Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 03 Reimbursement District Meeting Date: Meeting Type: Department: Staff Contact: Staff Phone No: Estimated Time: April 28, 2008 Work seSSi~O Public WorksQ Len Goodw' 726-3685 30 minutes AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL ITEM TITLE: REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT ACTION REQUESTED: Discuss proposal to authorize creation of reimbursement districts, and provide staff direction. ISSUE STATEMENT: Shall the City implement a proposal to authorize the creation of reimbursement districts to facilitate the funding of capital improvements. ATTACHMENTS: A: B: C: Council Briefing Memorandum Draft Ordinance Comparison between Local Improvement District and Reimbursement District DISCUSSION/ FINANCIAL IMPACT: As City staff continue development of a broad based capital financing plan, alternative revenue mechanisms are being explored. Currently, the City relies on such things as user fees, systems development charges, local improvement districts and intergovernmental grants and loans to provide revenue streams to support either pay as you go financing or issuance of debt. One revenue mechanism that is not used in Springfield is the reimbursement district, which involves collection of fees from developments which are used to reimburse an original developer who fronts the cost of a major capital improvement. Although the City has used a somewhat similar informal approach in isolated cases, the Council has not codified the process or the standards to be used. Based on the ordinances used by a number of other Oregon cities, staff, in consultation with the City Attorney, have developed a proposed reimbursement district ordinance which would provide a formal structure for creation of these districts when conditions are appropriate. If the Council believes it is appropriate to consider this approach as part of the City's overall funding strategy for capital projects, staff recommends that the draft be reviewed with interested parties and, following that review, presented to Council for formal action. MEMORANDUM City of Springfield Date: To: April 23, 2008 Gino Grimaldi, City Manager (If Len Goodwin, Assistant Public Work Director Reimbursement District From: COUNCIL BRIEFING MEMORANDUM Subject: ISSUE: Shall the City implement a proposal to authorize the creation of reimbursement districts to facilitate the funding of capital improvements. BACKGROUND: As staff continues the process of developing a comprehensive Capital ' Financing plan for consideration of the Council, we have explored alternative forms of generating the revenue that will be needed to fund the City's capital needs. Staff does this in the knowledge that it is probable the extent of the capital needs will far outstrip the City's own ability to generate resources. As Council has seen from the discussion of the draft sanitary sewer and storm drainage master facilities plans, the project needs are large. There is every reason to expect that the capital needs for public buildings and transportation infrastructure will be similarly large. One such concept that is in use by several cities, not including Eugene and Springfield, is the reimbursement district.. This is a mechanism which facilitates construction of capital improvements by private sector developers, by providing a way for them to recover much of their cost if they agree to fund the construction in advance. Staff believes that the ability to create such districts could prove to be a valuable addition to the financing tool kit. Since creation of such districts requires a preexisting ordinance authorizing their creation, staff have developed a draft of such an ordinance for Council discussion. If Council concurs that the approach is a sound one, staff will bring the ordinance forward for action and, thereafter, include the possibility of using the mechanism as it develops the capital financing plan alternatives. DISCUSSION: The concept behind areimbursement district shares many similarities with a local improvement district ("LID"). Its purpose is to allocate to properties owners who benefit from the construction of a public improvement, a proportionate share of the cost of the improvement. Like the LID, it presumes that the construction of a significant improvement may benefit a number of properties, including those that front on the improvement and, in many case, others who are near the improvement even if they do not abut it. Also like the LID, it uses a variety of formulae to determine a unit of benefit from an improvement. Commonly in sewer improvements this could be the frontage of the parcel of benefitted property, or the square footage of the parcel. In transportation improvements it could be the trip generating capacity of the parcel, based upon the zoning and land use designation and distance from the facility to be constructed. . There are also significant differences. While the LID concept assumes that properties in their existing state will benefit from an improvement, the reimbursement district does not. It presumes that in the absence of some action by the property owner to change (and generally Attachment A, Page I of 4 intensify) the use ofhis--or her "land, the property will enjoy only a de minimis benefit from the improvement. This difference is crucial. While under an LID the benefitting property owner is immediately assessed for a proportionate share of the cost of the improvement, a property owner in a reimbursement district is not. Several results follow from this distinction. In the case of an LID, the property owner immediately has a lien placed on the property to secure payment of the amount of the benefit. That obligation results in a need for the property owner to immediately pay the assessment or to fmance it (financing vehicles are available through the City). The amount of this lien becomes a part of the property tax burden and, in some cases could force a property into tax compression under Measure 5. Because. of the immediate and real fmancial impact of the imposition of the LID, property owners are allowed to file objections to the formation of the LID (such an objection is referred to as a remonstrance). Under Section 34 of the Springfield City Charter, remonstrance from two-thirds of the property owners affected by a proposed local improvement will block that improvement from being initiated by the Council for a period of at least six months. By contrast, the reimbursement district does not impose an obligation on any property owner unless and until that property owner seeks to take action with respect to his or her property. Under the draft attached, the triggering event is issuance of a permit to construct based upon a land use approval. Simple permits for repair and maintenance do not trigger the obligation. As a consequence of this distinction, property owners potentially subject to the fee imposed by a reimbursement district do not have authority to block formation by remonstrance. Likewise, the burden of the reimbursement fee is not a tax based on the ownership of real property within the meaning of Measure 5 and, accordingly, the fee does not become part of the tax upon the property for the purposes of calculating compression. Typically, the reimbursement district approach is used when a party is prepared and willing to construct substantial public improvements that do more than satisfy their obligation to contribute a proportionate share on the basis of their development. The party constructing the . improvement then is repaid for that portion of the cost which exceeds their proportionate share, 'Over the course of time, by other property owners who subsequently develop arid take advantage of the infrastructure constructed. The approach is used by a number of Oregon cities (not including, however, Eugene) to address the frequent problem that most cities face in extending infrastructure: the cost of a logical extension is far beyond the capacity of the local government to afford, and is far more than can legitimately be exacted from the property owner whose development triggers the need for the imp~ovement. The current draft is a broad ordinance that permits reimbursement districts to be formed for the widest variety of purposes. There remain significant areas where policy input from the Council is required. These areas include: 1. Whether or not we should permit districts to be formed after construction of an improvement has begun. Some cities permit this, although we see a number of ' concerns that may complicate such a decision. 2. Whether or not the reimbursement fee should be increased over time, to allow the developer who constructed the improvement to be somewhat insulated from the impact of inflation. Attachment A, Page 2 of 4 3. Conversely, whether or not the fee should diminish over time to reduce the impact on a developing property owner who begins to use the improvement only after it is perhaps many years old. Creation of districts after construction of a project has begun can be problematic because those who would ultimately be called to pay the reimbursement fee might not have had an opportunity to be a part of any process leading to the decision to construct the iinprovement. This might be perceived as making imposition of the district seem unfair. In addition, the process of district creation could be more controversial once the project has begun, because development may have already begun by the time a district is created. As a result, property owners may conclude there are "winners" and "losers" in district creation, particularly in the case of those properties where development has begun. Those developers may feel they have not had a chance to factor the cost of the district into their development financial planning. Staff recommends that the City not permit formation of a district to cover any construction after that construction has begun. The question of changing the fee over time, either increasing it or decreasing it, is an attempt to fine tune the impact of the fee on a late coming development. The argument for decreasing the fee over time is that the infrastructure has less value as it ages, thus later development should not have to pay the same cost. However, assuming the City continues its practice of perpetual maintenance, in reality the infrastructure does not decline in value over time. Allowing the fee , to decrease over time is likely to make the approach less attractive to developers, because it increases the risk that they will not recover the investment that they made. On the opposite side of the coin, increasing the fee over time is a way of assuring that later developments pay the same economic cost as did initial developers. It reflects the fact that cost of replacement of infrastructure actually increases over time. It also increases the likelihood that the original developer who constructed the infrastructure will fully recapture his investment. It is likely to increase opposition to the formation of a district because it could be perceived as advantaging those who can develop more quickly. On balance, staff believes that the two concepts effectively cancel each other out, and recommends that Council neither increase nor decrease the fee over time. Once we have received Council. input on these issues, and before presenting an ordinance to Council for consideration, there may be value in approaching other local government agencies to determine if they wish to participate in the concept of a reimbursement district. Although the draft is written to include the potential for application to facilities constructed by Springfield Utility Board (and probably, by extension, Emerald Peoples Utility District) we have not talked to SUB or EPUD to determine their level of interest. The current draft does not include facilities constructed by or for Willamalane Park and Recreation District, and it might be prudent to discuss the issue with them before bring this to Council. Finally, it seem~ prudent to have discussions with the local development community to ascertain their views. While the approach appears to be well-received in other parts of the State, we should not necessarily assume that local developers would come to the same conclusion. Attachment A, Page 3 of 4 ."RECOMMENDED ACTION: Provide direction to. staff on the three policy questions noted above, and other provisions of the draft ordinance, as well as direction on what process to use in vetting the ordinance before bringing it forward for Council action. Attachment A, Page 4 of 4 CHAPTER Sections: 3.400 3.410 3.420 . 3.430 3.440 3.450 3.460 3.470 3.480 3.490 3.500 3.510 3.520 3.530 REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICTS Purpose. Definitions. Application for a reimbursement district. City Public Works Director's report. . Amount to be reimbursed. Public hearing. Notice of public hearing. City Council action. Notice of adoption of resolution. . Recording the resolution. Contesting the Reimbursement District Obligation to Pay the Reimbursement District Administration Prohibited conduct. Attachment Bf Page 1 of 18 S:\PW\Reimbursement District\Muni Code final draft.doc Last printed 4/21/2008 8:23:00 PM 3.400 Purpose. (1) The city of Springfield requires developers to construct and install infrastructure improvements including electricity; water supply, distribution, and treatment; sanitary sewer; storm sewer; transportation improvements; and other public infrastructure appropriate to serve proposed developments. These improvements are constructed in accordance with city design and construction standards and later dedicated to the city as "public improvements." Often these street, water, sewer, and storm sewer improvements, particularly those constructed off-site, not only fulfill a developers obligation to provide needed infrastructure proportional to their impact, but also can and will benefit other property owners when they subsequently develop their property. Therefore, these improvements represent a benefit to those subsequent property owners. (2) ^ The purpose of this chapter is to provide a mechanism where owners of property which benefits from the construction of public improvements by another . property owner will share in the cost of those improvements through payment of a reimbursement charge at the time the benefited property is developed and/or the improvements are utilized. (3) Owners of property which would. be subject to a reimbursement charge will . be provided an opportunity to review and comment on pertinent information regarding the proposed reimbursement charge prior to the city establishing a Attachment S, Page 2 of 18 S:\PW\Reimbursement District\Muni Code final draft.doc Last printed 4/21/2008 8:23:00 PM reimbursement district pursuant to this chapter. The city will collect the reimbursement charges and, upon receipt, will forward the funds to the person who constructed or funded the improvements. (4) The reimbursement charges established under this chapter are intended to become due and payable upon development of benefited property. Such charges are fees for service because they contemplate a development's receipt of essential municipal services based upon the nature of that developme~t. The timing and extent of any development are within the control and discretion of the property owner. The reimbursement charges imposed under this chapter a~e not intended to be a tax on property or on a property owner as a direct consequence of ownership of property within the meaning of Article XI, Section llb, of the Oregon Constitution or the legislation implementing that section. (5) The reimbursement charges established in this chapter are in addition to, and not in lieu of, other charges which may be required for development. 3.410 Definitions As used in this chapter: (1) "City public works director" or "director" means the person holding the position of city public works director or any officer or employee desig~ated by that person to perform duties stated within this section. (2) "City" means the city of Springfield. Attachment B, Page 3 of 18 S:\PW\Reimbursement District\Muni Code final draft.doc Last printed 4/21/2008 8:23:00 PM (3) "Person" means a natural person, the person's heirs, executors, administrators, or assigns; a firm, partnership, corporation, association or legal entity, its or their successors or assigns; and any agent, employee or any representative thereof. (4) "Applicant" means a person, as defined in subsection. (3) of this section, who is required or chooses to finance some or all of the cost of a street, water or sewer improvement which is available to provide service to property, other than property owned by the person, and who applies to the city for reimbursement for the expense of the improvement. The "applicant" may be the city. (5) Infrastructure improvements include the planning, design and construction of, facilities or structures dedicated to public use including, but not limited to, (a) "Transportation improvement" -- an improvement designed and constructed in accordance with standards adopted by the city through ordinance or policy, or required through approval of any application for a land use decision, and including, but not limited to, streets, bicycle or multi-use paths (either on or off-street), storm drains, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, traffic control deyices, street trees, lights, intersections, signals, amenities required by City construction and design standards, and signs and public right-of-way. (b) "Water improvement" -- an improvement designed and constructed in accordance with standards adopted by the city acting though the Councilor the Springfield Utility Board, through "ordinance or policy, or required through Attachment B, Page 4 of 18 S:\PW\Reimbursement District\MuniCode final draft.doc Last printed 4/21/2008 8:23:00 PM approval of an application for a land use decision, and including, but not limited to a well, water distribution or treatment facility" extending a water line to property, other than property owned by the applicant, so that water service can be provided for such other property without further extension of the line. ' (c) "Sewer improvement" -- an improvement designed and constructed in accordance with standards adopted by the city through ordinance or policy, or required through approval of an application for a land use decision, and including, but not limited to, pump stations, trunk sewers, lateral sewers, and .extending a sewer line to property so that sewer service can be provided for such other property without further extension of the line. (d) "Storm water improvement" means a facility designed and constructed in accordance with standards adopted by the city through ordinance or policy, or required through approval of an application for a land use decision, which conveys or treats storm water and is determined by the Public Works Director to be necessary or convenient in the management of storm runoff by the City consistent with the requirements of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit held by the city and any other State or federal storm water and water quality standards applicable to the city (e) "Electrical improvement" -- an improvement designed and constructed in accordance with standards adopted by the City, acting through the Springfield Attachment S, Page 5 of 18 S:\PW\Reimbursement District\Muni Code final draft.doc Last printed 4/21/2008 8:23:00 PM Utility Board=through ordinance or policy, or required through approval of an application for a land use decision, (balance From 'SUB) (f) "Other infrastructure" - an improvement designed and constructed in accordance with standards adopted by the city through ordinance or policy, or required through approval of an application for a land use decision, and including, but not limited to, other capital construction determined by the Councl to be necessary and convenient to the provision of services to the citizens of the City . (6) "Reimbursement district" means the area which is determined by the city council to derive a benefit from the construction of infrastructure improvements, constructed or financed in whole or in part by the applicant and includes property which has the opportunity to benefit from such an improvement. (7) "Reimbursement fee" means the fee required to be paid by a resolution of the city council and the reimbursement agreement. The city council resolution and reimbursement agreement shall determine the boundaries of the reimbursement district and shall determine the methodology for imposing a fee which consists of the cost of reimbursing the applicant for constructing or financing a portion of the infrastructure improvement which is available to provide service to property other than property owned by the person. Attachment S, Page 6 of 18 S:\PW\Reimbursement District\Muni Code final draft.doc Last printed 4/21/2008 8:23:00 PM 3.420 Application for reimbursement district. (1) A person who is required to or chooses to finance some or all of the cost of an infrastr~cture improvement which will be available to provide service to property, other than property owned by the person, may, by written application filed with the city Public Works Director, request that the city establish a reimbursement district. The infrastructure improvements must include improvements in addition to or in a size greater than those which would otherwise ordinarily be required in connection with an application for permit approval and must be available to provide service to property other than property owned by the applicant. Examples include, but shall not be limited to intersections, full street improvements instead of half street improvements, traffic signals, off-site sidewalks, connection of street sections for continuity, extension of water lines and extension of sewer lines. The city may also initiate formation of a reimbursement district. The application shall be accompanied by a fee, as established by resolution, sufficient to cover the cost of administrative review and notice pursuant to this section. (2) The application shall include the following: (a) A description of the location, type, size and cost of the public improvement to be eligible for reimbursement. (b) A map showing the properties to be included in the proposed reimbursement district; the zoning district for the properties; Attachment S, Page 7 of 18 S:\PW\Reimbursement District\Muni Code final draft.doc Last printed 4/21/2008 8:23:00 PM (c) a proposed methodology for the calculation of the special benefit to be received by properties benefited by the improvement and the data necessary for calculating the apportionment of the cost to each benefitted property; and the property or properties owned by the. applicant. (d) The estimated date of completion of the public improvements. and the estimated cost of the improvements as evidenced by bids, projections of cost of labor and materials, or other evidence satisfactory to the city Public Works Director. (3) Application for formation of a reimbursement district may be made at any time, . but shall be made no later than any notice to proceed on infrastructure iomp[rovements to be subject to the district.. However, the city Public Works Director may waive this requirement upon the showing by the applicant of good cause for the delay, that the delay was not created by the applicant, and that the delay was unavoidable due to unanticipated or unforeseen circumstances. 3.430 City Public Works Director's report. (1) The city Public Works Director shall review the application for the establishment of a reimbursement district and evaluate whether a district should be established. The Public Works Director may request the submittal of other relevant information from the applicant in order to assist in the evaluation. The Public Works Attachment S, Page 8 of 18 S:\PW\Reimbursement District\Muni Code final draft.doc Last printed 4/21/2008 8:23:00 PM Director shall prepare a written report for the city council, considering and making recommendations concerning the following factors: (2) Whether the applicant will finance or has financed some or all of the cost of the infrastructure improvement, thereby making service available to property, other than property owned by the applicant; (3) The area to be included in the reimbursement district; (4) The actual or estimated cost of the infrastructure improvements within the area of the proposed reimbursement district and the portion of the cost for which the applicant should be reimbursed; (5) The methodology for spreading the cost among the parcels within the reimbursement district and, where appropriate, defining a "unit" for applying the reimbursement fee to property which may, with city approval, be partitioned, altered, modified, or subdivided at some future date. The methodology should include consideration of the cost of the improvements, prior contributions by property owners, the value of the unused capacity, rate-making principles employed to finance public improvements, and other factors deemed relevant by the city Public Works Director. Prior contributions by property owners will only be considered if the contribution was for the same type of improvement and at the same location (example: a sewer-related contribution in the same location as a sewer improvement would be considered, a water-related contribution in the same location as a sewer improvement would not be considered) ; Attachment B, Page 9 of 18 S:\PW\Reimbursement District\Muni Code final draft.doc Last printed 4/21/2008 8:23:00 PM (6) The city may charge a fee for administration of the agreement. The administration fee shall be fixed by the council in the resolution approving and forming the reimbursement district. The administration fee is due and payable to the city at the time the agreement is signed (or, if specified as a percentage, shall be paid quarterly based upon the reimbursement fees paid during that quarter). (7) The proposed period of time that the right to reimbursement exists shall be specified in the resolution and shall not to exceed 20 years. 3.440 Amount to be reimbursed. The cost to be reimbursed to the applicant shall be limited to the cost of construction, including the acquisition and condemnation costs of acquiring additional right-of-way, the cost of permits, engineering and legal expenses, less that amount, if any, that represents the proportional obligation of the applicant in connection with a related land use decision. 3.445 Meeting with the Applicant and Property Owners Within the District After the Public Works Director has completed a draft report required above, the Public Works Director shall convene a meeting with all property owners within the District and the applicant. At the meeting the applicant shall describe the project and methodology for allocation costs. All property owners will then be given an opportunity Attachment B, Page 10 of 18 S:\PW\Reimbursement District\Muni Code final draft.doc Last printed 4/21/2008 8:23:00 PM for comment. In the report submitted to the council, the City Manager has the discretion to recommend the District be formed as proposed, that the proposal be modified, or that the application be denied. 3.450 Public hearing. (1) Within a reasonable time after the report in SMC 3.430, and meetings required in SMC 3.430 and 3.445, the city council shall hold an informational public hearing in which any person shall be given the opportunity to comment on the proposed reimbursement district. Because formation of the reimbursement district does not result in an assessment against property or lien against property, the public hearing is for informational purposes only and any proposed district is not subject to mandatory termination because of remonstrances. The city council has the sole 'discretion after the public hearing to decide whether a resolution approving and forming the reimbursement. district shall be adopted. (2) If a reimbursement district is formed prior to construction of the improvement(s), a second public hearing shall be held after the improvement has been accepted by the City. At that time, the city council may modify the resolution to reflect the actual cost of the improvement(s). 3.460 Notice of public hearing. Attachment B, Page 11 of 18 S:\PW\Reimbursement District\Muni Code final draft.doc Last printed 4/21/2008 8:23:00 PM Not less than 10 nor more than 30 days prior to any public hearing held pursuant to this chapter, the applicant and all owners of property within the proposed district shall be notified of such hearing and the purpose thereof. Such notification shall be accomplished by either regular mail or personal service. If notification is accomplished by mail, notice shall be mailed not less than 13 days prior to the hearing. Notice shall be deemed effective on the date that the letter of notification is mailed. Failure of the applicant or any affected property owner to be so notified shall not invalidate or otherwise affect any reimbursement district resolution or the city council's action to approve the same. 3.470 City council action. (1) After the public hearing held pursuant to SMC 3.450, the city council shall approve, reject or modify the recommendations contained in the City Public Works Director's report. The city council's decision shall be embodied in a resolution. If a reimbursement district is established, the resolution shall be accompanied by the City Public Works Director's report as approved or modified, and specify that payment of the reimbursement fee, as designated for each parcel, is a precondition of receiving City permits applicable to development of that parcel as described in SMC 3.510. (2) When the applicant is other than the City, the resolution shall instruct the Public Works Director to enter into an agreement with the applicant pertaining to the reimbursement district improvements. If the agreement is entered into prior to Attachment S, Page 12 of 18 S:\PW\Reimbursement District\Muni Code final draft.doc Last printed 4/21/2008 8:23:00 PM construction, the agreement shall be contingent upon the improvements being accepted by the City. [See 3.420(2)(d)]The agreement, at a minimum, shall contain the following provisions: (a) The public improvement(s) shall meet all applicable City standards or comply with specific requirements imposed by the Public Works Director, planning commission, or city council. (b) The total amount of potential reimbursement to the applicant and the basis upon which such reimbursement shall be calculated. (c) The applicant shall agree provide such security as shall be required under Springfield Municipal Code Section 3.210. (d) The applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City from any and all losses, claims, damage, judgments or other costs of expense arising as a result of or related to the City's establishment of the district. (e) The City shall collect the reimbursement fee when property within the District is issued a building permit; however, the applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of all costs involved in the collection of these funds including but not limited to any attorney's fees for any proceedings , brought to enforce or determine the validity of any fee. Attachment B, Page 13 of 18 S:\PW\Reimbursement District\Muni Code final draft.doc Last printed 4/21/2008 8:23:00 PM (f) Other provisions as the city council determines necessary and proper to carry out the provisions af this chapter. (3) If a reimbursement district is established by the city council, the date of the farmation of the district shall be the date that the city council adopts the resolution forming the district. 3.480 Notice of adoption of resolution. The City shall notify all praperty owners within the district and the applicant of the adoption of a reimbursement district resolution. The notice shall include a copy of the resolutian and a summary of the report, including a short explanation of when the property owner is obligated to pay the reimbursement fee and the amount of the fee. 3.490 Recording the resolution. The City Recorder shall cause notice of the farmation and nature of the reimbursement district to. be filed in the office of caunty records so as to provide notice to potential purchasers of property within the district. The recording shall nat create a lien. Failure to make such a recording shall not affect the legality of the resolutian or the obligation to pay the reimbursement fee. 3.500 Contesting the Reimbursement District. No. legal action intended to contest the formation of the district or the reimbursement fee, including the amount of Attachment S, Page 14 of 18 S:\PW\Reimbursement District\Muni Code final draft.doc Last printed 4/21/2008 8:23:00 PM the charge designated for each parcel, shall be filed after 60 days following adoption of a resolution establishing a reimbursement district. 3.510 Obligation to Pay Reimbursement Fee. (1) Nothing herein shall require the payment of a reimbursement fee in connection with a permit for ordinary repair and maintenance, nor shall anything herein require the payment of a reimbursement fee if an application is not fired within the time limit established for the reimbursement district. (2) The applicant for a permit related to property within any reimbursement district shall pay to the city, in addition to any other applicable fees and charges, the reimbursement fee established by the council, if within the time specified in the resolution establishing the district, the person applies for and receives approval from the City for any of the following activities: (a) A building permit for a new building; (b) Building permit(s) for any addition(s) of a building, which exceed 25 percent of the value of the building within any 12-month period. The value of the building shall be the amount shown on the most current records of the county department of assessment and taxation for the building's real market value. This subsection shall not apply to repairs made necessary due to accidental damage to the structure beyond the owner's control or damage or destruction by fire or other natural disaster; Attachment B, Page 15 of 18 S:\PW\Reimbursement District\Muni Code final draft.doc Last printed 4/21/2008 8:23:00 PM (c) Any alteration, modification or change in the use of real property which increases the number of parking spaces required under the Springfield zoning ordinance in effect at the time of permit application; (d) Connection to or use of a water improvement, if the reimbursement district is based on the water improvement; (e) Connection to or use of a sewer improvement, if the reimbursement district is based on the water improvement; (f) Connection to or use of a storm water improvement, if the reimbursement district is based on the storm water improvement; (g) Connection to or use of a transportation improvement, if the reimbursement district is based on the street improvement; (h) Connection or access to, or use of an other infrastructure improvement as set forth by the Council in the resolution establishing the reimbursement district. (3) The City's determination of who shall pay the reimbursement fee is final. Neither the City nor any officer or employee of the City shall be liable for payment of any reimbursement fee, annual fee adjustment, or portion thereof as a result of this determination. (4) A permit applicant whose property is subject to payment of a reimbursement fee receives a benefit from the construction of street improvements, regardless of whether access is taken or provided directly onto such street at any time. Attachment B, Page '16 of 18 S:\PW\Reimbursement District\Muni Code final draft.doc Last printed 4/21/2008 8:23:00 PM Nothing in this chapter is intended to modify or limit the authority of the City to provide or require access management. (5) No person shall be required to pay the . reimbursement fee on an application or upon property for which the reimbursement fee has been previously paid for the. same improvement. A land use approval authorizing the development in question shall not give rise to an obligation to pay the fee; only the issuance of a permit pursuant to such approval within the time limit established for the district shall create such obligation. No permit shall be issued for any of the activities listed in subsection (2) of this section unless the reimbursement fee, together with the annual fee adjustment, has been paid' in full. Where approval is given as specified in subsection (2) of this section, but if no permit is requested or issued, then the requirement to pay the reimbursement fee lapses if the underlying approval lapses. (6) The date when the right of reimbursement ends shall not extend beyond 20 years from the district formation date, but if the district shall have initially been established for a period of less than 20 years, it may be extended by city council resolution for periods of 5 years for a total not to exceed 20 years. 3.520 Administration. (1) The right of reimbursement is assignable and transferable upon 90 days written notice is delivered to the City advising the City to whom future payments are to be made. Attachment S, Page 17 of 18 S:\PW\Reimbursement District\Muni Code final draft.doc Last printed 4/21/2008 8:23:00 PM (2) The City shall establish separate accounts for each reimbursement district. Upon receipt of a reimbursement fee, the City shall cause a record to be made of that property's payment and remit the fee to the person who requested establishment of the reimbursement district or their assignee. (3) The reimbursement fee is not intended to replace or limit, and is in addition to, any other existing fees or charges collected by the City. 3.530 Prohibited conduct. (1) -No person may cause, maintain or use a connection to a utility improvement for which a reimbursement district has been established and for which a reimbursement charge is due and payable, unless such charge has first been paid or financed with installment payments. (2) Violation of this section is a civil infraction, punishable by a fine not to exceed $720. Each day that a prohibited connection or use exists constitutes a separate violation. (3) The remedies provided under this section are cumulative to any other remedies provided by law. N: City /EconDev /ReimbursementDistricts/MuniCode.doc Attachment B, Page 18 of 18 S:\PW\Reimbursement District\Muni Code final draft.doc Last printed 4/21/2008 8:23:00 PM Trigger Mechanism How initiated Ability to Avoid Basis for charge Financing of charge Beneficiary of fee Remonstrance basis SUMMARY OF FEATURES Reimbursement District compared with Local Improvement District Development. Application Council Resolution, based on staff report and recommendation Yes; no impact until development Council approved allocation of benefit None Whoever funds construction N/A Attachment C, Page 1 of 1 Construction of Improvement CounC(il Resolution, based on staff report and reconimendation No; immediate impact on property owner Council approved allocation of benefit Bancrofting (10 years) City 2/3 of owners will block roject