7 STAFF REPORT CTY COUNCL MEETNG OF JUNE 16, 2015 TO: FROM: RE : Nancy Kerry Judy Finn, Associate Planner Shawna Brekke-Read, Director of Development Services Resolution Authorizing the Transfer of One Privately Owned Residential Development Right from the City of South Lake Tahoe to Washoe County. RECOMMENDATON: Staff recommends the City Council hear the staff report; receive public comment; receive City Council comments; and adopt the Resolution. BACKGROUND: The Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (TRPA) Code of Ordinances allows private and public entities to own and transfer development rights in the Tahoe Basin, subject to TRPA verification and banking. South Lake Tahoe City Code (SL TCC) 6.55.680 and 6.55.690 further regulates transferring development rights outside the City and requires City Council approval. SL TCC 6.55.690 also allows the City Council to require a fee to offset the loss of property tax revenue to the City of South Lake Tahoe. SSUE AND DSCUSSON: The current applicant proposes transferring a privately-owned Residential Development Right (RDR) from the City of South Lake Tahoe to Washoe County. The applicant purchased one RDR from the property owner of a vacant parcel located at 3962 Crest Road within the City limits to construct a TRPA approved mixed-use project. TRPA has verified and banked the development right. The mixed-use project was approved by TRPA with a condition the applicant obtain the necessary residential allocations and development rights to construct two new residential units. Residential development generates tax revenue to the City when a single family residence is constructed and transferring the RDR out of the City would result in the loss of that revenue. n 2006, Solimar Research Group conducted a financial impact analysis regarding the transfer of residential development rights and residential units of use outside the City limits. The final report, "Evaluation and Suggested Policy Framework for the City's Transferable Development Rights" (dated July 17, 2007) estimated a median priced single-family residence would generate property tax revenues of $19,517.00 to the City. The report concluded that the City's fee schedule for transfers at that time did not fully compensate for the loss of property tax revenue; however, the study concluded the negative net tax impact could be offset from other public benefits from RDR transfers, including goodwill to another jurisdiction. n this case, the receiving
Transfer of Residential Development Right Out of City City Council Meeting: June 16, 2015 Page 2 of 2 site and project will provide environmental benefits that include stream environmental zone restoration, reduction in daily trips, and removal of an existing driveway that was a dangerous shortcut. CTY COUNCL WORKPLAN: This project is consistent with adopted City Council policies and the Business Plan to develop public-private partnerships to leverage City resources. GENERAL PLAN CONSSTENCY: The Economic Development Element of the General Plan recognizes the benefits of working with neighboring jurisdictions for the good of the basin, and the proposed transfer is consistent with the following policy: Policy ED-1.3 Regional Partnerships. The City shall participate in regional economic development efforts that benefit the overall regional economy to the extent that these efforts serve the interest of the residents of South Lake Tahoe. FNANCAL AND/OR POLCY MPLCATONS: The transfer of a Residential Development Right outside the City could result in a loss of residential property tax to the City of approximately $19,517.00. The $4,935.00 fee in the current 2015 Fee Schedule would offset a portion of that loss of revenue. CEQA/ENVRONMENTAL CLEARANCE: The transfer of a Residential Development Right outside the City is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15061 (3). The activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects, which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. By: Concurrence: Associate Planner Sh ctor of Development Services ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: City Council Resolution Approving Transfer of Development Attachment B: City Code 6.55.680 and 6.55.690
CTY OF SOUTH LAKE TAHOE RESOLUTON NO. 2015- ------ RESOLUTON AUTHORZNG THE TRANSFER OF ONE PRVATELY OWNED RESDENTAL DEVELOPMENT RGHT FROM THE CTY OF SOUTH LAKE TAHOE TO WASHOE COUNTY WHEREAS, the City of South Lake Tahoe has received an application to transfer a privately owned Residential Development Right from the City of South Lake Ta hoe to Washoe County; and WHEREAS, the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency Code of Ordinance allows private and public entities to transfer development rights in the Tahoe Basin; and WHEREAS, the South Lake Tahoe City Code regulates transferring development rights outside the City and requires City Council approval; and WHEREAS, the South Lake Tahoe City Code allows the City Council to require a fee to offset the loss of property tax revenue to the City of South Lake Tahoe; and WHEREAS, the South Lake Tahoe General Plan Economic Development Element recognizes the benefits of working with neighboring jurisdictions for the good of the basin; Continued ATTACHMENT A
City of South Lake Tahoe Resolution No. 2015- Transfer of Residential Development Right Out of City June 16, 2015 Page 2 of 2 NOW THEREFORE, BE T RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of South Lake Tahoe does hereby approve the transfer of a privately owned Residential Development Right from the City of South Lake Tahoe to Washoe County and does hereby impose a $4,935.00 fee to offset the loss of property tax revenue to the City of South Lake Tahoe, with the following condition : The applicant shall pay to the City a sum of $4,935.00 prior to TRPA approving the transfer of development right.. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of South Lake Tahoe at a meeting on June 16, 2015 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAN: ABSENT: ATTEST Susan Alessi, City Clerk Hal Cole, Mayor
SOUTH LAKE TAHOE CTY CODE 6.55.700 mental and sustainable buildings and other social benefits to the community. vi. The transfer of CF A must be found to be consistent with the goals and policies of the city's adopted general plan. 2. Tourist Accommodation Unit (TAU) Transfers. a. Transfers of TAUs from within the city limits to outside the city limits may be approved by the city council if the council finds the transfer of TAUs will benefit the city (i) economically, (ii) socially, and/or (iii} environmentally. The benefits to the city may include, but are not limited to, the payment of a mitigation fee to the city, environmental benefits to sensitive lands and providing low and moderate income housing. n addition, all transfers shall be conditioned on the development or redevelopment of the sending parcel or the restoration of the sending parcel to its natural condition. b. The council in making its findings on the benefit to the city of transferring TA Us outside the city limits shall consider, but is not limited_ to, the following: i. The offset of lost tax opportunity of transit occupancy taxes, sales taxes and property taxes for at least the next 30 years. il n determining a mitigation fee; the council shall consider the impact of the receiving parcel's development on the city's economy, including impacts on city businesses, hotels and motels, housing and jobs in the city. iii. f the sending parcel transferring the TA Us is located in a redevelopment plan area. iv. Whether the sending parcel contains environmentally sensitive land that the city desires to preserve. v. The social benefits including the provision of low and moderate income housing, infill projects, priority to services and transit, environmental and sustainable buildings and other social benefits to the community. vi. The transfer oftaus must be found to be consistent with the goals and policies of the city's adopted general plan. (Ord. 1013 1. Code 1997 32-65) 6.55.680 Restrictions on all transfer of land use commodities outside the city limits. All transfers of land use commodities outside the city limits are subject to the following conditions and shall not be finalized until the applicant demonstrates th~ following: a. Prior to the transfer ofany TA Us or CF A outside the city limits, approvals shall be issued by the city for the sending parcel to be developed or redeveloped or the restoration of the sending parcel to its natural condition and/or any other projects conditioned by the transfer. b. f the transfer of TA Us or CFA to the receiving parcel has not been completed within 36 months of city approval, the transfer shall be void. The applicant may request one 12-month extension from the city council. c. Any and all conditions of approval, imposed by the council for the transfer shall be complied with prior to the transfer of the TAUs and/or CFA to the receiving parcel. n lieu of complying with the conditions of approval, the council may, in its sole discretion, allow the applicant to submit an adequate surety, performance bond or other financial security acceptable to the city, to secure the completion of the conditions of approvals. (Ord. 1013 1. Code 1997 32-66) 6.55.690 Restrictions on transfer of residential development rights and residential"units of use. RDRs and RUU may be transferred outside the city limits subject to approval of city council. The city council may require a fee in its sole discretion for the transfer in order to offset the loss of property tax revenue. (Ord. 1056 1 (Exh. A); Ord. 1013 1. Code 1997 32-67) Article X. Medical Marijuana Cultivation and Medical Marijuana Dispensaries 6.55.700 Purpose. t is the purpose and intent of this article to require that medical marijuana be cultivated in appropriately secured, enclosed, and ventilated structures, so as not to be visible to the public domain, to provide for the health, safety and welfare of the public, to prevent odor created by marijuana plants from impacting adjacent properties, 6-159 ATTACHMENT B