete plan area improvements; and Designate the approximate dates that the funding referred to in the above paragraph is expected to be deposited in the appropriate account or fund. The County must refund the unexpended or uncommitted revenue portion for which a need could not be demonstrated in the above findings unless the administrative costs exceed the amount of the refund. 33 P:\13000\13579 RD 784 Levee Financing Plan\ Nexus Study Update\Report\13579 FINAL.doc

39 VI. AB 1600 NEXUS FINDINGS AUTHORITY This Nexus Study has been prepared to establish Three Rivers Levee Fees for the Benefit Area, in accordance with the procedural guidelines established in AB 1600 codified in California Government Section et seq. These code sections set forth the procedural requirements for establishing and collecting various development impact fees. These procedures require that a reasonable relationship or nexus must exist between a governmental exaction and the purpose of the condition. 1 Specifically, each local agency imposing a fee must perform the following steps: Identify the purpose of the fee; Identify how the fee is to be used; Determine how a reasonable relationship exists between the fee s use and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed; Determine how a reasonable relationship exists between the need for the public facility and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed; and Demonstrate a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of public facility or portion of the public facility attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed. PURPOSE OF FEE The Three Rivers Levee Fees in the County s jurisdiction will help maintain adequate levels of flood control for development in the PLSP, NASA, ELSP and surrounding areas. As new development increases in the County, so will the requirement for levees and various flood control measures. The Three Rivers Levee Fees will fund levee infrastructure necessary to accommodate residential and nonresidential development in the Benefit Area. USE OF FEES The Three Rivers Levee Fees from new development in the County s jurisdiction will be used to directly fund improvements or reimburse those that initially funded improvements to the levee system. A description of the levee system improvements was provided by Ric Reinhardt of MBK Engineers, who is the TRLIA program manager, to 1 Public Needs & Private Dollars; William Abbott, Marian E. Moe, and Marilee Hanson, page P:\13000\13579 RD 784 Levee Financing Plan\ Nexus Study Update\Report\13579 FINAL.doc

40 Hearing Report April 25, 2006 the agency s executive director, Charles McClain, in a memorandum dated December 8, The levee improvements generally include a combination of the following types of work; the installation of slurry walls, the raising and strengthening of levees, installation of seepage berms and, the installation of setback levees. The levee improvement program is designed to provide levees that provide protection from the 1/200 Annual Exceedance Probability flood event. This is a flood event that has a ½ percent chance of flooding in any given year. Additional costs associated with the improvements include right of way land acquisition as well as environmental mitigation. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN USE OF FEES AND TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT The development of residential and nonresidential land uses in Southern County will require flood protection, which will be provided through the improved levee system and funded through this fee program, public funding sources, and CFD RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN NEED FOR FACILITY AND TYPE OF PROJECT Each residential and nonresidential development project will add to the incremental need for flood protection, and each new project will benefit from the new levee infrastructure. For the new development described in this Nexus Study to occur in the Benefit Area, the levee improvements are required to be expanded or improved to provide an adequate flood protection to the area. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN AMOUNT OF FEES AND COST OF OR PORTION OF FACILITY ATTRIBUTED TO DEVELOPMENT ON WHICH FEE IS IMPOSED Construction of necessary levee improvements will directly serve residential and nonresidential development in the Benefit Area and will directly benefit development in that area. The appropriate common use factor for allocating costs to land use is a Total Value Index determined for each land use. Table 8 shows the Total Value Index for each land use in the Benefit Area. 35 P:\13000\13579 RD 784 Levee Financing Plan\ Nexus Study Update\Report\13579 FINAL.doc

41 Hearing Report April 25, 2006 MBK Engineering, in conjunction with TRLIA, estimated the total cost of the required levee improvements. MBK Engineering also provided a breakdown of costs for the lands benefited by the specific improvements. A breakdown of these costs and an allocation to the zones of benefit based on the acres adjusted by the Total Value Index has been presented in Appendix B. The costs to each benefit zone have then further been allocated to each land use in each zone, based on the Total Value Index calculated for each type of land use. The result is a dollar figure attributed to each acre of residential and nonresidential development land uses. Tables 12 and 13 show the allocated costs to each type of land use in each zone. 36 P:\13000\13579 RD 784 Levee Financing Plan\ Nexus Study Update\Report\13579 FINAL.doc

42 APPENDICES APPENDIX A: APPENDIX B: APPENDIX C: APPENDIX D: APPENDIX E: APPENDIX F: THREE RIVERS LEVEE FEE EXAMPLE CALCULATION LOCAL SHARE OF COST CALCULATIONS TOTAL VALUE INDEX CALCULATIONS LAND USE CALCULATIONS LIST OF POTENTIAL PROJECTS LARGE LOT PARCEL GROSS DEVELOPABLE ACREAGE EXAMPLE CALCULATION

43 APPENDIX A THREE RIVERS LEVEE FEE EXAMPLE CALCULATION Table A 1 Three Rivers Levee Fee Example Calculation... A 1

44 Table A-1 Three Rivers Levee Fee Example Calculation DRAFT Plumas Lake Zone Residential Item Source Label Example Source Label Linda Zone Residential Example Initial Fee Calculation Step 1 - Allocated Cost (with Bond Issuance Cost) Determine the Allocated Cost per GDA [1] Table 1 A $72,655 Table 2 A $10,029 Step 2 - Add the Call Premium Charge Determine the Call Premium Percentage for the Current Period [2] B 3.00% [2] B 3.00% Determine the Call Premium Amount C = B * A $2,180 C = B * A $301 Add the Admin Fee to the Allocated Cost D = A + C $74,834 D = A + C $10,330 Step 3 - Add the Administration Fee Admin Percentage [3] E 3.00% [3] E 3.00% Determine the Admin Amount F = E * D $2,245 F = E * D $310 Add the Admin Fee to the Allocated Cost G = D + F $77,079 G = D + F $10,640 This is the Initial Fee Amount. This fee remains in place until 3 months before the 1st Impact Fee Bond Issue Coupon Date. Semi Annual Impact Fee Update - This update taken 3 months before every Impact Fee Coupon Date. Step 1 - Determine the Current Impact Fee Charge The Current Impact Fee Amount [4] A $77,079 [4] A $10,640 Determine the previous Call Premium percentage [5] B 3.00% [5] B 3.00% Remove the Call Premium Fee C = A/(1 + B) $74,834 C = A/(1 + B) $10,330 Remove the Admin Fee Amount D = C/1.03 $72,655 D = C/1.03 $10,029 Step 2 - Determine the Interest Load Determine the 5-Year Constant Maturity US Treasury Rate [6] E 4.79% [6] E 4.79% Add the Spread [7] F 4.00% [7] F 4.00% Determine the resulting Interest Load G = E + F 8.79% G = E + F 8.79% Divide the Interest Rate by 2 for Semiannual Compounding H = G/2 4.40% H = G/2 4.40% Step 3 - Add the Interest Charge Multiply the Impact Fee Charge by the Interest Load I = D * H $3,193 I = D * H $441 Add the Interest Load to the Impact Fee Charge J = I + D $75,848 J = I + D $10,470 Step 4 - Add the Call Premium Charge Determine the current Call Premium Percentage [2] K 2.00% [2] K 2.00% Determine the Call Premium Amount L = K * J $1,517 L = K * J $209 Add the Admin Amount to the Loaded Impact Fee Charge M = J + L $77,365 M = J + L $10,679 Step 5 - Add the Admin Fee Amount Admin Fee Amount [3] N 3.00% [3] N 3.00% Determine the Admin Amount O = N * M $2,321 O = N * M $320 Add the Admin Amount to the Loaded Impact Fee Charge P = M + O $79,686 P = M + O $11,000 This is the Fee Amount. This fee remains in place until 3 months before the Next Impact Fee Bond Issue Coupon Date. Source: EPS, Federal Reserve "example" [1] In the event overall program costs or local share costs change, this number would need to be recalculated. [2] Fee includes a 3%/2%/1% declining early payoff penalty associated with the financing of the levee improvements, 3% the 1st fiscal year, 2% the 2nd fiscal year and, 1% the 3rd fiscal year. [3] The Admin Fee is 3% unless revised by the County. [4] For purposes of this example, the current impact fees are assumed to be $77,079 and $10,640. [5] Determine the applicable call premium percentage used to determine the current fee amount. For purposes of this example, the previous call premium percentage is assumed to be 3%. [6] This number can be found on the Federal Reserve Board's Web site at The most recent Daily Updated rate should be used. [7] The spread is assumed always to be 400 Basis Points. Prepared by EPS A Rivers Levee Impact Fee R2.xls 4/25/2006

45 Table B 1 Table B 2 Table B 3 Table B 4 Table B 5 APPENDIX B LOCAL SHARE OF COST CALCULATIONS Total Cost Estimate for Levee Improvements (2 pages)...b 1 Total Cost Estimate for Environmental Mitigation...B 3 Allocation of Public Funding and Local Share Summary for TRLIA Levee Program...B 4 Summary of Adjusted Acreage...B 5 Cost Summary by Zone...B 6

46 Table B-1 Total Cost Estimate for Levee Improvements Three Rivers Levee Improvement Authority Fair Share Funding Study DRAFT Levee Improvement Costs Page 1 of 2 Cost Item/Task Levee Improvement Costs [1] Total Cost (2006$) Benefiting Flood Plains Yuba River Plain Feather River Plain Allocated Cost Percentage of Total Allocated Cost Percentage of Total Phase 1 Pre Phase 1 costs $0 $0 100% $0 0% Design $0 $0 100% $0 0% Construction $0 $0 100% $0 0% Construction Management $0 $0 100% $0 0% Right of Way $657,938 $657, % $0 0% YCWA Reimbursement $0 $0 100% $0 0% Contingency $0 $0 100% $0 0% Phase 1 Non-Categorized $3,982,286 $3,982, % $0 0% Subtotal Phase 1 Costs $4,640,224 $4,640, % $0 0% Phase 2 Design $4,605,600 $797,398 17% [2] $3,808,202 83% [2] Construction $16,862,960 $3,792,759 22% [2] $13,070,201 78% [2] Construction Management $1,400,000 $179,794 13% [2] $1,220,206 87% [2] Right of Way $3,940,000 $3,850,000 98% [2] $90,000 2% [2] TRLIA Project Management $590,000 $189,707 32% [2] $400,293 68% [2] Subtotal Phase 2 Costs $27,398,560 $8,809,658 32% $18,588,902 68% Phase 3 Design $4,850,000 $0 0% $4,850, % Construction - Unit 1 & 2 $20,800,000 $0 0% $20,800, % Construction Management $2,918,123 $0 0% $2,918, % Right of Way $17,200,000 $0 0% $17,200, % TRLIA Project Management $468,000 $0 0% $468, % Contingency $2,000,000 $0 0% $2,000, % Subtotal Phase 3 Costs $48,236,123 $0 0% $48,236, % Subtotal Page 1 Costs $80,274,907 $13,449,882 17% $66,825,025 83% Source: Yuba County, Klienfelder Engineering, HDR Engineering, TRLIA, MBK Engineers "trlia_costs" [1] Updated estimates provided in Cash Flow worksheets distributed by the TRLIA Escrow/Finance Committee on 4/13/05. [2] Cost break-apart estimates for Yuba & Feather flood plains provided through input by MBK Engineers. Phase 4 HDR Contract (Yuba River) Prepared by EPS B Levee Surcharge Phase IV R12 04_04_06.xls 4/25/2006

47 Table B-1 Total Cost Estimate for Levee Improvements Three Rivers Levee Improvement Authority Fair Share Funding Study DRAFT Levee Improvement Costs Page 2 of 2 Cost Item/Task Levee Improvement Costs [1] Total Cost (2006$) Benefiting Flood Plains Yuba River Plain Feather River Plain Allocated Cost Percentage of Total Allocated Cost Percentage of Total Design [2] $2,002,000 $2,002, % $0 0% Construction $17,154,000 $17,154, % $0 0% Construction Management $1,144,000 $1,144, % $0 0% Right of Way $1,000,000 $1,000, % $0 0% TRLIA Project Management $354,000 $354, % $0 0% Contingency $4,400,000 $4,400, % $0 0% BE/GEI Contract (Feather River) Design [2] $10,872,000 $0 0% $10,872, % Construction $72,482,000 $0 0% $72,482, % Construction Management $5,799,000 $0 0% $5,799, % Right of Way $6,502,000 $0 0% $6,502, % Cultural Resources $0 $0 0% $0 100% TRLIA Project Management $900,000 $0 0% $900, % Contingency $15,600,000 $0 0% $15,600, % Subtotal Phase 4 Costs $138,209,000 $26,054,000 19% $112,155,000 81% Olivehurst DB Construction $6,755,970 $0 0% $6,755, % Construction Management $200,000 $0 0% $200, % Right-of-Way $808,560 $0 0% $808, % TRLIA Project Management $60,000 $0 0% $60, % Subtotal Olivehurst Detention Basin Costs $7,824,530 $0 0% $7,824, % TRLIA General Expenses Services and Supplies [3] $5,855,000 $1,022,035 17% $4,832,965 83% Subtotal this Page $151,888,530 $27,076,035 18% $124,812,495 82% Subtotal from Page 1 $80,274,907 $13,449,882 17% $66,825,025 83% Total Estimated Costs $232,163,437 $40,525,917 17% $191,637,520 83% Source: Yuba County, Klienfelder Engineering, HDR Engineering, TRLIA, MBK Engineers "trlia_costs" [1] Updated estimates provided within Cash Flow worksheets distributed by the TRLIA Escrow/Finance Committee on 4/13/05. [2] This amount includes a portion of environmental design work. [3] TRLIA General Expenses are allocated to the two zones on a pro-rata share of all other program costs. Prepared by EPS B Levee Surcharge Phase IV R12 04_04_06.xls 4/25/2006

48 Table B-2 Total Cost Estimate for Environmental Mitigation Three Rivers Levee Improvement Authority Fair Share Funding Study DRAFT Environmental Mitigation Costs Benefiting Flood Plains Cost Item/Task Total Yuba River Plain Feather River Plain Environmental Mitigation Costs [1] Cost (2006$) Allocated Cost Percentage of Total Allocated Cost Percentage of Total Phase 1 Environmental Studies and Permitting $0 $0 100% $0 0% Environmental Mitigation $0 $0 100% $0 0% Subtotal Phase 1 Costs $0 $0 $0 Phase 2 Environmental Mitigation $594,450 $96,338 16% $498,112 84% Subtotal Phase 2 Costs $594,450 $96,338 $498,112 Phase 3 Environmental Mitigation (Wildlands offsite and onsite) $10,686,950 $0 0% $10,686, % Environmental Restoration (onsite and VELB) $5,827,000 $0 0% $5,827, % Existing Floodway Orchard Removal $420,000 $0 0% $420, % Subtotal Phase 3 Costs $16,933,950 $0 $16,933,950 Phase 4 HDR Contract (Yuba River) Environmental Studies and Permitting [2] $0 $0 0% $0 0% Environmental Mitigation $1,532,300 $1,532, % $0 0% BE/GEI Contract (Feather River) Environmental Studies and Permitting [2] $0 $0 0% $0 0% Environmental Mitigation $5,432,700 $0 0% $5,432, % Subtotal Phase 4 Costs $6,965,000 $1,532,300 $5,432,700 Olivehurst DB Environmental Mitigation/Restoration $500,000 $0 0% $500, % Subtotal Olivehurst Detention Basin Costs $500,000 $0 $500,000 Total Estimated Costs $24,993,400 $1,628,638 7% $23,364,762 93% Source: Yuba County, Klienfelder Engineering, HDR Engineering, TRLIA, MBK Engineers "trlia_env_costs" [1] Updated estimates provided in Cash Flow worksheets distributed by the TRLIA Escrow/Finance Committee on 4/13/05. [2] Amount included in Phase 4 levee improvement engineering & design amount. B-3 Prepared by EPS Levee Surcharge Phase IV R12 04_04_06.xls 4/25/2006

49 Table B-3 Allocation of Public Funding and Local Share Summary for TRLIA Levee Program Three Rivers Levee Improvement Authority Fair Share Funding Study DRAFT Item Source Label Total Yuba River Flood Plain Allocation Feather River Flood Plain Levee Improvement Costs Table 1 A $232,163,437 $40,525,917 $191,637,520 Percentage of Levee Improvement Cost [1] B 17.5% 82.5% Environmental Costs Table 2 C $24,993,400 $1,628,638 $23,364,762 Percentage of Environmental Cost [1] D 6.5% 93.5% Estimated Interest Costs on Advanced Funding [2] Table 12 E $72,000 $12,672 $59,328 Total TRLIA Program Costs F=A+C+E $257,228,837 $42,167,227 $215,061, % 83.6% Levee Improvement Funding Proposition 13 Funds for Levee Improvements [3] Phase 2 Design $4,776,581 Phase 2 Design - Retention $530,731 Phase 2 Construction $14,088,206 Phase 2 Construction - Retention $1,565,356 Phase 3 Design $4,458,195 Phase 3 - Retention $495,355 Phase 3 Construction $18,897,377 Phase 3 Construction - Retention $2,099,709 Subtotal Prop 13 Funding $46,911,509 Yuba County Water Agency Loan $632,633 FEMA Olivehurst Detention Basin $1,500,000 DWR Reimbursement to TRLIA $0 Miscellaneous [4] $1,506,441 Total Levee Improvement Funding G $50,550,583 Levee Funding Allocation Percentage of Funding to Allocate B (repeated for clarity) 17.5% 82.5% Total Levee Funding H = B x G ($50,550,583) ($8,823,994) ($41,726,589) Environmental Mitigation Funding Department of Fish & Game Funding $11,200,000 Total Environmental Mitigation Funding I $11,200,000 Environmental Funding Allocation Percentage of Funding to Allocate D (repeated for clarity) 6.5% 93.5% Total Environmental Funding J = D x I ($11,200,000) ($729,822) ($10,470,178) Net Costs Funded by Local Sources K=F+H+J $195,478,254 $32,613,411 $162,864,843 Source: TRLIA, Yuba County Public Works "public_funds" [1] The percentages are used for allocating public revenue funding. [2] This cost is added to the program to account for the interest required to be paid to those builders who advanced funded Phases 1-3 work beyond their projects ultimate levee obligation. See Table 12. [3] Proposition 13 levee improvement funding estimates of $46,911,509 provided by TRLIA Escrow Committee on 4/13/06. [4] Includes revenue generated from earned interest and other payments made by developers not directly creditable to specific levee projects. Prepared by EPS B Levee Surcharge Phase IV R12 04_04_06.xls 4/25/2006

50 Table B-4 Summary of Adjusted Acreage DRAFT Area Adjusted Acreage Cost Allocation Percentage Source A B = A/3,317 Yuba River Flood Plain Linda Zone Table % Plumas Lake Zone Table 9 2,653 80% Total Yuba River Food Plain Adjusted Acres 3,317 A B = A/2,653 Feather River Flood Plain Plumas Lake Zone Table 9 2, % Total Feather River Flood Plain Adjusted Acres 2,653 Source: Source: Yuba County Assessor's Office, July 2005 CD-DATA Assessor's Parcel Tax Roll "acre_share" Prepared by EPS B-5 4/25/ Rivers Levee Impact Fee R2.xls

51 Table B-5 Cost Summary by Zone DRAFT Item Total Costs Funded by Local Sources Linda Zone Plumas Lake Zone Percentage Share of Cost Percentage Share of Cost Source: Table B-3 Table B-4 Table B-4 Formula: A B C = A x B D E = A x D Total Yuba River Flood Plain Costs $32,613,411 20% $6,531,952 80% $26,081,459 Total Feather River Flood Plain Costs $162,864,843 0% $0 100% $162,864,843 B-6 Formula: A = Sum Above B = C / A C = Sum Above D = E / A E = Sum Above Total Share of Cost by Zone $195,478,254 3% $6,531,952 97% $188,946,302 Source: EPS "zone_costs" Prepared by EPS 4/25/ Rivers Levee Impact Fee R2.xls

52 Table C 1 Table C 2 Table C 3 APPENDIX C TOTAL VALUE INDEX CALCULATIONS Valuation and Acreage Calculations for Developed Residential Three Rivers Levee Improvement Benefit Area... C 1 Valuation and Acreage Calculations for Industrial, Retail, and Agriculture/Open Space... C 2 Valuation and Acreage Calculations for Vacant Residential, Industrial, and Retail... C 3

53 Table C-1 Valuation and Acreage Calculations for Developed Residential - Three Rivers Levee Improvement Benefit Area DRAFT Item Label Rural SF [1] Urban SF [2] Two or More Units per Lot [3] Mobile Home [4] C-1 Building Improvement Value Improvement Value for Residential A $68,510,104 $472,535,242 $11,731,144 $8,666,470 Total Acres of Residential [1] B 1, , Improvement Value per Residential Acre C = A / B $49,744 $459,278 $52,051 $16,655 Land Value Land Value for Residential D $20,097,892 $139,584,907 $4,482,514 $7,287,580 Total Acres of Residential E 1, , Land Value per Residential Acre F = D / E $14,593 $135,669 $19,889 $14,005 Other Value Other Value for Residential G $362,690 $35,593 $244,810 $2,336,632 Total Acres of Residential H 1, , Other Value per Residential Acre I = G / H $263 $35 $1,086 $4,491 Total Value per Residential Acre J = C + F + I $64,600 $594,981 $73,025 $35,151 Source: Yuba County Assessor's Office, July 2005 CD-DATA Assessor's Parcel Tax Roll "dev_res" [1] Value data for all Rural SF Units were incomplete; therefore only units with complete value data were included in the sample size to determine the Total Value per Residential Acre for Rural SF Units. [2] Acres of Urban SF developed land were provided for only some lots. Thus, the calculations for total acres are made based on a sample size. [3] Value data for all Two or More Units per Lot were incomplete; therefore only units with complete value data were included in the sample size to determine the Total Value per Residential Acre for Two or More Units per Lot parcels. [4] Value data for all Mobile Home Units were incomplete; therefore only units with complete value data were included in the sample size to determine the Total Value per Residential Acre for Mobile Home Units. Prepared by EPS Rivers Levee Impact Fee R2.xls 4/25/2006

54 Table C-2 Valuation and Acreage Calculations for Industrial, Retail and Agriculture/Open Space DRAFT Item Value Acres Value per Acre Industrial Improvement Value for Industrial $16,987, $40,136 Land Value for Industrial $3,427, $8,097 Other Value for Industrial [1] $429, $1,014 Total Value per Industrial Acre $49,247 Retail Improvement Value for Retail $43,559, $83,221 Land Value for Retail $17,712, $33,839 Other Value for Retail [1] $26, $51 Total Value per Retail Acre $117,112 Public Use/Other [2] Improvement Value for Public Use/Other $9,705, $14,131 Land Value for Public Use/Other $21,223, $30,901 Other Value for Public Use/Other [1] $0 687 $0 Total Value per Public Use/Other Acre $45,032 Agriculture/Open Space Improvement Value for Agriculture/Open Space $17,868,916 21,057 $849 Land Value for Agriculture/Open Space $40,561,678 21,057 $1,926 Other Value for Agriculture/Open Space [1] $15,731,095 21,057 $747 Total Value per Agriculture/Open Space Acre $3,522 Source: Yuba County Assessor's Office, July 2005 CD-DATA Assessor's Parcel Tax Roll "ind_value" [1] "Other value" includes fixed equipment or private property on site. [2] "Other" category includes public land uses such as drainage, well sites, etc. Prepared by EPS C Rivers Levee Impact Fee R2.xls 4/25/2006

55 Table C-3 Valuation and Acreage Calculations for Vacant Residential, Industrial, and Retail DRAFT Item Total Value Acres Value per Acre Vacant Residential Improvement Value for Vacant Residential $1,590, $1,673 Land Value for Vacant Residential $93,373, $98,240 Total Value per Vacant Residential Acre $99,913 Vacant Industrial Improvement Value for Vacant Industrial $18,070, $37,439 Land Value for Vacant Industrial $8,538, $17,690 Total Value per Vacant Industrial Acre $55,129 Vacant Retail Improvement Value for Vacant Retail $0 0 $0 Land Value for Vacant Retail $0 0 $0 Total Value per Vacant Retail Acre $0 Source: Yuba County Assessor's Office, July 2005 CD-DATA Assessor's Parcel Tax Roll "vacant" Prepared by EPS C Rivers Levee Impact Fee R2.xls 4/25/2006

56 Table D 1 Table D 2 Table D 3 Table D 4 Table D 5 APPENDIX D LAND USE CALCULATIONS Land Use Assumptions Plumas Zone... D 1 Land Use Assumptions Linda Zone... D 2 Residential and Ag/Open Space Assignment Plumas Zone and Linda Zone... D 3 Plumas Zone Planned Development Land Use Detail... D 4 Linda Zone Planned Development Land Use Detail... D 5

57 Table D-1 Land Use Assumptions - Plumas Zone DRAFT Land Use Acreage Land Sq. Ft. Existing Development Residential Rural SF ,342 Urban SF ,539,458 Two or More per Lot ,670 Mobile Home 0.0 1,762 Subtotal Residential ,307,232 Residential Assigned to Ag/Open Space 1, ,538,682 Developed Industrial ,326,886 Developed Retail/Commercial ,910,542 Vacant Residential ,940,029 Vacant Industrial ,829,726 Vacant Retail/Commercial Public Use/Other [1] 2, ,517,035 Agriculture Land/Open Space 8, ,543,001 Source: Yuba County Assessor's Office, July 2005 CD-DATA Assessor's Parcel Tax Roll "sqft_fee_p" [1] "Other" category includes public land uses such as drainage, well sites, etc. D-1 Prepared by EPS Rivers Levee Impact Fee R2.xls 4/25/2006

58 Table D-2 Land Use Assumptions - Linda Zone DRAFT Land Use Acreage Land Sq. Ft. Existing Development Residential Rural SF ,258,726 Urban SF ,986,984 Two or More per Lot ,298 Mobile Home ,068 Subtotal Residential ,906,076 Residential Assigned to Ag/Open Space 2, ,906,974 Developed Industrial ,109,453 Developed Retail/Commercial ,731,920 Vacant Residential ,462,456 Vacant Industrial ,194,944 Vacant Retail/Commercial Public Use/Other [1] 1, ,144,072 Agriculture Land/Open Space 13, ,582,879 Source: Yuba County Assessor's Office, July 2005 CD-DATA Assessor's Parcel Tax Roll "sqft_fee_l" [1] "Other" category includes public land uses such as drainage, well sites, etc. D-2 Prepared by EPS Rivers Levee Impact Fee R2.xls 4/25/2006

59 Table D-3 Residential and Ag/Open Space Assignment - Plumas Zone & Linda Zone DRAFT Land Use Total Acres Total Land Sq. Ft. Estimated Building Area in Sq. Ft. Estimated Land Area in Sq. Ft. [1] Remaining Area Assigned to Vacant Residential/Open Space in Sq. Ft. Developed Acres Acres Assigned to Vacant Residential/ Open Space Plumas Zone A B C D E = C x D F = B - E G = E/43,560 H = F/43,560 [2] Developed Residential Development Rural SF ,382, ,171 x2 722,342 32,660, Urban SF 209 9,090,480 1,269,729 x2 2,539,458 6,551, Two or more per lot 100 4,342,062 21,835 x2 43,670 4,298, Mobile Home 184 8,030, x2 1,762 8,028, Total Developed Residential 1,259 54,845,914 1,653,616 x2 3,307,232 51,538, ,183.2 D-3 Total Plumas Zone Residential Assigned to Ag/Open Space 51,538,682 1,183.2 Linda Zone Developed Residential Development Rural SF 1,255 54,677,407 1,129,363 x2 2,258,726 52,418, ,203.4 Urban SF ,726,912 5,493,492 x2 10,986,984 24,739, Two or more per lot 133 5,773, ,149 x2 602,298 5,170, Mobile Home ,635,719 29,034 x2 58,068 14,577, Total Developed Residential 2, ,813,050 6,953,038 x2 13,906,076 96,906, ,224.7 Total Linda Zone Residential Assigned to Ag/Open Space 96,906,974 2,224.7 Source: Yuba County Assessor's Office, July 2005 CD-DATA Assessor's Parcel Tax Roll "fee_acres" [1] Estimated land area in sq. ft. includes the area immediately adjacent to residential structures and represents the entire developed portion of the residential lot. [2] The 2x factor represents an assumed 0.5 floor area ratio for residential development, this factor provides the relationship between home size and lot size. Prepared by EPS Rivers Levee Impact Fee R2.xls 4/25/2006

60 Table D-4 Plumas Zone Planned Development Land Use Detail DRAFT Planned Development Acres [1] Public Use Acres Total Acres Residential Development Tentative Maps Acreage [1] 2, ,851 Nonresidential Development Commercial Development [2] Total 2, ,098 Source: Development Community, Yuba County Surveyor, July 2005 CD-DATA Assessor's Parcel Tax Roll "planned_detail_p" [1] Equivalent to Gross Developable Acres remaining on Projects that have been submitted in the Southern Zone. [2] Commercial Development assumes a.25 FAR. D-4 Prepared by EPS Rivers Levee Impact Fee R2.xls 4/25/2006

61 Table E 1 APPENDIX E LIST OF POTENTIAL PROJECTS List of Potential Projects Paying Fee...E 1

62 DRAFT Table E-1 List of Potential Projects Paying Fee Home Builder / Landowner Name of Project Potential Acreage Linda Zone Projects Dantoni Ranch Estates (Reynen & Bardis) Dantoni Ranch Estates (Quail Hollow) 9.57 David Lanza East Side Ranch Estates Dunmore Homes The Orchard Garcia Garcia ( ) 2.53 Gene Yakubovich Olivehurst Gardens (Condo) 1.20 Hinrichs, Karl & Laura Laura Subdivision 1.38 JMC Homes The Orchard Medical Billing Service Beale Estates (Bumpus) Pheasant Point II Cedar Estates Sierra Vista Sierra Vista Subdivision Staas, James Staas ( ) Sycamore Ventures LLC Sycamore Ventures Subdivision Tej Maan (Costa, LLC) Pheasant Pointe ( ) The Arbors The Arbors ( ) 7.70 Woodside Homes Montrose at Edgewater Plumas Lake Zone Projects Armada LLC - Ross Ranch Ross Ranch Armada LLC - Ross Ranch Ross Ranch - Multi Family 8.70 Arnaiz - Draper South Draper Ranch South Beazer (Remaining Portion) Rio Del Oro (1-5, 7, & 9-13) Blue Mountain Land Blue Mountain Land 8.75 Cassano/Kamilos Rio Del Oro (6 & 8) Concept Studios, Inc. (Goddard) Bishop Ranch Cresleigh Creekside Plumas Ranch Cresleigh (Remaining Portion) Woodside DeValentine Sawyer's Landing DR Horton Wheeler Ranch (Units 4 & 5) DR Horton River Oaks South Dunmore Communities Feather River Estates (Leal) Gilbert Retail Holdings Meadows Subdivision Hansen Ranch Estates (Ellis) Hansen Ranch Homes by Towne Rio Del Oro Jensen Ranch Estates Jensen Ranch Estates K Hovnanian (Forecast) Wheeler Ranch (Units 2, 3, 6 & 7) KB Home Hawes Ranch KB (Option) - Leak Plumas Lake Cobblestone KB Home Plumas Lake Cobblestone Lakemont Homes (Arboga) Feather Glen Phase Lakemont Homes (Avian) Feather Glen Phase Lennar Renaissance River Oaks East Lennar Renaissance River Oaks North Lennar Winncrest Northpoint Matthews Homes Riverside Meadows Meritage Homes - Draper North Draper Ranch North North Wheeler Ranch Estates North Wheeler Ranch Estates Rio Del Oro 4 Rio Del Oro (Danna 70) Rio Del Oro Farms #2 Rio Del Oro (Villages 15 & 16) Ryland Homes Thoroughbred Acres Soto - Fairway West Fairway West Takhar Takhar ( ) Wheeler Land LLC Wheeler Ranch Phase YCH Communities Fairway North Yuba Investors (Mark Engstrom) Plumas Lake Estates ( ) Source: EPS, Development Community, Yuba County Surveyor "projects" Prepared by EPS E Rivers Levee Impact Fee R2.xls 4/25/2006

63 APPENDIX F LARGE LOT PARCEL GROSS DEVELOPABLE ACREAGE EXAMPLE CALCULATION Example Gross Developable Acreage Calculation... F 1 Map F 1 Map F 2 Tentative Map Wheeler Ranch... F 2 Wheeler Ranch Unit 1 B... F 3

64 APPENDIX F EXAMPLE GROSS DEVELOPABLE ACREAGE CALCULATION For this example calculation, the Gross Developable Acreage (GDA) for Lot 1 B is calculated. Map F 1 shows the overall tentative map for Wheeler Ranch. Map F 2 is an enlargement of Unit 1 B with an indication of acreage to be subtracted from the Large Lot map when determining GDA. Note: For purposes of the fee calculation, it shall be a requirement of the small lot final map to provide a calculation of GDA for purposes of the fee calculation. STEP 1 GOAL: From the tentative map determine the gross acreage for the large lot. SOLUTION: In this case, the gross acreage for the large lot by the unit is given in the land use table. Lot 1 B s gross acreage is stated as 38.3 acres. This includes the allocable portion of parks/open space that is not indicated as its own unit, as well as major collectors and arterials. STEP 2 GOAL: Subtract all acreage in Major Roads, Park, Open Space, and other property that will ultimately be publicly owned. SOLUTION: In this case, the densities indicated in the land use table, based on the note, exclude the allocable area of arterials and collector streets. If the density is divided by the number of units, the result is the acreage of the unit without allocable major roads. Lot B has 147 lots each with a density of 4.1 units/acre. 147/4.1 = 35.9 acres. Therefore, there were 2.4 acres of major roads included in the unit acreage stated in the land use table (38.3 acres 35.9 acres). Subtract all open space. Unit B includes two park areas, one of 1.3 acres and one of 0.5 acres acres (1.3 acres acres) = 34.1 acres. No additional ultimately publicly owned property is remaining in the Unit. Therefore, the GDA for Unit 1 B is 34.1 acres. F App F text.doc

65

66 DRAFT Map F-2 Wheeler Ranch Unit 1-B Example Gross Developable Acreage Calculation Gross Acreage 38.3 Acres per Land Use Table Less Major Roads (2.4 Acres) Less Parks and Open Space (1.8 Acres) Gross Developable Acres for Fee = 34.1 Acres