Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout95-036 CC ResolutionRESOLUTION NO. 95-36 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE SCHOOL FACILITY IMPACT MITIGATION PROGRAM WHEREAS, rapid population growth in recent years in the City of Temecula ("City") has resulted in large increases in the numbers of students that the Temecula Valley Unified School District ("District") is required to educate, and has resulted in the need to enlarge existing school facilities and construct new facilities to house the students in accordance with the policies of the District and standards specified by state law; and WHEREAS, new student impacts on existing school facilities are due primarily to residential uses (except senior citizen development); and WHEREAS, impacts from commercial and industrial development are less significant than those of residential development and are partially offset by the contributions of commercial and industrial uses toward a strong tax base in the City which supports public services, including schools; and WHEREAS, adequate school facilities are a benefit to both new development and the community at large, and are a necessary component of the City's social and infrastructure systems; and WHEREAS, the State Legislature has declared that financing the construction of school facilities is the responsibility of the State of California; and WHEREAS, the State of California has been unable to adequately fulfill its obligation for funding such additional school facilities and has shifted the primary responsibility for financing of school facilities to local school districts, which, under Chapter 887, Statutes 1986, ("School Facilities Law of 1986"), may establish developer mitigation fees for residential, commercial and industrial uses, and may establish Mello-Roos Community Facilities Districts to provide for school plant facilities financing as authorized and limited by the laws of the State of California; and WHEREAS, the combination of state school bond monies, school district imposed developer fees, local school bond measures, and other sources of financing have generally been inadequate to provide for the enlargement and construction of school plant facilities sufficient to adequately house new students in accordance with the minimum standards set forth by the State of California; and WHEREAS, school funding sources under current state laws and available funding are oriented toward the provision of interim school facilities, and a need exists to fund permanent K-12 school facilities, including facilities for the special education needs of special or disadvantaged students; and Resos\95-36 I WHEREAS, the City, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act CCEQA"), has the authority to review development proposals for impacts on School Facilities; and WHEREAS, pursuant to decisions reached in Mira Development Corporation v. City of San Diego, 205 Cal. App. 3d 1201 (1988), William S., Hart High School District v. Regional Planning Commission, 226 Cal. App. 3d 1612 (1991), and Murrieta Valley Unified School District v. County of Riverside, 228 Cal. App. 3d 1212 (1991) interpreting the School Facilities Law of 1986, the City has the authority to condition legislative acts including general plan amendments, specific plans and amendments thereto, and changes of zone, if it finds that the impacts on school facilities have not been mitigated to a level of insignificance; and WHEREAS, the provision of a quality school system to educate the residents of the City of Temecula is important to the City's future; and WHEREAS, the Temecula Valley Unified School District requested that the City of Temecula adopt a resolution providing creating a program to provide full funding for school facilities from some types of development; and WHEREAS, the City Council included language in the Growth Management and Public Facility Element of the General Plan concerning the mitigation of school facility impacts; and WHEREAS, this Resolution is being adopted at the request of the District which has agreed to indemnify and hold harmless the City from claims resulting from the adoption, enforcement, or implementation of the Resolution; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered the Program at its November 7, 1994 meeting and recommends that the Council approve this Resolution; and WHEREAS, notice of the proposed resolution was posted at City Hall, County Library, Rancho California Branch, the U.S. Post Office, and Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Mitigation of School Facility Impacts A. Except as provided below, all development projects and applications that are submitted to the City of Temecula and that require a General Plan amendment, zone change, development agreement, pre-annexation agreement or Specific Plan approval or amendment shall be reviewed for their potential school facility impacts and mitigation of such impacts. B. No conditions of approval on a General Plan amendment, zone change, development agreement, pre-annexation agreement or Specific Plan approval or amendment shall require any applicant or developer to provide mitigation in excess of the amounts authorized by Government Code Section 65995, as it now exists or may be amended from time to time, unless a School District Mitigation Plan ("Mitigation Plan") has been prepared by or on behalf of the District and approved by the City Council. Resos\95-36 2 C. Any of the following shall be considered to be adequate mitigation of school facility impacts associated with approvals by the City for General Plan amendments, Specific Plans and Specific Plan Amendments, development agreements, pre-annexation agreements and zone changes: 1. A legally enforceable School Facility Impact Mitigation Agreement ("Mitigation Agreement") between the District and developer that specifies the exact nature, amount, process and conditions of mitigation to be provided by the applicant/developer or other appropriate documentation. 2. A finding pursuant to CEQA by the appropriate City review body that no significant impacts on school facilities shall occur as a result of the proposed development. Provided further, findings may also be made pursuant to CEQA that the impacts on school facilities have been mitigated to a level of insignificance. Section 2. School Facility Impact Mitigation Plans A. Any school district located partly or totally within the City may prepare and submit a School Facility Impact Mitigation Plan to the City to address the impacts on school facilities which may result from new residential development projects within that district. The City shall review and may consider, at its sole discretion, approving a proposed Mitigation Plan if the Plan adequately addresses the impacts resulting from increases in the number of students within the school district submitting the Mitigation Plan. B. The following development projects shall be exempt from the requirements of an approved Mitigation Plan. These projects shall be required to pay only the statutory school fees authorized by Government Code Section 65995, as it now exists or may be amended from time to time, or any other amount previously agreed to by the District and the owner/developer of the proposed development project: 1. Residential projects which have been approved by a hearing body (Planning Commission or City Council) prior to the effective date of this Resolution. 2. "Quasi-judicial" land use approvals, including but not limited to subdivision maps, use permits, plot plans and variances. 3. Subsequent approvals for the components of a larger project which has already met the requirements of this Resolution (e.g. a tentative tract map within a specific plan which has already mitigated school facility impacts). 4. Commercial or industrial projects. 5. Senior citizen housing as defined in Government Code Section 65995. l(a). 6. Any residential development proposal for which a Mitigation Agreement has already been executed between the developer and the District. Resos\95-36 3 7. Any or all changes of zone needed to make the Official City Zoning Map consistent with the Land Use Designations contained in the City's first adopted General Plan as required by Government Code Section 65860, as it now exists or may be amended from time to time, of the State Planning and Zoning Law. 8. Any amendments to a legislatively approved land use entitlement (including a general plan amendment, zone change, development agreement, pre-annexation agreement, specific plan approval or amendment) that does not increase the total number of residential housing units within the area of the entitlement. Section 3. Preparation of School Facility Impact Mitigation Plans A. The Mitigation Plan shall contain documentation of the need for any level of mitigation that exceeds the total of revenue anticipated to be received by the District from Statutory School Fees authorized by Government Code Section 65995, as it now exists or may be amended from time to time, and any other sources of funding available to or anticipated by the District. The Mitigation Plan shall be adopted by the District Board of Trustees. At a minimum, all Mitigation Plans shall contain the following information: 1. Student Generation Factors. a. The District Student Generation Factor (SGF) shall be based upon a household survey. The SGF shall include peak student loading for all elementary, middle and high school grades. following: bo The SGF Household Survey shall be based upon and consist of the (1) A minimum random sample of 250 occupied dwelling units that were constructed in the preceding three years. (2) A representative sample of the current or anticipated future characteristics of the community, including consideration for any resort or second home characteristics of the community. (3) The survey shall exclude senior citizen housing. (4) A representative sample of the housing product types within the district (i.e. single family detached, single family attached, or multi-family rental properties and mobile homes). (5) The SGF shall be based on an assessment of student "pass through" from new homes over at least a five-year period. c. The District and any other interested party may propose additional survey factors and conditions to be included in the survey. The use of any additional survey factors and conditions (that could affect the SGF) must be approved by the City Council prior to doing the survey. Resos\95-36 4 2. Typical School Land Cost Factors a. The Typical School Land Costs Factor CrSF) shall be based on the State's standard cost and shall be based upon a finished and improved, construction ready school site, including the extension of necessary infrastructure. b. Development of school sites shall be based on California Department of Education standards for infrastructure, location, and acreage. c. School construction costs shall be as authorized by the State Office of Local Assistance (OLA), or as required by local and state codes. d. All costs for plans, test, inspections, furniture and equipment, and contingencies shall be in accordance with OLA requirements. 3. Optimum Facility Utilization utilization of its facilities. This District shall demonstrate, in the Mitigation Plan, optimum b. The Mitigation Plan shall include consideration of a year-round, multi-track education program, double school sessions, and alternative student loading programs. 4. Bond Issues and Other Funding Sources a. The District shall certify, and provide supporting evidence in the Mitigation Plan that the District has used, or committed for use, all its available funding sources. b. The District shall certify, and provide supporting evidence in the Mitigation Plan that the District is pursuing state and alternate facilities financing. c. If the District is not pursuing, or does not anticipate pursuing alternate financing, it shall include an explanation and rationale in the Mitigation Plan for not doing so. d. The Mitigation Plan shall include considerations of methods of financing the payment for and construction of School Facilities, to ensure the provision of adequate facilities and to minimize actual costs to future residents, including the use of developer loan funds based on anticipated state bond fund reimbursement and community facilities districts. 5. Central Administration and Support Facilities and Interim Facilities The District shall have the opportunity, through the Mitigation Plan, to present an argument justifying mitigation for impacts on administration and support facilities and interim facilities. The justification shall include infomarion on staffing, work loads, and other data to demonstrate that the District is using its administrative funding in a manner which maximizes productivity and minimizes costs. In addition, if the District elects to present this Resos\95-36 5 justification, the Mitigation Plan shall demonstrate that the mitigation requested is proportional to the impacts direcfiy attributable to new development. 6. Level of Support From New Development The Mitigation Plan may provide for total mitigation of school facilities impacts that are shown to result from new residential developments from all potential funding sources. The Mitigation Plan shall not be used to provide for mitigation of impacts attributable to existing development. 7. Coordination of Planning Review for School Site Development. The Mitigation Plan shall include provisions for consultations between the District, the City, and/or the applicant on future school facility location and site development plans in order to promote compatibility with City land use, circulation, and other plans, and coordination on public improvements, including streets, sidewalks, and traffic control mechanisms. B. The District shall submit its adopted Mitigation Plan to the City for its review and approval as to whether it conforms to these requirements and will reasonably and equitably mitigate, in the best interest of the City and its residents, the additional impacts on the District school facilities. Upon submittal of the Mitigation Plan to the City the following procedures shall be followed: 1. The District shall submit the adopted Mitigation Plan to the Director of Planning. The submittal shall be accompanied by the appropriate fee to cover the City's cost of reviewing the District's Plan. 2. Within 30 days following receipt of the District's Mitigation Plan, the Director of Planning shall review the plan to determine whether it conforms to the requirements of this Section. The Planning Director shall inform the Building Industry Association for Riverside County of its receipt of the District's Mitigation Plan, and invite them to provide written comments or objections. After reviewing the Mitigation Plan, the Director shall take one of the following actions: a. Notify, by written notice to the superintendent of the District, that the Mitigation Plan conforms to the requirements of this Resolution. The notice shall also contain the anticipated meeting date for the Planning Commission's consideration of the Mitigation Plan. b. Notify, in writing, the superintendent of the District that the District's Mitigation Plan does not conform to the requirements of this Section and describing the deficiencies that need to be corrected. Any major changes in the District's Mitigation Plan must be approved by the District's Board of Trustees. 3. Within 60 days following the Director of Planning's notification of the completeness of the District's Mitigation Plan, the Planning Commission shall review and Resos\95-36 6 consider the plan to determine whether it conforms to the requirements of this Section and will reasonably mitigate the impacts of new development on school facilities. After considering the Mitigation Plan, the Commission shall recommend that the City Council approve, deny, condition, or continue the approval of the District's Mitigation Plan. 4. Within 30 days following the Planning Commission's recommendation on the District's Mitigation Plan, the City Council shall review and consider the Plan to determine whether it conforms to the requirements of this Section and will reasonably and equitably, in the best interests of the City and its residents, mitigate the impacts of new development on school facilities. After considering the Mitigation Plan, the Council shall approve, deny, condition, modify, or continue consideration of the District's Mitigation Plan. C. Upon approval of the City Council, the Mitigation Plan shall thereafter be regarded as the basis for the identification by the District of specific impacts attributable to individual residential development proposals, and mitigation measures which may be appropriate to eliminate or reduce to a level of insignificance the impacts attributable to such residential development proposals. The City shall not adopt any financial mitigation in excess of the District's recommended development mitigation measure, unless it is found to be consistent with the provisions of a previously approved Mitigation Plan, an executed developer-District agreement, or any measures permitted by State law. D. The District may request, or the City Council may initiate, the process of amending the previously approved Mitigation Plan at any time. Any amendments to the Plan shall follow the approval procedures specified in this Resolution. Section 4. Review of Residential Projects A. For all residential projects, the Director of Planning shall notify the District, by means of written notice, as to any proposed development located within said District prior to the first Development Review Committee meeting. 1. The Notice to the District shall include the following information: a. The location of the project; b. The name of the owner and developer; c. The number and type of dwelling units proposed; d. A preliminary site or development plan; and, e. The date of the DRC meeting. 2. The District shall provide written comments on any project submitted for their review and comment prior to the date of the Development Review Committee meeting. 3. The failure of the District to provide a written response to the Director of Reso8\95-36 7 Planning shall constitute the equivalent of "No Comment." In this case, the City will require only the State mandated school impact mitigation fees authorized by Government Code Section 65995, as it now exists or may be amended from time to time. B. All residential development proposals that do not require a General Plan amendment, zone change, development agreement, pre-annexation agreement, or Specific Plan approval or amendment by the City shall be reviewed for their potential impact on school facilities as pan of the Initial Environmental Study process. Nothing in this resolution restricts the ability of the Director of Planning to determine that an otherwise exempt residential project may have a significant impact on the environment and that an Environmental Impact Report should be prepared. No mitigation of school impacts beyond the mitigation identified in State law will be required for these projects. C. All residential development proposals that require General Plan amendments, Specific Plans, Specific Plan amendments, development agreements, pre-annexation agreements, and changes of zone shall be reviewed for their potential impact on school facilities and the environment and the mitigation of those impacts in accordance with the requirements of State and Local law. 1. If a School Facility Impact Mitigation Agreement is required and an Agreement has not been submitted, the Director of Planning shall notify the applicant that the application is incomplete and that additional information (i.e. special study or environmental impact report) is required to assess the impacts on and mitigation of the effects of the development project on the District's school facilities. 2. Within 30 days of submission of an application, the Director of Planning shall notify the applicant that either: a. The proposed development project will not have a significant adverse impact on the District's school facilities or the environment, and that no additional special studies or supplemental mitigation agreement is required. b. The proposed development project will not have a significant adverse impact on the District's school facilities, but may have an adverse impact on the environment and that a special study or environmental impact report is required. c. The proposed development project could have an adverse impact on the District's school facilities and that a detailed impact assessment and mitigation study must be prepared and/or a School Facility Impact Mitigation Agreement must be obtained. d. The proposed development project could have an adverse impact on the District's school facilities and/or the environment, and that a special study or an environmental impact report must be prepared and/or an Impact Mitigation Agreement is required. e. The proposed development project will have an adverse impact on the District's school facilities and the environment and that a special study or an environmental Resos\95-36 8 impact report must be prepared. 3. If the applicant and/or developer disagrees with the Director's determination of the project's potential impact on the environment or the District's school facilities, they may appeal the decision to the Planning Commission within 10 calendar days of receipt of the Director's determination. The appeal shall be made and filed in accordance with the requirements of the Planning Commission. 4. Within 30 days of filing an appeal of the Director's decision, the Director of Planning shall schedule the appeal for the Planning Commission's consideration. 5. If the applicant, developer, or District disagrees with the Planning Commission's determination of the project's potential impact on the environment or the District's school facilities, they may appeal the decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days of receipt of the Commission's determination. The appeal shall be made and filed in accordance with the requirements of the City Clerk. 6. Within 30 days of filing an appeal of the Planning Commission's action the City Clerk shall schedule the appeal for the City Council's consideration. The City Council's decisions on these matters shall be final. D. The evidence of adequate mitigation of any significant adverse impacts on the District's school facilities shall be established by a Mitigation Agreement. The terms of the Mitigation Agreement, shall be incorporated by reference in the conditions of CEQA Approval, and on the Conditions of Approval of any Specific Plan, the Resolution of Approval of any general plan amendment, and in the terms of any development or pre-annexation agreement. Section 5. Implementation of this Resolution A. Nothing in this Resolution shall be interpreted as limiting or restricting the ability of the Director of Planning, Planning Commission, or Council to require additional information or special studies on any residential projects submitted to the City for approval. B. It is the intent of the Council that this Resolution be in force and effect until amended, rescinded, suspended, superseded or until a subsequent resolution or ordinance is enacted which supersedes this Resolution. C. This Resolution is adopted at the behest of and for the benefit of the Temecula Valley Unified School District and other school districts within the limits of the City of Temecula. It is agreed that should any claim, action, challenge, or similar proceeding be instituted against the City for the adoption, imposition, or calculation of the school mitigation requirements under the provisions of this Resolution, shall be the full and complete responsibility of the District. To that end, the District shall indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless the City against any loss, cost, expense, claim, damage, settlement, or judgment, resulting from a lawsuit or any part ther~f pertaining to this Resolution. Resos\95-36 9 D. This Resolution shall not become effective unless and until the District acknowledges, in writing, and takes any and all appropriate Board action related to its obligations as set forth in this Section. Section 6. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 1 lth day of April, 1995. ATTEST: Stone, Mayor Jun~r~k, City Cler-~CC [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMECULA I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 11th day of April, 1995 by the following vote of the City Council: AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Lindemans, Roberts, Stone NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 C OUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSTAINED: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mufioz, Parks - ~' CMC ~June S. Gree~k, Re~os\95-36 10