HomeMy WebLinkAboutORD1160ORDINANCE NO.1160
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,
ARIZONA,AMENDING DEVELOPMENT FEES,AND ADOPTING THAT CERTAIN DOCUMENT FILED
WITH THE CITY CLERK ENTITLED "AMENDMENTS TO APACHE JUNCTION CITY CODE VOLUME
LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,CHAPTER 7,ARTICLE 7-1 DEVELOPMENT FEES"BY
REFERENCE:ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE;REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING
PROVISIONS;AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY.
WHEREAS,new development within the City of Apache Junction (hereafter
referred to as "City -)creates additional demands and generates the need for
capital improvements to the major roadway system,police,park & open space,
library,and municipal building facilities:and
WHEREAS.the City intends for new development to pay for its "proportionate
share -of the capital costs associated with infrastructure needed to serve
City residents:and
WHEREAS,municipalities in Arizona have broad authority to impose development
fees under Arizona Revised Statutes §9-463.05:and
WHEREAS,the imposition of development fees is one of the preferred and most
direct methods of ensuring that development bears a proportionate share of
the cost of capital facilities necessary to accommodate new development:and
WHEREAS.the City originally adopted development fees for roads,police,
parks,and library and municipal building facilities in December,1996 and
amended them in February,1998;and
WHEREAS,the City entered into a contract with James Duncan and Associates to
assist the City in updating the existing development fees and to determine
the maximum development fees for parks and open space:and
WHEREAS,in December 2001,James Duncan and Associates prepared a report
entitled "Development Fee Update Study",which sets forth methodology and
analysis for the determination of the impact of new development on the need
for and costs for additional roadway,police,parks and open space,library,
and municipal building facilities.
NOW,WHEREFORE,the Mayor and City Council of the City of Apache Junction,
ordain as follows:
ORDINANCE NO.1160
PAGE 1 OF 3
SECTION I IN GENERAL
That certain document entitled "Amendments to Apache Junction City Code
Volume II,Land Development Code,Chapter 7,Article 7-1 Development Fees,"
three copies of which are on file in the Office of the City Clerk of the City
of Apache Junction,Arizona,which document was made a public record by
Resolution No.02-03 of the City of Apache Junction,Arizona,is hereby
referred to,adopted and made a part hereof as if fully set out in this
Ordinance.
SECTION I I EFFECTIVE DATE
The provisions of this Ordinance and public record adopted herein are
effective from and after August 6,2002.
SECTION III REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS
All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of
this Ordinance or any part of the Code adopted herein by reference are hereby
repealed.
SECTION IV PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY
If any section,subsection sentence,phrase,clause or portion of this
Ordinance or any part of the Code adopted herein by reference is for any
reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent
jurisdiction,such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions thereof.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE
JUNCTION,ARIZONA,THIS 7TH DAY OF MAY ,2002.
SIGNED AND ATTESTED TO THIS 7TH DAY OF MAY ,2002.
DOUGLAS /COLEMAN
Mayor
ORDINANCE NO. 1160
PAGE 2 OF 3
ATTEST:
KATHLEEN CONNELLY
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
425 02_
R.JOEL STERN
City Attorney
ORDINANCE NO. 1160
PAGE 3 OF 3
AMENDMENTS TO
APACHE JUNCTION CITY CODE,VOLUME I I
LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,
CHAPTER 7
ARTICLE 7-1 DEVELOPMENT FEES
ARTICLE 7-1-1 DEVELOPMENT FEES -GENERAL PROVISIONS
A.Title,Purpose,and Administration
1.This Article 7-1 of the Land Development Code shall be known as
the "Development Fee Ordinance,"and may be referred to herein as
this Ordinance."
2.This Ordinance assesses development fees to offset the costs to
the City associated with providing necessary public services to a
development.The fees shall:1)result in a beneficial use to
the development,2)bear a rational relationship to the burden of
the developer,and 3)be assessed in a non-discriminatory manner.
The development fees to be paid by each new development pursuant
to this Ordinance are to be proportional to the impact that the
new development will have on the types of facilities for which
the fees are charged.
3.The City official with primary responsibility for administering
this Ordinance is referred to herein as the "Development Fee
Administrator."The Development Fee Administrator shall be the
Director of Development Services unless another person is so
designated by the City Manager.The Development Fee
Administrator may delegate authority conferred by this Ordinance
to other City staff.
B.Applicability
The collection of development fees shall apply to all new development
in the City,unless otherwise provided herein.Until any development
fee has been paid in full,no building permit,electrical permit,
certificate of compliance,certificate of occupancy,or other permit
for any development shall be issued.A stop work order shall be issued
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 1 of 32
by the Building Official on any development for which the applicable
development fee has not been paid in full.
1.Park and open space and library development fees shall apply only
to new residential development.
2.The movement of a structure onto a lot or parcel shall be
considered development and shall be subject to the development
fee provisions,unless otherwise provided herein.
3.The residential categories for Development Fee collection are as
follows:
a.single-family,detached residential units,including site-
built,manufactured,and modular;
b.mobile and manufactured home and recreational vehicle
spaces in a designated park:and
c.individual dwelling units in a multi -family dwelling unit
project.
4.Development fees for mobile/manufactured home and recreational
vehicle parks shall be assessed for the entire development,based
on the number of mobile home and recreational vehicle spaces
created at the time of application for the first building,
electrical or other permit for the development.No additional
development fees shall be assessed on subsequent building or
electrical permits in the mobile home or recreational vehicle
park unless additional spaces are created.Development Fees for
mobile/manufactured homes placed on single parcels shall be
assessed in the same manner as site -built or conventional homes.
5.The development fee provisions shall not apply to the following
actions:
a.placing on a lot or parcel in the City a temporary
construction trailer or office,but only for the life of
the building permit issued for the construction served by
the trailer or office:
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 2 of 32
b.expansion,upgrade,repair or replacement of an existing
residential dwelling unit on a lot or parcel with a legal,
conforming,residential dwelling unit or structure:and
c.any development,including but not limited to,the mere
subdivision of land,installation of utilities,or the use
of land for limited recreational,agricultural,filling or
dredging purposes which,in the opinion of the Development
Fee Administrator,will not result in a net increase of
more than one (1)one-way Average Daily Trip.
C.Service areas
1.The following development fee services are hereby established:
a.for the purpose of road development fees,the service area
shall be all of the incorporated area of the City:
b.for the purpose of police development fees,the service
area shall be all of the incorporated area of the City:
c.for the purpose of park and open space development fees,
the service area shall be all of the incorporated area of
the City:
d.for the purpose of library development fees,the service
area shall be all of the incorporated area of the City and:
e.for the purpose of municipal building development fees,the
service area shall be all of the incorporated area of the
City.
2.Development fees shall be assessed only on new development
located within the service area.
3.Development fees collected within the service area shall be spent
within the service area.
4.The appropriateness of the designation and boundaries of the
service areas shall be reviewed by the City as part of the
development fee revision process set forth in Section 7-1-1.0
Updates and Revisions of the Development Fees.Following such
review and a public hearing,the services areas may be amended.
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 3 of 32
D.Reserved
E.Calculation of Development Fees Based on Fee Schedule
1.Unless an applicant requests an individual assessment as set
forth in the following subsection,the development fees shall be
calculated for the proposed development based on any plan
approval and/or permit allowing the use,according to the
applicable fee schedule.
2.The following development fee schedules have been adopted by City
Council ordinance and are incorporated herein by reference:
a.Road Development Fee Schedule (see also Section 7-1-2.A):
b.Police Development Fee Schedule (see also Section 7-1-3.A):
c.Park and Open Space Development Fee Schedule (see also
Section 7-1-4.A):
d.Library Development Fee Schedule (see also Section 7-1-
5.A):
e.Municipal Building Development Fee Schedule (see also
Section 7-1-6.A).
3.The land uses specified in the development fee schedules shall be
interpreted as follows:
a.Single-family Detached shall include "dwelling,single-
family"as defined in § 5.0101 of the City Zoning
Ordinance.The definition includes mobile and manufactured
homes when located on a platted lot outside of a mobile
home park.
b.Mobile Home shall include "mobile home"and "manufactured
home"as defined in §5.0101 of the City Zoning Ordinance
and as defined in A.R.S.§ 41-2142(29),and shall be
interpreted as the creation of a new mobile home or
recreational vehicle (as defined in A.R.S.§ 41-2142(29))
space in a mobile home or recreational vehicle park.
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 4 of 32
c.Assisted Living Facility shall include multi -family
dwelling units used or designed to be used by older
persons,persons with disabilities or other persons needing
assistance with day-to-day living matters,but not
including nursing homes,hospitals or convalescent care
facilities.
d.Multi -family shall include any "dwelling unit"as defined
in Section 5.0101 of the City Zoning Ordinance that does
not fit the definition of Single-family Detached,Mobile
Home,or Assisted Living Facility.
e.Nonresidential land uses in the road,police,and municipal
building development fee schedules shall be defined
according to the descriptions of land uses in the most
current edition of Trip Generation,published by the
Institute of Transportation Engineers,provided that retail
uses not separately identified shall be classified in the
shopping center category,and institutional uses not
separately identified shall be classified in the general
office category.
4.The units of development specified in the fee schedule shall be
interpreted as follows:
a.a dwelling shall be interpreted as "dwelling unit"as
defined in Section 5.0101 of the City Zoning Ordinance,
provided that i t shall also be interpreted as the creation
of a new mobile home or recreational vehicle space in a
mobile home or recreational vehicle park,and
b.building square footage shall be measured in terms of gross
floor area,measured from the outside surfaces of the
building walls.
5.For categories of uses not specified in the applicable
development fee schedule,the Development Fee Administrator shall
apply the category of use set forth in the applicable fee
schedule that he or she deems to be most similar to the proposed
use.
6.If any plan or permit approval for the proposed development
indicates a mix of uses in the development,the development fees
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 5 of 32
shall be calculated separately for each use and the results
aggregated.
7.For an addition,or to remodel or replace existing structures,or
for a change of use to an existing structure,the development fee
to be paid shall be the difference,if any.between:
a.the fee,if any,that would be payable for existing
development on the site or,in the case of demolition or
removal of a structure,the previous development on the
site,provided that the demolition or removal has occurred
within one (1)year of the date of submittal of the
application for which development fees are assessed:and
b.the fee,if any,that would be payable for the total
development on the site after the new development.
8.After receiving a written request of an applicant,the
Development Fee Administrator shall provide an estimate of the
current fee based on the data provided by the applicant.
However,such estimate does not establish any vested rights to
build or develop the property.
F.Individual Assessment of Development Fees
If any applicant believes that the impact of the proposed development
will be substantially less than would be indicated by using the fee
schedule,such person may request to perform an individual assessment
of the impact of the proposed development at their own cost.A request
for an individual assessment must be made before submitting an
application for a building permit.
1.The individual assessment shall be subject to the following
special standards and procedures:
a.Road Development Fees (as set forth in Section 7-1-2.B):
b.Police Development Fees (as set forth in Section 7-1-3.B):
c.Park and Open Space Development Fees (as set forth in
Section 7-1-4.B):
d.Library Development Fees (as set forth in Section 7-1-5.B):
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 6 of 32
e.Municipal Building Development Fees (as set forth in
Section 7-1-6.B):
2.If the Development Fee Administrator accepts the computations of
the individual assessment under this Section.the applicable fee
shall be determined from the individual assessment.
G.Collection of Development Fees
1.Except as set forth in the following paragraph,the development
fees for all new development shall be calculated and collected in
conjunction with the application for the first building permit or
electrical permit,certificate of compliance or occupancy,or
other permit subsequent to development plan approval for such
development,whichever occurs first in time.
2.For other uses not ultimately requiring a building permit,
electrical permit,certificate of compliance or occupancy,or
other permit,the fee shall be calculated and collected at such
time as determined by the Development Fee Administrator.
H.Fund Accounting for Development Fees
1.The City Finance Department shall establish a separate accounting
fund in which the development fees collected for a particular
type of facility within the service area shall be credited.Such
fees shall be invested by the City and the yield on such fees,at
the actual rate of return to the City,shall be credited to such
accounting fund periodically in accordance with the accounting
policies of the City.Such funds need not be segregated from
other City monies for banking purposes.
2.Any yield on such accounting fund into which the fees are
deposited shall accrue to that fund and shall be used for the
purposes specified for such fund.
3.The City Finance Department shall maintain and keep financial
records for such accounting fund showing the revenues to such
fund and the disbursements from such fund,in accordance with
normal City accounting practices.The records of such fund shall
be open to public inspection in the same manner as other
financial records of the City.
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 7 of 32
I.Expenditure of Development Fees
Development fees may only be spent on qualifying improvements,as
follows:
1.Road Development Fees shall be spent as set forth in Section 7-1-
2.C:
2.Police Development Fees shall be spent as set forth in Section 7-
1-3.C:
3.Park and Open Space Development Fees shall be spent as set forth
in Section 7-1-4.C:
4.Library Development Fees shall be spent as set forth in Section
7-1-5.C:
5.Municipal Building Development Fees shall be spent as set forth
in Section 7-1-6.C.
J.Refunds of Development Fees
1.Any development fee or portion thereof collected pursuant to this
Ordinance which has not been committed for a use permitted by
Section 7-1-1.1 Expenditure of Development Fees,within seven
(7)years from the last day of the fiscal year in which it was
received by the City,shall be refunded to the current record
owner of the property on file at the County Recorder's Office
upon written application on a form prescribed by the Development
Fee Administrator.Development fees shall be deemed to be
"committed"in the order in which they are received by the City.
The refund shall include accrued interest at the rate of return
on investments earned by the City on such amount.In disbursing
such funds,the City may rely on the written certification of the
current record owner of the property as to his or her entitlement
to the refund,in the absence of a written assertion by another
party that such proposed payee is not the proper payee.I f in
doubt,the City may deposit such funds in an appropriate court
for disposition as the court may determine.In such event,the
City may deduct,from the funds deposited,an amount equal to the
reasonable cost of causing the funds to be deposited with the
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 8 of 32
court,including reasonable attorneys fees.Failure to file a
refund request with the Development Fee Administrator more than
six months from the date the development fee was paid to the City
shall be deemed waived by the applicant •
2.The applicant may apply for a refund of the development fee and
accrued interest in writing within sixty (60)calendar days after
the expiration of the building permit or other approval (or any
extension thereof)on which it was assessed if no construction
has commenced within the allowable building permit period.
3.The city shall charge an administrative fee for verifying and
computing the refund of three percent (3%)the amount of the
refund.
K.Offsets to Development Fees
Offsets,which are reductions from the development fee that would
otherwise be due from a development,shall be subject to the following
provisions.
1.An offset shall be applied against development fees otherwise due
for qualifying improvements,as defined in Section 7-1-1.1
Expenditure of Development Fees,that are required to be made by
a developer as a condition of development approval.
Offsets shall be allowable and payable only to offset development
fees otherwise due for the same category or improvements and
shall not result in reimbursement from nor constitute a liability
of the City.
3.Offsets shall be given only for the value of any construction of
improvements or contribution or dedication of land or money by a
developer or his or her predecessor in title or interest for
qualifying improvements of the same category for which a
development fee was imposed.Offsets shall not be provided
against road development fees for dedication of rights -of -way
since land costs were not included in the development fee
calculations.
4.The person applying for an offset shall be responsible for
providing appraisals of land and improvements,construction cost
figures.and documentation of all contributions and dedications
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 9 of 32
necessary to the computation of the offsets claimed.The
Development Fee Administrator shall prepare an analysis and
response to the offset claim and submit both to the applicant.
The Development Fee Administrator shall have the final decision
with regard to approval or denial of an offset claim,subject to
appeal to the City Council as set forth in 7-1-1(M),below.
Approvals may be all or in -part.
5.The value of land dedicated or donated shall be based on the
appraised land value of the parent parcel.A land value is based
on the date of transfer of ownership to the City.A certified
appraiser who was selected.and paid for by the applicant and who
used generally accepted appraisal techniques shall determine the
value.If the City disagrees with the appraised value,the City
may hire another appraiser at the City's expense and the value
shall be an amount equal to the average of the two appraisals.
If either party rejects the average of the two appraisals,a
third appraisal shall be obtained,with the cost of such third
appraisal being shared equally by the property owner and the
City.The third appraiser shall be selected by the first two
appraisers,and the third appraisal shall be binding on both
parties.
6.Offsets provided for qualifying improvements meeting the
requirements of this Section shall be valid from the date of
approval until seven (7)years after the date of approval or
until the last date of construction within the project,whichever
occurs first.
7.The right to claim offsets shall run with the land and may be
claimed only by owners of property within the development for
which the qualifying improvement was required.
8.Any claim for offsets must be made in writing no later than the
time of submittal of a building permit application or application
for another permit that is subject to development fees.Any
claim not so made shall be deemed waived.
L.Developer Agreements for Development Fees
1.Where a development includes or requires a qualifying improvement
as defined in Section 7-1-1.1 Expenditure of Development Fees.
the City and the developer may agree in writing to have the
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 10 of 32
developer participate in the financing or construction of part or
all of the qualifying improvements.Such agreement may provide
for cash reimbursements,offsets,or other appropriate
compensation to the developer for the developer's participation
in the financing and/or construction of the improvements.
2.The agreement shall include:
a.the estimated cost of the qualifying improvements,using
the lowest responsive bid by a qualified bidder,which bid
is approved by the Development Fee Administrator:or,if no
bid is available,the estimated cost certified by a
licensed Arizona engineer and approved by the Development
Fee Administrator:
b.a schedule for initiation and completion of the
improvement:
c.a requirement that the improvement be designed and
completed in compliance with any applicable City
ordinances:and
d.such other terms and conditions as deemed necessary by the
City.
M.Relief Procedures and Hearings
The developer who owes,has paid a development fee,or disputes the
offset amount determined by the Development Fee Administrator may
appeal to the Mayor and City Council.Such appeal must be filed with
the Development Fee Administrator in writing:1)within (30)calendar
days after the date the City notified the developer of an assessment or
offset determination:or 2)within thirty (30)calendar days after the
developer paid the development fee.In either case,any building
permit issued before the appeal is filed shall be considered stayed
until after the appeal process has concluded.Any work in progress
completed during the appeal process shall be performed at the
developer's own risk.Failure to pay the development fees as
determined on appeal shall result in the withholding by the City of the
Certificate of Occupancy of Developer's project.The City Council must
hold a hearing on the appeal within forty-five (45)calendar days after
received by the Development Fee Administrator.The Council's failure
to hold a public hearing within the forty-five (45)calendar days
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 11 of 32
absent a continuance request by the developer,shall result in the
developer's position prevailing over the City's.The decision of the
Mayor and City Council shall be considered the final administrative
decision of the City.
N.Development Fee as Supplemental Regulation to Other Financing Methods
1.Except as herein otherwise provided,development fees are in
addition to any other requirements,taxes,fees,or assessments
imposed by the City on development or the Issuance of building
permits or certificates of occupancy which are imposed on and due
against property within the jurisdiction of the City.
Development fees are intended to be consistent with the City's
Comprehensive Plan,Capital Improvements Program,Land
Development Code,and other City policies,ordinances and
resolutions by which the City seeks to ensure the provision of
capital facilities in conjunction with development.
2.In addition to the use of development fees,the City may finance
qualifying capital improvements through the issuance of bonds,
the formation of assessment districts or any other authorized
mechanism,in such manner and subject to such limitations as
provided by law.
0.Updates and revisions of the Development Fees
1.Not less often than every three (3)years,the Planning and
Zoning Commission,following a public hearing,shall review and,
if warranted,recommend changes in the schedules of development
fees.Factors to be considered may include,without limitation,
past and projected growth in residential and nonresidential
development,qualifying improvements actually constructed,
changing levels of service,revised cost estimates for qualifying
improvements,changes in the availability of other funding
sources,changes in demand generation characteristics,sources of
non -City funds and such other factors as may be relevant.
2.On January 1st,following each calendar year during which the
development fee schedules have not been updated to reflect
changes in construction costs,the Development Fee Administrator
shall prepare updated development fee schedules to reflect
changes in average construction costs as provided herein.The
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 12 of 32
Development Fee Administrator shall also calculate updated net
costs per service unit to be used in individual development fee
calculations using the same procedure.The proposed revisions
shall then be presented to the Mayor and City Council for action.
a.The fees in the development fee schedules and the net costs
per service unit shall be multiplied by the following
Construction Cost Factor. •
b.The Construction Cost Factor shall be the ratio of the most
current quarterly national Construction Cost index (CCI)
published by Engineering New -Record magazine,divided by
the CCI for the same quarter of the previous year.In the
event that the CCI ceases to be published,the Construction
Cost Factor shall be calculated in a comparable manner
using the national Consumer Price Index,and All Urban
Consumers published by the U.S.Census Bureau.
SECTION 7-1-2 ROAD DEVELOPMENT FEES
A.Road Development Fee Schedule
At the option of the applicant,the road development fee may be
calculated based on the adopted road development fee schedule.The
Development Fee Administrator shall determine the land use category in
the fee schedule that best represents the proposed use in terms of trip
generation characteristics.In the event that the Development Fee
Administrator determines that the land use categories,trip generation
rates,or primary trip factors in the fee schedule do not accurately
reflect the proposed development,the Development Fee Administrator
shall determine the fee based on the land use categories,trip
generation rates or equations and/or primary trip data contained in the
most current edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip
Generation manual ("ITE manual").The Development Fee Administrator
shall make the determination of the appropriate land use category,trip
generation rate,or equation and primary trip factor,based on the
appropriateness and quality of the data,guidelines for determining
whether to use trip generation rates or equations set forth in the ITE
manual,and other relevant considerations.Once the appropriate land
use and travel demand factors have been determined,the Development Fee
Administrator shall calculate the fee using the following formula.
FEE
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 13 of 32
= VMT x NET COST/VMT
VMT = TRIPS x PERCENT NEW x LENGTH 2
NET COST/VMT = COST/VMT -CREDIT/VMT
COST/VMT = COST/VMC x VMC/VMT
Where:
VMT = Vehicle -miles of travel placed on the major
roadway system during and average week day
TRIPS = Average daily trip ends
PERCENT NEW
LENGTH
system
- 2
COST/VMC
VMC/VMT
CREDIT! VMT
=Percent of trips that are primary trips,as
opposed to pass -by or diverted -link trips
= Average length of trip on major roadway
= Avoids double -counting trips for origin and
destination
= Average cost to create a new vehicle -mile of
capacity (VMC)
= The system -wide ratio of capacity to demand
on the major roadway system
= Revenue credit per VMT
B.Individual Assessments of Road Development Fees
1.The Road Development Fee shall be calculated based upon
individual assessment.An individual assessment shall be at the
cost of the applicant and shall be prepared by a qualified
traffic engineer firm.
2.The traffic study shall be signed by the traffic engineer
submitting the assessment and shall include,without limitation,
the following elements:
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 14 of 32
a.a projection of the number of vehicular trips entering and
departing from the project during an average weekday:
b.if the site is already developed,and some or all of the
existing development will be replaced by the completed
project,a calculation of the number of vehicular trips for
that portion of the existing development which will be
replaced by the completed project:
c.the percentage of those trips identified in (a.)and (b.)
above which are "primary trips"(as opposed to "pass -by
trips"or "diverted -link trips"for which the project is
not the primary destination):
d.the average length of those trips on the City's major
roadway system:
e.the assumptions and conclusions from which any projections
are made:if the assumptions or conclusions are derived
from the current edition of the ITE manual or other
standard reference materials,the materials shall be
identified and appropriate excerpts or specific references
provided:otherwise,the reasoning underlying the
assumptions and conclusions shall be clearly stated in
writing:and
f.such information as the Development Fee Administrator shall
reasonably request.
C.Use of Road Development Fees
1.The revenues from road development fees collected within the
service area and accrued interest on such revenues shall be used
to finance project costs of qualifying major roadway
improvements,as determined by the City Council.
2.Qualifying road improvements are limited to improvements to the
City's major roadway system.The City's major roadway system
consists of all City -maintained roadways or portions thereof that
are classified as collectors or arterials by the City of Apache
Junction's adopted Street Classification Plan on file within the
Public Works Department..
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 15 of 32
3.Qualifying improvement costs include project engineering costs:
the construction cost of improvement,including,but not limited
to,street travel lanes,public pedestrian and bicycle pathways,
turning lanes,lighting,signalization,signage and landscaping
improvements that are required for the roadway improvement to
function effectively:and the principal,interest and other
financing costs of bonds.notes or other obligations issued by or
on behalf of the City to finance qualified improvements.Such
revenues may also fund the cost of consultants used in updating
the transportation portion of the Capital Improvements Program
and in updating the road development fee computations.
4.Monies collected as road development fees shall not be used to
pay for any of the following:
a.construction,acquisition or expansion of public facilities
other than qualifying road improvements:
b.retirement of debt incurred for road facilities constructed
before to March 1,1997:
c.road improvements,such as acceleration or deceleration
lanes,that primarily serve,or are needed to mitigate the
impacts of an individual development:
d.repair,operation or maintenance of existing streets:
e.city personnel and consultants hired for purposes other
than those expressly permitted under Section 7-1-2.C.
subsections 1 and 2 above:
f.streets and related transportation improvements that are
within or adjacent to,and intended to serve only.a
specific development such as a new residential subdivision:
or
g.acquisition of land or rights -of -way.Land costs are not
included in the road development fee calculations and no
development fee funds shall be expended on right-of-way
acquisition,nor shall offsets against road development
fees be provided for dedication of rights -of -way.
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 16 of 32
SECTION 7-1-3 POLICE DEVELOPMENT FEES
A.Police Development Fee Schedule
At the option of the applicant,the police development fee may be
calculated based on the adopted police development fee schedule.The
Development Fee Administrator shall determine the land use category in
the fee schedule that best represents the proposed use in terms of
functional population characteristics.In the event that the
Development Fee Administrator determines that the nonresidential land
use categories in the fee schedule do not accurately reflect the
proposed development,the Development Fee Administrator shall determine
the fee based on the land use categories,trip generation rates or
equations,average vehicle occupancy and/or other data contained in the
most current edition of the ITE manual or other appropriate source.
The Development Fee Administrator shall make the determination of the
appropriate land use category,trip generation rate or equation and
other factors based on the appropriateness and quality of the data,the
guidelines for determining whether to use trip generation rates or
equations set forth in the ITE manual,and other relevant
considerations.Once the appropriate land use,trip generation and
other factors have been determined,the Development Fee Administrator
shall calculate the fee using the following formula:
FEE =Functional population/1000 sf x Net Cost per
Functional Population
Where:
Functional population/1000 sf =(employee hours/1000 sf +
visitor hours/1000 sf)+16 hours/day
Employee hours/1000 sf =employees/1000 sf x 10 hrs/day
Visitor hours/1000 sf =visitors/1000 sf x 1 hour/visit
Visitors/1000 sf =weekday ADT/1000 sf x avg.Vehicle occupancy
employees/1000 sf
Weekday ADT/1000 sf =one-way average daily trips (total trip
ends 2)
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 17 of 32
Net Cost per Functional Population shall be $99.11,unless the
applicant provides convincing evidence that another net cost
factor is more appropriate for the proposed development.
B.Individual Assessments of Police Development Fees
1.The Police Development Fee may be calculated based upon
individual assessment.An individual assessment shall be at the
cost of the applicant and shall be performed by a traffic
engineer or other qualified professional as approved by the
Development Fee Administrator.
2.The individual assessment for a residential use shall include,
without limitation,the data sources and calculations used to
derive the average household size for the type of dwelling units
proposed.The development fee per dwelling unit shall be
calculated according to the following formula:
FEE =Average Household Size x Occupancy Factor x Net
Cost per Functional Population
Where:
Average Household Size is the average number of persons
residing in occupied dwelling units of the proposed housing
type.
Occupancy Factor shall be 0.50 unless the applicant
provides convincing evidence that another factor is more
appropriate for the proposed development.
Net Cost per Functional Population shall be $99.11 unless
the applicant provides convincing evidence that another net
cost factor is more appropriate for the proposed
development.
3.The individual assessment for a nonresidential use shall include,
without limitation,the following elements:
a.a projection of the number of vehicular trips entering and
departing from the project during an average weekday:
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 18 of 32
b.the average number of persons occupying vehicles entering
the project:
c.the average number of hours spent by employees and visitors
at the site during an average weekday:
d.the assumptions and conclusions from which any projections
are made.If the assumptions or conclusions are derived
from the current edition of the ITE manual or other
standard reference materials,the materials shall be
identified and appropriate excerpts or specific references
provided.Otherwise,the reasoning underlying the
assumptions and conclusions shall be clearly stated in
writing:and
e.such other information as the Development Fee Administrator
shall reasonable request.
4.The Development Fee Administrator shall determine the fee based
on the review of the individual assessment and the guidelines and
formula described in the preceding Section 7-1-3.A,Police
Development Fee Schedule or the formula for residential uses
described in Section 7-1-3.B.2.
C.Use of Police Development Fees
1.The revenues from police development fees collected within the
service area and accrued interest on such revenues shall be used
to finance project costs of qualifying police improvements,as
determined by the City Council,provided that the improvements
are located within the same service area.
2.Qualifying police improvements are limited to capital
improvements to the City's Public Safety building,acquisition of
land for or construction of police substations,acquisition of
capital equipment required for police operations,or other
similar improvements,including the principal,interest and other
financing costs of bonds,notes or other obligations issued by or
on behalf in the City to finance qualified improvements.Such
revenues may also fund the cost of consultants used in updating
the police portion of the Capital Improvements Program and in
updating the police development fee computations.
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 19 of 32
3.Monies collected as police development fees shall not be used to
pay for any of the following:
a.construction,acquisition or expansion of public facilities
other than qualifying police improvements:
b.retirement of debt incurred for police facilities
constructed prior to March 1.1997:
c.repair,operation,maintenance or replacement of existing
police facilities or capital equipment:and
d.City personnel and consultants hired for purposes other
than those expressly permitted under Section 7-1-3.C.
subsections 1 and 2 above.
SECTION 7-1-4 PARK AND OPEN SPACE DEVELOPMENT FEES
A.Park and Open Space Development Fee Schedule
At the option of the applicant,the park and open space development fee
may be calculated based on the adopted park and open space development
fee schedule.
B.Individual Assessments of Park and Open Space Development Fees
1.The park and open space development fee may be calculated based
upon individual assessment.An individual assessment shall be at
the cost of the applicant and shall be performed by a qualified
professional as approved by the Development Fee Administrator.
2.The individual assessment shall include,without limitation,the
data sources and calculations used to derive the average
household size for the type of dwelling units proposed.The
development fee per dwelling unit shall be calculated according
to the following formula:
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 20 of 32
FEE =Equivalent Dwelling Unit x Net Cost per
Equivalent Dwelling Unit
Where:
Equivalent Dwelling Unit = the ratio of the average
household size of the proposed housing type to the average
household size of a typical single-family dwelling unit in
Apache Junction.
Average Household Size = the average number of persons
residing in occupied dwelling units of the proposed housing
type.
Net Cost per Equivalent Dwelling Unit =$699.20,unless the
applicant provides convincing evidence that another net
cost factor is more appropriate for the proposed
development.
3.The Development Fee Administrator shall determine the fee based
on the review of the individual assessment and the guidelines and
formula described in the preceding Section 6.1.
C.Use of Park and Open Space Development Fees
1.The revenues from park and open space development fees collected
within the service area and accrued interest on such revenues
shall be used to finance project costs of qualifying park and
open space improvements,as determined by the City Council,
provided that the improvements are shown in the Capital
Improvements Program and are located within the same service
area.
2.Qualifying park and open space improvements are limited to
acquisition of park and open space sites:park and open space
site development costs,including grading,utilities,
landscaping,lighting,fencing,signage and construction of
parking facilities;acquisition,construction and installation of
park and open space facilities and equipment;or other similar
improvements,including the principal,interest and other
financing costs of bonds,notes or other obligations issued by,
or on behalf of,the City to finance qualified improvements.
Such revenues may also fund the cost of consultants used in
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 21 of 32
updating the park and open space portion of the Capital
Improvements Program and in updating the park and open space
development fee computations.
3.Monies collected as park and open space development fees shall
not be used to pay for any of the following:
a.construction,acquisition or expansion of public facilities
other than qualifying park and open space improvements;
b.retirement of debt incurred for park and open space
facilities constructed prior to March 1,1997;
c.repair,operation,maintenance or replacement of existing
park and open space facilities or capital equipment;and
d.City personnel and consultants hired for purposes other
than those expressly permitted under Section 7-1-4.C.
subsections 1 and 2 above.
SECTION 7-1-5 LIBRARY DEVELOPMENT FEES
A.Library Development Fee Schedule
At the option of the applicant,the library development fee may be
calculated based on the adopted library development fee schedule.
B.Individual Assessment of Library Development Fees
Individual assessments of library development fees shall be allowed as
follows:
1.The library development fee may be calculated based upon
individual assessment.An individual assessment shall be at the
cost of the applicant and shall be performed by a qualified
professional as approved by the Development Fee Administrator.
2.The individual assessment shall include,without limitation,the
data sources and calculations used to derive the average
household size for the type of dwelling units proposed.The
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 22 of 32
development fee per dwelling unit shall be calculated according
to the following formula:
FEE =Equivalent Dwelling Unit of Proposed Housing Type
x Net Cost per Equivalent Dwelling Unit
Where:
Equivalent Dwelling Unit = the ratio of the average
household size of the proposed housing type to the average
household size of a typical single-family dwelling unit in
Apache Junction.
Average Household Size = the average number of persons
residing in occupied dwelling units of the proposed housing
type.
Net Cost per Equivalent Dwelling Unit =$262.16,unless the
applicant provides convincing evidence that another net
cost factor is more appropriate for the proposed
development.
3.The Development Fee Administrator shall determine the fee based
on the review of the individual assessment and the guidelines and
formula described in the preceding Section B.1.
C.Use of Library Development Fees
1.The revenues from library development fees collected within the
service area and accrued interest on such revenues shall be used
to finance project costs of qualifying library improvements,as
determined by the City Council,provided that the improvements
are shown on the Capital Improvements Program and are located
within the same services area.
2.Qualifying library improvements are limited to acquisition of
library sites;library site development costs,including grading,
utilities,landscaping,lighting,fencing,signage and
construction of parking facilities;acquisition,construction and
installation of library facilities and equipment;or other
similar improvements,including the principal,interest and other
financing costs of bonds,notes or other obligations issued by or
on behalf of the City to finance qualified improvements.Such
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 23 of 32
revenues may also fund the cost of consultants used in updating
the library portion of the Capital Improvements Program and in
updating the library development fee computations.
3.Monies collected as library development fees shall not be used to
pay for any of the following:
a.construction,acquisition or expansion of public facilities
other than qualifying library improvements:
b.retirement of debt incurred for library facilities
constructed prior to March 1,1997:
c.repair,operation,maintenance or replacement of existing
library facilities or capital equipment:and
d.city personnel and consultants hired for purposes other
than those expressly permitted under Section 7-1-5.C,
subsections 1 and 2 above.
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 24 of 32
SECTION 7-1-6 MUNICIPAL BUILDING DEVELOPMENT FEES
A.Municipal Building Development Fee Schedule
At the option of the applicant,the municipal building development fee
may be calculated based on the adopted municipal building development
fee schedule.The Development Fee Administrator shall determine the
land use category in the fee schedule that best represents the proposed
use in terms of functional population characteristics.In the event
that the Development Fee Administrator determines that the
nonresidential land use categories in the fee schedule do not
accurately reflect the proposed development,the Development Fee
Administrator shall determine the fee based on the land use categories,
trip generation rates or equations,average vehicle occupancy and/or
other data contained in the most current edition of the Institute of
Transportation Engineers Trip Generation manual (ITE manual)or other
appropriate source.The Development Fee Administrator shall make the
determination of the appropriate land use category,trip generation
rate or equation and other factors based on the appropriateness and
quality of the data,the guidelines for determining whether to use trip
generation rates or equations set forth in the ITE manual,and other
relevant considerations.Once the appropriate land use,trip
generation and other factors have been determined,the Development Fee
Administrator shall calculate the fee using the following formula:
FEE =Functional population/1000 sf x Net Cost per Functional
Population
Where:
Functional population/1000 sf =(employee hours/1000 sf +
visitor hours/1000 sf)+16 hours/day
Employee hours/1000 sf =employees/1000 sf
Visitor hours/1000 sf =employees/1000 sf
Visitors/1000 sf =weekday ADT/1000 sf x
occupancy -employees/1000 sf
x 10 hrs/day
x 1 hour/visit
avg.Vehicle
Weekday ADT/1000 sf = one-way average daily trips (total trip
ends -2)
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 25 of 32
Net Cost per Functional Population = $64.24,unless the applicant
provides convincing evidence that another net cost factor is more
appropriate for the proposed development.
B.Individual Assessments of Municipal Building Development Fees
1.The municipal building development fee may be calculated based
upon individual assessment.An individual assessment shall be at
the cost of the applicant and shall be performed by a traffic
engineer or other qualified professional as approved by the
Development Fee Administrator.
2.The individual assessment for a residential use shall include,
without limitation,the data sources and calculations used to
derive the average household size for the type of dwelling units
proposed.The development fee per dwelling unit shall be
calculated according to the following formula:
FEE =Average Household Size x Occupancy Factor x
per Functional Population
Where:
Net Cost
Average Household Size = the average number of persons residing
in occupied dwelling units of the proposed housing type.
Occupancy Factor =0.50,unless the applicant provides convincing
evidence that another factor is more appropriate for the proposed
development.
Net Cost per Functional Population =$64.24,unless the applicant
provides convincing evidence that another' net cost factor is more
appropriate for the proposed development.
3.The individual assessment for a nonresidential use = without
limitation,the following elements:
a.a projection of the number of vehicular trips entering and
departing from the project during an average weekday:
b.the average number of persons occupying vehicles entering
the project:
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 26 of 32
c.the average number of hours spent by employees and visitors
at the site during an average weekday;
d.the assumptions and conclusions from which any projections
are made.If the assumptions or conclusions are derived
form the current edition of the TIE manual or other
standard reference materials,the materials shall be
identified and appropriate excerpts or specific references
provided.Otherwise,the reasoning underlying the
assumptions and conclusions shall be clearly stated in
writing:and
e.such other information as the Development Fee Administrator
shall reasonably request.
4.The Development Fee Administrator shall determine the fee based
on the review of the individual assessment and the guidelines and
formula described in the preceding Section 7-1-6.A,Municipal
Building Development Fee Schedule,or the formula for residential
uses described in Section 7-1-6.B.2.
C.Use of Municipal Building Development Fees
1.The revenues from municipal building development fees collected
within the service area and accrued interest on such revenues
shall be used to finance project costs of qualifying municipal
building improvements,as determined by the City Council,
provided that the improvements are shown on the Capital
Improvements Program and are located within the same service
area.
2.Qualifying municipal building improvements are limited to capital
improvements to the City's administrative offices and vehicle
maintenance facilities,including the principal,interest and
other financing costs of bonds,notes or other obligations issued
by,or on behalf of the City,to finance qualified improvements.
Such revenues may also fund the cost of consultants used in
updating the municipal building portion of the Capital
Improvements Program and in updating the municipal building
development fee computations.
3.Monies collected as municipal building development fees shall not
be used to pay for any of the following:
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 27 of 32
a.construction,acquisition or expansion of public facilities
other than qualifying municipal building improvements:
b.retirement of debt incurred for municipal building
facilities constructed prior to December 31,1997:
c.repair,operation,maintenance or replacement of existing
municipal building facilities or capital equipment:and
d.City personnel and consultants hired for purposes other
than those expressly permitted under Section 7-1-3.C,
subsections 1 and 2 above.
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 28 of 32
ROAD DEVELOPMENT FEE SCHEDULE,2002
Land Use Unit
Daily
VMT
Net
per
Cost
VMT
Net Cost
per Unit
Residential
Single -Family Detached Dwelling 10.20 $145.56 $1,485
Multi -Family Dwelling 7.07 $145.56 $1,029
Mobile Home/Manufactured/RV Park Space 5.13 $145.56 $747
Assisted Living Facility Dwelling 2.30 $145.56 $335
Retail/Commercial
General Retail/Shopping Center 1000 sq.ft.26.51 $145.56 $3,859
Auto Sales/Repair 1000 sq.ft.29.95 $145.56 $4,360
Building Material/Lumber 1000 sq.ft.31.73 $145.56 $4,619
Convenience Store/Gas Station 1000 sq.ft.33.82 $145.56 $4,923
Discount Store 1000 sq.ft.28.95 $145.56 $4,214
Drive -In Bank 1000 sq.ft.26.85 $145.56 $3,908
Hotel/Motel Room 7.39 $145.56 $1,076
Movie Theater 1000 sq.ft.62.35 $145.56 $9,076
Nursery/Garden Center 1000 sq.ft.28.82 $145.56 $4,195
Restaurant,Fast Food 1000 sq.ft.37.21 $145.56 $5,416
Restaurant,Sit -Down 1000 sq.ft.12.82 $145.56 $1.866
Office/Institutional
General Office Building 1000 sq.ft.11.74 $145.56 $1,709
Medical Office 1000 sq.ft.38.49 $145.56 $5,603
Hospital 1000 sq.ft.17.87 $145.56 $2,601
Nursing Home 1000 sq.ft.5.01 $145.56 1.729
Church/Synagogue 1000 sq.ft.9.71 $145.56 $1,413
Day Care Center 1000 sq.ft.7.13 $145.56 $1,038
Elementary School 1000 sq.ft.1.08 $145.56 $157
High School 1000 sq.ft.2.24 $145.56 $326
Industrial/Warehouse
General Light Industrial 1000 sq.ft.7.43 $145.56 $1,082
Warehouse 1000 sq.ft.5.28 $145.56 $769
Mini -Warehouse 1000 sq.ft.2.66 $145.56 $387
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 29 of 32
POLICE DEVELOPMENT FEE SCHEDULE,2002
Land Use Type Unit
Functional
Population/
Unit
Net Cost/
Functional
Population
Net
Cost/
Unit
Residential
Single-family Dwelling 1.34 $99.11 $133
Multi -family Dwelling 1.29 $99.11 $128
Mobile home/Manufactured/RV Park Space 1.03 $99.11 $102
Assisted Living Facility Dwelling 0.94 $99.11 $93
Retail/Commercial
General Retail/Shopping Center 1000 sq.ft.3.28 $99.11 $325
Auto Sales/Repair 1000 sq.ft.2.89 $99.11 $286
Building Material/Lumber 1000 sq.ft.2.28 $99.11 $226
Convenience Store/Gas Station 1000 sq.ft.8.34 $99.11 $827
Discount Store 1000 sq.ft.3.69 $99.11 $366
Drive -In Bank 1000 sq.ft.3.99 $99.11 $395
Hotel/Motel Room 2.87 $99.11 $284
Movie Theater 1000 sq.ft.4.78 $99.11 $474
Nursery/Garden Center 1000 sq.ft.2.74 $99.11 $272
Restaurant,Fast Food 1000 sq.ft.10.81 $99.11 $1,071
Restaurant,Sit -Down 1000 sq.ft.6.93 $99.11 $687
Office/Institutional
General Office Building 1000 sq.ft.2.28 $99.11 $226
Medical Office 1000 sq.ft.3.83 $99.11 $380
Hospital 1000 sq.ft.2.73 $99.11 $271
Nursing Home 1000 sq.ft.2.06 $99.11 $204
Church/Synagogue 1000 sq.ft.0.75 $99.11 $74
Day Care Center 1000 sq.ft.5.44 $99.11 $539
Elementary School 1000 sq.ft.4.99 $99.11 $495
High School 1000 sq.ft.4.91 $99.11 $487
Industrial/Warehouse
General Light Industrial 1000 sq.ft.1.58 $99.11 $157
Warehouse 1000 sq.ft.0.92 $99.11 $91
Mini -Warehouse 1000 sq.ft.0.14 $99.11 $14
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 30 of 32
PARK AND OPEN SPACE DEVELOPMENT FEE SCHEDULE,2002
Open
Park Space Total
EDUs/Net Cost Net Cost/Net Cost/Net Cost/
Housing Type Unit Unit per EDU Unit Unit Unit
Single-family Dwelling 1.00 $563.95 $480 $84 $564
Multi -family Dwelling 0.96 $563.95 $461 $81 $542
Mobile
Home/Manufacured/RV Park Space 0.77 $563.95 $369 $65 $434
Assisted Living Facility Dwelling 0.70 $563.95 $336 $59 $395
LIBRARY DEVELOPMENT FEE SCHEDULE,2002
EDUs/Net Cost/Net Cost/
Housing Type Unit Unit EDU Unit
Single-family Dwelling 1.00 $262.31 $262
Multi -family Dwelling 0.96 $262.31 $252
Mobile Home/
Manufactured/RV Park Space 0.77 $262.31 $202
Assisted Living Dwelling 0.70 $262.31 $184
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 31 of 32
MUNICIPAL BUILDING DEVELOPMENT FEE SCHEDULE,2002
Land Use Type Unit
Functional
Population/
Unit
Net Cost/
Functional
Population
Net
Cost/
Unit
Residential
Single-family Dwelling 1.34 $62.04 $83
Multi -family Dwelling 1.29 $62.04 $80
Mobile home/Manufactured/RV Park Space 1.03 $62.04 $64
Assisted Living Facility Dwelling 0.94 $62.04 $58
Retail/Commercial
General Retail/Shopping Center 1000 sq.ft.3.28 $62.04 $203
Auto Sales/Repair 1000 sq.ft.2.89 $62.04 $179
Building Material/Lumber 1000 sq.ft.2.28 $62.04 $141
Convenience Store/Gas Station 1000 sq.ft.8.34 $62.04 $517
Discount Store 1000 sq.ft.3.69 $62.04 $229
Drive -In Bank 1000 sq.ft.3.99 $62.04 $248
Hotel/Motel Room 2.87 $62.04 $178
Movie Theater 1000 sq.ft.4.78 $62.04 $297
Nursery/Garden Center 1000 sq.ft.2.74 $62.04 $170
Restaurant,Fast Food 1000 sq.ft.10.81 $62.04 $671
Restaurant,Sit -Down 1000 sq.ft.6.93 $62.04 $430
Office/Institutional
General Office Building 1000 sq.ft.2.28 $62.04 $141
Medical Office 1000 sq.ft.3.83 $62.04 $238
Hospital 1000 sq.ft.2.73 $62.04 $169
Nursing Home 1000 sq.ft.2.06 $62.04 $128
Church/Synagogue 1000 sq.ft.0.75 $62.04 $47
Day Care Center 1000 sq.ft.5.44 $62.04 $337
Elementary School 1000 sq.ft.4.99 $62.04 $310
High School 1000 sq.ft.4.91 $62.04 $305
Industrial/Warehouse
General Light Industrial 1000 sq.ft.1.58 $62.04 $98
Warehouse 1000 sq.ft.0.92 $62.04 $57
Mini -Warehouse 1000 sq.ft.0.14 $62.04 $9
Article 7-1
Development Fees
Page 32 of 32
DEVELOPMENT FEE UPDATE STUDY
prepared by
Du NCAN ASSOCIATES
Aus-n N, TEXAS
In association with
EARTH TECH, INC.
PHCENIX, ARIZCNA
DECEMBER 2001
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION .............................................................1
Background .............................................................1
Description of Changes ....................................................2
Comparative Fees ........................................................4
ROADS .....................................................................5
Service Unit ............................................................5
Methodology ............................................................5
Major Roadway System ....................................................7
Cost per Service Unit ....................................................11
Net Cost per Service Unit .................................................13
Demand and Cost Schedule ...............................................14
POLICE ....................................................................19
Service Unit ...........................................................19
Cost per Service Unit ....................................................22
Net Cost per Service Unit .................................................23
Demand and Cost Schedule ...............................................24
PARKS AND OPEN SPACE ...................................................27
Service Unit ...........................................................27
Cost per Service Unit ....................................................27
Net Cost per Service Unit .................................................31
Demand and Cost Schedule ...............................................32
LIBRARY ...................................................................34
Service Unit ...........................................................34
Cost per Service Unit ....................................................34
Net Cost per Service Unit .................................................36
Demand and Cost Schedule ...............................................37
MUNICIPAL BUILDINGS .....................................................38
Service Unit ...........................................................38
Cost per Service Unit ....................................................38
Demand and Cost Schedule ...............................................39
APPENDIX A: DEMOGRAPHIC DATA .........................................42
APPENDIX B:DEBT SERVICE CREDIT ........................................44
APPENDIX C:STUDY COST ..................................................46
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1:DEVELOPMENT FEE REVENUES, 1997-2000 ........................2
Table 2:SUMMARY OF MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT FEES ....................3
Table 3:COMPARATIVE DEVELOPMENT FEES PER SINGLE-FAMILY UNIT ...4
Table 4:MAJOR ROADWAY INVENTORY ..................................8
Table 5:TRAVEL AND DEMAND ON MAJOR STREET NETWORK ............11
Table 6:ROADWAY CONSTRUCTION COSTS PER LANE -MILE ...............12
Table 7:ROAD COST PER SERVICE UNIT .................................13
Table 8:ANNUAL ROAD REVENUE ......................................13
Table 9:ROAD REVENUE CREDIT PER VMT ..............................14
Table 10:ROAD NET COST PER SERVICE UNIT .............................14
Table 11:AVERAGE TRIP LENGTH ........................................15
Table 12:ROAD SERVICE UNIT GENERATION BY LAND USE TYPE ..........16
Table 13:ROAD NET COST BY LAND USE TYPE ............................17
Table 14:POTENTIAL CHANGE IN ROAD FEES .............................18
Table 15:FUNCTIONAL POPULATION PER DWELLING UNIT .................19
Table 16:NONRESIDENTIAL FUNCTIONAL POPULATION PER 1,000 SQ. FT...21
Table 17:TOTAL FUNCTIONAL POPULATION, 2001 .........................22
Table 18:POLICE FACILITY REPLACEMENT COST ..........................23
Table 19:POLICE GRANT FUNDING CREDIT PER SERVICE UNIT .............24
Table 20:POLICE NET COST PER FUNCTIONAL POPULATION ...............24
Table 21:POLICE NET COST PER DEVELOPMENT UNIT ....................25
Table 22:POTENTIAL CHANGE IN POLICE FEES ...........................26
Table 23:PARKS AND OPEN SPACE SERVICE UNITS, 2001 ...................27
Table 24:EXISTING PARKS ...............................................28
Table 25:PARKS AND OPEN SPACE LAND AND DEVELOPMENT COSTS ......29
Table 26:EXISTING PARK FACILITIES .....................................30
Table 27:PARKS AND OPEN SPACE COST PER SERVICE UNIT ...............30
Table 28:PARKS GRANT FUNDING CREDIT PER SERVICE UNIT ..............31
Table 29:CONSTRUCTION SALES TAX CREDIT .............................32
Table 30:PARKS AND OPEN SPACE NET COST PER SERVICE UNIT ...........32
Table 31:PARKS AND OPEN SPACE NET COST PER DWELLING UNIT ........33
Table 32:POTENTIAL CHANGE IN PARKS FEES ............................33
Table 33:LIBRARY BUILDING COST PER SQUARE FOOT ....................34
Table 34:LIBRARY COST PER SERVICE UNIT ...............................36
Table 35:LIBRARY NET COST PER SERVICE UNIT ..........................37
Table 36:LIBRARY NET COST PER DWELLING UNIT ........................37
Table 37:POTENTIAL CHANGE IN LIBRARY FEES ..........................37
Table 38:MUNICIPAL BUILDING COST PER SERVICE UNIT ...................39
Table 39:MUNICIPAL BUILDING NET COST PER DEVELOPMENT UNIT .......40
Table 40:POTENTIAL CHANGE IN MUNICIPAL BUILDING FEES ..............41
Table 41:HOUSING UNITS AND OCCUPANCY, 1990-2000 .....................42
Table 42:AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD SIZE, 1990-2000 ..........................42
Table 43:DWELLING UNITS BY TYPE, 2001 .................................43
Table 44:EXISTING NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ....................43
Table 45:DISPOSITION OF 1992 REVENUE BOND PROCEEDS ...............44
Table 46:DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS PER FUNCTIONAL POPULATION .......45
Table 47:POLICE, PARKS AND LIBRARY DEBT SERVICE CREDITS ............45
Table 48:STUDY COST PER FACILITY .....................................46
Table 49:STUDY COST PER SERVICE UNIT .................................46
INTRODUCTION
Development fees are one of the most direct ways for local government to require new residential and
commercial developments to pay a larger portion of the infrastructure costs they impose on the
community. Development fees are charges that are assessed on new development based on a standard
formula such as the amount of square footage or the number of bedrooms per dwelling unit.Fees are
one-time, up -front charges, with the payment usually made at the time of building permit approval.
Funds are earmarked for capital improvements that expand the capacity of the system facilities for
which the fee has been designed. Essentially, development fees require that each developer of a new
residential or commercial project pay the pro -rata share of the cost of new infrastructure facilities
required to serve that development.
Since only 23 states have thus far enacted specific enabling legislation authorizing development fees,
such fees have generally been legally defended as an exercise of local government's broad "police
power"to protect the health, safety and welfare of the community.The courts have gradually
developed guidelines for constitutionally valid development fees, based on a "rational nexus" that must
exist between the regulatory fee or exaction and the activity that is being regulated. The standards set
by court cases generally require that a development fee meet a three-part test:
1)The need for new facilities must be created by new development;
2)The amount of fee charged must not exceed a proportional fair share of the cost to serve new
development; and
3)All fee revenues must be spent within a reasonable period of time and in proximity to the fee-
paying development.
While Arizona's development fee enabling act for municipalities, Sec. 9-463.05 A.R.S., reflects these
constitutional standards, it gives municipalities broad authority to impose development fees. The
primary requirement is that the amount of the fee must bear a "reasonable relationship to the burden
imposed upon the municipality to provide additional necessary public services to the development." In
addition, the fees must "result in a beneficial use to the development," and appropriate credits or offsets
must be provided for developer contributions, whether in cash or in kind. This enabling authority is
fairly unusual in that (1) it does not expressly list or limit the types of infrastructure for which
development fees can be developed, and (2) it does not set forth a specific methodology for the
calculation of the fees. Thus, Arizona municipalities can consider the use of development fees to help
finance any type of facility for which it can demonstrate a relationship between new development and
the need for additional capital facilities that result in "costs to the municipality."
Background
As a consultant for the City of Apache Junction, Duncan Associates first prepared an Impact
Fee/Exactions Study and draft development fee ordinance in November 1996.The original study
calculated maximum development fees for roads, police facilities, parks, libraries and schools. Based
on the study, the City adopted a development fee ordinance for roads, police facilities, parks and
libraries on December 17, 1996.The ordinance became effective on March 1,1997. The fees were
phased -in over a two -month period, and were assessed at 100 percent beginning May 1, 1997.
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 1
In August 1997, the City retained Duncan Associates to perform an update of the development fee
study and ordinance.Given the short interval since completion of the original study, the consultants
and City staff agreed that it was not appropriate to update the level of service on which the original
study was based (i.e., inventory of capital facilities and amount of existing development). Instead, the
focus was on updating capital costs, revenue credits, and land use categories.In addition, the update
included preparation of a development fee for municipal buildings, such as the City's administrative
complex and public works garage. Finally, the update did not revisit the school development fee, which
was then under consideration by the City and the Apache Junction School District. TheDevelop men t Fee
Update .S.tne0 was completed in November 1997.The revised ordinance was adopted on February 3,
1998 and became effective on May 4, 1998.
The history of development fee revenues since the fees were enacted is summarized in Table 1. In the
two full years since the current fee schedule has been in place, the fees have brought in $1.6 million.
Facilities
Table 1
DEVELOPMENT FEE REVENUES, 1997-2000
1997 1998 1999 2000
Roads $103,015 $167,436 $238,299 $188,020
Police $45,654 $117,438 $158,182 $91,429
Parks $98,058 $253,875 $482,861 $108,401
Library $38,544 $120,543 $263,171 $58,941
Municipal Buildings $0 $32,439 $70,938 $41,104
Total $285,271 $691,731 $1,213,451 $487,895
Source:City of Apache Junction Finance Department.
Description of Changes
The major changes undertaken in this update, besides updating the inventories, costs and credit
calculations, were the following:
1)change the road fee methodology from a standard consumption -based approach to a modified
consumption -based approach;
2)add a new open space component to the parks development fee; and
3)calculate a credit for the construction sales tax, which was applied to the parks and open space
development fee.
This study calculates the maximum development fees that may be charged by the City consistent with
the data, methodology and assumptions used in the analysis presented here. The City Council is under
no obligation to charge the maximum fees, but may instead choose to charge the fees at some
percentage of the maximum. As long as the fees for all land uses are assessed at the same percentage
of the maximum fees, the proportionality of the fees to the impacts of different developments will be
maintained.
The change to the modified consumption -based road impact fee methodology, along with updated road
construction costs, results in significant potential increases in road development fees. However, while
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 2
the increases are significant in percentage terms, the updated maximum road fees are in line with those
charged by most other growing communities in the area.In addition, the revised fees do not include
right-of-way (ROW) costs, and the City may want to cease giving credit against the road fees for the
value of ROW dedications.
With the addition of the open space component, the parks development fees could increase by more
than 50 percent, even after giving credit for construction sales taxes paid by new development. The
construction sales tax credit was applied to the parks and open space fees because this revenue source
is planned to be used exclusively for parks improvements for the foreseeable future.
Police development fees could increase modestly for residential and industrial uses, but must actually
be reduced for retail and office uses. The reduction in fees for retail and office uses can be attributed
to changes in national trip generation data contained in the sixth edition of the ITE manual.
Development fees for libraries and municipal buildings could increase by about 30 and 50 percent for
most uses, respectively.A major cause of the fee increases is the inclusion of land costs, which were
omitted in the previous study.
The potential maximum development fees are summarized and compared with current development
fees in Table 2.
Facility Type
Table 2
SUMMARY OF MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT FEES
Single-
Family
Unit
Multi-
Family
Unit
Mobile
Home
Unit
Retail
1,000
Sa. Ft
Office
1,000
Sa. Ft
Industry
1,000
Sa. Ft.
Maximum Fees
Roads $1,485 $1,029 $747 $3,859 $1,709 $1,082
Police $133 $128 $102 $325 $226 $157
Parks and Open Space $564 $542 $434 $0 $0 $0
Libraries $262 $252 $202 $0 $0 $0
Municipal Buildings $83 $80 $64 $203 $141 $98
Total Maximum Fees $2,527 $2,031 $1,549 $4,387 $2,076 $1,337
Current Fees
Roads $270 $183 $136 $846 $469 $197
Police $118 $114 $91 $364 $230 $130
Parks $366 $352 $283 $0 $0 $0
Libraries $199 $191 $154 $0 $0 $0
Municipal Buildings $53 $51 $41 $164 $103 $58
Total Current Fees $1,006 $891 $705 $1,374 $802 $385
Potential Change
Roads 450%462%449%356%264%449%
Police 13%12%12%-11%-2%21%
Parks and Open Space 54%54%53%NA NA NA
Libraries 32%32%31%NA NA NA
Municipal Buildings 57%57%56%24%37%69%
Total 151%128%120%219%159%247%
Source: Maximum potential fees from Tables 13, 21, 31, 36 and 39.
Development Fee Update Study
City of Apache Junction, Arizona
December 3, 2001
Page 3
Comparative Fees
Apache Junction's current and proposed development fees per single-family unit are compared to those
of other communities .in the region in Table 3. The water and wastewater fees shown in the Apache
Junction column are imposed in parts of the city by independent community facilities districts. Even
with the significant increase in road fees and the addition of an open space component to the parks fees,
Apache Junction's total development fees would still be in line with those charged by most other
communities in the region.
Table 3
COMPARATIVE DEVELOPMENT FEES PER SINGLE-FAMILY UNIT
Facility Phoenix Mesa
Water $3,444 $907
Wastewater $1,781 $1,059
Roads $3,752
Fire $142
Police $93
Parks/Open Space $1,503
Library $276
Gen. Government
Oth er *$430 $228
$145
$226
$696
$378
Scotts-
dale Chandler
$2,696 $2,060
$2,356 $2,047
$906 $1,537
$105
$159
$680
$68
$231
Apache Junction
Gilbert Glendale Current Proposed
$1,346 $542 $921 $921
$2,314 $1,367 $2,000 $2,000
$86 $2,003 $270 $1,485
$127 $311
$47 $289
$705 $1,094
$452
$178 $660
$264
$118
$366
$199
$53
$133
$564
$262
$83
Total $11,421 $3,639 $5,958 $6,887 $4,803 $6,982 $3,927 $5,448
• Residential development tax and cultural facilities for Mesa, equipment repair and solid waste for Phoenix: sanitation for Glendale
and Peoria.
Source:Apache Junction's existing and proposed fees from Table 2;City of Chandler from Municipal Code Corporation website,
6/5/01;City of Gilbert:water and wastewater fees from Town website, 6/10/01, other fees from Municipal Code Corp website,
6/5/01;City of Glendale, "Development Impact Fee Schedule,-effective 9/25/00;Mesa Impact Fee Update Study,1/22/01;City of
Phoenix,"Desert View Infrastructure Financing Plan," January 12, 2000;City of Scottsdale, Municipal Code Corporation Website,
6/5/011; Peoria from website 8/25/01 (road and wastewater fees for north part of town).
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 4
ROADS
While the provision of internal local and collector streets is clearly the responsibility of the developer,
improvements to the major road system, including arterials and major collectors, are typically funded
partially by the private sector and partially by the public sector. The private sector is required to dedicate
and construct planned arterials and major collectors that lie within or adjacent to a subdivision, while
state and local governments typically pay the cost of widening projects or new roads needed to
accommodate the off -site traffic impacts of new development. Road development fees are a means of
shifting the cost of off -site improvements to the new development that creates the need, while also
ensuring through development fee credits that no development is required to contribute more than its
proportionate share of the cost of major road facilities.
The City's subdivision regulations require that where a proposed subdivision includes a planned street
designated in the adopted Street Classification Plan, such street shall be platted and constructed in
conformance with the Plan. Arterials, including section line roads, must have a minimum right-of-way
(ROW) width of 100 feet and a minimum pavement width, excluding curbs, of 60 feet. Major collectors,
including mid -section line roads, must have a minimum ROW width of 80 feet and a minimum
pavement width of 48 feet.Collector streets must have a minimum ROW width of 60 feet and a
minimum pavement width of 40 feet.
Service Unit
Service units create the link between supply (roadway capacity) and demand (traffic generated by new
development). An appropriate service unit for road development fees is vehicle -miles of travel (VMT)
during an average weekday. Vehicle -miles is a combination of the number of vehicles traveling during
a given time period and the distance (in miles) that these vehicles travel. The time period was chosen
based on the availability of data on average daily trips (ADT).
The VMT that will be generated by a proposed development is determined, in general terms, by
multiplying the trip generation rate by the average length of a trip in miles. The total VMT on the major
road system is determined by multiplying the length, in miles, of each road segment by the average daily
traffic count and summing the results for all roadway segments.
The supply side is represented by vehicle -miles of capacity (VMC). For a roadway, the VMC provided
is simply the product of the capacity of the roadway and the length of the roadway.The capacity
supplied by a road improvement is determined by multiplying the capacity of the new lanes by the
length of the road improvement.
Methodology
The current road development fee methodology is based on a "consumption -based" model, which
basically charges a new development the cost of replacing the capacity that it consumes on the major
road system. That is, for every service unit of traffic generated by the development, the development
fee charges the net cost to construct an additional service unit of capacity. Since travel is never evenly
distributed throughout a roadway system, actual roadway systems require more than one VNIC for every
VMT in order to keep most road segments functioning at an acceptable level of service. Consequently,
the consumption -based road development fee model generally underestimates the full cost of growth.
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 5
It is, however, a conservative, legally sound and relatively simple approach to the calculation of road
development fees.
While the consumption -based model is probably the most commonly -used approach for road
development fees in the nation, many communities have used other models.The most common
alternative is the "improvements -driven" model. The improvements -driven approach essentially divides
the cost of growth -related improvements required over a fixed planning horizon (or to build -out) by
the number new service units (e.g., VMT) projected to be generated by growth over the same planning
horizon in order to determine a cost per service unit. This approach requires a sophisticated level of
planning, as well as consideration of fiscal constraints in developing the capital improvements plan to
ensure that it does not include low priority, marginally -needed improvements. Despite these difficulties,
the improvements -driven model can come closer to capturing the full cost of maintaining desired levels
of service on most roadway segments than the consumption -based approach.
The consultant has developed a modification to the standard consumption -based road development fee
model that more accurately identifies the full growth -related cost of maintaining desired service levels,
while avoiding the difficulties associated with the improvements -driven approach. Essentially, the idea
is that new development should be required to pay for the cost to construct more capacity than it
directly consumes in order to maintain the system -wide ratio of capacity to demand. This methodology
has been used as the basis of road development fees in several communities, including Atlanta, Georgia,
Rio Rancho, New Mexico and Larimer County, Colorado.
In the standard consumption -based model, which is the one on which the City's current road
development fees are based, the VMT generated by a development is multiplied by the cost per VMC
of new roadway capacity to develop the development fee. Implicit in this formula is the conversion of
the cost per VMC to a cost per VMT.In other words, the standard model implicitly assumes that the
ratio of VMC to VIVIT is one-to-one.The recommended approach simply makes the implicit
VMC/VMT ratio an explicit part of the formula. The recommended formula for road development fees
in Apache Junction is shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1
RECOMMENDED ROAD DEVELOPMENT FEE FORMULA
FEE =VMT x NET COST/VMT
VMT =TRIPS x % NEW x LENGTH ± 2
NET COSTNMT =COST/VMT - CREDITNMT
COSTNMT =COST/VMC x VMCNMT
Where:
VMT =Vehicle -miles of travel placed on the major roadway system during an average week day
TRIPS =Average daily trip ends
% NEW =Percent of trips that are primary trips, as opposed to passby or diverted -link trips
LENGTH =Average length of a trip on major roadway system
± 2 =Avoids double -counting trips for origin and destination
COSTNMC =Average cost to create a new vehicle -mile of capacity (VMC)
VMCNMT =The system -wide ratio of capacity to demand on the major roadway system
CREDITNMT =Revenue credit per VMT
Development Fee Update Study
City of Apache Junction, Arizona
December 3, 2001
Page 6
Major Roadway System
The City's road development fees are designed to cover the costs of capacity -expanding improvements
to the City's major roadway system.For the purpose of road development fees, the major roadway
system includes all City -maintained roadways designated as arterials or collectors in the City's adopted
Street Classification Map,which was most recently revised in July 2001. State -maintained roadways, which
in Apache Junction are limited to the Superstition Freeway and portions of Idaho Road and North
Apache Trail, are excluded from the definition of the major roadway system because the City has limited
responsibility for paying for improvements to state roads. In addition, responsibility for some boundary
roads is shared with the adjoining counties, and only one-half of the travel demand and capacity of such
roadways is considered to be part of the City's major roadway system. Developers required to construct
portions of the major roadway system are eligible for credit against their road development fees.
To determine system -wide demand and capacity on the City's major roadway system, an inventory of
all roadway segments that are included in the major roadway system and are located within the existing
City limits was prepared (see Table 4).Current daily traffic volumes were estimated for each roadway
segment from the most recent available traffic data, which included the West Apache Trail/ Old West
.Hi:ghipayCrossover,S'af0/Study(year 2000 counts), Maricopa Association of Governments (1997 and 1998
model output) and Apache Junction Engineering Department "Winter/Spring 24 -I -lour Traffic Counts"
(1996 and 1997 counts). The daily volumes for each segment were then multiplied by the length of the
segment to determine existing ViVIT.
For each segment, existing VMC was determined by multiplying the length of the segment by the
capacity of the segment. The actual capacity of an individual roadway segment is affected by a host of
factors, including frequency of signalized intersections, signal timing, intersection configuration
(including turn lanes), lane width, percent of truck traffic, etc.The engineering analysis required to
precisely estimate the capacity of individual segments is generally not appropriate for development fee
analysis, however, both because it would be prohibitively expensive and because it is simply not practical
to do for future roadway improvements in advance of engineering design. Instead, the planning -level
capacity estimates adopted by the local government or used in a regional transportation model are
typically used to determine the approximate capacity of existing and future roadways for the purpose
of development fee calculations.The original study and the first study update used a generalized
capacity estimate of 6,000 vehicles per day per lane as a reasonable approximation of the capacity of the
City's major roadways, and this capacity figure will continue to be used in this update.
The inventory of the City's existing major roadway system are summarized in Table 4.The existing
major roadway system is illustrated in Figure 2.
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 7
Street
Superstition
W Apache Trail
N Apache Trail
Broadway Ave
Southern Ave
Meridian Drive
Ironwood Drive
Idaho Road
Tomahawk Rd
Table 4
MAJOR ROADWAY INVENTORY
Length # of % City
Segment (mi.)Lanes Maint.
Meridian -Ironwood 1.00 2
Ironwood -Idaho 1.00 2
Idaho -N Apache Trail 0.25 4
N Apache Tr -Tomahawk 0.75 2
Tomahawk -Goldfield 1.00 2
Goldfield -E. City Limits 0.50 2
Meridian -Ironwood 1.00 6
Ironwood -N Apache Trail 0.75 6
W Apache Trail -Idaho 0.40 2
Meridian -Ironwood 1.00 2
Ironwood -Idaho 1.00 2
Idaho -Old West Highway 0.50 2
Old West Hwy -Tomahawk 0.50 2
Tomahawk -Goldfield 1.00 2
Goldfield -Arroyo 0.50 2
Meridian -Ironwood 1.00 2
Ironwood -1/4 mi. east 0.25 2
1/4 mi. east -Idaho 0.75 2
Idaho -Winchester 0.25 4
Winchester -Cactus 0.25 2
Cactus -Tomahawk 0.25 2
Tomahawk -Goldfield 1.00 2
McKellips-Lost Dutchman 1.00 2
Lost Dutchman -Superstition 1.00 2
Superstition -W Apache Tr 0.50 2
W Apache Trail -Broadway 0.50 2
Broadway -Southern 1.00 2
McKellips-Lost Dutchman 1.00 2
Lost Dutchman -Superstition 1.00 2
Superstition -W Apache Tr 0.50 2
W.Apache Trail -Broadway 0.50 4
Broadway -Southern 1.00 4
Southern -Superstition Fwy 0.50 4
Superstition Fwy-Baseline 0.50 4
Baseline -Elliot Align 2.00 2
McKellips-Lost Dutchman 1.00 2
Lost Dutchman -Superstition 1.00 2
Superstition -N Apache Tr 0.20 4
Superstition Fwy-Baseline 0.50 4
Lost Dutchman -SR 88 0.40 2
N Apache Tr -Superstition 0.60 2
Superstition Blvd -Broadway 1.00 2
Broadway -Old West Hwy 0.33 2
100%
100%
100(1/0
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%4,000
100%
50%
50%
100%1
50%1
50%
100%
100%
100%
100%1
100%1
100%
100%
100°/0
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
ADT
10,000
10,000
10,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
26,000
25,000
5,000
7,000
7,000
3,000
3,000
3,000
2,000
4,000
5,000
5,000
4,000
4,000
1,000
2,000
5,000
0,000
0,000
8,000
2,000
4,000
7,000
1,000
1,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
2,000
5,000
5,000
1,000
1,000
1,000
2,000
2,000
VMT
10,000
10,000
2,500
3,000
3,000
1,000
26,000
18,750
2,000
7,000
7,000
1,500
1,500
3,000
1,000
4,000
1,250
3,750
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,000
2,500
5,000
2,500
4,000
2,000
4,000
3,500
5,500
11,000
2,000
1,500
4,000
2,000
5,000
1,000
500
VMC
12,000
12,000
6,000
9,000
12,000
6,000
36,000
27,000
4,800
12,000
12,000
6,000
6,000
12,000
6,000
12,000
3,000
9,000
6,000
3,000
3,000
12,000
6,000
6,000
6,000
3,000
6,000
12,000
12,000
6,000
12,000
24,000
12,000
12,000
24,000
12,000
12,000
4,800
12,000
400 4,800
600 7,200
2,000 12,000
660 3,960
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 8
Street
Goldfield Road
Old West Hwy
Lost Dutchman
Tepee St
Cortez Rd
Delaware Ave
Baseline Rd
16th Avenue
S Royal Palm
San Marcos Dr
S Phelps Drive
Length # of % City
Segment (mi.)Lanes Maint.ADT VMT VMC
Old West Hwy -Southern 0.67 2 100%5,000 3,350 8,040
Southern -Superstition Fwy 0.50 2 100%4,000 2,000 6,000
Superstition Fwy-Baseline 0.50 4 100%2,000 1,000 12,000
Lost Dutchman -Superstition 1.00 2 100 0/0 1,000 1,000 12,000
Superstition -Broadway 1.00 2 100%1,000 1,000 12,000
Broadway -Old West Hwy 1.00 2 100%2,000 2,000 12,000
Southern -Superstition Fwy 0.50 4 100%7,000 3,500 12,000
Superstition Fwy-Baseline 0.50 2 100%1,000 500 6,000
W Apache Trail -Broadway 0.90 4 100%17,000 15,300 21,600
Broadway -Tomahawk 0.55 4 100%17,000 9,350 13,200
Tomahawk -Goldfield 1.16 4 100%8,000 9,280 27,840
Meridian -Ironwood 1.00 2 100%4,000 4,000 12,000
Ironwood -Idaho 1.00 2 100%3,000 3,000 12,000
Idaho -N Apache Trail 1.40 2 100%2,000 2,800 16,800
N Apache Tr -Goldfield 0.60 2 100%1,000 600 7,200
Meridian -Idaho Rd 2.00 2 100%1,000 2,000 24,000
Old W Hwy -Lost Dutchman 2.75 2 100%1,000 2,750 33,000
Lost Dutchman -Superstition 1.00 2 100%1,000 1,000 12,000
Superstition -W Apache Tr 0.50 2 100%2,000 1,000 6,000
W Apache Trail -Broadway 0.50 2 100%2,000 1,000 6,000
Broadway -W 16th Ave 0.50 2 100%2,000 1,000 6,000
W 16th Ave -Southern 0.50 0 100%0 0 0
W City Limits -Meridian 0.15 2 100%2,000 300 1,800
Meridian -Ironwood 1.00 2 100%2,000 2,000 12,000
Ironwood -Idaho 1.00 2 100%1,000 1,000 12,000
Idaho -Tomahawk 1.00 2 100%1,000 1,000 12,000
Tomahawk -Goldfield 1.00 2 100%500 500 12,000
Delaware -Ironwood 0.50 4 100%1,000 500 12,000
Ironwood -San Marcos 0.50 4 100%2,000 1,000 12,000
San Marcos -Idaho 0.50 2 100%2,000 1,000 6,000
Idaho -S Royal Palm 0.50 2 100%1,000 500 6,000
Old West Hwy -Southern 1.00 2 100%2,000 2,000 12,000
Broadway -W 16th Ave 0.50 2 100%2,000 1,000 6,000
W 16th Ave -Southern 0.50 2 100%3,000 1,500 6,000
Apache Tr Intrsct-Broadway 0.50 2 100%7,000 3,500 6,000
Total 254,140 830,040
Source:Streets are City -maintained roadways identified as urban arterials or urban collectors in the City of Apache Junction Street
Classification Map: only road segments within existing City limits are included; number of lanes from City of Apache Junction staff:
boundary roads are shown at reduced "% City -maintained" to reflect shared responsibility with adjoining county where applicable;
average daily trips (ADT) are most recent available counts from "West Apache Trail/Old West Highway Crossover Safety Study"
(2000), Apache Junction Engineering Department "Winter/Spring 24 -Hour Traffic Counts" 11996 and 19971, and Maricopa Association
of Governments based on output of regional transportation model (1997 and 1998);vehicle -miles of travel (VMT) is product of
length, %, City -maintained and ADT; vehicle -miles of capacity (VMC) is product of length, number of lanes, % City -maintained and
daily capacity of 6,000 vehicles/lane.
Development Fee Update Study
City of Apache Junction, Arizona
December 3, 2001
Page 9
I
.-.._----E-ta
!
1-
i
4!
i
s.1
-
im
•,;
17
Figure 2
MAJOR ROADWAY SYSTEM
0
,...It 1.11.411 II .1
1 . 7 1
/
i I
a
6 .,i 5••'‘I 4-5's(,c I',i .,-.:411
1../ ..'...!1.:
i
*.
J
7.7„ .• .1 :-.._":!,..
x .
!„4,1
2.)21
c7.1"
tt.
•
•- - •••I 111,'^N
5 a
,•MIL =1 . - --M•17.7-1=177n
'1)
s
11.
c. 6:1 0 v •? 6 .1 23 i• 9 1.1,".17 ;
9 1 ,11. ,1• 3. 1 tJ6 •
— -
a
-A
I .
i LI= moo Arterial
CollectoriIFreeway.
j D I.)State Rte.
Z.3
l b
I j
I
imirj
9
.11,114.CM MO re
3
I .
!„.
.••
35
I
,t1C•M ..,1 ...1...C.i .....
- - - - - - - - -1.
I
II..
i ,...
i
2 !i
1
Development Fee Update Study
City of Apache Junction, Arizona
December 3, 2001
Page 10
l!
I
:11
_
A comparison of existing VMT and VMC for each segment indicates that none of the roadway
segments are currently operating over capacity. As described in the methodology section, however, the
appropriate level of service measure for a consumption -based road development fee is not a segment-
specific measure, but a system -wide measure. In fact, the City's existing major roadway system currently
provides over three units of capacity for every demand unit, as shown in Table 5. However, a
considerably lower ratio of 1.5 -to -one is recommended for use in the development fee calculations.
Table 5
TRAVEL AND DEMAND ON MAJOR STREET NETWORK
Vehicle -Miles of Travel (VMT)
Vehicle -Miles of Capacity (VMC)
254,140
830,040
Current Ratio of System -wide VMC to VMT 3.27
Recommended VMC/VMT Ratio 1.50
Source:VMT and VMC from Table 4.
Cost per Service Unit
The costs of adding new capacity to the major roadway network vary significantly from one community
to another. Local roadway design standards, including such things as landscaped medians for four -lane
arterials, can also significantly affect costs.
There are three major capacity -enhancing roadway improvements that are being undertaken by the City
with proceeds from the 1998 bond issue.The three projects are Broadway from Meridian to Idaho,
Ironwood from Apache Trail to Superstition, and Superstition from Meridian to Idaho. All of these are
two-lane to four -lane widening projects. However, there are a number of reasons why the cost per lane-
mile used in the impact fee calculations should not be based on the bonded amounts for these three
projects.First, these costs do not include the full cost of paving. Since the paving will be done with
City crews, the costs in the bond issue reflect a City subsidy of the paving crews' labor.Second,
engineering and contract administration costs are real costs of these projects that are not reflected in
the bond issue figures. Finally, the cost estimates do not include landscaping costs, which are required
by the City's development ordinance.
Because of these issues and the limited number of planned capacity projects, an alternative lane -mile
cost estimate was prepared based on unit construction cost and quantity estimates. The estimates were
prepared by Earth Tech based on their experience with road construction projects in the region. The
estimated cost for new four -lane roads and two- to four -lane widening projects averages $754,919 per
lane -mile, as shown in Table 6. It should be noted that the cost estimation procedure does not include
right-of-way (ROW) costs.While the City's current ordinance provides for credit against the road
development fees for ROW dedication, this is not necessary if ROW costs are not included in the fee.
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 11
Item
Table 6
ROADWAY CONSTRUCTION COSTS PER LANE -MILE
Unit New 4 -Lane
Cost Units Cost/MileUnit
Widen 2 -4 -Lane
Units Cost/Mile
Excavation c.y.$2 15,644 $31,288 9,387 $18,774
Asphalt Concrete Pavement ton $48 7,656 $367,488 4,594 $220,512
Aggregate Base ton $12 21,859 $262,308 13,116 $157,392
Curb Ei Gutter, Type A If.$12 10,560 $126,720 5,280 $63,360
Loop Detector for Signals ea.$1,000 12 $12,000 8 $8,000
Elect. Conduit 2" PVC intersect If.$5 320 $1,600 320 $1,600
Elect. Conduit 2" PVC st lights I.f.$5 10,560 $52,800 5,280 $26,400
Street Light Pole ea.$3,500 28 $98,000 14 $49,000
Pullbox (No. 7)ea.$300 8 $2,400 8 $2,400
Pole (Type R)ea.$4,500 8 $36,000 8 $36,000
Pole Foundation (Type R)ea.$1,800 8 $14,400 8 $14,400
Mast Arm (50 Ft)ea.$2,400 8 $19,200 8 $19,200
Traffic Signal Face (Type R)ea.$525 8 $4,200 8 $4,200
Pedestrian Pushbutton ea.$250 8 $2,000 8 $2,000
Control Cabinet (Type IV)ea.$15,000 2 $30,000 2 $30,000
Storm Drain Pipe, 24"If.$45 560 $25,200 560 $25,200
Storm Drain Pipe, 36"If.$70 5,280 $369,600 5,280 $369,600
Storm Drain Pipe, 48" w/headwall If.$110 400 $44,000 200 $22,000
Cross Drain, 4'x6 CBC w/headwall If.$350 200 $70,000 100 $35,000
Catch Basin, MAG Det. 535 type F ea.$2,000 28 $56,000 28 $56,000
Manhole (C-18.10)(No. 3)ea.$2,500 14 $35,000 14 $35,000
Striping If.$1.20 31,680 $38,016 26,400 $31,680
Concrete Sidewalk, MAG Det. 230 s.f.$2.50 52,800 $132,000 26,400 $66,000
Landscaping mi.$114,000 1 $114,000 0.5 $57,000
Construction Cost per Mile $1,944,220 $1,350,718
Construction Cost per New Lane -Mile $486,055 $675,359
Average Construction Cost per New Lane-Mile $580,707
Project Administration/Legal (5%)$29,035
Engineering (Design Er Construction @ 15%)$87,106
Contingency (10%)$58,071
Total Project Cost per Lane -Mile $754,919
Source: Earth Tech, Inc., November 26, 2001.
The next step is to translate the average lane -mile cost into a cost per service unit.As noted in the
previous section, an arterial or collector roadway can accommodate about 6,000 daily vehicles per lane.
Dividing the average cost of a lane -mile by 6,000 vehicles per day yields the average cost per vehicle-
mile of capacity (VMC). Multiplying that by the system -wide ratio of capacity to demand results in the
average cost per vehicle -mile of travel (VMT), which is $188.92, as shown in Table 7. To this capital
cost, the cost of the development fee study, calculated in Appendix C to be $0.19 per vehicle -mile, can
be added.
Development Fee Update Study
City of Apache Junction, Arizona
December 3, 2001
Page 12
Table 7
ROAD COST PER SERVICE UNIT
Average Cost per Lane -Mile $754,919
Capacity (Vehicles per Lane per Day)6,000
Cost per Vehicle -Mile of Capacity (VMC)$125.82
VMCNMT Ratio 1.50
Cost per Vehicle -Mile of Travel (VMT)$188.73
Study Cost per VMT $0.19
Total Cost per VMT $188.92
Source:Average cost per lane -mile from Table ?;capacity per lane
assumed; VMCNMT ratio from Table 5,
Net Cost per Service Unit
To avoid double -charging, new development should receive credit in the fee calculations for the
additional outside revenues it will generate that will be available for capacity-expandingimprovements.
The City receives several sources of outside funding for road improvements, including Highway User
Revenue Funds (HURF), Pinal County sales tax funds, state Local Transportation Assistance Funds
(LTAF), and state and federal highway funds. However, the City is a low priority for state and federal
highway funds and has received virtually no funding over the past several years. The Central Arizona
Association of Governments Transportation Improvement Program for fiscal years 2001-2005 provides
funding only for addressing drainage improvements at two locations where culverts are needed. Current
funding dedicated to road maintenance and improvements amounts to about $3.2 million annually, as
shown in Table 8.
Table 8
ANNUAL ROAD REVENUE
State Highway User Fees (HURF)
County Sales Tax
Local Transportation Assistance Funds (LTAF)
Federal and State Highway Funds
$1,830,021
$1,110,614
$221,293
$0
Total $3,161,928
Source:Actual FY 2000/01 revenues from City of Apache Junction,
Annual Budget for the Fiscal Year July 1, 2001 to June 30, 2002.
In FY 1998-99, the City Council approved a $6 million bond initiative to fund street construction
projects, with the majority of the funding going for the three capacity -expanding improvements
identified earlier.The annual debt service on these projects is about $885,000, which will be repaid
primarily with HURF funds, although road development fees can also be used for this purpose.The
credit for future road funding that will be generated by new development and used for capacity-
expandingimprovements will be based on this funding pattern for the next several years. Assuming that
future funding will increase proportionately to growth in travel demand, the net present value of
additional outside funding for capital improvements expected to be generated over the next 20 years
is estimated to be $43.36 for each additional VMT generated by new development, as shown in Table
9.
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 13
Table 9
ROAD REVENUE CREDIT PER VMT
Annual Capital Funding
Existing VMT
Annual Capital Funding per VMT
Present Value Factor (20 years at 5%)
$885,448
254,140
$3.48
12.46
Net Present Value of Capital Funding per VMT $43.36
Source:Annual capacity project funding is actual FY 2000/01 street debt
service from City of Apache Junction,Annual Budget for the Fiscal Year
July 1, 2001 to June 30, 2002,p. 101: existing VMT from Table 5.
Deducting the revenue credit results in a net cost of $145.56 per vehicle -mile of travel generated by new
development, as shown in Table 10.
Table 10
ROAD NET COST PER SERVICE UNIT
Total Cost per Vehicle -Mile of Travel $188.92
Revenue Credit per Vehicle -Mile of Travel $43.36
Net Cost per Vehicle -Mile of Travel $145.56
Source:Capital cost from Table 7;study cost per VMT from Table 49 in Appendix
C; credit from Table 9.
Demand and Cost Schedule
The number of service units (or VNIT) generated by specific land use types is a product of three factors:
1) trip generation, 2) percent primary trips and 3) trip length. The first two factors are well documented
in the professional literature, and the average trip generation characteristics identified in studies of
communities around the nation should be reasonably representative of trip generation characteristics
in Apache Junction.In contrast, trip lengths are much more likely to vary between communities,
depending on the geographic size and shape of the community and its major roadway system.
Average daily trip rates are based on information published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers'
(ITE)Trip Generation.In the original study and the 1997 update, the 1991 Fifth Edition of the rrE
manual was used. This update uses the 1997 Sixth Edition. Rates were established for specific land use
types within the broader categories of residential, retail/commercial, office/institutional and industrial
land uses.Rates are per dwelling unit, 1,000 square feet of gross floor area, or other appropriate unit
of development.
Trip generation rates represent trip ends, or driveway crossings at the site of a land use. Thus, a one-
way trip from home to work counts as one trip end for the residence and one trip end for the work
place. To avoid over -counting, all trip rates have been divided by two. This places the burden of travel
equally between the origin and destination of the trip and eliminates double -charging for any particular
trip.
Trip rates also need to be adjusted by a "primary trip factor" to exclude pass -by and diverted trips. This
adjustment is intended to reduce the possibility of over -counting by only including primary trips
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 14
generated by the development. Pass -by trips are those trips that are already on a particular route for a
different purpose and simply stop at a particular development on that route.For example, a stop at a
convenience store on the way home from the office is a pass -by trip for the convenience store. A pass-
by trip does not create an additional burden on the street system and therefore should not be counted
in the assessment of development fees.A diverted trip is similar to a pass -by trip, but a diversion is
made from the regular route to make an interim stop. The reduction for pass -by and diverted trips was
drawn from the ITE manual and other published information.
The average length of a trip on the City's major roadway system can be estimated by dividing total daily
travel demand (VMT) by the total number of average daily trips generated by existing land uses.As
shown in Table 11, the average trip length on Apache Junction's major roadway system is just over two
miles.
Table 11
AVERAGE TRIP LENGTH
Existing ADT/Existing
Land Use Type Units Units Unit Trips
Single -Family Dwelling 9,308 4.79 44,585
Multi -Family Dwelling 1,415 3.32 4,698
Mobile Home Dwelling 18,261 2.41 44,009
Retail/Commercial 1,000 sq. ft.1,820.679 12.45 22,667
Office/Institutional 1,000 sq. ft.495.261 5.51 2,729
Industrial 1,000 sq. ft.167.456 3.49 584
Total Daily Trips 119,272
Total Daily VMT on Major Road System 254,140
Average Trip Length (miles)2.13
Source:Existing dwelling units from Table 43;existing nonresidential square footage from
Table 44: average daily trip rates from Table 12 (retail is ADT times primary trip factor); total
existing VMT from Table 5.
The system -wide average trip length should be appropriate for residential, industrial and most office and
institutional uses, for which the home -to -work commute is the predominate trip type.On the other
hand, trip lengths for retail and some specialized uses tend to be determined by market area and
locational characteristics that are likely to be relatively similar from one community to the next.
Consequently, published and unpublished data from studies of other communities have been relied
upon to derive recommended trip lengths for such uses.
The result of combining trip generation, primary trip and trip length information is an equivalency table
that establishes the number of service units (VMT) generated by various land use types per unit of
development.The recommended equivalency table is presented in Table 12.The development fee
ordinance contains a provision allowing the option of independent fee determination studies for those
applicants who feel that their developments will have less impact on the need for road facilities than
indicated by the fee schedule.
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 15
Table 12
ROAD SERVICE UNIT GENERATION BY LAND USE TYPE
Trip Primary Trip
Land Use Unit Rate Trips Length VMT
Residential
Single -Family Detached Dwelling 4.79 100°/0 2.13 10.20
Multi -Family Dwelling 3.32 100%2.13 7.07
Mobile Home/RV Park Space 2.41 100%2.13 5.13
Assisted Living Facility Dwelling 1.08 100%2.13 2.30
Retail/Commercial
General Retail/Shopping Center 1000 sq. ft.21.46 58%2.13
Auto Sales/Repair 1000 sq. ft.18.75 75%2.13
Building Material/Lumber 1000 sq. ft.19.86 75%2.13
Convenience Store/Gas Station 1000 sq. ft.422.8 16%0.50
Discount Store 1000 sq. ft.28.32 48%2.13
Drive -In Bank 1000 sq. ft.132.61 27%0.75
Hotel/Motel Room 3.47 100%2.13
Movie Theater 1000 sq. ft.39.03 75%2.13
Nursery/Garden Center 1000 sq. ft.18.04 75%2.13
Restaurant, Fast Food 1000 sq. ft.248.06 30%0.50
Restaurant, Sit -Down 1000 sq. ft.44.98 38%0.75
Office/Institutional
General Office Building 1000 sq. ft.5.51 100%2.13 11.74
Medical Office 1000 sq. ft.18.07 100%2.13 38.49
Hospital 1000 sq. ft.8.39 100%2.13 17.87
Nursing Home 1000 sq. ft.2.35 100%2.13 5.01
Church/Synagogue 1000 sq. ft.4.56 100%2.13 9.71
Day Care Center 1000 sq. ft.39.63 24%0.75 7.13
Elementary School 1000 sq. ft.6.02 24%0.75 1.08
High School 1000 sq. ft.5.96 50%0.75 2.24
Industrial/Warehouse
General Light Industrial 1000 sq. ft.3.49 100%2.13 7.43
Warehouse 1000 sq. ft.2.48 100%2.13 5.28
Mini -Warehouse 1000 sq. ft.1.25 100%2.13 2.66
26.51
29.95
31.73
33.82
28.95
26.85
7.39
62.35
28.82
37.21
12.82
Sources:Trip rates =1/2 of trip ends on a weekday reported in ITE, Trip Generation, 6th Edition, 1997;ADT for hotel/motel per
room averaged;primary trip factors for shopping center,convenience store,discount store,drive-in bank and restaurants from
ITE.Trip Generation Handbook,October 1998 (shopping center factor equals non -pass -by percentage based on formula for 200,000
sq.ft.center less 10% for diverted trips);day care center primary trip factor from paper by Hitchens,1990 ITE Compendium;
primary trip factors for other land uses assumed; average trip length from Table 11, other trip lengths assumed.
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 16
Based on projected travel demand by land use and the net cost per vehicle -mile of travel, the net costs
to provide major roadway capacity at the existing system -wide level of service per unit of development
are shown in Table 13.
Table 13
ROAD NET COST BY LAND USE TYPE
Daily Net Cost Net Cost
Land Use Unit VMT per VMT per Unit
Residential
Single -Family Detached Dwelling 10.20 $145.56 $1,485
Multi -Family Dwelling 7.07 $145.56 $1,029
Mobile Home/RV Park Space 5.13 $145.56 $747
Assisted Living Facility Dwelling 2.30 $145.56 $335
Retail/Commercial
General Retail/Shopping Center 1000 sq. ft.26.51 $145.56 $3,859
Auto Sales/Repair 1000 sq. ft.29.95 $145.56 $4,360
Building Material/Lumber 1000 sq. ft.31.73 $145.56 $4,619
Convenience Store/Gas Station 1000 sq. ft.33.82 $145.56 $4,923
Discount Store 1000 sq. ft.28.95 $145.56 $4,214
Drive -In Bank 1000 sq. ft.26.85 $145.56 $3,908
Hotel/Motel Room 7.39 $145.56 $1,076
Movie Theater 1000 sq. ft.62.35 $145.56 $9,076
Nursery/Garden Center 1000 sq. ft.28.82 $145.56 $4,195
Restaurant, Fast Food 1000 sq. ft.37.21 $145.56 $5,416
Restaurant, Sit -Down 1000 sq. ft.12.82 $145.56 $1,866
Office/Institutional
General Office Building 1000 sq. ft.11.74 $145.56 $1,709
Medical Office 1000 sq. ft.38.49 $145.56 $5,603
Hospital 1000 sq. ft.17.87 $145.56 $2,601
Nursing Home 1000 sq. ft.5.01 $145.56 $729
Church/Synagogue 1000 sq. ft.9.71 $145.56 $1,413
Day Care Center 1000 sq. ft.7.13 $145.56 $1,038
Elementary School 1000 sq. ft.1.08 $145.56 $157
High School 1000 sq. ft.2.24 $145.56 $326
Industrial/Warehouse
General Light Industrial 1000 sq. ft.7.43 $145.56 $1,082
Warehouse 1000 sq. ft.5.28 $145.56 $769
Mini-Warehouse 1000 sq.ft.2.66 $145.56 $387
Source:Daily VMT from Table 12: net cost per VMT from Table 10
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 17
If the revised road development fees are adopted at 100 percent of the net cost calculated in this report,
the fees would double, triple or quadruple for most land use categories, as shown in Table 14. However,
while the increases are large in percentage terms, the potential increases would only bring the City's fees
within the range already charged by most other communities in the Valley (see Table 3).
Table 14
POTENTIAL CHANGE IN ROAD FEES
Current Maximum Potential
Land Use Unit Fee Fee Increase
1 Residential
Single -Family Detached Dwelling $270 $1,485 450%
Multi -Family Dwelling $183 $1,029 462%
Mobile Home/RV Park Space $136 $747 449%
Assisted Living Facility Dwelling $61 $335 449%
Retail/Commercial
General Retail/Shopping Center 1000 sq. ft.$846 $3,859 356%
Auto Sales/Repair 1000 sq. ft.$1,015 $4,360 330%
Building Material/Lumber 1000 sq. ft.$861 $4,619 436%
Convenience Store/Gas Station 1000 sq. ft.$2,238 $4,923 120%
Discount Store 1000 sq. ft.$1,208 $4,214 249%
Drive -In Bank 1000 sq. ft.$1,544 $3,908 153%
Hotel/Motel Room $266 $1,076 305%
Movie Theater 1000 sq. ft.$1,647 $9,076 451%
Nursery/Garden Center 1000 sq. ft.$764 $4,195 449%
Restaurant, Fast Food 1000 sq. ft.$1,879 $5,416 188%
Restaurant, Sit -Down 1000 sq. ft.$1,130 $1,866 65%
Office/Institutional
General Office Building 1000 sq. ft.$469 $1,709 264%
Medical Office 1000 sq. ft.$965 $5,603 481%
Hospital 1000 sq. ft.$474 $2,601 449%
Nursing Home 1000 sq. ft.$147 $729 396%
Church/Synagogue 1000 sq. ft.$263 $1,413 437%
Day Care Center 1000 sq. ft.$201 $1,038 416%
Elementary School 1000 sq. ft.$27 $157 481%
High School 1000 sq. ft.$58 $326 462%
Industrial/Warehouse
General Light Industrial 1000 sq. ft.$197 $1,082 449%
Warehouse 1000 sq. ft.$138 $769 457%
Mini -Warehouse 1000 sq. ft.$74 $387 423%
Source:Maximum fees from Table 13; current fees form "City of Apache Junction Development Fee Schedule," July 2000.
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 18
POLICE
The Apache Junction Police Department provides police protection and law enforcement services,
including animal control, within the City.The City has a main police station built in 1994, but has
already run out of room in that facility.The City's facility plans call for construction of a new police
substation in about three years.
Service Unit
The two most common methodologies used in calculating police development fees are the "calls -for-
service" approach and the "functional population" approach.The calls -for -service approach uses
historical data on crime reports and emergency calls by land use type to make the connection between
land use type and demand for police facilities.However, many communities, including Apache
Junction, do not maintain records based on the land use type where the call for service originates.
An alternative approach for estimating the public safety service demands of various land use types is
known as "functional population." To a large extent, the demand for police protection is proportional
to the presence of people. Functional population is analogous to the concept of "full-time equivalent"
employees. It represents the number of "full-time equivalent" people present at the site of a land use,
and it is used for the purpose of determining the impact of a particular development on the need for
police facilities.
The demand for public safety services is related to real property itself, regardless of whether it is
occupied, as well as to the presence of people. Consequently, the need for public safety services during
the nighttime hours, when most people are at home, should not be attributed solely to residential
development. For this reason, the functional population calculations are based on a 16 -hour day, rather
than on a 24 -hour day.
The residential component of functional population is considerably simpler than the nonresidential
component. Of the 16 -hour day used in the functional population calculations, it is assumed that people
spend eight hours, or one-half of their waking hours, at home. The other half of the day is spent away
from home accounts for working, shopping and other away -from -home activities.This functional
population factor for residential development essentially distributes the cost of public safety facilities
evenly between residential and nonresidential development. The functional population for residential
dwelling units is shown in Table 15.
Table 15
FUNCTIONAL POPULATION PER DWELLING UNIT
Average Functional
Household Occupancy Population/
Housing Type Size Factor Unit
Single -Family 2.68 0.50 1.34
Multi -Family 2.58 0.50 1.29
Mobile Home 2.07 0.50 1.03
Source.Average household size from Table 42
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 19
The functional population methodology for nonresidential uses is based on national trip generation data
compiled by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). Functional population per 1,000 square
feet is derived by dividing the total number of hours spent by employees and visitors during a day by
16 hours. Employees are assumed to spend ten hours a day at their place of employment, accounting
for both the regular 8 -hour workday and split shifts, overtime and 24 -hour operations.Visitors are
assumed to spend one hour per visit. The formula used to derive the nonresidential functional
population estimates is summarized in Figure 3.
Figure 3
FUNCTIONAL POPULATION FORMULA
Functional population/1000 sf = (employee hours/1000 sf + visitor hours/1000 sf) + 16 hours/day
Where:
Employee hours/1000 sf = employees/1000 sf x 10 hrs/day
Visitor hours/1000 sf = visitors/1000 sf x 1 hour/visit
Visitors/1000 sf = weekday ADT/1000 sf x avg. vehicle occupancy - employees/1000 sf
Weekday ADT/1000 sf = one-way average daily trips (total trip ends + 2)
Using this formula and information on trip generation rates from the ITE Manual, nonresidential
functional population estimates per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area were calculated.Table 16
presents the results of these calculations for the same land use categories used in the road development
fee schedule.
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 20
Table 16 .
NONRESIDENTIAL FUNCTIONAL POPULATION PER 1,000 SQ. FT.
Trip Persons/Employees Visitors/Func.
Land Use Unit Rate Trip Unit Unit Pop.
Residential .
Assisted Living Facility Dwelling 1.08 1.62 0.53 1.22 0.94
Retail/Commercial
General Retail/Shop Ctr 1000 sq. ft.21.46 1.62 1.96 32.81 3.28
Auto Sales/Repair 1000 sq. ft.18.75 1.62 1.77 28.61 2.89
Building Material/Lumber 1000 sq. ft.19.86 1.17 1.47 21.77 2.28
Convenience Store w/Gas 1000 sq. ft.422.8 1.62 1.96 682.98 8.34
Discount Store 1000 sq. ft.28.32 1.46 1.97 39.38 3.69
Drive -In Bank 1000 sq. ft.132.61 1.27 3.64 164.77 3.99
Hotel/Motel Room 3.47 1.62 0.51 5.11 2.87
Movie Theater 1000 sq. ft.39.03 1.62 1.47 61.76 4.78
Nursery/Garden Center 1000 sq. ft.18.04 1.62 1.63 27.59 2.74
Restaurant, Fast Food 1000 sq. ft.248.06 1.59 10.90 383.52 10.81
Restaurant, Sit -Down 1000 sq. ft.44.98 1.78 7.46 72.60 6.93
Office/Institutional
General Office Building 1000 sq. ft.5.51 1.20 3.32 3.29 2.28
Medical Office 1000 sq. ft.18.07 1.37 4.05 20.71 3.83
Hospital 1000 sq. ft.8.39 1.72 3.25 11.18 2.73
Nursing Home 1000 sq. ft.2.35 1.62 1.21 2.60 2.06
Church/Synagogue 1000 sq. ft.4.56 1.62 0.52 6.87 0.75
Day Care Center 1000 sq. ft.39.63 1.62 2.54 61.66 5.44
Elementary School 1000 sq. ft.6.02 1.62 0.92 8.83 4.99
High School 1000 sq. ft.5.96 1.62 0.66 9.00 4.91
Industrial/Warehouse
General Light Industrial 1000 sq. ft.3.49 1.30 2.31 2.23 1.58
Warehouse 1000 sq. ft.2.48 1.30 1.28 1.94 0.92
Mini -Warehouse 1000 SQ. ft.1.25 1.55 0.04 1.90 0.14
Source:Trip rates from Table 9; persons per trip are average vehicle occupancies from ITE,Trip Generation,5' and 6" editions,
1991 and 1997,and U.S.Dept.of Transportation,Federal Highway Administration,"Summary of Travel Trends from the 1995
Nationwide Personal Transportation Survey." Jan 8,1999: employees per 1,000 sq. ft. from ITE Trip Generation manual (shopping
center and convenience store use retail rate from National Association of Office and Industrial Parks,America's Future Office Space
Needs,1990, p. 22; assisted living from American Seniors Housing Association,Assisted Living Residences -A Study of Traffic and
Parking Implications,1997):visitors/unit and functional population calculated based on formula in Figure 3:1 hour per visitor
assumed,with the following exceptions:10 minutes for bank,convenience store and fast-food restaurant,1/2 hour for sit-down
restaurant, and 8 hours for schools, nursing homes and assisted living facilities.
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 21
Total functional population for Apache junction can be estimated based on existing land use data and
functional population ratios for various land use categories, as shown in Table 17.
Table 17
TOTAL FUNCTIONAL POPULATION, 2001
Land Use Type
Single-family detached
Multi -family
Mobile home
Retail/Commercial
Office/Institutional
Industrial/Warehouse
Unit
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
1,000 sq. ft.
1,000 sq. ft.
1,000 sq. ft.
2001
Units
9,308
1,415
18,261
1,820.679
495.261
167.456
Functional
Pop./Unit
1.34
1.29
1.03
3.28
2.28
1.58
2001 Func.
Population
12,473
1,825
18,809
5,972
1,129
265
Total Functional Population 40,473
Source:2001 units from Table 43;residential functional population/unit from Table 15:nonresidential
functional population/1.000 sq.ft.based on shopping center, general office and light industrial land uses
from Table 16.
Cost per Service Unit
In 1994, the City built a new police station in the municipal complex. The 16,000 square foot building
includes a 16-18 bed lockup. Additional capital facilities include animal control facilities with 35 dog
runs and administrative offices, communications and electronic equipment, patrol vehicles, a mobile
command post and a crime scene van. The total replacement cost of existing capital facilities is about
$5.3 million (see Table 18).
Police development fees are designed to charge new development the cost of providing the same level
of service that is provided to existing development. As noted above, the service unit used in the police
development fee calculations is functional population. Based on the cost of existing capital facilities and
current functional population, the cost to provide the same level of service to new development is
$131.67 per functional population, as shown in Table 18.In addition to the capital costs of police
facilities is the cost of the portion of the development fee study attributable to police facilities.As
shown in Table 18, the total cost of police facilities, including study costs, is $132.85 per functional
population.
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 22
Cost Comoonent
Table 18
POLICE FACILITY REPLACEMENT COST
Unit Cost Units Total Cost
Public Safety Building NA NA $2,865,000
Public Safety Building Site (acres)$133,750 1.97 $263,488
Patrol Sedans $40,000 16 $640,000
Administrative Sedans $21,000 9 $189,000
Motorcycles $16,000 4 $64,000
4 x 4s $35,000 2 $70,000
Vans $28,000 3 $84,000
Pickup Truck $16,000 1 $16,000
Under Cover Vehicles $21,000 10 $210,000
Speed Monitoring Trailer $12,000 1 $12,000
Other Trailers $6,000 2 $12,000
Dictaphone $11,040 1 $11,040
Computer -Aided Dispatch/Records Management System NA NA $500,000
Computer Equipment NA NA $19,512
Computer Software NA NA $59,545
Copy Machines NA NA $24,471
Security System NA NA $7,287
Emergency Power Generator NA NA $18,911
Phone System NA NA $60,798
Communications Equipment NA NA $202,200
Total Replacement Cost $5,329,252
Existing Functional Population 40,473
Police Capital Cost per Functional Population $131.67
Police Development Fee Study Cost per Functional Population $1.18
Total Police Cost per Functional Population $132.85
Source:City of Apache Junction Police Department, June 22,2001 and Finance Department,"Fixed Assets by Department,"
September 25,2000;original 1994 police station cost of $2.474,000 adjusted to October 2001 dollars using Engineering
News -Record Building Cost Index from www.enr.com;land cost per acre based on survey of asking prices for commercial land
in Apache Junction CBD. August 2001; functional population from Table 17; study cost from Table 49.
Net Cost per Service Unit
The cost per service unit calculated above should be reduced to account for the availability of outside
funding or debt service payments that will be generated by new development.
The City has received several grants for police capital facilities over the past five years. Assuming that
this level ofgrant funding continues, the City would receive 63 cents per functional population annually
for capital improvements. Over the next 20 years, this is the equivalent of a lump sum amount of $7.85
in capital funding per service unit, as shown in Table 19.
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 23
Grant
Table 19
POLICE GRANT FUNDING CREDIT PER SERVICE UNIT
Date Amoun
I Governor's Highway Safety Grant: DUI Car July 1998 $29,000
Governor's Highway Safety Grant: 2 Motorcycles July 1998 $32,000
Bureau of Justice Administration: Car Terminals November 1998 $30,983
Bureau of Justice: Bulletproof Vests FY 1999/00 $36,000
Bureau of Justice: Bulletproof Vests FY 2000/01 $218
Total Grant Funding, 5 Years $128,201
Annual Grant Funding $25,640
Existing Functional Population 40,473
Annual Grant Funding per Functional Population $0.63
Present Value Factor (20 years at 5 percent)12.46
Grant Funding Credit per Functional Population $7.85
Source:Grant information from City of Apache Junction Grants Coordinator. July 2001; existing functional
population from Table 17.
Counterbalancing the costs of additional police capital facilities that will be necessary to serve new
development is the sales tax revenue that new development will generate to retire the outstanding debt
on the police station. The appropriate credit for these debt service payments is calculated in Appendix
B.Subtracting the grant and debt service credits from the total cost yields a net cost of $99.11 per
functional population, as shown in Table 20.
Table 20
POLICE NET COST PER FUNCTIONAL POPULATION
Police Capital Cost per Functional Population
Police Grant Funding Credit per Functional Population
Police Debt Credit per Functional Population
$132.85
$7.85
$25.89
Police Net Cost per Functional Population $99.11
Source:Police capital cost per functional population from Table 12;police grant funding credit
from Table 19; police debt credit from Table 47.
Demand and Cost Schedule
The maximum development fees that the City can charge for police facilities needed to accommodate
new development are shown in Table 21. The maximum fee is the product of the functional population
associated with each development unit times the net cost per functional population.
Since the functional population calculations for nonresidential uses are based on trip generation data,
the land uses included in the police development fee schedule are the same ones used in the road
development fee schedule. The development fee ordinance contains a provision allowing the option of
independent fee determination studies for those applicants who feel that their developments will have
less impact on the need for police facilities than indicated by the fee schedule.
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 24
Land Use Type
Single-family
Multi -family
Mobile home/RV Park
Assisted Living Facility
Retail/Commercial
General Retail/Shopping
Auto Sales/Repair
Building Material/Lumber
Convenience Store/Gas Station
Discount Store
Drive -In Bank
Hotel/Motel
Movie Theater
Nursery/Garden Center
Restaurant, Fast Food
Restaurant, Sit -Down
Office/Institutional
General Office Building
Medical Office
Hospital
Nursing Home
Church/Synagogue
Day Care Center
Elementary School
High School
Industrial/Warehouse
General Light Industrial
Warehouse
Mini -Warehouse
Table 21
POLICE NET COST PER DEVELOPMENT UNIT
Functional Net Cost/Net
Population/Functional Cost/
Unit Unit Population Unit
Dwelling 1.34 $99.11 $133
Dwelling 1.29 $99.11 $128
Space 1.03 $99.11 $102
Dwelling 0.94 $99.11 $93
1000 sq. ft.3.28 $99.11 $325
1000 sq. ft.2.89 $99.11 $286
1000 sq. ft.2.28 $99.11 $226
1000 sq. ft.8.34 $99.11 $827
1000 sq. ft.3.69 $99.11 $366
1000 sq. ft.3.99 $99.11 $395
Room 2.87 $99.11 $284
1000 sq. ft.4.78 $99.11 $474
1000 sq. ft.2.74 $99.11 $272
1000 sq. ft.10.81 $99.11 $1,071
1000 sq. ft.6.93 $99.11 $687
1000 sq. ft.2.28 $99.11 $226
1000 sq. ft.3.83 $99.11 $380
1000 sq. ft.2.73 $99.11 $271
1000 sq. ft.2.06 $99.11 $204
1000 sq. ft.0.75 $99.11 $74
1000 sq. ft.5.44 $99.11 $539
1000 sq. ft.4.99 $99.11 $495
1000 sq. ft.4.91 $99.11 $487
1000 sq. ft.
1000 sq. ft.
1000 SCI.ft.
1.58
0.92
0.14
$99.11
$99.11
$99.11
$157
$91
_$14
Source:Functional population per unit from Tables 15 and 16; net cost per functional population from Table 20.
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 25
The updated fees are compared with the current fees in Table 22. The revised maximum fees are higher
than existing fees for residential, institutional and industrial uses, and lower than existing fees for
general retail, office and some commercial uses.These declines can be attributed to lower trip
generation rates and related factors in the sixth edition of the Trip Generation manual, which came out
shortly after the last Development Fee Update Study.
Table 22
POTENTIAL CHANGE IN POLICE FEES
Current Maximum Potential
Land Use Type Unit Fee Fee Change
Residential
Single-family Dwelling $118 $133
Multi -family Dwelling $114 $128 12%
Mobile home/RV Park Space $91 $102 12%
Assisted Living Facility Dwelling $76 $93 22%
Retail/Commercial
General Retail/Shopping 1000 sq. ft.$364 $325 -11`)/0
Auto Sales/Repair 1000 sq. ft.$333 $286 -14%
Building Material/Lumber 1000 sq. ft.$261 $226 -13%
Convenience Store/Gas Station 1000 sq. ft.$797 $827 4%
Discount Store 1000 sq. ft.$355 $366 3%
Drive -In Bank 1000 sq. ft.$414 $395
Hotel/Motel Room $378 $284 -25%
Movie Theater 1000 sq. ft.$454 $474 4%
Nursery/Garden Center 1000 sq. ft.$257 $272 6%
Restaurant, Fast Food 1000 sq. ft.$1,173 $1,071
Restaurant, Sit -Down 1000 sq. ft.$914 $687 -25%
Office/Institutional
General Office Building 1000 sq. ft.$230 $226 -2%
Medical Office 1000 sq. ft.$361 $380 5%
Hospital 1000 sq. ft.$229 $271 18%
Nursing Home 1000 sq. ft.$183 $204 11%
Church/Synagogue 1000 sq. ft.$63 $74 17%
Day Care Center 1000 sq. ft.$440 $539 23%
Elementary School 1000 sq. ft.$356 $495 39%
High School 1000 sq. ft.$361 $487 35%
Industrial/Warehouse
General Light Industrial 1000 sq. ft.$130 $157 21%
Warehouse 1000 sq. ft.$79 $91 15%
Mini -Warehouse 1000 sq. ft.$11 $14 27%
Source:Current fees from "City of Apache Junction Development Fee Schedule," July 2000:maximum fees from
Table 21.
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 26
PARKS AND OPEN SPACE
The City of Apache Junction operates eight parks and recreation facilities for the benefit of the public.
These include several small parks, a City/school recreation complex, a senior/community center and
a large regional park. All of the parks are within the City's corporate jurisdiction. The City adopted a
parks development fee in 1997 and updated it in 1998.
In addition to parks, the City also provides a considerable amount of open space on the north and east
sides of the city, on which it has begun building a multi -purpose trail system.The City desires to
purchase additional State trust land located adjacent to its existing open space.Currently, the City's
parks impact fee does not include an open space component.This section calculates such a fee
component.
Service Unit
The demand for parks facilities, as well as open space, is generally attributed only to residential
development. In the original study and in the 1997 update, parks development fees were calculated in
terms of a cost per person, which was then converted into a cost per dwelling unit for various housing
types based on the average household size associated with single-family, mobile home and multi -family
dwelling units.The level of service was expressed in terms of the cost per peak population, which in
turn was estimated based on the number of units and average household sizes.
In this update, a slightly different approach is used. The demand for parks facilities and open space will
be expressed in Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDUs). An EDU is the demand for parks and open space
equivalent to that of a typical single-family unit.Since the demand for parks and open space is
proportional to population, the number of EDUs represented by a dwelling unit is the ratio of the
average household size of that type of unit to the average household size of a single-family unit. EDUs
per unit based on average household size data from the 1990 census are shown in Table 23 below. The
total number of EDUs are then estimated based on existing housing.
Table 23
PARKS AND OPEN SPACE SERVICE UNITS, 2001
Housing Type
Single -Family Detached
Multi -Family
Mobile Home/RV Sites
Average
Household
Size
2.68
2.58
2.07
EDUs/
Unit
1.00
0.96
0.77
2001
Housing 2001
Units EDUs
9,308 9,308
1,415
18,261
1,358
14,061
Total EDUs 28,984 24,727
Source:Average household size from Table 42; 2001 units from Table 43.
Cost per Service Unit
As shown below, existing City park sites total over 330 acres.With the exception of the City/School
Recreation Complex, where the land is owned by the school district, the remaining 321.7 acres of the
City's existing park land is under long-term (25 -year) lease from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
Development Fee Update Study
City of Apache Junction, Arizona
December 3, 2001
Page 27
and will eventually be acquired through the patent process. To date, the City has developed 69.3 acres
(Superstition Shadows Park was developed jointly with the school district), as shown in Table 24.
Table 24
EXISTING PARKS
Park
Veterans Memorial Park
City Hall Complex Park
Little League Field
Superstition Shadows Park (City/School Recreation Complex)
Prospector Park
Multi -Events Center/Rodeo Arena
Goldminers Park
Renaissance Point Retention Area
Arroyo Verde Retention Area
Ironwood Cove Retention Area
Focal Point
City/County Retention Area
Total
Acres
2.0
2.5
3.0
23.0
265.0
20.0
5.0
7.9
10.9
1.1
1.1
3.2
City/BLM
Owned
2.0
2.5
3.0
0.0
265.0
20.0
5.0
7.9
10.9
1.1
1.1
3.2
Developed
by City
2.0
2.5
3.0
7.5
30.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.1
3.2
Total Acres 344.7 321.7 69.3
Source:City of Apache Junction, Parks and Recreation Department, November 9, 2001
The City has obtained long-term leases on 1,628 acres of
BLM land along the north and east sides of the city to
preserve as open space (see Figure 4).This land will
eventually be acquired through the patent process.The
City has made some access improvements and has begun
building a multi -purpose trail system within this linear
open space corridor.There exists about 2,700 acres of
State-owned open space in and around the existing open
space.This land is for sale by the State and may be sold
to the highest bidder and developed.This land is also
eligible for preservation under the Arizona Preserve
Initiative. The City is in the process of initiating petitions
to reclassify some of the land to be preserved as open
space. If the reclassification is granted, the land cannot be
sold on the open market and the State will enter into
negotiations with the City on the price of the land and
how to pay for it.
While the City historically has not had to pay to acquire
parks or open space land, this will not be the case in the
future. The City has already acquired long-term leases on
virtually all of the BLM land in its proximity for use as
either parks or open space. Additional land will need to be purchased
owners. The City is growing to the south where the land is owned by the State and park land will have
Figure 4
EXISTING OPEN SPACE
from the State or from private
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 28
to be purchased at market value. Additional open space that the City is trying to acquire adjacent to its
existing open space is also State-owned. A local realtor familiar with the value of comparable land in
Apache Junction, Mesa and Queen Creek has estimated that the City will end up paying about $45,000
per acre for State land to be preserved as open space or used for park land. Based on this estimate, the
cost to acquire the amount of parldand currently serving existing residents would be about $14.5 million,
while the City's open space would be valued at $73.3 million.
The development of park land includes clearing and grading the site, and installing security lighting,
landscaping and utilities. The current cost of park land development is estimated by City staff to be
about $77,000 per acre, based on recent parks improvement projects.Multiplying this figure by the
amount of park land that has been developed by the City indicates that, in today's dollars, the City has
invested approximately $5.3 million in park development, as shown in Table 25.
Table 25
PARKS AND OPEN SPACE LAND AND DEVELOPMENT COSTS
Cost Components
Park Open Space
Park Land Development Land
Clearing/Grading Cost/Acre
Security Lighting Cost/Acre
Landscaping Cost/Acre
Utilities
NA $10,000
NA $20,000
NA $40,000
NA $7,000
NA
NA
NA
NA
Total Cost/Acre $45,000 $77,000 $45,000
321.7 69.3 1,628Acres Leased/Developed by City
Total Cost $14,476,500 $5,336,100 $73,260,000
Source:Estimated land cost by realtor Tony Vehon from City of Apache Junction. "Report on Arizona
Preserve Initiative to Reclassify/Acquire State Lands,''September 15,2000;development costs per
acre from City of Apache Junction Parks and Recreation Department, 6/12/2001; park acres from Table
24;open space acres from BLM lease agreements per City of Apache Junction Parks and Recreation
Department.
In addition to developing park land, the City has also invested in the construction of parks facilities,
ranging from playgrounds and picnic ramadas to swimming pools.The current replacement costs of
these City -built facilities total about $4.4 million, as shown in Table 26. The senior/community center
was not included, since it was developed with Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds.
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 29
Table 26
EXISTING PARK FACILITIES
Total City -Built Unit Total
Facility Units Units*Cost City Cost
Ramadas (single)3.0 3.0 $7,500 $22,500
Ramadas (Small Group)17.0 10.0 $15,000 $150,000
Ramadas ( Large Group)10.0 6.0 $25,000 $150,000
Shuffleboard Courts 3.0 3.0 $10,000 $30,000
Horseshoe Pits 5.0 5.0 $1,500 $7,500
Playgrounds 4.0 4.0 $50,000 $200,000
Ball Fields 8.0 6.5 $100,000 $650,000
Concession/Restrooms 5.0 3.5 $100,000 $350,000
Swimming Pools**1.0 1.0 $1,000,000 $1,000,000
Tennis Courts 9.0 9.0 $35,000 $315,000
Racquetball Courts 4.0 4.0 $45,000 $180,000
Basketball Courts 4.0 2.0 $35,000 $70,000
Rodeo Arena 1.0 1.0 $160,000 $160,000
Focal Point Public Art 1.0 1.0 $125,000 $125,000
Soccer/Football Fields 3.0 3.0 $100,000 $300,000
Skate Park 1.0 1.0 $250,000 $250,000
Support Facilities***na 1.0 $400,000 $400,000
Total City Facility Cost $4,360,000
* excludes facilities or portions of facilities funded by the school district
** does not include improvements scheduled for spring of 2002
*** landscape, accessibility, parking, security and maintenance facility improvements made during
the past five years
Source:City of Apache Junction Parks and Recreation Department, June 12, 2001.
Dividing the total replacement cost of existing City parks and open space land and improvements by
the total number of existing EDUs yields the capital cost per service unit. To this is added the cost per
service unit of this study attributable to parks to derive the total parks and open space cost per service
unit, as shown in Table 27.
Table 27
PARKS AND OPEN SPACE COST PER SERVICE UNIT
Parks Open Space Total
Land Costs $14,476,500 $73,260,000 $87,736,500
Park Development Costs $5,336,100 $0 $5,336,100
Park Facility Costs $4,360,000 $0 $4,360,000
Total Costs $24,172,600 $73,260,000 $97,432,600
Existing Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDUs)24,727 24,727 24,727
Capital Cost per EDU $977.58 $2,962.75 $3,940.33
Study Cost per EDU $1.93 $0.00 $1.93
Total Parks/Open Space Cost per EDU $979.51 $2,962.75 $3,942.26
Source:Land and development costs from Table 25; facility costs from Table 26; existing EDUs from Table 23;
parks study cost from Table 49.
Development Fee Update Study
City of Apache Junction, Arizona
December 3, 2001
Page 30
Annual Parks Capital Grant Funding
Net Cost per Service Unit
The parks and open space cost per service unit should be reduced to account for potential grant funding
that will pay for some of the costs, to account for tax revenues that will be paid by new residents and
used to retire outstanding debt for existing park facilities, and to account for construction taxes paid on
the sales price of new construction and earmarked for park capital improvements.
Not all of the park development and park improvement costs have been paid for by the City with local
funds. Matching grants from the state Heritage Fund and other sources have been available in the past
to defray some of these costs, and are likely to continue to be available in the future. Over the five-year
period from 1992-1997, the City obtained $225,000 in grant funding for park improvements. Over the
last three years, the City has received about $150,000. In recent years, then, the City has been receiving
about $50,000 annually in grant funding. If funding continues at this rate, the City can expect to see the
present value equivalent of $25.17 in outside capital funding per single-family unit or equivalent, as
shown in Table 28.
Table 28
PARKS GRANT FUNDING CREDIT PER SERVICE UNIT
$50,000
Existing EDUs 24,727
Annual Parks Grant Funding per EDU $2.02
Present Value Factor (20 years at 5% discount rate)12.46
Parks Grant Funding Credit per Functional Population $25.17
Source:Annual grant funding from City of Apache Junction Parks and Recreation
Department. September 1997 and August 2001: existing EDUs from Table 23.
The appropriate revenue credit to account for sales tax payments that will be made by new development
and used, in part, to retire outstanding debt for existing park facilities has been calculated in Appendix
B.This credit will be deducted from the parks cost per service unit.
There is a potential for the City to get some outside funding to help acquire additional open space. The
most promising source is the Growing Smarter State Trust Land Acquisition Program administered by
the Arizona State Parks Department.The purpose of the program is to provide grants "to conserve
open spaces in or near urban areas and other areas experiencing high growth pressures." The grants are
to be used to purchase or lease State Trust land that has been classified as suitable for conservation
purposes.The program requires a 50 percent local match and will provide up to $20 million annually
in grants state-wide.Another potential sources of outside funding is the federal Land and Water
Conservation Fund. None of these outside funding sources are guaranteed to be available. However,
to be conservative, the cost per service unit should probably be reduced by one-half to account for the
potential availability of outside funding to help defray part of the growth -related costs.
Another source of capital funding for parks is the sales tax on new construction and the set-up of new
manufactured buildings. The City's policy is to earmark these "construction tax" or "one-time sales tax"
revenues to be spent only on capital improvements. The City's current adopted budget and its unofficial
capital facilities plan indicate that virtually all of the one-time sales tax revenues expected to be received
over the next 4-5 years will be spent exclusively on park improvements. Consequently, a credit will be
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 31
Median Single -Family Home Price
35% Sales Tax Deduction
Taxable Single -Family Home Price
Tax Rate
provided against the parks and open space development fees equal to the average amount of sale tax
paid per equivalent dwelling unit, as shown in Table 29.
Table 29
CONSTRUCTION SALES TAX CREDIT
$130,000
$45,500
$84,500
2.2%
Construction Sales Tax per EDU $1,859
Source:Median asking price of single-family homes built in Apache
Junction in the last five years from www.homeadvisor.msn.com.
The net cost per service unit is calculated by subtracting the grant credits, park debt service credit and
construction tax credit from the total cost per service unit, as summarized in Table 30.The
construction tax credit is allocated among the parks and open space components based on their share
of the total cost.
Table 30
PARKS AND OPEN SPACE NET COST PER SERVICE UNIT
Parks Open Space Total
Cost per EDU
Grant Credit per EDU
Park Debt Service Credit per EDU
Construction Tax Credit per EDU
$979.51 $2,962.75 $3,942.26
$25.17 $1,481.38 $1,506.55
$12.76 $0.00 $12.76
$461.89 $1,397.11 $1,859.00
Net Parks/Open Space Cost per EDU $479.69 $84.26 $563.95
Source:Cost per EDU from Table 27;park grant credit from Table 28; 50% open space grant credit
assumed; park debt service credit from Table 47; total construction tax credit from Table 29, allocated
to parks and open space components proportional to cost.
Demand and Cost Schedule
The net cost to the City to accommodate the parks and open space impacts of new residential
development at the existing level of service is the product of the number of service units (equivalent
single-family dwelling units) associated with each dwelling unit times the net cost per EDU calculated
above.As shown in Table 31, the net cost per single-family unit to provide the current level of park
facilities is $564.
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 32
Housing Type
Table 31
PARKS AND OPEN SPACE NET COST PER DWELLING UNIT
Parks Open Space Total
EDUs/Net Cost/Net Cost/Net Cost/
Unit Unit Unit Unit
Single-family Dwelling 1.00 $480 $84 $564
Multi -family Dwelling 0.96 $461 $81 $542
Mobile Home/RV Park Space 0.77 $369 $65 $434
Assisted Living Facility Dwelling 0.70 $336 $59 $395
Source:EDUs per unit from Table 23 (assisted living is ratio of functional population from Table 16 to single-family
functional population from Table 15);net cost per unit is net parks and open space costs per EDU from Table 30
times EDUs per unit.
If parks and open space development fees are adopted at the maximum rates shown above, they would
increase by 54 percent from current park development fee levels, as shown in Table 32.
Table 32
POTENTIAL CHANGE IN PARKS FEES
Current Maximum Potential
Housing Type Fee Fee Change
Single-family detached $366 $564 54%
Multi -family $352 $542 54%
Mobile home $283 $434 53%
Assisted Living Facility $235 $395 68%
Source:Current fees from "City of Apache Junction Development Fee Schedule,''
July 2000: maximum fees from Table 31
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 33
LIBRARY
The City of Apache Junction provides library facilities for its residents. These facilities were expanded
with a major addition in 1995. This section calculates the development fee that the City could charge
to ensure that new residential development pays a proportionate share of the cost of new library
facilities necessitated by growth.
Service Unit
As with parks, the demand for library facilities is generally attributed only to residential development.
Consequently, library development fees will also be calculated in terms of a cost per Equivalent
Dwelling Unit (EDU), as described in the parks section. An EDU, which is the equivalent of a typical
single-family unit in terms of average household size, will be the service unit for the library development
fees.
Cost per Service Unit
The Libra°, Expansion Needs Assessment S tne/y was prepared for the City of Apache Junction by Capital
Improvement Associates, Inc. in June 1993, and was adopted by the City Council.At that time, the
library occupied 10,147 square feet.The consultants recommended a 7,500 square foot addition to
accommodate existing library needs. This addition was completed in May 1995, and the library currently
occupies 17,647 square feet of a building it shares with the Senior Citizens/Community Center (see
Figure 4).For the long-term (2010 and beyond), the needs assessment recommended expansion to a
total of 38,200 square feet, to be accomplished by converting the space in the building currently
occupied by the Senior Center to library use and adding another 18,000 square feet.
The total cost of the library addition, which did not include land costs, was just over $1 million. This
amount does not include the cost of retrofitting the existing library space with fire sprinklers, which was
done at the same time but with a different contractor.Based on the cost of the 1994 library addition
and construction cost inflation, the current cost of library space is $156.60 per square foot, as shown
in Table 33.
Table 33
LIBRARY BUILDING COST PER SQUARE FOOT
Total Addition Cost
Addition Square Feet
$1,014,200
7,500
Cost per Square Foot (1994$)
Construction Cost Inflation Factor
$135.23
1.158
Cost per Square Foot (2001$)$156.60
Source:Cost from City of Apache Junction Finance Department,
March 1996;construction cost inflation factor from Engineering
News -Record Building Cost Index for October 2001 to 1994 annual
average from website (www.enr.com).
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 34
Figure 4
1994 LIBRARY ADDITION SITE PLAN
IN
A
°
P
L
:
A
Z
.
1
PR
O
P
E
R
T
Y
L
I
N
E
FROrFRTY LINE
',51!L PLAN L.Iarlos.RY A)0IT:C4 198:3/gL)
LIBRARY EXPAN:31:N
- -
CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION LIBRARY EXPANSION
o7A A.RCHITECTS, •NC.
Development Fee Update Study
City of Apache Junction, Arizona
December 3, 2001
Page 35
Library buildings alone, of course, are not sufficient.Another major cost of library expansion is
acquisition of circulation materials. As shown in Table 34, the cost of the library's existing circulation
materials is roughly equal to the cost of the building in which they are housed. The total replacement
cost of the existing library building and circulation materials is about $6.8 million. Dividing this figure
by existing single-family equivalents, and adding the cost of the development fee study attributable to
library facilities results in a cost of $277.17 per service unit.
Library Facilities
Table 34
LIBRARY COST PER SERVICE UNIT
Units Unit Cost Total Cost
Building (square feet)17,647 $156.60 $2,763,520
Land (acres)3.00 $133,750 $401,250
Circulation Materials
DVD Collection 90 $20.00 $1,800
CD Collection 133 $12.50 $1,663
Video Collection 5,531 $10.00 $55,310
Audio Collection 2,606 $8.00 $20,848
Adult Fiction Books 17,350 $22.53 $390,896
Reference Books 4,765 $51.75 $246,589
Adult Non -Fiction Books 39,326 $51.75 $2,035,121
Juvenile Circulating Books 18,381 $18.58 $341,519
Mass Market Paperbacks 8,248 $10.00 $82,480
Documents 11,710 $10.00 $117,100
Computer Inventory $347,749
Total Existing Capital Facility Replacement Cost $6,805,845
Existing Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDUs)24,727
Library Capital Cost per EDU $275.24
Library Development Fee Study Cost per EDU $1.93
Total Library Cost per EDU $277.17
Source:Building square feet from Capital Improvements Associates, Inc.,Library Expansion
Needs Assessment Study,June 1993;inventory units and computer costs from City of
Apache Junction Library, June 18,2001 memorandum:building cost per square foot from
Table 33; land cost per acre based on survey of asking prices for commercial land in Apache
Junction CBD,August 2001:unit costs for adult fiction books,reference books,adult
non-fiction books and juvenile books from School Library Journal,March 1,2001;existing
EDUs from Table 23; study cost per EDU from Table 49.
Net Cost per Service Unit
In addition to being based on reasonable cost estimates, development fees should also take into account
outside funding that may be available. The 1994 addition was partially funded with a $280,000 federal
Title II grant, which was all of the Title II grant money available for libraries in the state for that year.
However, Title II is no longer being funded, and State -level grants for library construction are extremely
limited in Arizona. Consequently, any future expansion of the library will have to rely primarily on local
funding sources.
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 36
While no credit is warranted against library fees for grant funding, credit does need to be given for
contributions toward repaying the debt on existing library facilities that will be made by new
development. Deducting the debt service credit per service unit calculated in Appendix B yields a net
cost of $262.31 per single-family equivalent, as shown in Table 35.
Table 35
LIBRARY NET COST PER SERVICE UNIT
Library Total Cost per Equivalent Dwelling Unit
Library Debt Credit per Equivalent _Dwelling Unit
$277.17
$14.86
Library Net Cost per Equivalent Dwelling Unit $262.31
Source:Total cost per EDU from Table 34; debt credit per EDU from Table 47.
Demand and Cost Schedule
Multiplying the net cost per service unit calculated above by the number of equivalent dwelling units
associated with the different housing types yields the net cost per dwelling unit for library facilities, as
shown in Table 36.
Housing Type
Table 36
LIBRARY NET COST PER DWELLING UNIT
EDUs/
UnitUnit
Net Cost/
EDU
Net Cost/
Unit
Single-family Dwelling 1.00 $262.31 $262
Multi -family Dwelling 0.96 $262.31 $252
Mobile Home/RV Park Space 0.77 $262.31 $202
Assisted Living_Dwelling 0.70 $262.31 $184
Source:EDUs per unit from Table 23;EDUs per assisted living unit from Table 31; net cost per
EDU from Table 35.
Iflibrary development fees are adopted at the maximum rates shown above, they would increase by 32
percent from current levels, as shown in Table 37.
Table 37
POTENTIAL CHANGE IN LIBRARY FEES
Current Maximum Potential
Housing Type Fee Fee Change
Single-family detached $199 $262 32%
Multi -family $191 $252 32%
Mobile home $154 $202 31%
Assisted Living Facility $128 $184 44%
Source:Current fees from "City of Apache Junction Development Fee Schedule,"
July 2000: maximum fees from Table 36.
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 37
MUNICIPAL BUILDINGS
In order to perform the functions of local government, a city must provide certain municipal buildings.
For the City of Apache Junction, these facilities consist of buildings to house the administrative staff
and facilities to maintain the fleet of municipal vehicles required to provide public safety, street
maintenance and other local government functions. As the city grows, these municipal buildings will
need to be expanded to house the additional staff and to maintain the additional vehicles needed to
maintain existing levels of municipal services.
Service Unit
The" functional population" used in this study to estimate the demand for police protection services is
also one of the few techniques used in development fee studies to estimate the demand for municipal
buildings. Functional population is analogous to the concept of "full-time equivalent" employees, and
represents the number of "full-time equivalent" people present at the site of a land use. The calculations
of functional population for various land use types are presented in the police facilities section of this
report.
Cost per Service Unit
The City's existing municipal buildings are provided in two locations: the municipal complex on Idaho
Road and the vehicle maintenance facility on Baseline Road. The municipal buildings exclude more
specialized facilities, such as the police station and library, that are located in the municipal complex but
are covered by separate development fees. As shown in Table 38, the City's existing municipal buildings
and the land that they occupy have an estimated replacement cost of about $2.5 million.
The City does not have any outstanding deb t on its existing municipal buildings. Consequently, no debt
service credit is warranted. Dividing the cost of existing facilities by the estimated functional population
of the city and adding the pro rata cost of this study results in an municipal building cost of $62.04 per
functional population.
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 38
Table 38
MUNICIPAL BUILDING COST PER SERVICE UNIT
Facility LocationLocation Value
City Hall 1001 N Idaho Rd $147,000
Council Chambers and Court 1001 N Idaho Rd $157,000
Parks and Recreation Building 1001 N Idaho Rd $150,000
Development Services 1001 N Idaho Rd $75,000
Storage Building 1001 N Idaho Rd $30,000
Building Department 1001 N Idaho Rd $15,000
Development Services Building 1001 N Idaho Rd $150,000
Admin. Services 1001 N Idaho Rd $75,000
Human Resources 1001 N Idaho Rd $131,000
Attorney Building and Conference Center 1001 N Idaho Rd $100,000
Chamber of Commerce Building 122 E 2nd Ave $60,000
Public Works Garage 575 E Baseline $289,000
Wash Building 575 E Baseline $10,000
Total Building Insured Value $1,389,000
Municipal Complex Land Value (8.03 acres)$1,074,013
Total Building and Land Value $2,463,013
Existing Functional Population 40,473
Municipal Building Capital Cost per Functional Population $60.86
Development Fee Study Cost per Functional Population $1.18
Total Municipal Building Cost per Functional Population $62.04
Source:Southwest Risk Services,Apache Junction Property Schedule (insured value
listing),2001;land value based on average land cost per acre of $133,750 based on
survey of asking prices for commercial land in Apache Junction CBD,August 2001;
functional population from Table 17; study cost from Table 49.
Demand and Cost Schedule
The maximum development fees that the City can charge for municipal buildings needed to
accommodate new development are shown in Table 39.The maximum fee is the product of the
functional population associated with each development unit times the net cost per functional
population.
Since the functional population calculations, at least those for nonresidential uses, are based on trip
generation data, the land uses included in the municipal building development fee schedule are the same
ones used in the road development fee schedule.
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 39
Table 39
MUNICIPAL BUILDING NET COST PER DEVELOPMENT UNIT
Functional Net Cost/Net
Population/Functional Cost/
Land Use Type Unit Unit Population Unit
Single-family Dwelling 1.34 $62.04 $83
Multi -family Dwelling 1.29 $62.04 $80
Mobile home/RV Park Space 1.03 $62.04 $64
Assisted Living Facility Dwelling 0.94 $62.04 $58
Retail/Commercial
General Retail/Shopping 1000 sq. ft.3.28 $62.04 $203
Auto Sales/Repair 1000 sq. ft.2.89 $62.04 $179
Building Material/Lumber 1000 sq. ft.2.28 $62.04 $141
Convenience Store/Gas Station 1000 sq. ft.8.34 $62.04 $517
Discount Store 1000 sq. ft.3.69 $62.04 $229
Drive -In Bank 1000 sq. ft.3.99 $62.04 $248
Hotel/Motel Room 2.87 $62.04 $178
Movie Theater 1000 sq. ft.4.78 $62.04 $297
Nursery/Garden Center 1000 sq. ft.2.74 $62.04 $170
Restaurant, Fast Food 1000 sq. ft.10.81 $62.04 $671
Restaurant, Sit -Down 1000 sq. ft.6.93 $62.04 $430
Office/Institutional
General Office Building 1000 sq. ft.2.28 $62.04 $141
Medical Office 1000 sq. ft.3.83 $62.04 $238
Hospital 1000 sq. ft.2.73 $62.04 $169
Nursing Home 1000 sq. ft.2.06 $62.04 $128
Church/Synagogue 1000 sq. ft.0.75 $62.04 $47
Day Care Center 1000 sq. ft.5.44 $62.04 $337
Elementary School 1000 sq. ft.4.99 $62.04 $310
High School 1000 sq. ft.4.91 $62.04 $305
Industrial/Warehouse
General Light Industrial 1000 sq. ft.1.58 $62.04 $98
Warehouse 1000 sq. ft.0.92 $62.04 $57
Mini -Warehouse 1000 SQ. ft.0.14 $62.04 $9
Source:Functional population per unit from Tables 15 and 16: net cost per functional population from Table 38
The updated fees are compared with the current fees in Table 40.The revised maximum fees could
potentially increase by 50 percent or more for residential and many other land uses.
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 40
Table 40
POTENTIAL CHANGE IN MUNICIPAL BUILDING FEES
Current Maximum Potential
Land Use Type Unit Fee Fee Change
Single-family Dwelling $53 $83 57%
Multi -family DWelling $51 $80 57%
Mobile home/RV Park Space $41 $64 56%
Assisted Living Facility Dwelling $34 $58 71%
Retail/Commercial
General Retail/Shopping 1000 sq. ft.$164 $203 24%
Auto Sales/Repair 1000 sq. ft.$150 $179 19%
Building Material/Lumber 1000 sq. ft.$117 $141 21%
Convenience Store/Gas Station 1000 sq. ft.$358 $517 44%
Discount Store 1000 sq. ft.$160 $229 43%
Drive -In Bank 1000 sq. ft.$186 $248 33%
Hotel/Motel Room $170 $178 5%
Movie Theater 1000 sq. ft.$204 $297 46%
Nursery/Garden Center 1000 sq. ft.$116 $170 47%
Restaurant, Fast Food 1000 sq. ft.$527 $671 27%
Restaurant, Sit -Down 1000 sq. ft.$411 $430 5%
Office/Institutional
General Office Building 1000 sq. ft.$103 $141 37%
Medical Office 1000 sq. ft.$162 $238 47%
Hospital 1000 sq. ft.$103 $169 64%
Nursing Home 1000 sq. ft.$82 $128 56%
Church/Synagogue 1000 sq. ft.$29 $47 62%
Day Care Center 1000 sq. ft.$198 $337 70%
Elementary School 1000 sq. ft.$160 $310 94%
High School 1000 sq. ft.$162 $305 88%
Industrial/Warehouse
General Light Industrial 1000 sq. ft.$58 $98 69%
Warehouse 1000 sq. ft.$36 $57 58%
Mini -Warehouse 1000 sq. ft.$5 $9 80%
Source:Current fees from "City of Apache Junction Development Fee Schedule," July 2000; maximum fees from
Table 39.
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 41
APPENDIX A: DEMOGRAPHIC DATA
For the purposes of this study, the amount of existing development in the city must be estimated in
order to determine existing levels of service.
Given Apache Junction's second -home and tourist characteristics, there is a significant difference
between the peak season, which occurs in the winter months, and the off-peak season. The U.S. census,
which is taken in April, is representative of the permanent population. At the time of the 1990 Census,
for example, only 61 percent of the City's housing units were occupied.As might be expected,
occupancy rates were lower for mobile home and mu] ti -family, but they were low for single-family units
as well, as shown in Table 41. The overall occupancy rate reported in the 2000 census is very similar.
Table 41
HOUSING UNITS AND OCCUPANCY, 1990-2000
Total Occupied Occupancy
Housing Type Units Units Rate
Single-family, 1990 3,567 2,663 75%
Multi -family, 1990 1,314 865 66%
Mobile home, 1990 7,906 4,252 54%
Total. 1990 12,787 7,780 61%
Total, 2000 22,771 13,775 60%
Source:U.S.Census.1990 and 2000 (multi -family category includes
everything other than single-family detached and mobile home).
Average household size is an important characteristic that links occupied housing units with the number
of people that reside in them.Data on average household size by structure type is available from the
1990 U.S. Census.These figures were then adjusted upward proportionately to account for non-
household population. The resulting estimates of average household size by housing type are shown
in Table 42. The limited data so far available from the 2000 census indicate little change has occurred
in average household sizes in Apache Junction over the last decade.
Table 42
AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD SIZE, 1990-2000
Occupied Persons/
Housing Type Units Population Unit
Single-family, 1990 2,663 7,147 2.68
Multi -family, 1990 865 2,230 2.58
Mobile home, 1990 4,252 8,819 2.07
Total, 1990 7,780 18,196 2.34
Total, 2000 13,775 31,814 2.31
Source:1990 and 2000 U.S. Census:1990 population by housing type is
household population by housing type with proportionate allocation of total
group quarter residents; 2000 is total population dividing by occupied units.
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 42
Combining 1990 and 2000 census data with 1990-2000 building permit data allows us to develop a
relatively precise estimate of current year-round dwelling units by housing type. To this must be added
the number of mobile home and recreational vehicle pads in existing mobile home and RV parks that
are only occupied during the peak season, as shown in Table 43.
Housing Type
Single-family
Multi -family
Mobile home
Table 43
DWELLING UNITS BY TYPE, 2001
1990
Units
3,567
1,314
7,906
1990-00
New Units
5,391
100
4,493
2000
Units
8,958
1,414
12,399
2000
New Units
350
1
162
Est. 2001
Units
9,308
1,415
12,561
Subtotal, Year -Round 12,787 9,984 22,771 513 23,284
Seasonal MH/RV Pads 5,700 0 5,700 0 5,700
Total 18,487 9,984 28,471 513 28,984
Source:1990 total year-round units and units by type and 2000 total year-round units from U.S. Census;1990-
2000 total new units is difference;1990-2000 new units by type based on 1990-2000 distribution of new units
permitted from City of Apache Junction; 2000 units by type is sum of 1990 and 1990-2000 new units; 2000 new
units from City of Apache Junction: seasonal mobile home/RV pads from count by GeoStat, Inc., August 1996.
Since the Census does not record information on nonresidential development, other data sources must
be used. Information from tax records indicates that Apache Junction had about 1.7 million square feet
of nonresidential development in 1995. Adding the amount of square footage authorized by building
permits issued since 1995, the current amount of nonresidential development is estimated to be about
2.5 million square feet, as shown in Table 44.
Table 44
EXISTING NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
Land Use
Retail/Commercial
Office/Institutional
Industrial/Warehouse
1995
Sq. Ft.
1,162,598
440,299
128,550
1995-2001
Sq. Ft.
658,081
54,962
38,906
Est. 2001
Sq. Ft.
1,820,679
495,261
167,456
Total 1,731,447 751,949 2,483,396
Source:1995 square feet from Pinal County Tax Assessor records, April 11, 1995:
square feet permitted since 1995 from City of Apache Junction.Development
Services Department. November 14, 2001.
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 43
APPENDIX B:DEBT SERVICE CREDIT
The City's only outstanding long-term debt on existing capital improvements is the $4.6 million revenue
bond issue used to construct the new police station, library addition and parks improvements. While
technically these bonds were issued by the Municipal Property Corporation whose board happens to
be appointed by the City Council, the debt service on these bonds is paid from the City's general
revenues, which consist largely of sales tax revenues.New development that is required to pay for
police, library and parks facilities through development fees should be given credit for the additional
sales tax revenue that will be generated by new development and used to retire the bond issue.
Credit against police, library and parks development fees are based on that portion of the bond issue
spent on each type of facility.The disposition of the bond proceeds is shown in Table 45.
Table 45
DISPOSITION OF 1992 REVENUE BOND PROCEEDS
Improvement
Projects
Bond Issue % of Project
Budget Budget
Police Building $2,344,000 60.6%
Library Addition $820,167 21.2%
Parks Improvements $705,000 18.2%
Project Subtotal $3,869,167 100.0%
Reserve $770,833 NA
Total Issue $4,640,000 NA
Source:City of Apache Junction Finance Department, February 1996.
In 1997, the remaining $3 million in the original bond issue was refunded as part of a new $10 million
bond issue. The additional bonded amount is to be used to pay for street improvement projects.
Consequently, 30 percent of the debt service for the new bond issue is attributable to the police, library
and parks improvements funded with the original issue.
Some method must be used to allocate the debt service credit among various land use types.Retail
businesses collect the sales tax, but the sales tax is paid by consumers and all types of businesses.For
the purposes of this analysis, the debt service credit will be allocated among various land uses based on
the functional population associated with that land use (see the police section for a description of
functional population). The present value of the future debt service payments amounts to $42.72 per
functional population, as shown in Table 46.
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 44
Table 46
DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS PER FUNCTIONAL POPULATION
Year Total Debt Service/
ending Debt Attributable Functional Functional
6/30:Service Debt Service Population Population
2001 40,473
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
$1,218,505
$1,220,765
$1,220,200
$1,222,338
$1,223,405
$1,218,425
$319,450
$322,275
$324,425
$321,150
$327,200
$365,552
$366,230
$366,060
$366,701
$367,022
$365,528
$95,835
$96,683
$97,328
$96,345
$98,160
42,861
45,390
48,068
50,904
53,907
57,088
60,456
64,023
67,800
71,800
76,036
$8.53
$8.07
$7.62
$7.20
$6.81
$6.40
$1.59
$1.51
$1.44
$1.34
$1.29
Total $8,938,138 $2,681,444 NA $51.80
Net Present Value of Future Debt Service per Functional Pop.$42.72
Source:Debt service payments for City of Apache Junction Municipal Property Corporation
Municipal Facilities Revenue Bonds,Series 1998 from City of Apache Junction Finance
Department:debt service attributable to original bond issue is 30%(the $10 million issue
refunded $3 million from the 1992 issue); 2001 functional population from Table 17,functional
population for succeeding years based on 1990-2000 year-round dwelling unit growth of 5.9%
from Table 43; net present value based on 5% discount rate.
The total debt service credit per functional population for the 1992 bond issue calculated above must
be multiplied by the percentages attributable to each of the three facility type funded to determine the
attributable debt service credit by facility type. This is all that is needed for the police development fees,
which are based on functional population.However, the credits for parks and libraries need to be
converted to a credit per equivalent dwelling unit.This is accomplished by multiplying each by the
current city-wide ratio of functional population to EDUs. The resulting debt service credits for police,
parks and library facilities are presented in Table 47.
Table 47
POLICE, PARKS AND LIBRARY DEBT SERVICE CREDITS
Police Parks Library
Total Debt Service Credit per Functional Population
Percent Attributable to Type of Facility
Attributable Debt Service Payment per Functional Population
City-wide Functional Population per Equivalent Dwelling Unit
$42.72
60.6%
$25.89
na
$42.72
18.2%
$7.78
1.64
$42.72
21.2%
$9.06
1.64
Debt Service Credit per Equivalent Dwelling Unit na $12.76 $14.86
Source:Total debt credit per functional population from Table 46;percentages from Table 45;ratio of functional population to
EDUs from Table 17 and Table 23.
Development Fee Update Study
City of Apache Junction, Arizona
December 3, 2001
Page 45
APPENDIX C:STUDY COST
In addition to the direct cost of capital improvements, the City can also recover the cost of preparing
and updating the development fee study from development fees.As shown in Table 48, the
development fee study per facility is calculated by dividing the total cost of this study by the number
of facilities studied.
Table 48
STUDY COST PER FACILITY
Study Cost $44,740
No. of Facilities Studied 5
Cost per Facility $8 948
Since the development fee ordinance mandates that the study be updated every three years, the cost of
this study attributable to road, police, parks, library and municipal building development fees should be
recovered from development fees over the next three years. Dividing the development fee study cost
attributable to each type of facility by the projected number of new service units to be added over the
next three years results in the following costs per service unit.
Cost Factor
Type of Service Unit
Attributable Study Cost
New Service Units, 3 years
Table 49
STUDY COST PER SERVICE UNIT
Roads
VMT
$8,948
47,289
Police
Func. Pop.
$8,948
7,595
Parks
EDUs
$8,948
4,640
Library
EDUs
$8,948
4,640
Munic.
Func. Pop.
$8,948
7,595
Study Cost per Service Unit $0.19 $1.18 $1.93 $1.93 $1.18
Source:Study cost per facility from Table 48; new service units based on 5.9% annual growth in dwelling units
from 1990-2000 from Table 43 and existing VMT from Table 4, existing functional population from Table 17 And
existing EDUs from Table 23.
Development Fee Update Study December 3, 2001
City of Apache Junction, Arizona Page 46