HomeMy WebLinkAboutPackets - Council Packets (919) AGENDA
ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL
STUDY SESSION
MARCH 14, 2007
ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
11000 N. LA CANADA DRIVE
STUDY SESSION - AT OR AFTER 5:30 PM
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
1. WATER UTILITY RATES
2. UPDATE ON POTABLE WATER SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT IMPACT
FEES AND
ALTERNATIVE WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT
IMPACT FEES
3. MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS CENTER - INTERIM OCCUPANCY PLAN
ADJOURNMENT
POSTED: 03/07/07
4:30 p.m.
cp
The Town of Oro Valley complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act(ADA). If any person
with a disabilityneeds any type of accommodation, please notify the Town Clerk's Office at
(520)229-4700.
1 �
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION STUDY SESSION: March 14, 2007
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR&COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: Shirley Seng,Water Utility Administrator
Philip C. Saletta,Water Utility Director
SUBJECT: Water Rates Analysis
SUMMARY:
The presentation at this Study Session will include an overview of the work completed to date, underlying
assumptions and the preliminary findings. These preliminary findings will include the following:
1.) Baseline Analysis for a 5 year projection
2.) Preliminary results for Alternative 1 for a proposed rate increase. Alternative 1 will take into
consideration:
a. The need for a proposed increase in the base and commodity rates based on revenue
requirements,
b. A proposed new tiered rate structure,
c. A proposed 5 year gradual increase in the Groundwater Preservation Fee, and
d. Existing Water Utility Policy regarding Debt Service Coverage and Cash Reserves.
Additional alternatives will be discussed and results of those will be presented in the Rates Analysis Report
which will be completed by the end of March. A review of Water Utility Staff work and the Rates Analysis
Report will be conducted by Red Oak Consulting. Water Rates review and Analysis will be discussed at the
March 12th and the April 9th Water Utility Commission meetings.
On April 18, 2007 Council will be presented with a resolution to consider adoption of Notice of Intent to
Increase water rates, fees and charges. If adopted, the Notice of Intent will establish a Public Hearing Date
for June 6, 2007. Council would then be asked to consider adoption of the proposed rates immediately
following the Public Hearing. If adopted, the new water rates, fees and charges would become effective on
July 6, 2007.
FISCAL IMPACT:
If adopted, the proposed water rates will provide revenue to meet the Utility's revenue requirements in FY 2007-
' 2008.
I �I
I �
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION PAGE 2 OF 2
ATTACHMENT:
1. Proposed Time Schedule
Water Utility Ad • trator
Water Uti�ty Director
0-4/14,wx--
Town Manager
DRA F T
ORO VALLEY WATER UTILITY
WATER RATES REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
2007 SCHEDULE
The following schedule is proposed to assist in the implementation of proposed
increases in water rates, service fees and/or charges:
3-12-07 Water Utility Commission meeting
Discussion on water rates
3-14-07 Joint Study Session —Town Council & Water Utility Commission
3-23-07 Notify Town Clerk to place Notice of Intent to Increase Water Rates on
Council Agenda for 4/18/07
3-30-07 Notice of Intent to Increase Water Rates Council Packet submitted to
Town Manager
4-09-07 Water Utility Commission meeting
Final Recommendation on water rates
4- 18-07 Town Council Meeting — Notice of Intent to Increase Water Rates
Rate Report in support of water rate increase on file with Town Clerk
5-11-07 Notify Town Clerk to place Public Hearing on Water Rates on Council
Agenda for 6-06-07
5-14-07 Town Clerk to Advertise Notice of Intent to Increase Water Rates
5-17-07 Public Hearing to Increase Water Rates Council Packet due to Town
Manager
5-21-07 Mail Notice of Intent to Increase Water Rates to all customers
6-06-07 Town Council Meeting— Public Hearing to Increase Water Rates; Adopt
new rates
7-06-07 If adopted, new water rates become effective
?JA EYE`
Town of Oro Valley
Water Rates Analysis
Preliminary Results
March 14, 2007
Town Council Study Session
I.. ...... ..� •.��..:..};.}•.;:::;.yv;vy}:.:::L.:i'r'iti•.::.}::•.................::.}v::;:is'i':::v:.::�:.•:... .. :_:. ...;..,:;.;.�:.
Overview
•Water Utility — 3 separate funds
•Financial Considerations
•Basic Assumptions
•Financial Scenarios Evaluated
—Baseline, Scenarios: A, B, C & D
-Impact to Customers
•Consultant Review
•Schedule
rF
• :•. _
•
i t
1
Oro Valley Water Utility Funds
Oro Valley Water Utility
Summary of All Funds
Debt Service Coverage
Cash Reserves
Enterprise Fund AWRD Impact Fee Fund PWSD Impact Fee Fund
Revenue: Water Rates Revenue: AWRD Impact Fees Revenue: Impact Fees
Expenses: Personnel, Expenses: CIP&debt service Expenses: Potable CIP&
O&M,existing system for alternative water debt service for growth
CIP&debt projects(CAP&reclaimed) related projects
Financial
• Mayor & Council Water Policies (Mar. 2005)
Debt service coverage of 1 .30
Cash reserves of 5% of budget
Minimize/Avoid rate shock
• Existing Cash Reserves
• Capital Expenditures
• Minimize Future Debt
• AWWA Methodology
..::::.::..
2
Financial
• Tiered Structure
— From 3 Tiers to 4 Tiers
— Pricing for Water Conservation
• Groundwater Preservation Fee (GPF
— Gradual increase over 5 years
— Relation to AWRDIF
• Bond Refunding/Refinancing
•r�jr.lr��rr
:...................:•:::::::::•.:+.:n::�:{i}.}?�:t^:•:v:�•:??:tt:;•i::.:v::::::::::::r•:::•::/.�:::::::. ... r..t...:....v:..
� ..................... ...::tit:.:..
Basic Assumptions
• Growth — 400 new connections/year (500 EDUs)
• O&M Costs increased by 3% annually
• Increased CAGRD costs
• Acquisition of 3,557 AF of CAP Water
• Enterprise cash reserves used for most capital
projects in first 2 years
• Capital improvements financed in Dec. 2008
• Reclaimed Phase 2 on line in 2008
• GPF transferred to AWRD for debt service
• CAP Water Development estimated at $63.1 M
- $3.66 M debt service in FY 2011-12
f$
-�: ,p.j..'S,•..r f.r t - `C .x,Gr. /../ r.-�. "....�a`r H? ..: �.:....� < fit..u.„�,i•7y t t+�,,"'f4�,Yt,�{? '. +�f./n4.„�~
ka .a:�.s3.rS-vn4.�,.W...:\TYa+:•ii h:46Wkh.:.}.} �:. rs a+</ ,.�J {•.k
3 •
Financial Scenarios Evaluated
• Evaluated 5 different scenarios
Baseline
Scenario A & B
Scenario C & D
• Basic assumptions in all scenarios
Growth projections, O&M costs, CAP water rights,
CAGRD increase, Phase 2 of reclaimed water
system, financing of capital projects
• Variable assumptions
Tiered rate structure, increases to water rates, GPF
and impact fees
Baseline Scenario
• Includes basic assumptions
• Existing 3 tiered rate structure
• No increases in water rates, GPF or impact fees
PRELIMINARY RESULTS:
• Only meets debt service coverage 1 of 5 years
• AWRD fund out of cash in year 2
• Enterprise fund out of cash in year 4
• Combined funds out of cash in year 4
4
Scenario A
• Includes basic assumptions
• New 4 tiered rate structure (previously 3)
• Annual water rate increases
• Annual gradual increases to GPF (5 years)
• Increases to AWRDIF and PWSDIF
PRELIMINARY RESULTS:
• Meets debt service coverage all years
• Meets cash reserve requirement all years
• New rate structure encourages conservation
• No future financing for growth related projects
*4.
Scenario A
Summary of All Funds
FY 07-08 FY 08-09 FY 09-10 FY 10-11 FY 11-12
Net
Revenue $8,740,264 $9,896,070 $11,522,223 $12,381,101 $13,517,922
Debt
Service $5,682,627 $5,868,320 $6,328,853 $8,339,713 $10,251,322
Debt Svc.
Coverage 1.54 1.69 1.82 1.48 1.32
Rate
Increase 10.8% 7.8% 7.6% 7.2% 9.1%
5
Scenario A
Impact to Customers in FY 07-08
• Average residential customer uses 10,000
gallons per month and would experience a
$3.94 increase per month.
— Consists of $2.44 for water use & $1.50 for
GPF
• New 4 tiered rate design will encourage
water conservation. The more water a
customer uses, the larger their water bill.
Scenario B
• Includes61-3 basic assumptions
• &EtatIffej4 tiered rate structure
• Annual water rate increases
• Annual gradual increases to GPF (5 years)
• Increases to AWRDIF and PWSDIF
• Includes proposed Bond Refinancing in 2007
PRELIMINARY RESULTS:
• Meets debt service coverage all years
• Meets cash reserve requirement all years
• o futufina cing for growth related projects
•
• 6
Scenario B
Summary of All Funds
FY 07-08 FY 08-09 FY 09-10 FY 10-11 FY 11-12
Net
Revenue $8,707,160 $9,513,656 $11,070,510 $12,032,720 $13,357,848
Debt
Service $4,878,686 $ 5,674,479 $6,342,412 $8,348,472 $10,261,682
Debt Svc.
Coverage 1.78 1.68 1.75 1.44 1.30
Rate
Increase 10.1% 5.0% 7.8% 8.5% 10.8%
Scenario B
Impact to Customers in FY 07-08
• Average residential customer uses 10,000
gallons per month and would experience a
$3.69 increase per month.
— Consists of $2.19 for water use & $1.50 for
GPF
• New 4 tiered rate design will encourage
more water conservation. The more water
a customer uses, the larger their water bill.
• .•
,.• . 7
Scenario C
• Includes basic assumptions
• Existing 3 tiered rate structure
• Annual water rate increases
• Annual gradual increases to GPF (5 years)
• Increases to AWRDIF and PWSDIF
PRELIMINARY RESULTS:
• Meets debt service coverage all years
• Meets cash reserve requirement all years
• No future financing for growth related projects
• „
Scenario C
Summary of All Funds
FY 07-08 FY 08-09 FY 09-10 FY 10-11 FY 11-12
Net
Revenue $8,387,618 $9,726,356 $11,478,621 $12,491,962 $13,735,957
Debt
Service $5,682,627 $5,868,320 $6,328,853 $8,339,713 $10,251,322
Debt Svc.
Coverage 1.48 1.66 1.81 1.50 1.34
Rate
Increase 6.8% 10.4% 8.8% 8.4% 9.7%
8
Scenario C
Impact to Customers in FY 07-08
• Average residential customer uses 10,000
gallons per month and would experience a
$2.50 increase per month.
— Consists of $1.00 for water use & $1.50 for
GPF
• Existing 3 tiered rate design encourages
water conservation. The more water a
customer uses, the larger their water bill.
-• •••••-","-
i�f e
)0101uomonsiiiiiionologgiumgrp!pilINiaggr',inglito„
Scenario D
• Includes basic assumptions
• Existing 3 tiered rate structure
• Annual water rate increases
• Annual gradual increases to GPF (5 years)
• Increases to AWRDIF and PWSDIF
• Includes proposed Bond Refinancing in 2007
PRELIMINARY RESULTS:
• Meets debt service coverage all years
• .Meets cash reserve requirement all years
• ��,• ��,,in �� • �f
owttLret,ted projects
_ - -. .
9
Scenario D
Summary of All Funds
FY 07-08 FY 08-09 FY 09-10 FY 10-11 FY 11-12
Net
Revenue $8,083,375 $9,325,222 $11,167,785 $12,265,933 $13,487,107
Debt
Service $4,878,686 $5,674,479 $6,342,412 $8,348,472 $10,261,682
Debt Svc.
Coverage 1.66 1.64 1.76 1.47 1.31
Rate
Increase 4.1% 9.6% 9.8% 9.3% 9.8%
Scenario D
Impact to Customers in FY 07-08
• Average residential customer uses 10,000
gallons per month and would experience a
$1.50 increase per month.
— Consists of $1.50 for GPF — no increase in
water charges
• Existing 3 tiered rate design encourages
water conservation. The more water a
customer uses, the larger their water bill.
<...
10 •
Consultant
• An independent review of the water rates
analysis will be
erformed by Red Oak
p
Consulting (Div. of Malcolm Pirnie)
• Review to be com leted by 4-02-07
p
• Opinion will be included in Water Rates
Analysis Report
.:::::........
Schedule
3-12-07 Water Utility Commission (1st review)
3-14-07 Town Council Study Session
4-09-07 Commission's Final Recommendation
4-12-07 Final Water Rates Analysis Report completed
4-18-07 Adoption of Notice of Intent to
increase water rates
5-14-07 Publication of Notice of Intent
5-21-07 Mail notification of rates to customers
6-06-07 Public Hearing & Adoption of new
water rates
7-06-07 New water rates become effective
•
< ;:ryr i`,;i>,?'El:i,fiP y:.FS.f w�w S�.",,•xK ni s•+t
11
• Discussion
— Four Tiered Rate Structure
— Summary of Preliminary Results
— GPF Increases
— Relationship to AWRDIF
• Questions & Answers
. .•••••••••••,.... . .
' � �•:%:#::. ... ..:.!�.:/'v �:.'-, .:..:.,!/ '.•�"tr}}'t}C:•y+.•:}•%.i{n'•Y:::i`S}:4:Y';i.:, :.c:.:t•::..}::- •:5:.
:::.:•:::}.. y:. :. ,: :rt::}:r::::, '{Via`:
....:::.::.:.....,::..��/,i"...%'rat:.' ....................,..,...... 7Y{'•4 ••Y}:
Oro Valley Water Utility
1: ,2�♦ \ �nY Jaa ya}#io-r `>.,;£:>,•;,.,;
fY,,+.{it',2Yr•. #''�S/:f rk aqt' fy in{f•y:
✓a' y&.N',/r�V 4�:✓ sot :\ Y"t;i y 2{t`'�'4`�J�a�,�>���'�';�Y�:'J.,�.
,�£xJ>"`t.;�t,>, 9?/ 5 J✓ � ,t.. �kvi:.> t a ;sy,.,a;}»# L ♦r.yt},, S:••a;?.:#:#:at€{ate:
'�Y�,,,,;,'f•!'<}*t �„L;'`6 ,♦ 7,y �c- .... x _ :.., a a:ti: fi?•:;. a J ,y
f fl2
�.J ..o>,yJ'>Y: AVM K,' {.�'H ,`<,a Fo A^w�•^ `tN y r,♦aT:4f}}t£, j,�.: G(" F\{f�y,+�.}CF•,`Tt+}Ea`3 y{•� r
��>>••v>q}.^' Z'�• f $y J f,: •f• <�,, `Y f`f F\f 2\2'.J! �}; Z,{\\ { {:F• Y Y�•Y+P• �
A, � >• },K !��j�1�17 /(W.L zY.?(•'<fY \ L ttt ,�Y3{\• :b°.Yt}J,M^, �p..
' '!w� �. .. K�„< w< b j.'"7!/ .x� rn:n? �.,�.�}� .::R•$.t; w\�•L\, ,/���,•k.•. .�.r` ftf}:'�..
.'!t A'A:. �6 r t!n! � ?�f` #}: yy..� �{,v`-}•SS .<.5�47. }
�,�?� ^' ,oaf'.y -. !a>ik 3¢E� ;.>i':;{ �{7., ,f J"af��}.. -`S' c`•aYxs
a ,c a J �yYo, av<Q�,::Z.t.,£. '♦Kk :: } `•\ �J.;�•.•.,;,,;• '�Ss:r.abr�. :rM
.♦x, a� x' fr%?6..:`/.Ifo: : .' -�� {•:{:2 X ,'E%s.�.� %�~}`#''r.{�'w �5{ J 9`}"a3
Yt �C 'w�t'� '}'- ;:aGa a"'e. o;� :;��K�:' { J• y} j.y J,?'h.: •�}a��;�x��t+l!R;:
•. ••
r:�t2^:..,<�,•l; .:♦••�'"'`',""n1R �2 2 ..}� S?##})`}�'\,�lrr��'•��,,\�,{N•:���'''`,�cy�tr♦•'..
foie",S`. .. 4 ..`"f6``�3� ,'' }. ;'L. }.t•}%b�'S'f 4`\�Y��}�}�i;:{ j•'��}'}r,}�},•2}:�y�pt ,
. ��.. :�-� ��: v �}. • 3 <��r ��i t\k\\ }{'a`"':;23t2''���.`'.-24`�.}��? J/"D},O<
'+t w;•:}:>::. af'S .�y. s ♦♦'s: 'qty �l fi\ '£ $' 3E
:;-?:}:••:r..t:}s{f:�:•;;;::{b >.:; 1:111,0
,,.+ � R� •} \ n<4::r' ,,\♦`t`. Yr'�s�`���:a� �'
tx�' �z� L `fFi:\��� e 3 fi < 'Y22��, y �:>✓'J!y6•,6:%•r�,a\ `SS� �� £b �� �'�w
t ,}. \*\� '< :.w:.' �'c#wd •ACR '4r% p`t' '<,�}'Q ��J,A-'. .,,w
.. :. � \2\\`:•w .}.:..a;•:•,}.•••a'::i r:a::.4i:'S �.♦ . ottt. ,<} 9t� o,, 4/ .:ao..,
- '� :.:. .<�}� \.'4y} .t.r<♦....}� .: c�Fr':s>}`,. :'.2`�'S r'jtt}. %„
i� : �:+ }::K•}.t•S:}L;ry � k 2(`•n`,' ::}..:x �.. '.: •>'t.}t`/� ti" ;<Y. Q
.w, y .'�!�Y:•z�}•ac;�;>r; ti s<\•x•?} 5<Y}•s{;t>•-':£?��`.oriz' �:��•,''.��i�,s::�.
.s .io-. .�r;.;�:t } ♦'rte;::. f;.+ r'k��a ro�'`'o,;�({,t;''' 6..4dn•.•aYro\3it y
< k 7ty:}r+-.+�. _ f `.} << ,a">>��,��'�f(.f' )'':y�4.5£3i'u;}l p:•}t•t.; .�{,.....4
.... `4,�:�.:.J<}Y/•Y-H.}.}:}J:1�'yd,�10:dii ..�.. .. Y n .VJa :4�+'�� a a}Y:•'.t.< }. t,�: :f
):.:..:.a..,•smN a:.. ::YF�'..x.-...�..�..3.;�,;ri{Y$Sa',£�i�A4.atL;v: .�K"isGY>.•wuo>3'':#::dE6:'•3:`�Yf?.�:Sui�n"
¢` < F}•>} \3,}\��\♦<Z ♦tK`,}`�\ j£s!}�1'.v�\�\1.:x`d<.k#>�•�J\`�`�y�`t,
< `\ ,•:„•:L`�n::\``\:,, \\v:i?a}};:: ;+�+, :,.�,\�:fi'.'. �!j,��.,..,`
..\\,,,\\\\\`} \\\,. ...Lam:,,-- „. v•.
Sx� : : .�♦»w�f;:,•4U•,.•\�,L,4v:}':\♦.`♦*\\�`�,♦;.4 y:•.•?��v„\�•,:;.��'•`\�'�+♦••.,::::�♦ ♦:.U} �:it`••,'. :tK...+f .:.{:� 4 �T
;..{ya}a,, .`�\UU'}S:}:�.,.}:,.♦„��,,,,,•::::•.'' \:<�\�:,:n\\a.,_.; :.'f.;. ::::\:•. •�`' :,�:o ,.,,♦.?y.,.' ,..�s y, `"�
J.,t;,., \��,t,. Z,\,:.,.•\ .\,:.♦:t.,p...._.,..Y}L3\:.:: •A3)♦ ..,.: o.:.:::< }S:??:':�.::9};.:x:Safi;}fR'•” ,Y.
.(<:..,�3, .w�A,\•\�oti:yi.w.\•3 ,�}.^•`itaoy^}k�)''.},?:?•,,, .:2, \ .,t.: ,;��'• +2+.,�U<�.:.,.` }.;f,. £R
•\:' \AAri..., :`•.$R{#\}.:L�:,?Xw}.iat;,,.. ,Y♦�a. .,$� k�.i i.�.,'ASK�'2,:' ;a:T<`��� ..d>-;. ;,:C�::.,;c•.!
}@4'tr't{££iF': ... ::.>.y♦♦:}..,..:•.,., :.;a,• .2..yajj y<�y� - ,..oJ :a
-,•.v-:w}:t•\:,•.�:,^k v., 22.. :.:v v:�v,:^v;n}}:�:;{2`' „'.,� �r::!`*::�} .. ��... .}t•Li::;t- :;\ff.{. ,}!h'.�`k�N��” :CO;SJ.•.:,.J.....
a•:ta'.!:'^ ��,y.,, .}}:`,r�:?.K n'.:>a"i,,;.:v:,. � }C>.k;''': ..A .$' ,.,Z':,+' ,T:`+'}^•.^,`.wQ;;, SS';; ,,%.',.: ''y}w:\..:::4,.?.. <..S.
.2:rS\{a:q. ,.{c:?\ .w7G•r,..r...;A.. x,i}aiiu 2�::S:a! a.�.,•„-.� `.:Y�:E '�,�„•. ?i }�a '�i."�S:�:St?�'.:.,.:ti..;,
�•;. ��, �}.V.w;.y�y;�#yg„ k w'.\,\ .. :•i f3'�.}'f-.�:T:F.'�+:ftc#s., :o't yf; .;�.F{. .t� t
`:.x,k`,..<�,:#,;, '%' a..,. .,.�{t� � .'e�;\�}}`v `ti,.•.'}Nti:�.C..•"{{'"' 2<} y;:� btyy, .'6' �C }?(...Y......♦,..
�. :a:a ,\'•}r.:. .a.. ...'`''l.4kr}:>.'•--:...t>::Y>.}.,.#2...•?. � .\,o.:,:i}{{%'• •t':{, K.v : ': .. ':" ?.,'.} ...4...,,:.;{.� <....:
w:'`�'}+'�`2,�k-\k#.v. :'*v�^„a"\''.a„ ....^^�}•i,:».:wa.Vit.. ,•<+y.,?•:.5.>y} f� •s. ,,.r.G ,,�}x :}y}..:., y:•N. t
ym•
,
2'•(05\� }ta fi .- \, .,,.�`�Cit:`�\M'`V^`.i•... an .a'�+:.,,f,.. 3} J`°t; �:.'y.:�?$Sfi.t ::.y�'�.:.r�� „r:.�:',�:�: ••��-:..� Sb,..,�./,'rF,,. 2f:.•iR;,!.•...
�+' ^Z„ y ...}n+,�`}.•♦.:Ya2A:n:v:4. �, ^}f?: .: g`'S,<1;:,, ::j{{�,T,.�. ..•f/ {: :li .,S•:�.7:1Y...;n .,��,, .,Y. ,.� ../:,+Q
'gY¢','•,'.+�'�•�', "�\+�`:Y.`'•'D^:; t'ti;<{ !.�' � � :h: ,.>i'%``:�3r. -'f .N,�, J%•,'. :; :.o
L;:ro:SL;i'C" '.:.•"♦,'�;.,:.:S�,:fi Y}0' \v,2a-a�..}.v,.en.�'6>';.\.?f,•,. .:�,2 �i" .t3` i:''V /.:.,.,'��:+;;,'^"-.4 .�;.: � �.;r.•..�.; '%'<: •J
3 ♦','\V:~, .v>^{a• :arl�y 0:'03 x r�\at•::':... a�:'t.'Z� .:�R / Sr' '' <.'.:
��.,�� -�-'Z`J`t•: ♦. �� :�, �`w,ama:t-..a .tf•;,r;.:� f'i ':{; <3 �%".- �K.}�S ''•<$/'t.'•'°;.
<L.
..\-v:..-.,:,,,.L,.,;,.-a♦.,SK,..,.......,.....3.l..........x,. :.v<. ::•4•.v
w.a.... ..:?�>.,.:..♦♦.. \ .,,v:,.•:::i;..l...,,o.l..,,.:>„: ��:.::..;... .tu, 7•. v.��'.; ::9:.::::� .t. 4
......3n a.J:,,..., .`�..a...........,...,: ..............,,... \..:aV`�.,v::.. ._:,.;>•.8 :' '
......::.o-;\..;..:va.,�:....:............. ...:;v.t.........,.............:?.,.:...-<.\ ....:.. .... i
............ . ..:•.},-:::.,,....:.:?v::�,5.:.>,...;.........}...x.. �. `., ....` 'ti. ....<{t4rtt.':rt'� v.• :#et .b}a-.,?.,.:. :;�.. r
a'4.:£:�'-'-'J;;••Sw\.,}��O�^-TaA +t• }n �..:.:! ......:....,.. � . .;,��\;$t• ,t,.a*,ir„�...\ } a:�:;>
`w.:�-�.:'�„S''.'�.���.--';t a}k.; +dfi?..aM,...�:^ .::.��.�:.l..♦�:!Srr`. .90h..� ::.;,it...a. ”;S '',Z;S�c?:v,£,•:` 3 ♦♦�r•.
.n-.{:.v.•,2 0.:::`';o .:g{•. .. �_,K,:Y;.,i�;v,>`.�»�a-r}�X.'�.?R� .,q;kc. ♦ Y ,S�,a 5�; \`,2'•qE <�; �\. J.., it♦ }' }�
�t� U :�-::n„., ..:..'S` '�?,'.'x+r.'• ..\ ..`< :4v♦t a,<,at.�i \ ..\,. ...\-. :`tc�4
>5,::.,q:>'•iix.}:ha,?>j,?�`:::1::'.'X..::v....,t.:::..:-'.:�::.:,...:3�::....,.:..:..�� „•,:.?>::t .:.. `T o'}A�.\� �`+;t5�� L':.,o::. J.f,.:;:.p.>:::::::.,..: '�Z.�<4�. •'.?a�`,' `,.•••,.�.
••:•::.,.S.^....n•:?:.;::.::....\.mL^......::. ..:.}+::,,,.. ,...a ,s.,v• >.� �i<t" ..dL:}...s:..::x...._ ..:\�;��;�+i:;:.�.'. .,�.
+.:;:}.'t£?•e,'{:,''�...::�:):�R>:.''�..<.,':iv\`�eaef>:i�.vaSa�:.. ;;.;off-::.. •rt,:..:$..::3:,`aa\�"-'$ t.r.-: :.":2.K,,.{r'�''.:x:'-? ;.?¢j?.,, ai••.
x,.,,�:.Jg..:.�....,X., :..........:.a.... -.:....„:;:a♦-:::..:., .tea.. "?t .t}...}.. :.�f;-i.,`s3`a;{:$;'S';kit}a't:::£:5:�?.•
y,n..:::::+,L:•:.,:.::,.:-.v......�:�...?,..;... ..v. `F�{}.��t, •.. .. ��:;',::;•�•}'v.}?:::. .. .vv::`\••� 1;�\,{.\.4.. :5...
.aJ!}M >>t., ,.�� \:J,�e`g,� vnh'`E.:WCtO'Y Z'fv�-�(�< ♦,v�:� ^-.< �: \tSJ. ``fes?''�'`.��,„:, u J},,•.;
2 V - :...yr.`%A`'� v '.,♦`S:Sa\�:�bC$D�ois�.aiti�t'�Cj : •n.�.?<. ,a c.x,\.•.
,2��L{.iR .C`ra,�'1� .:. ���,:�v S\?;\,"'':�'',♦.,<4°.�.•` .'F"..\\\�.;a:',♦'`••\y ,.}i;:"' .} \'��.,,,yA' ...''�rt`'".�, �,3i \'aL•.\`.}s„'.Rq.`�'w :'t... n.�,,
��,;. •�^. �,,..'<'`f<` 3• 4c •z�r. <a,�y f z''y\`�a{;:?: �23.\`tic..,,\2.3t�,T:`..y:q{� ''�� %`;,\ �\<, > �k
�.`ti'_ ..y: :•`fi},' .•.��•$�\.'\ .t , ::::i:�S:::3.'.,;: :cti@:,�t�CjS:::'?ti \�" ,"�`.Q�C,'�\\�♦\'
;VSA'}. �t}:•:<.: aa,,k� ,�2�.S' ,'e:9•�.v;a,.Qt'?', ^,��w �E:,J.....\,.}.:'f.'.:;;�•a:.r:::.:. ,,S:u.A.:'. : ♦ ..`:'2 `�2Z+^�. <a•l`:�K�.t
":Y' :::.a,"-.+. .�'b• ;4S,; .{.,..� `•2,• �:h?:.,, 'hti<}�♦£�:,�';t,���''�•0�9,,',, `.:.}•.•`'�\`ice•� .:.�j. �: .,ti,.�>♦}J ,xt,,.a♦� .�:
'�'},; ,..aoyp'-. .�".,• w 5•, �k..;�3`i ^%;;a::a;,;:k}}�'a':':?.�.'�,>LL ?;,, Sc::.c.:;`..�`�'Q`.+.y, t, ♦.a,,'�;fi�\„.?R'�n."c,,.,,..'M..
r.<3+••2}vJ��'.ka 'Y' �.. �?; .::i.:h}.;a•:.�• Sii,.r w�k�}�}\'\}}}a+i\\4,,• YA,2.}
•tt... L '!> ,y ,�:\ 2,�, }♦C,`R.'C„t:2iS3...,t,.�t,.
.v�.. �� .:r ,t . }}.:�... ` ,'�2 3;'vZ.t;)C3}
r 4r.' . ''3 k• i?'L'R.:fi:•:. a4 �„�,gg'',,,,.ya��.55,� Gr:�:.,+.:�.. ��.'`:�}5'
{ �I �:'`� �'iYw} .a� .YL... i':.htY:.•..:T`'}''i:��
,Ri.�.., ',,;.'r' ,•7�,N♦:•. �` ^a v.{}�.,• i6,>.Y' �,�-\,” 4;2C.;`,`.\C �`3:,,;..,�.+�t::... •x�`,\
�Y ��.'� \q.. M1 , ?:a»: :• �. ��„ '� \♦�.ya ' ` �`' �'
� >\ ��: Via.h'•♦\3•.a �:?Y' ,♦ {::.�Z:. .\5.�� z �� `�.\ �,.:`•..kt•\,.
.ti''fi... o.K,^,`'i�.SSuav�i5:>ua�o�t2GYn•'xri� :,\':;u:�v'�:..Ai.�Y.i:.' � ,., a,v:f:' .. `,xbw .a•.E£.�'ot•
12 •
Oro Valley Water Utility
Summary of Preliminary Results of Rates Analysis
Prepared: March 14, 2007
POTABLE WATER RATES
FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 FY 09-10 FY 10-11 FY 11-12
Scenario A
4 Tier Rate Design
Increase in Water $ 2.44 $ 1.15 $ 1.13 $ 1.40 $ 2.09
Increase in GPF 1.50 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.50
Total Increase $ 3.94 $ 3.15 $ 3.33 $ 3.40 $ 4.59
Percent Increase 10.8% 7.8% 7.6% 7.2% 9.1%
Monthly Bill $ 36.55 $ 40.49 $ 43.64 $ 46.97 $ 50.37 $ 54.96
Scenario B (Refinancing)
4 Tier Rate Design
Increase in Water $ 2.19 $ - $ 1.31 $ 1.89 $ 2.82
Increase in GPF 1.50 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.50
Total Increase $ 3.69 $ 2.00 $ 3.31 $ 3.89 $ 5.32
Percent Increase 10.1% 5.0% 7.8% 8.5% 10.8%
Monthly Bill $ 36.55 $ 40.24 $ 42.24 $ 45.55 $ 49.44 $ 54.76
Scenario C
3 Tier Rate Design
Increase in Water $ 1.00 $ 2.05 $ 1.80 $ 1.95 $ 2.45
Increase in GPF 1.50 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.50
Total Increase $ 2.50 $ 4.05 $ 3.80 $ 3.95 $ 4.95
Percent Increase 6.8% 10.4% 8.8% 8.4% 9.7%
Monthly Bill $ 36.55 $ 39.05 $ 43.10 $ 46.90 $ 50.85 $ 55.80
Scenario D (Refinancing)
3 Tier Rate Design
Increase in Water $ - $ 2.05 $ 1.80 $ 1.95 $ 2.45
Increase in GPF 1.50 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.50
Total Increase $ 1.50 $ 4.05 $ 3.80 $ 3.95 $ 4.95
Percent Increase 4.1% 9.6% 9.8% 9.3% 9.8%
Monthly Bill $ 36.55 $ 38.05 $ 41.70 $ 45.80 $ 50.05 $ 54.95
NOTES:
1. Analysis based on average residential customer using 10,000 gallons per month.
2. Reclaimed water rates are equal to Tier 1 in all scenarios.
GROUNDWATER PRESERVATION FEES
FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 FY 09-10 FY 10-11 FY 11-12
Potable
GPF Cost per 1,000 gals. $ 0.25 $ 0.40 $ 0.60 $ 0.80 $ 1.00 $ 1.25
Reclaimed
GPF Cost per 1,000 gals. $ 0.21 $ 0.25 $ 0.30 $ 0.40 $ 0.50 $ 0.50
Scenario B
Total Cost per 1,000 gals. $ 2.29 $ 2.33 $ 2.38 $ 2.54 $ 2.75 $ 2.91
Oro Valley Water Utility
Water Use Data
12/01/05 thru 12/01/06
5/8"x 3/4"water meters - residential only
The usage below accounts for 15,278 customers which represents 86.8% of the total customer base.
Existing Structure Proposed Structure
(Used in Scenarios C & D) (Used in Scenarios A& B)
Number of Number of
Gallons Customers Gallons Customers
0 334 0 334
1000 485 1000 485
2000 770 2000 770
3000 1035 3000 1035
4000 1216 4000 1216 Tier 1 = 50%
68% 5000 1292 Tier 1 5000 1292 7,625
10,483 6000 1295 6000 1295
7000 1198 7000 1198
8000 1082 T 8000 1082
9000 958 2,858 9000 958
10000 818 j, 10000 818
11000 689 11000 689
12000 594 12000 594 Tier 2 = 37%
13000 509 13000 509 5,726
14000 420 14000 420
15000 354 15000 354
16000 302 16000 302
28% 17000 266 Tier 2 T 17000 266
4,220 18000 221 18000 221
19000 186 19000 186
20000 163 20000 163
21000 135 1,352 21000 135
22000 110 22000 110
23000 103 23000 103
24000 92 24000 92 Tier 3 = 11%
25000 76 1 25000 76 1,656
26000 70 26000 70
27000 52 27000 52
28000 44 28000 44
4% 29000 43 Tier 3 29000 43
575 30000 34 30000 34
31000 31 31000 31
32000 30 32000 30
over 32000 271 271 over 32000 271 Tier 4 = 2%
eetiN
Town of O
A well-planned community balancing the
needs of today and tomorrow
Water Utility Impact Fee /�nalSIS
Presentation to the Oro Valley Town Council
March 14, 2007
Study Session
� �4hj6r h
{. `R�b . �y t� �Y\S:�' ) 11Z 1i1{(j�1t (..
i.�c_ ,.•�;,: tbk�.: ir t 1 i_. >�' } l t l LVA A;tel
Overview
• Introduction & Background
• Stakeholder Meetings and Comments
• Basis for need Oro Valley Water Development
Fees
• Potable Water System Development Impact Fee
(PWSDIF)
• Alternative Water Resources Development Impact
Fee (AWRDIF)
• Options for Implementation
- Notice of Intent
- Process and Schedule
•
.-.. ..._.... .... .... ..�._.
1
Introduction
• Water Utility responsible to look into water impact fees
— Water Utility Commission recommended
— Council provided direction at the last rate review
• Groundwater Supply
— 1980 Groundwater Code and Assured Water Supply
— Sustainable Groundwater Production
• Incorporates use of Renewable Water
— Central Arizona Project&Reclaimed Water
• Based on the approved Potable Water Master Plan and
General Plan Area
• Balances Future Costs between Existing Customers and
New Development
1111Ik
'‘a
Stakeholders Meetings
• 1-8-07 Water Utility Commission meeting to Discuss Water
Development Impact Fees
• 1-9-07 Met with SAHBA to Discuss Water Impact Fee
Process
• 1-24-07 Town Council Study Session—Water Impact Fees
• 1-30-07 Public Meeting on Water Development Impact Fees
• 2-12-07 Water Utility Commission meeting-Recommendation
on Water Development Impact Fees
• 2-20-07 SAHBA Meeting—Discuss Water Impact Fees
• 3-5-07 SAHBA/Stakeholder Meeting
▪ 3-6-07 Metropolitan Pima Alliance
• 3-?-07 SAHBA/Stakeholder Meeting
• 4-5-07 Northern Pima Chamber—Government Affairs
11' 411k
•
{{}L
2
S
1
1f
1
i
i
1
t
1 Ww
i a Town of Oro Valley Water Utility i
Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Analysis
Tabu 4-1
Proposed Potable Water System
Development Impact Fee Schedule
Cuctwnar Class AWWA Meter Proposed
Capacity Ratio PWSDIF
Single Family Residential,
(per meter stns)
3L-inch 1.0 52.587
Proposed Potable1.5 3,850
1-inch 2.6 8.420
134-Inch 5.0 12,840
Water System2-inch
M8.0 20,540
Multifamily Reeklent/el
(per unit,
Development Per unit NA , S1.230
Commerdai and Industrial
Impact Fee- rage)
,.o 54,110
i4-Inch 1.5 8,170
1-inch 2.3 10,280
1 fi-Inst, 5.0 20,550
PWSDIF 2-inch3A nch _ 8.0 32,880
18 85,780
4-inch 26 102.750
8-inch 50 205,500
8-inch 80 328,800
irrigation(non-turf)
(per meter size)
V.-inch _ 1.0 $4.380
34-Inch 1.5 8,540
1-inch 2.5 10.900
1,4-inch 5.0 21.800
2-Inch 8.0 34,580
3-inch - 18 88,780
4 Inch 25 109,000
5lrlch _ 50 218,000
8 inch 80 348,800
Turf uses
(per ecre3
Turf uses less then 2 scree NA $28,800
0,,,,-,r,;.,.ft�t't `�'� r�s f e1 ''
rr�s i�+_ c n f l Q iti3,,t v t�`a aP tr�`,,c$,�'lr' -4 '
I�Y ,e , �, �*i`cr eM�n�E' .Yc t�`�t}�3<4gr�S�Xc�i, March 2407
r r� r it ia,; Palle 25 of 27 RED• .COVULTING
'AiQ,F Town of Oro Valley
4,4 Alternative Water Resources Development Impact Fee Analysis
T
Table 41
Proposed Alternative Water Resources
Development Impact Fee Schedule
AWWA Meter Proposed
_ Capacity Ratio AWRDIF
'jingle Family Rn,dendat,
Proposed (per meter atze)
5S-Inch t.o s4.e82
Yr-inch 1.5 7,470
Alternative Water 1-Inch 2b 12.450 E
135 Inch 5.0 24,910
2-inch 8.0 39,850
Resources (per
Residentiei
(per unit) i
Per unit NA S2,390
Development Commercial and industrial
(per meter size)
Impact Fee - 5i-inch _ 57870
11-Inch 1.5 11,980^
1 anU, 2.8 19,930
1,4-inch 5.0 39,850
2-inch 8.0 83,780
AWRDIF 3 127,5
4 inch 25 199,250
8-inch 50 398,500
8-1^o), 80 637,800
Irrigation(non-turf)
(per meter size)
%-each 1.9 58.470
31-inch 1.5 12.710
1-inch 2.5 21,180
144-inch 5.0 42.350
2-inch 8.0 87.780
3-Inn 18 135,520
4-inch 25 211,750
8-Inch 50 423,500
t3-Inch 80 877,800
Turf uses(per acre)
At turf uses NA 555,800
i
Morch 2007 Pelle 29 of 30
RED C0,501.TING
1
C
a
i
10
I
1
Alternative Water Resources
Development Impact Fee (AWRDIF)
New Development • $12,150 per acre foot
• 0.41 acre feet per EDU
- Proposed Fee: $4,982 for a new,single
family,5/8-inch meter
7,000 AF(61%) • Fee adjustments for connections larger than 78-
inch are based on AWWA ratios
CAP and Reclaimed
• Fee adjustments for other customer classes are
based on average water demands
• Financing is required
• Fees will need to be re-evaluated following design
$85,156,000 and construction
•
Groundwater Preservation Fee
(paid J by existing customers)
• Debt Service on $54.4 million Existing Customers
- $3.95 million annually
• Current Fee of$0.25 per 1,000 gallons
generates approximately$700,000 4,500 AF(39%)
annually. CAP and Reclaimed
• Oro Valley Water Utility staff will review
the GPF as part of the next rate review.
$54,444,000
9
Alternative Water Resources
Development Impact Fee (AWRDIF
• Current Fee: $300 for new 5/8-inch water meter (adopted
in year 1996)
• Alternative Water Resources Projects and Costs
$ 24.0 million - Northwest WTP
$ 32.3 million—Oro Valley Pipeline
$ 19.5 million — Reclaimed Water System
$ 75.8 million—Total Capital Costs
$ 57.1 million— Financing Costs
$132.9 million—Total Project Cost
$ 6.7 million—CAP Acquisition Capital Charge
$139.6 million--TOTAL COSTS
Alternative Water Resources Supply
$139,600,000 Capital and FinancingCosts
New Development i Existing Customers
0r} l 1 sz,A55-.4e,
IVIct
7,000 AF(61%) t _,> ! 'Y;,Y 4,500 AF(39%)
iii�s'�?�a i �. C�' ' (
h. t,, CAP and Reclaimed
CAP and Reclaimed � .�=�
$85,156,000 $54,444,000
., t 44 �5.!1t•r A.ityX, ws
j}frj
l
8
6(F�
1
Potable Water System D
Impact Fee (PWSDIF
• Current Fee:$1,774 for new%-inch water meter(adopted in year 2000)
• Town's 2006 Potable Water System Master Plan
— In-Town water infrastructure specifically required to serve new growth
— $15.4 million for expansion projects over the next 10 years
— 6,000 EDUs over the next 10 years(600 EDUs per year)
— $2,567 per EDU
• Proposed Fee: $2,567 for a new,single family,5/s-inch meter
— An increase of$793,or 45%
• Fee adjustments for connections larger than/r-inch are based on AVVWA ratios
• Fee adjustments for other customer classes (multifamily; commercial and
industrial; non turf irrigation)are based on average water demands
• Assuming 600 EDUs per year, financing is not required
• Fees will need to be re-evaluated prior to the end of the 10-year period
Ilk
Alternative Water Resources
Development Impact Fee
AWRDIF
_ tet=t• • .
_
•
157, Aft, t7.57-T
- } .,.ye.�abY,a arr
_ _:< ... __ -
7
d
Basis of the Potable Water System F
versus the Alternative Water Resources Fee
Potable Water
System Alternative Water Resources
E- Development *<-- Development Impact Fee -*
Impact Fee
Fee Based on water system
Based on raw water supply,transmission and
BASIS infrastructure capital costs
required for new treatment infrastructure capital costs required for
development new development.
Water Expansion of New Water---- -__�New Raw
System Potable Water -� Treatment Water -�
System Supply
Infrastructure
Wells,Transmission Mains,
Components Booster Stations,Treated Clarification,Filtration, Intakes,Pumps,Canals,
Water Storage,Pressure and Treatment of Aqueducts and Water
Reducing Valves,etc. Reclaimed and CAP Rights
Water-AP
f ,I h Aw4
• 7,-',
Y>..tii ym��}.�''1.
Potable W
Water System
1
Development Impact Fee
• . :::,,,..::„,.. ...,...„ ,,.:::::
,. ,..„..... ..PWSDIF
,:,-,,,,,,,,,,,, ,.,;-4,,,,,,- ..,.,i
.-„,
. , ...
,
f • ' .�.�•
, , . . ...-, .
I .,.
1,'3,, 7 , 1 ,'
.4
'..i'k•?.•25'''-, \ - • -.. -,• •'-.,Ali .1.0t-4.--A., ..
l i L7� 71 ,: {i .C...44::-,.-Z,<.ice.
ii iti s
-.
7 „.4.-.:-.:('
t ,,,,14-0.:i,!-',1” a.
i ,,,,, .
:2.2_2 i. -.,-.‘„.....,..,_ _
1
i1
t
__ _ __ _ _ 1
1_ _.__ __ _ ______-_ 6I
Overview
Tovvn of ro Valley
Waterplm actFees
Utility
Potable Water System Fee
Alternative
Water Resources Fee
. -
. ... _ s. , .,.......
. -+. -‘,.., , , ./ ____
._. . , . ,
r.l 'e1") '-,',,,,:i.v.
�• + �' , `
a sp;,,,..._�''J:g..
i
.1. '41111 14 ,(.;-;°•'''611. — .,,,i,-,,„,.1.14
-1r , N ''''-- ,"i.. ,,tte..,,i,,, ,.,4,,,:t ,..,J.: ,,,,,,Afg-VA4,-(,.,`,,4;.>-.".
Arizona
Revised Statutes — Synopsis of
Impact Fee qRe uirements
• Development fees in Arizona must meet the requirements of the
Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS 9-463.05),which outline a
number of requirements for determination and assessment of
development impact fees. In general,the following standards
must be met:
— Fees must be used for projects that benefit a new development.
— There must be accountability in the uses of fee revenue to ensure that funds
are only used for allowable capital projects.
— Fees and schedules must be uniform.
— Cities and Towns must demonstrate a reasonable and proportionate
relationship between fee amounts and growth-related capital improvements
funded with fee revenue.
— Developers must be given credit for related exactions or other dedications.
— Fees must be paid at the time of issuance of building permits.
� v�7+-?ori c^. , � .._.,-,46N„ .>,. fg^3 ''4-�,..' Vis{ti�`^J
_...-..,,,,,-.4„,........,,--„.,:t,:‘,.-..-:-
- 5
_
.
u +'
Water
Use and Sources of Supply
20.000 —
18,000 3rd Phase CAP
Deave,;es 17,000 AF
2nd Phase CAP :;1%T.M
16,000 Deliveries
•
1st Phase CAP
LL, DeFiveries Projectedar)--
14,000 Demand
2‘‘).)
2nd Phase Reclaimed
11,500 AF
a• 12,000 water Deliveries
•
st Phase Reclaimed Alternative Water
10.000
Water Deliveries •
•CAP
5 Reclaimed Resources
8 000 ■Groundwater
9
• 6,000•
5,500 AF
4,000 .. .. . .
2,000 Sustainable Groundwater Production
Year
Whyand CAP?Do We Need Reclaimed
• ExistingSupply
• Additional Supply to meet Growth
• Assured Water SupplyPlat C
• Central Arizona Groundwater
Replenishment District
{
4
Comments from Stakeholders
• SAHBA
— Requested 3-year Incremental Approach
— Impacts to construction —Inhibit development—economic impact
— Investigate Assessment approach instead of one-time Impact
Fee-Town Staff will meet with SAHBA to discuss further
— NW Water Providers Cost Estimate Study is not complete
— Financing Study and Growth Projections Study are not complete
— Requested 90-day extension
• Various Homebuilders
— Fees make it too expensive to build in Oro Valley
— Requested to buy meters prior to effective date of fees
— Cost per meter size and concern that larger homes pay higher
fee
-le '.T�t�:�..1j-.,_±1"' is
Comments from Stakeholders
• Metropolitan Pima Alliance
— Concern for Commercial Development
— Fees will slow development
— Incremental Approach
• Tucson Realtors
— Affordability of Housing
— Investigate alternate methods of financing (funding)
that does not create obstacles to homeownership
• "' r 1w )- a--•fii+ ilr. .e•• t,p-a"eS.oTi
'...._......-..t._a.. _ _ ....n.-:.i_.3.......vra.ue.....v.---.......-.......:...-....v_.2._ .... ..r.......e.v.....+.....,....,......
3
Options for Implementation
AWRDIF Only
• OPTION 1
— Proceed with $4,982 fee as calculated. The fee
would be in place in September, 2007.
• OPTION 2
— Provide a three-increment phase-in period for the
AWRD Fee.
— Fees would be set for scheduled increases in 2007,
2008 and 2009
— Would not require further Council Action
• SAHBA/Stakeholders also asked to investigate
possibility of Assessment Approach
tYt r
4454
NOTICE OF INTENT
• Scheduled for March 21st Council Meeting
• Sets in place formal process for proposed
increases in PWSDIF and AWRDIF
• Can be lowered from proposed noticed
amounts in report but not increased
• Must meet statutory minimum time
requirements for schedule and actions
- mot,
11
Process and Schedule
• 3-12-07 Water Utility Commission Update
• 3-14-07 Town Council Study Session
• 3-21-07 Town Council Meeting —Adopt Notice of Intent
to increase Water Development Impact Fees
• 4-9-07 Water Utility Commission Update
• 6-6-07 Town Council Meeting — Public Hearing to
Increase Water Development Impact Fees
• 6-20-07 Town Council Meeting — Consider Adoption of
Increased Water Development Impact Fees
• 9-19-07 If adopted, New Water Development Impact
fees become effective
.d4
Questions and D
(to ,,„
,. . lit"°9111t
IP
Contact
Philip C.Saletta,PE Shirley Seng Dennis E.Jackson,PE
Utility Director Utility Administrator Senior Consultant
ORO VALLEY WATER UTILITY ORO VALLEY WATER UTILITY RED OAK CONSULTING
11000 n.La Canada Drive 11000 n.La Canada Drive 100 Fillmore Street,Suite 200
Oro Valley,Arizona 85737 Oro Valley,Arizona 85737 Denver,Colorado 80206
520-229-5000 520-229-5000 303-316-6537
psaletta@orovalley.net sseng@orovalley.net djackson@pirnie.com
�3 fit L
°' `- tt
.. ..-a_:. -_y_._._.J..-..:v.,.._......--;._.....-.':...-_..-e.?u\•.r-•._.....--.zx.-.idvS*...ai,...-.s?.'ut£i"cr;.1i'sCab..fciT�t. :.. ._. ... - .._.. .. _-
3F3i
12
1
4:.-0-.--Lc-!•'.'"-%
E <-• ct:iiik. ,. -.-.-.
iz4
,t!..........,,,,.. -,:„.,....„. Town of Oro Valley, Arizona
A4
-...--. ..---,--. ..
Final DRAFT Report
Water Utility Impact Fee Analysis
Potable Water System
Development Impact Fee
:i.....,,'/'I::-.7.4.....7:Iii.:.:,.!,..',,,',:-......?-...::;r.::,*".--:„.,,c.'.:::iis-
• .......„.„,„,,,,,,,,,..„.„...,,,,,...-.,. . ..,,,, .. , .. 4
(Ls.i'3;,, l smit± 4:41k,s,Z \''',2,...t'„.:04.3.
.:,:;....‘ ....,-; :,--- 4;tf 7,: 'lir A agr' ;xi--6: rir .....--'w.0..., - :,--:-: "-:-... •,4,4;•.'''A.;:1142:'•:'• ' 4?('''''''.- '4,•ti-;'
, •
•.••••,,,:,, ,'..,. :.1111'!,h.:at,•in ar;•-....:•---:,..110,,,st •,:,-.4r,.•at.,,,,r,‘,...-.:te„.-2,,:., . ..,--2.„,..$10 0.i, -s.,....,:..
•
-'
',..:,.
• ' A040)-'.:'ofili,,,,,', •--.. , - 7 444tWIO*1104tr,‘.2•••.i.,,:-..iis.‘"' cje,4-1t4 ;.;0'.d,....1,,',',-••.k:-.....',..?.-.!1..04-4,..s...i?',1„,'-'..;
:•.:-.:. ,,,,,..,,,,,,tfr„it,Ay,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,r,,,,,l ,,..,:,,,.,,, , t '-'.-.-:-',-`‘'': ''•:"''''.'''''''''.?...3.ftr .•-•, .,"; .,.7:‘,... .,,,,,..::::,:3";I,,,,,-..c:-.:;,-;,...,e,sx,",.:fie;',,,%: ;11.:1
-.4,...
.. ,..... ..
...., --.;....-.;;;. ,:'-''',.zii,=,'1.,-'..V1';',..,'-' ''- , -'''..-'-'---"-•-• ' *''' ''-' ----"i''-- '.„-,.._ • .. .. „'.-...:;.,_,.•..:-...'...t't-.41::::-.':.''''''-'727-•--. ',........_
,..., ,. -,•,--:''• ' i`t, ' -,e4.1te .,..-, -,- ----- : :- ., .f.•.,.7;:, .-';";,.-,--,,,,,. -,'-,• "" -.,:,...1..,`,:01:••'•-:;,,>7 T-,:',...g,:22,:. f‘..„,'4,.,t
A,..,,,, ' 1,1 - ...,,.'-':-;,'-'-' 7,,,••:`,:,1-,4..-. 'Aot.,;•''''.-.v,,i, •;•-, 4-:.-rt',.,,',..,..1:-.)- 4::,,-'0; ,...,,,s7.:;Sr::
, I,..t'. • ....•,%":4,,..-„:20.-.•..*•,4-•„) „.. .,,,,.• -,;;;,,i•,, .' "rt., •.,,•,,k. ,..2,,,,•:):4::• •.,,,,‘..i,..: •I,,,.,•,-,z•s,.7,,,,.....'
.1 - ,'''''''z',..7-_,1 '‘,5,:'.,,I, ,,,,r.-...•:,,,',I, '-',iii i'''''''','14,\,'.,':,..:.,»7;‘,...'".'si,s-•".....,1;.;''.:',3 ::,'":'
i. '' ''.-..*-'''., ".'''s' itift:..":.:''''--.',,r:1 1.•;".,.4,..2i,t2.';',.•'s- 1..„,,,,‘ii47.2:4:4A ts.:-.1.-:,.!:L.....--
, .
— ,..„,II 4,-,..,t., •-• ' ...r..., ••."7.••,,•='.,1."...,f:,..,„,,,, •r.6,1,-'.,',...f.). ,..-,,,......,...,..,...•-
:14,7'1,i .•-- i.i';'.....1:- 4' -;:, .i:: ,, 4''';:i1;i:•4‘:::..!11. ,41;...7:::::-.:,1,::;'..:4.'::-1.''''''',1;:ii';•••:Y1:4,';-:''':::;;4:4.:;:./: ''11‘..:1:7:::::7:":':*":',':.:.1';'41';1**''''' ''''Ii‘:;::::..71r:;::.'14.
....,-,,-,-7-77,-,7^-77 , ,'.''i. ''',..‘410'..'''..-:p e\'''..:''X,rg•;1 4,,,,,.,!'-'7,..---•',v.!:;., ,i,..,'..;,=;ssi.r.,:Y1'
„.-. -- -.- ._ . ;._ ...,,_....„_ i„....Ar.i..,:tilifOlitiPi.:''','''''Z''', • i...." . .), 4.si,*,‘,.;1•••••''''''''•",ii'-'37-1r•'''''''''':•?:'''''''''' ' :•‘:^A'''''.4':<'''' ''''"...•.:
d"'s<,z.,-.,, /I x•:,;;.;,..'-‘>,...'s's'."1/40,.... .• ' . : •ii'•-,..,-•„;;c4oriiii I-.ai
• ,---- -,---• • t...41 ,----., 7,...r,,,i5....,.,0,.''..i.„..,',:i,.., v,',1,:..."4-.v...;:,--..0.:14.-f.,;!.-14',;;,„„irs.--- .,,,,,,, ...,.. ..,,,,,,,,
-. 1.--, ... ••••,-.'.. ...,--... ....: ,,,,=,.-',..t--•'go-,
''''—' -'.-•--:' ''''•.7..'1'7.s.. -—.-•.-----..:-. .-,--.'.:.-/•• !.r!-'I:::i-'.,'.'t,'.;',.,•,1{Ii.I:':',-:"-.-,‘,ij,':,..'.t.:••.4,-••-f•.••:-1'-..''.•-...-„1::.-,,.-;,\i-:.-2:s::i;-•-i-,::,:::-.,.-:;.',•.':,:--•';--=•.=..'f.=-•;s4..,,.-i.,'-:l;'.'',--.:'••-';,,-,-.:,,:'-.:...+.".,^,,4',:`..,14.‘i,*'..-c.,, %--i-1•....'•s:,-:4t,,,I',tY,,,,A:.i-;e,,,f4:1:,,--:4'.l.-:...'Ay4v,,.:,.,),e„,..,*,,.;'.',-,,.,,...-:,‘.---:.,:-.;i.:,:,,.--,.;..--,:!'.-=-..,',,,',,4,&---,.4-.,,-,•7,•‘,,,•-,-.:'7.,1...'.:-.:,:.;.•:-."'',-W
,•• k ,7..‹1........,.:.z.:W.4V.3.,”,,,t,4,t•,'p'i'X,,n-A,,.f';':.4,F-.A4..t„,^3..3.,.k.,F.,..T:4;'•,-,7,,T.•.•.,.
•
• - i ---,re, ..:,,-;,. =.... -;r.,,, ,..,.,ii.:.kii . ,,,,,,.....,,,,,-%,.....4,,,....7, _ ...,--:_ei,_„,___,,:•••••:,;^,i5,"',..f^al
. ,. . •• ';•.2, 11.2V1 ,t :,:.:.',;,.,...1..:2:4,:::.'.. :..,..„_':.:f..;,,::,:y.‘,,,, ,''':,"Al: ., ,''' ,,. t,:s..,.,4,:,:*,....... .,77P-*..4.1:1,,,...
.1.Airr ***•• ',:••••••)\:N.,.:';.1..":;'•'41 '•-•4i.,k4' .,..'t,:' '-' ,',:z1-4.44,1e,-. ”Tn. ."•1::,.,1:•-'4..4•91,,,,ii
1 ,.'47,.":,..-:. •..:1. -,$.4•'''''.:Z.' yh .:,;.„.'.s ' ,,:14i,f, ,,,..!.. ''*‘T'.-ilAri*A:•1‘t,-.1
• • ••,, , ...,,,,..,•Ai , • •‘.,• ,,...4...,,....%,•...v.t,i..•,,-,....4... --.........,...--kzr.s.-•
,. ..-.....: • — ,, • • , ,..,-.• ....,•‘• 4,-... ,...,-.44-.'
. Lib .."., ' ...;i , ..'21,...t' ,11,44./,'",.-.N•licE.4...- -
• , .4! :i •...-',,,, v‘... • • ,,:„..,...A., . ...Os'. , ..-•.'4,,,,,,, :i...tiV,;';`,.,.:,.‘..:,.,,,..4,•,.._ . ,...,,,.....
..I '' 'f.''i-',.r...j:::' . ''''''a:,•'.,4,,c i''' e'C'''.4.,,,:' , '•:: ',4A,1,,,
• :-. ' ..-,...!: -..o..J,. 4.4'.::..:,:ie-..' ,,,-',:p-eir ,.,..,,,s.,,,,,,iii.,..-,, ,f,:: ::t!..'..-i'..!,:',...7.;',.is'.?-sq-'4k:::=.#‘1,7,,,,‘:-,..,
.. , (..„ .. „ ,....t.•-...,,,i....•.,,.........•,-. ..„ ippl,. •N-,-,,
.::, 4 ::',,1 i',...s,,;'..',-,L:.•'".: *,:.,.,:...'..'''' ..,..?.;1*-* • .-. ''. ''-'"' . ." .'-' ''''''.''''"'
„,,,,, ,.,:, ...• .,,... .,, ....e.,..,•,,,,t,..i:..!pglf, Alhork;:wNi) i
, .1 fe4!',1, .' ,i'....{•.',:::;.:,-.',' '.:-)i, , ,' ' 1,11P--..,,,>'.14111,,W_,:-',.,..,;.,414F„,:prs,,,,,
' :,A:, ''' . •'''••- k ' --"•••-',,..,*4 „'f,-.0.2;';,;',. .71'''.:-.:',:-4ti'"...'''..,,,,..„Y:34.:•• ••*-7'4,.;',:,,,,Iii...:.'-'.'... .(i,-,' -
,,,,q,,....', ''''' .. '-....•--t '.-';J.Nt • r e.,„,,..'''',, 444.-N'''.'-,,,,,,,,,,W,r vi...x..;';',se...",i,..it's-:!'
•'''' -' .)14- /:"!../:. '', t.•.,./p '...S.'.:: ss-'...',7,Vir -' '....Z.,'-' .::ii.::::;-, , -',i4V.$!::',,,.-,4:„:',,"‘esiN"'=,c1,-,tf,A,,a,„
i..4.t 1, ,, . .._... Altv IS'-,,;-,Sk.a,A,•.%-4.,,.'":14k,A,1:1;,s,,,,,,,,,,,....,i,t,,
•• •,,
.., .
. ,•,
:-•:: •;=', -;3: ; ,-. ,1,., ,..
- A 't le'' '-',......7.7-A• ..,Ase,.. .llirt4t.....=_.2::;.,:,.-.,„,,..:44:14.1_-.....'...„'4.1_..,._:,__._,k.,,,„i•;.r-izt..;.-:,..::_.„.,,,,,r;17..t:,...ki..,„7..:;•,..i
:---.---• --•----. . - ...,,,,,-..,:..i,,,.,,-4''iTt7t, i-- -e---c . -- ',-.. .-- - --,---4-'4,- - • — -
„,,, ...„„,„, , , ,,,,,:...,,.,,,.. ,,,,,....„.„.... . ...., ,„,,..;.,,,,*„.„tiF.,....,.,,.....,,,,,,,,,,.,:„........,,......„...•..
s:...„..,:......,.._ .....,, ...,,,..:,....,:,,,,„,.:..,„...,, .. , ,.,.. : 1„...„1„...,„„,..,..,.:s..,„ ,,..P.:-''..'"_.....:. ,..4. ,'N',;.,•'.....,`:,,-:,C,`,,-'..r...:iiii-4,:•_:'7'7::WI,:,.....m.:4,4i1:-.1'.....1
-':-- ffil•,,V':‘t..;1::4 . '''''-,i,”.. ft:' •
• ••,,,,, '''T4',":':te,:-nit • -.V.,...'..„- ;•.,,,, 2,1:4:1,..*4 f•'•.,:•••••.••••••:''''..‘i-4.,•:,-4
f;---.: ''.'•-"'••••.'.:.';';'',„•:. ,•,i'lltstiv"...!I -,;-, . -: , i' :::`,,,'., i"-,-, . ''''..4'''';):4-• iniz'.-:, ...,,..1 •, P;•.:',,,,ss ,.....4„,,•:.:`,1-,. .„•A...i•---- 4 •.:4
• ...,....-,.-..„-,,,,,. .iii.., i..,.-J. • etu s.
,i,,,F.? -•,, -•l'"'"'",' "i.7-7—'"'"ul*4- s:,.."-!?' . . . : • . ' . . . ':. !,,'_-.•:::1, ,1101111.1)c 1..'.i. i x,"i','-'...t 42: . ..,47,...,- ‘. ......!..e,--.,Atr„..r.1•• .1"10,-.
..,V,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,ZsttS : •Z - '.1"4.,4,;', '-',.-,. , • ' _. , , ‘., • ' = ' 1• , , .,Z,,,, .,-I. -„,t_ri-', ...:t •* 7,.it*,,,,,::-. :Sk?..,:it.%
.,, .0.,.., A_ :,,,1:.-,,:•.,74 •- , , . , , , - " , • , ,• : i,Aft,•,„!i••,ti V p*i‘Vi el,"le.,:,, k ,i;','fi, '...)-,.''',., "=„1,L,T.,,, -...,1#•alik.,-;.-1.......•"•;.a..P:•,; ,..:41
'it:, '''i..'iiih_fP ,,,* fr',., = -',' ''-b-Zti.— ':.,1-,.40F.i, ',/411r-dik•••"1:113.-'2.:'1 .„.-_,...
laii;',5r.: ' =_..... --:',,,, -'..T.4!,-.i. 114::;,:.
2
' ' ' 's- -.-:s; —.'fs,—=: ‘•"' 1 1 —..:.--*. :..2:...::;., '‘:. ::1.4qw.:'N :M-141. s'`_:,,,,.. •till:,:,-.. • L. -1,-4:_-.7.,......i:•-,;.:.--
-
. ..., -, __
REFDA K
,. 3 ::, k
-
- _ March 2007 Pathways to Lasr/I7G Solutions CONSULTING
—----
___ _ _______ _ -_- -- - :__-_-,--- _ • - _ _ _ _ . -
- ...,
PATHWAYS TO LASTING SOLUTIONS
: ::
• R
•
• ••
CONSULTING
• . • A DIVISION OF MALCOLM PIRNIE
March 2, 2007
Mr. Philip C. Saletta, PE
Water Utility Director
Town of Oro Valley Water Utility
1100 N. La Canada Drive
Oro Valley, AZ 85737
Re: Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Study
Dear Mr. Saletta:
Red Oak Consulting, a division of Malcolm Pirnie, Inc., is pleased to provide this final
draft report documenting our development of an updated Potable Water System
Development Impact Fee (PWSDIF) for the Town of Oro Valley. This PWSDIF report is
a companion document to the Alternative Water Resources Development Impact Fee
report, which was submitted to you under separate cover.
This report is suitable for distribution to the Town Council and stakeholder groups (e.g.,
Southern Arizona Homebuilder's Association, Metropolitan Pima Alliance, and others).
Over the coming weeks, we look forward to participating in meetings and presenting our
findings with the Town and its stakeholders. In the interim, please feel free to contact me
at 303-316-6500 with any questions.
Very truly yours,
RED OAK CONSULTING
A/Dennis E. Jackson,PE
Senior Consultant/Project Manager
{
100reet,Suite 200••Denver,CO 80206••T 303-316-6500 F 303-316-6599-www.redoakconsulting.com - _
Fillmore St
o '
Town of Oro Valley Water Utility
K. Analysis
Fee Potable Water System Development Impacty sis
Town of Oro Valley Water Utility
Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Analysis
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Transmittal Letter
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.0 INTRODUCTION 6
1.1 Project Scope and Objectives 6
1.2 Fee Requirements 6
1.3 Background 7
1.4 Definition of the PWSDIF 9
1.5 Basis and Assumptions 10
1.6 Definitions 11
1.7 Methodologies 11
2.0 PROPOSED POTABLE WATER SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT IMPACT
FEE 13
2.1 Selected Methodology 13
2.2 Planning Period 13
2.3 Detailed Projects and Costs 14
2.4 Number of Capacity Units 14
2.5 Fee per Capacity Unit 15
2.6 Long Range Cash Flow Projection 15
2.7 Financing Costs 16
2.8 Uniform Fee Assessment Structure 16
2.9 Fee Survey of Comparable Arizona Communities 20
3.0 FEE IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS 22
3.1 Reclaimed Water System Connections 22
3.2 Supplemental Fire Flow System Development Fee 22
3.3 Offsets and Credits 23
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 24
4.1 Recommended Fee Schedule 24
4.2 Future Considerations 26
March 2007
. s -
CONSUETING
._ .. - __ _: .._.-: . ._ :- � - - _ i esu er ssu rr
--� Town of Oro Valley Water Utility
y Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Analysis
List of Figures
Figure 2-1: Basis of the Potable Water System Development Impact Fee
versus the Alternative Water Resources Development Impact Fee
List of Tables
Table ES-1: Comparison of Existing and Proposed PWSDIFs
Table 1-1: Existing Potable Water System Development Impact Fee
Table 2-1: Cash Flow Plan Assumptions
Table 2-2: Customer Demand Adjustment Factors
Table 2-3: Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Demand
Adjustment Factors and AWWA Meter Capacity Ratios
Table 3-1: Supplemental Fire Flow Development Fees
Table 4-1: Proposed Potable Water System Development Impact Fee
Schedule
Table 4-2: Proposed Supplemental Fire Flow Development Fees
List of Attachments
Attachment A: Definitions
Attachment B: Potable Water System- Expansion Related Projects and Costs
Attachment C: Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Fund- Projection
of Cash Flow and Debt Service Coverage
Attachment D: Water System Development Impact Fees for Comparable
Communities in Arizona
March 2007
..__ -tee; -...-.a. .._. _.-:— .. age +'•�
�
— — . 1WlA� O
NSLLTING
.
- - --
a ic�rlcax•r utttcn lta:ft
;`- r Town ofOro Valle
y y Water Utility
--.-- �- = Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Analysis
EXECUTIVE SU1VEVIARY
The Town of Oro Valley, Arizona (Town) retained Red Oak Consulting, a division of
Malcolm Pirnie, Inc., to update its Alternative Water Resources m I
Development act Fee
p p
(AWRDIF), Potable Water System Development Im act Fee (PWSDIF), and
p
Groundwater Preservation Fee (GPF). This report contains Red Oak's findings and
recommendations for the PWSDIF only. Red Oak provided its findings and
recommendations for the AWRDIF and GPF under separate cover.
Development fees in Arizona must meet the requirements of the Arizona Revised Statutes
(ARS §9-463.05) and development fee case law, namely the rational nexus criterion. The
rational nexus criterion in essence means that impact fees such as the PWSDIF must be
administered in a nondiscriminatory manner and must bear a reasonable and
proportionate relationship to the burden imposed upon the municipality to provide
y
additional necessary public facilities.
Based on our review and analysis of the water utility's customer characteristics, growth
projections, capital projects and costs, and related information, Red Oak designed the
proposed PWSDIF to recover the full cost of potable water system infrastructure required
to serve new customers. PWSDIF revenue is restricted to pay for potable water system
expansions and additions required to serve new customers.
The Town's existing PWSDIF varies by meter size (%-inch through 8-inch) and customer
category (single family residential; multifamily; commercial and industrial; non-turf
irrigation; and turf uses). The proposed PWSDIF maintains the existing structure, with
the exception of modifications to the assessment methodologyand fee schedule, where
needed, to comply with ARS 9-463.05 and fulfill the rational nexus criterion.
Supplemental fees for commercial and industrial fire flow requirements remain
unchanged. Table ES-1 on the following page compares existing and proposed
PWSDIFs.
March 2007
Page iv `�,#
_ s Tim
- .-.�,._ - _ _
r
agr �r ,
a
f Town of Oro Valley Water Utility
r,= t Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Analysis
- Table_ES-1 - _
rs
r '
7.-.7-. 7':'t- t omparison oExistinand Proposed=PWSD.IFs t �,
�S�:iP�„' •0, i�-,:.. u,.:.�.y a F�.a.....,•�_ gyp{ r .-.�y Y. x.�.: ,:7,7_, {_- .-s-y L-.
�i�d.��W�`.� : r G.,a�}!l- Y�'�1"nc�f':r x��''�'ri lvt+',�`..)!�•^�Y�.,... ek' e.�- �ty ..-:-.._:,:-_,:7,7_, --„-_-,:,-,:-...-:-_
'c_c• .a ss�-.
_'rT'F �'. �•.'��-- •.�ti. f.t`�,..; 3.3.r" .t y'u ,,,,`�.f..e'iA:,.eSis+�-..ar 2,,,z, •' -,::yS~r eL',;-sh a�r Y; �s..�.' by _ _ -
�=.���� •^t..-•� ==�a�:"� _°"'•�:� `n.�'f:�'A•-t'`:r._.�� :'i+r r�^..eN.t�'- �r " ��t�s .,r'y'�.'�..1*�:�!�"'r - `Y'=:
•.P- - t.., rhe•■ w>. 1:r-sf -4 ,,t 14.V e,T i) J�7��F `a'T*' 51. x er .r<t4t+P- .ss.
Single Fail ii[y F�esE.dentia � , ,rLx� ;
,. f gr- m �ThI ent ,� ^ ExiSti n ---
g Iry-^'
,'.r"FY r-xis - Y-� Propos ed-
(pei deter size} _ _ Fy xYE_ r §T
Fes'F�.:. '•s'-. - ,_...,,,,,,,4,,,,..,,:,,,....,,,,,.::„.,__:,,,_
,)? a .,. �..r ��.;;<,•a. .. .. .. ..
5/-inch
0 $1,774 $2,567
3/-inch 1,774 3,850
1-inch 4,435 6,420 f
0
11/2-inch 8,870 12,840
2-inch 14,192 20,540
�,. r� �Existi"ng��wfy Proposed
(per unit):
^x,
Et3
0Perunit $84 $1,23
ommerciaand Industrial t• xkz,„ X Fi� ' xisin Propose
(permeter size) r4i < r �.� {,�, 7i „ ft .. X
,,,.-
5 -inch $4,080 $4,110
3/-inch 4,080 6,170
1-inch 10,200 10,280
1/2-inch 20,400 20,550
2-inch 32,640 32,880
3-inch 65,280 65,760
4-inch 102,000 102,750
6-inch 204,000 205,500
8-inch 408,000 328,800
;_. '
,. r ,-,,,,,,,,w,47;4;:,;
f �4
{
Yr• _K {•• �ytH� c� yGy„rta �.t St� isOb4:.i)1 ^4:r, 7 i . t (n---.-
. tfi 4u°�$ idX». Y� ✓44„ �Y .x.V :' ) o� 1;s: ro os
p
• '- drrigaion (non- }si:.`;+ro, {: xy�'„ zi�tsi,�, ��:s�o k,xY ,tx •in � c r.x4 'tS.^ ,F Mr
K,• > to'r.wY^s _se � Y $ � 1�� 1' �4 „�wai . i -, \.ermeter it � �tyy
------
5/-inch $3,193 $4,360
3A-inch 3,193 6,540
1-inch 7,983 10,900
1'/2-inch 15,965 21,800
2-inch 25,544 34,880
3-inch 51,088 69,760
4-inch 79,825 109,000
6-inch 159,650 218,000
8-inch 319,300 348,800
'+v♦tK_K�+Sx•ic1'��'!may,:,:. ..„,!,-.:..,...i.'„,..,:-.,-_:-_,:-.;-,-..._-_..--__:-
3 4' •:---'''- -
Y�1y _
� ��; Existing Proposed
e��acre __.�t� 4 r ,� �r :ti SYS y_ d = _
>w .j 1 ±CV.Y•ws.a•Y - 4,'1'-t .rte v-K y K, "�.'•t{j C '4.Cr i is 4..w\, 1.1 .
Turf uses less than 2 acres $18,351 $28,800
e =ga
March 2007 Page v
- : R. AK CO' SL LTINQ _ - _ .-
: ;t�tr:itaR a►aaite��e ttaitfL.'.- .._._._---_----_.___.-_._..
•
• -r4),4:.: r Town of Oro Valley Water Utility
Potable Water System Development y Impact Fee Analysis
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Scope and Objectives
The Town of Oro Valley, Arizona (Town) retained Red Oak Consulting, division a of
Malcolm Pimie, Inc., to update its Alternative Water Resources Development Impact p p Fee
(AWRDIF), Potable Water System Development Im act Feep (PWSDIF), and
Groundwater Preservation Fee (GPF). This report contains Red Oak's findings and
recommendations for the PWSDIF only. Red Oak'srovided its findings and
p g
recommendations for the AWRDIF and GPF under separate cover.
The objective of Red Oak's analysis was to develop a fair and equitable PWSDIF that
recovers the proportionate share of costs to construct the required infrastructure for a new
customer connecting to the system, and to comply with Town policies, State laws, and
development impact fee case law.
1.2 Fee Requirements
Development fees are one-time payments for public facilities based on thero ortionate
p p
share of costs incurred for facilities needed to accommodate new development.
p •
Development fees relate only to capital facility expansions resulting from new
development and are not to be utilized for rehabilitation efforts or operating expenses.
p g
Development fees in Arizona must meet the requirements of the Arizona Revised Statutes
(ARS 9-463.05) and development fee case law, namely the"rational nexus" criterion.
The Arizona Revised Statutes outline a number of requirements for determination and
assessment of development impact fees. In general, the following standards must be met.
• Fees must be used for projects that benefit a new development.
• There must be accountability in the uses of fee revenue to ensure that funds are
only used for allowable capital projects.
• Fees and schedules must be uniform.
• Cities and Towns must demonstrate a reasonable and proportionate relationship
between fee amounts and growth-related capital improvements funded with fee
revenue.
• Developers must be given credit for related exactions or other dedications.
• Fees must be paid at the time of issuance of building permits.
._.. :
March 2007�- _ •
Page 6 of 2 7 • ;._ :�V�};/
j�LLX-j� i�SULTING
• A orr.stom or iIALCO.At ntrxt
.,?4114N.
Town of Oro Valley Water Utility Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Analysis
The rational nexus criterion test consists of three requirements: 1)needed capital facilities
are a consequence of new development; 2) fees are a proportionate share of the cost of
the needed capital facilities; and 3) revenues are managed and expended in such a way
that new development receives a substantial benefit.
This impact fee analysis demonstrates that the required capital facilities are a
consequence of new development, that the PWSDIF is proportionate and related to the
additional demands of new development, that it will substantially benefit new
development, and that the fee assessment schedule is fair and equitable. In addition, the
PWSDIF allows for the evaluation of credits for exactions or other dedications, as
described in Section 3 of this report. This impact fee analysis also considers the Town's
current fees and assessment methodologies, cost recovery analysis, and fee schedule, and
recommends adjustments, where needed, to comply with ARS 9-463.05 and fulfill the
rational nexus criterion.
1.3 Background
In year 1996 the Town adopted a first-time PWSDIF. Four years later, in year 2000, the
Town increased the PWSDIF following a comprehensive study of the Town's potable
water system infrastructure and preparation of a potable water system master plan. The
Town's existing fee (adopted via Ordinance No. (0) 00-11) has been in effect since year
2000 without adjustment.
Current fees vary by meter size (%-inch through 8-inch), and customer category (single
family residential, multifamily, commercial and industrial; non-turf irrigation; and turf
irrigation). The Town's current water-related fees for a new meter connection are shown
in Table 1-1.
I
March 2007 Page 7 of 27
• =:•REEDAK CONSULTING --
__ - - - _ __ - - -
J,g��EY
Town of Oro Valley Water Utility
o tab l P
-AL e Water System Development Impact Fee Analysis
` - = Table
•
Wafer_System.
;:t035* rnent •
�op
Vatt,OXe Vis: R-P air;int
Customer Category PWSDIF
•
4 ,}yz��t`��i>�l1�Y.�,aM'�� 4)..ti,R^.rx+" •FG'`?�"'F b « Fi:''arras .e a
Sing1e.-t'arnity F(esi entiat(permete q siz lx,, r^�� ;
R r .x.rX•,.�'•TtS?K35 vt?c%£�S" <..,�4 C•(.�.AAr; ta0.
1.hri3...a1♦�Y }•�1i .T. ✓�'�'{+' `rl� ��"�{Tt�,/�M1
3/4-inch $ 1,774
3A—inch
1,774
1-inch 4,435
11/2-inch 8,870
2-inch 14,192
���•• ""��jj^s����y,,��"T�'t�',,yyr<1'`y.�w�i`:y�c:'�4-;!.t 4.�}.�ut�t-t cr.r���:t:��,:::�'�;��ay y"j}t�r'' f �; �.
.' ,�'�.,���. t�yrt f''e�?�:I����,5,'�c"yi�y<»�,•�•x�`�ati��wy���}�F���,�Erty:)•%`����,?>l.,y}.t,�`'µ?�`sr r,:
{;.�r!�.��.,`,+tk'.{�'v„4i�.`?l.+n.,.�i,.:r..a.'.r.'x`%`.3l%'�;,:y.y"sx��%':::�;R'''N�,�'k77;p�;�:•�►�'�"�T.,����1�i'S{f`Y"'11"�/�3�/�� �y�'t,,,�.^F7�y4s! r
Per unit $834
'��y ih �},,SS,Y,tr`5�yy.`��r sAr�4 I�j XYw f��Sr. �7y�s�a y.a'�ti�, / «ti V` .]�i�g� �j,�.nw>�.••��.,.
,,e r��Citi "'C�7�Y3.Y�a,��`��Q`��'�`'�"W�tC•'frq rt�F' �ttti� ��.+a-'-'i���S'Y't ly'}!y,Ir {.y t¢�y�E..Sah�
�ceo rn ercla nxc Industrial ' e[�"�{Q+.�- `�,e e�
hS+Y/7t .�ty��Y?�•'�aic5?h.0'S�i;4::i�S. +•..� fyt,�� •'�
��•i�,t�C�r��P�1.�.;�Y,:�Yfl i9R!'/i}rtSh,.r;,l''S'-•�'. ..�!� .i :h:.i�1'✓xTrY!r.
SA-inch $4,080
3A-inch N/A
1-inch 10,200
1/2-inch 20,400
2-inch 32,640
3-inch 65,280
4-inch 102,000
6-inch 204,000
8-inch 408,000 ,
'�,xht t:<inS k=t�••5�-,"ai+kY.ie.k�"d��'rYtxsSkY°k�n�a`y..:c..`u,�rSn'*f,»tr>>i.o��s:4Rlt rk/4/rKa<lt-,n.:�iaie�:•wt•r:Kr
L_.Y1K°\a�vySS..r.�,t,'�,ayy/,i�t`y,x�,,�kv�t`tt-cct.-hxC!•r.t#?t f�'tit"�'•t'-f��'7s,u�'�.;t`+r.'�}+.0r ft
.46,2,A7
'
AG !rS„ lK, , • . , fwLers , Cn�.t
A?,
5A-inch $3,193
3A-inch 3,193
1-inch 7,983
11/2-inch 15,965
I
2-inch 25,544
3-inch 51,088
4-inch 79,825 �
6-inch 159,650
8-inch 319,300
u['V:Uses(peracre :} x * ¢yam �� , h
cSYr` ty` `�`t�1
Turf uses less than 2 acres $18,351
IVQrch 2007 Page 8 of 27 **•.;REEDA—KCONSULTING -
A 911135111111 or sensate sewer
1
Town ofOro ValleyWater Utility ,
: .�
` - �....� Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Analysis
''`ti...--Z-7,--,
Existing fees exclude the Town's meter installation charges and supplemental fees for
fire flows requiring more than 1,000 gpm of fire flow. In 2006, the Town completed a
fully revised and updated Town of Oro Valley Potable Water System Master Plan, which
identified growth and non-growth related infrastructure needs. This PWSDIF analysis is
based on the growth related infrastructure needs and costs from the Town's 2006 master
plan.
1.4 Definition of the PWSDIF
The Town has clearly defined the projects and related capital costs that comprise the
updated PWSDIF. These projects are all forward-looking and are required to serve new
growth in the Town (i.e., only new customers). The major water system infrastructure
components included in the Town's AWRDIF and PWSDIF are illustrated in Figure 1-1.
Figure 1-1
Basis of the Potable Water System Development Impact Fee versus the
Alternative Water Resources Development Impact Fee
Potable Water
System
Development Alternative Water Resources
E- Impact Fee --> <---- Development Impact Fee ______>
Based on water
Fee
Basis system infrastructure Based on raw water supplytransmission
capital costs pp y'
re uired for new and treatment infrastructure capital costs
q required for new development.
development.
/r�i3�/�%"!r��>n.YY/ ��r �N/2rz#`�"�p,,ti, '�i�a(.E/f��.'v+e�-/ t f"'./,"�pv"yv'.C'°.N,r;..y�,.c���y.,R�,�i„�„x/y
t'f t v ity',,�4����G� lru�r.r nY,r7:N,th r N y"i7''�N (> /M1 w}y t Nx f /,•y+^•/'�y� rN'
�jNt!/73, ,F r o f F -w7 1 y f t4 r.j �',yy y , t 7 f b .IR.C. rr�t "car/lq"F r' y w
S tiv' +-r,t�jSRy 1 �L./Y a z:'�f.s'!/'/7N.4�/�//� t r rre it y t/,c 3a <a Z7 ?!JAL'Msr! .'^y�C✓'.
ff i yrt i�C/`�.,,/f3jz N�Lrvr M'L'�S n?1 �2ff�4h �. Kr Yr a // µ/wr'b.y r . r/r /E/'y L 9< •t
,L �! y t LuC/Jrw i en:e.. � wr v A u r/ rt:f� .b w.� /w> t 3 ai,..vK '
x L w‘,!1::::4,4,,„.,;A';-:
'f��,.b ivr Y ..v( f..,��.!.Ff r NA l f,pi �. /^' L•yL+ N^;:`,.,
L N''f rry�l/'
:".. r �. F „.,L �/N,,y,,, ,;;
r/ ryGSM1 yr t A,,/.r f / t s. rN
Lui.*f'::-;;',11'
,f��N��� z ''',.-'5:`::'
yJrr .<,af r1i,;'.;;;`-,
.M�>/ � {J L. r t y ..,. aM1 v,f / °y ,',-;;%;-:,"}'t,ih'hM1
9 M1Y y .4M1- J•f / /r Y; i! h/ r A ✓- L f Y F .r/'
r.:rt.'+n/✓�1 rf' r }.9 LL',yNr yr.��� . y r.-./;: K l v ',';',2,.,r '���.;tit Cr v�
> M:.� .N .[�r.�,.�:+ •+• r i!w'i%iL✓'.7. !' r Y'�'.r./._
Water Expansion of New Water New Raw
System Potable Water -->-11E-- Treatment Water -->
Infrastructure System Supply
Components Clarification,
Wells, Transmission
Mains, Booster Stations, Filtration, and Intakes, Pumps,
Treated Water Storage, Treatment of Canals,Aqueducts
Pressure Reducing Reclaimed and CAP and Water Rights
Valves, etc. Water
Red Oak derived the PWSDIF from the capital costs for growth related potable water
supply infrastructure. In all cases Red Oak excluded costs associated with operations and
maintenance (O&M) of existing and future systems. O&M costs are funded via revenues
from water rates.
March 2007
- - Page 9 of 27 :�= REED'', CONSULTING _ _
.
"41N,
r Town of Oro ValleyWater Utility
` -� Potable Water System Development Impact Fee
3 ....ars--^}.. � p Analysis
1.5 Basis and Assumptions
This report reflects the Town's comments and guidance as provided via frequent project
status conference calls and meetings. Findings presented in this report are
p based on
Town-provided technical information, cost and revenue data, and discussions with Town
staff. Red Oak has relied on this data in the formulation of our findings.g Red Oak also
reviewed the following documents during the :preparation of this study:
y
• "Town of Oro Valley Potable Water System Master Plan, " Westland Resources,
Inc., July 2006.
• "Water Utility Commission Water Rates Analysis Report, "" The Town
p of Oro
Valley, April 5, 2006.
• "Town of Oro Valley Water Utility Commission 2006 Annual Report, "" Tow
p n of
Oro Valley, April 2006.
• "Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30,
2005, "Oro Valley Finance Department, June 2005.
• "Groundwater Action Plan — 2004, Oro Valley Water Utility, Oro Valley,
Arizona, "Brown and Caldwell, August 2004.
• Official Statement for $31,750,000 Senior Lien Water Project Revenue Bonds,
Series 2003, December 9, 2003.
• "Assured Water Supply Hydrology Report for the Oro Valley Utility"
Utili "
Brown and Caldwell, June 2002.
• "Town of Oro Valley Reclaimed Water System Master Plan, " CH2M Hill,
September 2002.
• "Potable Water System Development Impact Fees, " Westland Resources, Inc.
Gust Rosenfeld, P.L.C., and Peacock, Hislop, Staley & Given, Inc. February
y
2000.
• "Alternatives for Using Central Arizona Project Water in the Northwest Tucson
Area, Appraisal Study,"the U.S. Departmentpf the Interior, August 2000.
• "Report on Oro Valley A WRDF: Fee for Multi Family & Turf Uses. " Frank
Cassidy, P.C. and the WLB Group, January 1997.
This PWSDIF analysis was based, in part, on the followingkeyassumptions:
p
March-2007:._ _ Page 10 of 27 • - --` -
- - mss•
A aaV;s.■er tALteitt iitsst
<PWater Utility
of Oro Valley
r
4.
Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Analysis
• -+.ems—'I�..-i
• Growth-related potable water system capital improvements and costs as defined in
the "Town of Oro Valley Potable Water System Master Plan," Westland
Resources, Inc., July 2006.
• This analysis includes the entire planning area of the Utility, which is based on
the future Town limits and land uses as indicated in the Town's General Plan.
Red Oak endeavored to include the latest and best available information in this impact fee
analysis. However, because plans and events sometimes may not occur as expected, it
should be anticipated that there may be differences between forecasted and actual results
and those differences could have a material positive or negative effect on the findings in
this report.
1.6 Definitions
Defined terms used for purposes of this PWSDIF study are provided in Attachment A to
this report. All capitalized words, abbreviations, acronyms, and terms used herein shall
have the meanings set forth in Attachment A unless otherwise noted in this report.
1.7 Methodologies
For the purposes of the PWSDIF development, Red Oak evaluated industry-standard
impact fee calculation methodologies defined by the American Water Works Association
(AWWA) M1 Manual "Principles of Water Rates, Fees, and Charges" These methods
include:
• Equity Buy-In method
• Incremental Cost method
• Hybrid method
The goal of the equity buy-in method is to achieve an equity position between new and
existing customers of the system. This approach is best suited for existing facilities that
have been oversized and have excess capacity available. It utilizes the original cost of
existing assets, escalated to current value using a standard cost index such as Engineering
News-Record (ENR) Construction Cost Index (CCI). Adjustments are made to account
for outstanding debt, developer contributions, and accumulated depreciation. The
resulting estimate of current system equity is divided by the number of equivalent
customers connected to the system to compute an equivalent unit charge.
March 2007 Page 11 of 27
• A erIP:siss or swuaclr»ease
t
-41\ Town of Oro Valley Water Utility
Ain
Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Analysis
The incremental cost method assigns to new development the incremental cost of
system expansion needed to serve new development. This approach is best suited for
communities that have limited existing capacity, and have prepared detailed growth-
related capital project plans and acquisition plans. The cost of proposed projects for a
specified time frame (e.g., 10, 20, or 30 years) is divided by the number of equivalent
customers that will be served by the additional capital projects to compute an equivalent
unit charge.
The hybrid method applies principles from both methods and is appropriate where some
existing reserve capacity for growth is available and new capacity is planned.
March 2007 Page 12 of 27
• :#f• ROMA,
i CONSULTING'
• • z ari:zior or=1ttOt+[t• rsa[
-,aa-
Town of Oro Valley Water Utility
.r Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Analysis
2.0 PROPOSED POTABLE WATER SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT
IMPACT FEE
2.1 Selected Methodology
The Town's potable water system requires expansions and additions over the next ten
years to accommodate growth within the utility service area. Therefore, because
additional capacity is required to serve new development, and the Town has prepared
detailed growth-related capital projections, Red Oak applied the incremental cost
method to calculate the updated PWSDIF.
The steps to develop the PWSDIF using the incremental cost method are as follows:
• Step 1 - Determine the planning period
• Step 2 - Prepare a detailed capital plan
• Step 3 - Determine the number of capacity units (e.g., equivalent dwelling units)
• Step 4 - Calculate the fee per capacity unit
• Step 5 - Prepare a long range cash-flow projection
• Step 6 - Calculate financing costs, if applicable
• Step 7 -Develop a uniform fee assessment structure
The remainder of this report describes these sequential steps for the PWSDIF
development.
2.2 Planning Period
The time frame for the PWSDIF analysis is the 10-year period beginning with fiscal year
(FY) 2006-07 (i.e., July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2007) and ending with FY 2015-16.
This planning period was selected to correspond with the capital planning projects
provided in the Town of Oro Valley Potable Water System Master Plan.
This analysis includes the entire planning area of the Utility, which is based on the future
Town limits and land uses as indicated in the Town's General Plan, plus the Countryside
service area. This planning area includes portions of areas currently served by other
water providers, including Metropolitan Domestic Water Improvement District and
Tucson Water. The future population water demand is based on parcels that have been
March 2007 Page 13 of 27 =`:- _ -�
4 f RSA= C '�SUL t�zC_
-- --- � � a af�Fstio■at�.tra:s�srittt - - ---- --_ -
•
Town ofOro ValleyWater Utility
s.- - Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Analysis
subdivided but are not occupied, and on the planning densitiesp rovided in the Town's
General Plan. A more complete description of the future system analysis andlannin
p g
can be found in the Town of Oro Valley 2006 Potable Water System Master Plan.
2.3 Detailed Projects and Costs
Capital projects and costs are summarized in Attachment B: Potable Water System -
Expansion Related Projects and Costs. Capital costs consisted of facility construction
including 20 percent for engineering and contingencies. Total capital costs over the 10-
year study period were $15,402,000.
2.4 Number of Capacity Units
In order to allocate future capital costs using a common denominator, growth is expressed
in terms of Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDUs). One EDU is represented by the average
g
single-family residential customer with a%—inch water meter. Residential customers with
water meters larger than 5/8—inch are measured in terms of multiple EDU's, as follows:
Meter Size EDUs
%-inch 1.0
3/4-inch 1.5
1-inch 2.5
1/2-inch 5.0
2-inch 8.0
The proposed PWSDIF calculated later in this report is expressed on aper EDU basis.
As further described in Section 2.8 below, fees for multifamily, commercial and
industrial customers are also calculated on a common-denominator EDU basis by
determining their relationship to the single family dwelling unit.
The capital projects and cost estimates provided in Attachment B: Potable Water System
- Expansion Related Projects and Costs were based on growth of approximately 400
residential EDUs per year and moderate commercial growth of 200 EDUs
er year (a
p
total of 600 EDUs per year). Therefore a total of 6,000 EDUs are anticipated over the
10-year study period.
March 2007 Page 14 of 27
REMAKCONSULTING
• O A ai7:uQY Dr KA LC11.1t►it'it(
t.� :�:• -�� Town of Oro Valley Water Utility f
Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Analysis
2.5 Fee per Capacity Unit
The PWSDIF per capacity unit is the product of simple division — dividing the total
projected capital costs by the total anticipated EDU's, or:
$15,402,000/ 6,000 EDUs= $2,567 per EDU
2.6 Long Range Cash Flow Projection
The Town has established a PWSDIF Fund to track revenues from fees and expenditures
for growth related infrastructure. The primary sources of revenue in this fund are
PWSDIF revenue, Fire Flow System Development Fee revenue (FFSDF) and interest
income. Positive or negative ending fund balances are retained in the fund (i.e., for the
purposes of Red Oak's analysis, there are no inter-fund transfers to or from the PWSDIF
Fund).
In fiscal year 2006 revenue from PWSDIF fees was approximately $1,742,000. Total
revenue was $1,999,510, including FFSDF revenue and interest income. Based on the
proposed fees and growth rates, expected average annual revenues are expected to be
$1,848,800 annually, comprised of $1,026,800 from residential connections and
$822,000 from commercial and industrial connections. The complete 25-year cash-flow
projection is provided in Attachment C: Potable Water System Development Impact Fee
Fund - Projection of Cash Flow and Debt Service Coverage. The purpose of the cash
flow projection is to ensure that proper liquidity levels are maintained to meet long-term
future liabilities.
Cash flow plan assumptions, including inflation and interest rates, beginning fund
balances, and minimum target fund reserves are provided in Table 2-1.
......�....... ... .;�, •.. �.::t.s w ,,,...�.: :,.�::•.'ry• <,���µ'"`J'.:' ,:o,..,�a ...T�,��,_^ .7. -:i a i.� s t: �a s:7si`.
•
Y. �+ ).1.4w sC'�',t.�,t?�ry; "'L"�'�, �.. �..:+ at +,Cy„. �+1ri �r.� c t a ^ .t�i iT +, ,•s xi y�.2��rj,n. x.
i•C s'!♦ "p Kxw,rix;"Ly ',.•,<`�.i.7x!!yyre4,t�°"'.:� y;,�� i���t+. 3sc���.�•lt: ,, t--.,,,t J c 4; 1 a:�..
x :i�� .�. .dam.��• �^.'� L-�r a ti _I l:f t a c
,t,Y+, .i, �.r\. r�; c r :� ✓•� �`: *�i.' �'t e.•�4'.'•,T r�z�:r �lxfi.4 f <� �s i c. F s t*xLrs ssn
.:. - a :ir7�r,..; :v. v.. t "'�+a.y�z^ "+*•.ren' ,t ; '' ..�r �:��.
w \ f t t w:.<"<�' ;;i,ax!`WJ,.a• ti 1 '� '�'S i�x.:°a�';i�,x •�.+y 4 j;� +4r "� ;s. n tri..
if
�� y,..r. yz 'x ,.�� .5+ 4L �(�!tit's: '.''J.s(�,, .��� t �.x:':�t t + a,�•,:• ��.c.y,Yar, ;�1�.`.{:+�ot`�.a..:,,�t.`:?.x- ,�'yl1i, �.�r... 4 •
CasFCow--.P[a•rt,Ass:urrf t�on���
vs;5 -!' .x7. ,.�� Si,.�y, •.r�F-5 t �/�. �S,yy+Y,��,"e.,•;'�':y,f^�.'?'
- �. :r Y.i..�:u1•a:„fr�ca��,,y yyx'�hx r`n.+'�4 e..7..-.P•t.+ `♦y w:.' .y-." ?yJ:i;. + .t :��
M � •� 5::. I .., ,:}e+•.to»,r.•:>y]-.urk�t..r.�.��:.+'.r,�1Y.+�< ea a r� :�e...! 'c�'..e a n.,,r•..F,.<"i:'3l it h +,`,-:s:_
_ f
� � ,� `• � t -f ,, i .1 y.. -.. c � tiscrt..�( ! ,�< ,.-ri`� � rF•�'...-,...,..<. Y....l• ... �..-
Annual Inflation—All Capital Items 4.5%
Interest Rate on Cash Reserves 3.0%
Beginning PWSDIF Fund Balance (FY 2005-06) $8,000,000
Minimum Target Fund Reserve $1,000,000
(The greater of$1,000,000 or 1-year of PWSDIF Revenue)
March 2007 Page 15 of 27 .: RBMAXCONSULTING
- a WPM.or sauatn PSt
42,v,„.
z.mk. r Town of Oro Valley Water Utility
Potable Water S stem Develo ment Im act Fee4IJ Y P p Analysis
In addition to the assumptions above, Red Oak also assumed that:
• All future residential and nonresidential development will pay 100% of the
proposed PWSDIF fees, without offsets or credits.
• Future development will occur at the pace and magnitude assumed in this
report.
• Infrastructure cost estimates will fall within the range of costs estimated in the
Town of Oro Valley Potable Water System Master Plan.
• The proposed PWSDIF will become effective on September 19, 2007.
Thereafter, the PWSDIF is not adjusted for annual inflation or other factors.
It should be anticipated that these assumptions may change in the future; that there may
be differences between forecasted and actual results, and those changes and differences
could have a material positive or negative effect on the cash flow projection.
To maintain the reasonable and proportionate relationship between the fee amounts and
growth-related capital improvements funded with fee revenue, Red Oak recommends a
comprehensive fee review at a minimum every three years or earlier if the Town
substantially changes its capital improvement plans.
2.7 Financing Costs
Based on the cash flow projections described above, the Town will be able to cash-fund
the required expansion-related potable water system infrastructure. As a result, future
financing is not required, and no future financing costs are included in the proposed
PWSDIF.
2.8 Uniform Fee Assessment Structure
The single family residential fee for a %-inch meter is based on the cost per EDU
previously calculated ($2,567 per EDU). Fees for the Town's multifamily, commercial
and industrial, and non-turf irrigation customer classes, are adjusted based on the average
annual flow relationship between customer classes. Using the most recent 3 years of
billing system data, Red Oak computed demand adjustment factors for the various
customer classes, as shown in Table 2-2.
March 2007 Page 16 of 27 REEDAKCONSULTING
A arv:s4aa Of■Aico:It n�ru
Ask.
-!f/wig :T Town of Oro Valley Water Utility
'` • Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Analysis
'�i<3..-•��'..'r--�`*.%C�•••.'_..�e�rr'./�.r-.:�hb's:•_.�.-�i./d:;r•�r'y'hr�t%•'?•�__•r.c..�x'i�a�i�r}r''•s:N�-�y".•.t+.Y ilv�_.S.#.!si.��a'us'.{.cqd�..t°v,:.i�.:+,_f�,-•,.:-r;r✓�t:;,_.rr^.,=�•>_.::::.+.tK.r•.r_:•'�,o_.•T��.c v:t-,l-�r:.lr.r-�:.i.--rwY•,ry:.Y�v^•'s'..ti.F�.`,..-C'.^-��_ti.�.-..:":4�,,R-`...-r��':'��Y+(.l3'::iyi''.2-.:!rs.i,•.-l•h:..'::rr,-.•J':,�i;iye^.lYJ.�.'..:'.'.��.....;�::E�.�'.�?_.:_�•a^S.T.s`,��-.L-.•�.�a.s1w.�3:,��h��..'zvr�:•+Y�...l!•`l.�ar1:r+`i::_y-s'��.yr{..w'.`•._Z'`�'t'rrr J:•,'.••+'�.•�:?.r'.-•:-Y�rr•.•'`�.r•-�•=<r•.Y:'l_:�?f•'y•.,;i_.,y•r-sC�:.r•�•A;:.3:^:rs!,.';C-�•'•sr•...•�S_,3 v�i�ti{r--.•a�-�.-��t:••^�r-tJ.�.'-K�4��..S+.Z-r.+-:+GC.y.A.y.-„.�`r•r-��•Q��f'�•:,.•�:,'�y.Y:��:'iE•:�.�*1,n;�i^�..,Ki�•:s_'.t..te..d•-i:_�n+�r•,.j.r..,l.i::,�iJ�•'.'=�'.•J:,':
•`�"
4
" � .�Y � � Yr:r = am. ryeOy :W";-1;tt�� A1" FhV'rNr•�cr'� n• !Y ri61 'a:Wit'4hrtiSZff.iC: r4Cr
q�.���•
s�,-lcie. J Zw”:-. rE �_�rVS..1��' it-0 .�r. R: _1. !,•T� J '�`Li
�:�.ir ti. !rte:�•::=:sc. tc.r•- < ���_� ';S[-•t"r.'::�'i:% .r� :Y::_. vyti�j�i:!.{'-.:�' �, ? •,..te7 .F.;'r a w�,^� f.K•�iY•' •�.
'r,•t:' _i s!f:.•'�•...r-�'J_. ti;��!{:e�nl•�d rues!`'t �_i•�-. hr��.' .:> l••.,r? y�.,•+ �r. .•.•:•!^••C.a tsa,
-..._.:.Y r,;,�iKi�`L:�• ';s�ni$�:.i,iS.c.._X. -t. i- ..¢• i-: ..: �T .i "- is.r.ri � ? r. ••�r :a'}�r{n%�1 y {C1T_.rl,;• l,r
.r:i,[s"c' w,,,,,tt_ }•i}f* tf.vrkr „s +G .tr y. o-
•.�-,•}q��iZ'•'�;.-�?.N.�;. err :�:-�. .�w,K:r!_'{•rnt`j-�':h�'r'••\r,s�--' e:J. ...:.r X;v;:\sb;,r:'r�'S,!^-t:.•:i4�-.�;. 54..�.F...r..._ ti..+.•tr•';•-.,+`r. :.0:�rl
�7 -..,.'•�'•r:,,.. ,f. =`r'.�.c=;F•tt1i:m?-,--N_J..,�.,.:� ..!•'x^,> moi, - :•.G�u is•r C'a+"ti. l •�� �7• }?`-r �•YQ:x E• _7,,�•- �Cs�-•
'-%'k'r< 'a:i ,rr�.>r 1 � {- 'c'1s'�{'.,•��s 'K' F' ^'i'"fS...�cfci>'�t�ir'�n r'r�=-"- ?3'" •4r✓.7'�ry�.i ��f �;:� '�';?�3• -^'' ��� -` '-
i<�'+•1.X .•�'. •�.-wig'iiia?'':!�t62t'�✓+-S>JL-'�v�''3`-c':`x,•C••'.. .••�.•iti�s 4=':. i'-r.!...�-_ s•5':1.. .r<:••'��.n•;r'T.- •.'sc• •"�i.,.'`..... .•I�GjY-'+,s',r..^i'iSe:�:•,g:•:=:.1.�:�.�^�
.;:�:.. 1'^-�::�r< ��._ a.x•..•' ?F .�� ;a 1. 'an:+ �.�: q, y,,��... t i•�grf�C_ ":y-.;x�.•; �;v•:ti?'-,'`
;C.. -"�=• .::i: r.. `ice�iC.'r"r.•.. -� i.3L;C r:
a. �';y s�;E'.�[ .�"� s: t?.zrs''c�`',C ,:4-+ txs'?.rr..fi.• . �'" .1. r. •r;? ^•,aT_. .7 ?"i.C::r�:#:KIK y^ tr
��j �'__.� T+.,=::�•`i�•Y.♦rr,.Mr - �a• ,�y .�k, h_ ��!.>,,G't�, � a . �••� .dt+TCus•�..5 .r• c!1.�i;Xx�', '^'v
'�•s.•°- .per .te•_-r•?' r !.• ita3. +C`'•}o.4-=' r•."y.y' `"�ar rs•,rtY-• *i;.':i^if• ia•. •3 tat ,} '^t's•�.,r-.!`''-+�. ••t .,1r_..t�F t: .11-�;',••�stwi-' ,�...r x�'�.:L,l:y f?..
il^.•�'✓KFF� f.�std rr� f•:�sc�r{...t;' r�r"' 'gr:'=.'r'• �{i'`£'+4 cY�:rrF�> ;� y�g�-saw{y..,�.{'L',�'Fy�' ��!1�Y,.f rf<`as{'�'�+S'••S•�.,r�`r :'t'��,�y��,::i�;: J
••fY it's �i:5` ..•..•'ft lr �. w sf' ,.�•i gip. tb.f.;;.+_��•`> z 4.,:rt{Y 4� N
> 'r•�'rS'1".�' ,S. •... .r •r.:? •.aero`; S,, >K`.�•0:•;;;;',;;;,V;;; •cCs •ti4':'i;�'•,:
y� '3•r'r✓' r,`��'xh-Custom
� .Y__ �r, �d usf rn�ein tr: .�•�t4.,
T`�Q•'�.L- ^ -� f=;=i:r�..✓�:'� .;•.,!h•:'=,f� ?x•Tfn^*.-+. �-�.�.�` a-•;ac,:r". I`:�'.:r�.'t•.:•?:r?:,.-�, +,.v..n^t,i"'"r�Y'.• ••r:.5.;lr:t•1:.<.�. :.i.;s'r ;s;'S :,7•�•;if;r:.•=.,7• �r-7.•n- +:•^''jhr,'c•.
.�� -to 5�����«r rr il":� ?±`e�.r� •���{,,� �r� a f;.:��. ;+re .�{.r�,,;�;..C �yg.h.t{„I. Y..,�_�zf..-.�!ri.:,3'�`:,'4't'•'=•r- --',.r.<- -n:.rc�.+_rr.•��,(1:_. �-�:e-`�`;�-:.
�•Y_f.•T.,a�+°=f - .r,'l..F•:r -C='�N` i�,r,'S{•r..,y;r,�•. •;•• 2 44•.:1 "��..v a •.;:rv.•ar-r w?..:' .i :O `. �._ `1, i".
•�•'-f-�n-C�'•'�•`o�r--.lr't�+,•��:'`r1 '�% y7:'rcc.�+'•. +f.�'0..'1•` •lt',• s :e-,.,�. .i?' K �.e.Gs *,� .;c Y' /?t•�a'`.r s:^^"n,^',�.�.t K�nr i....":ar o•.� +'
'S�,.' r<'.•( �'�+.✓_r:� .L rit:' r:.ti{Y r{ �•,
?S, :�?, .:�-.' �' � ,'• ..�t+'f;3.y��-t rfr;.�%3;'�'' :f�`�' �+ °+, '�"'{•-,�:•,s .•.,..Z+'r�.�,�et,.;,
:J.:•'+-...Y`�;c::•�';`•c�;y;'�a+,::d� '..s'i�*:;rt.- ti-t•r.'::t� �.,ae .?�?; �,,,,-;�'•s:,v, �Er•-y 5^.r r L ;?:e�-n•,. -Y Xr
.__. .-,r.r,�...rr�-.. ....._.•.=5:...:?•`:2'�_,_•CrS.,s fir......�?r -.:....-�•.., iyDj; •'�� c....yS 1N`t,S,. r.._.-•,.,. �: r•-. -�� ,
PWSDIF
Customer Class
Existing Proposed
Single Family Residential 1.0 1.0
Multifamily Residential 0.47 0.48
Commercial and Industrial 2.3 1.6
•
Irrigation (non-turf) 1.8 1.7
The demand adjustment factors calculated by Red Oak for the PWSDIF are generally
lower than in the previous 2000 study, which may be the result of the larger statistical
sample, changes in water consumption patterns and/or other factors.
The PWSDIF for connections with meter sizes larger than %-inch are adjusted based on
their relative meter capacities, as derived from capacity ratios published by the American
Water Works Association(AWWA).
In order to develop a uniform fee assessment structure, Red Oak applied the water
demand adjustment factors and AWWA meter capacity ratios to each customer class as
shown in Table 2-3.
March 2007 Page 17 of 27 :; REMAK CONSULTING
- - � A on;s/ar or IIAicoIY ntatxt
::::,;,,,,....A.,.-'YTown of Oro Valle Water Uti 1• r y 1 ty
..-} Potable Water System Development Im act Fee Anal srZ .+v...,.cYr
. ,i p Analysis
'tisG1%l�v-�s*s�•;ry4- mG.^�,.L��,. trJ�� r'
'3y;M-� u `_'�:!-r"+��:��..�it�F� ;fertiiJ K •/ :r_
>:+t--fL;z3M _s-
':%'
.r,;f
} r',.•.nl>-�.•4..-...-s�§r �^ 4:
:•'-v
:-^.
trfi-
<
�1t' , 5,,• .i�" iw.4t ��� ..y-,1om,!rt-. ' %:r�� �j . 1.^ -'y �y'ns��r ;ox: /}g.1e .T.ntv.-..=,gpzfi-fi;,..f.. _.;��.�.r!.r-,. y_=
i;4t�:G - _.�• ��/�"�,iC`slC.h,r4 �=.N n7,� �•�Sa .:v.�• = � ,?t.. + a� yr 4n .A•: Lec -i.4-1 .•« s'• }•. 4 .F..,,i•. ,v.�7}�£5< -'� -
.._.....,,..,.. - .;.- •tT..L�r ft: �S .,��:.ls•.,i£L'w�.,'rt,!�•.7'�•
./-..S.:-rS,»..,„.`..'-.tr`i.n:r,•�>'..-�.��t`'
::v•.ti't�'=.i3r5•":t�
=:r`L
}7f•;yx ~?�� :� �rrti �=� �X��a��=� ----4-4..-f-`1l=Y ''v��'� � i,t-{vn .•"y:-Zirtt�'rJ''� v,,yF;,- "' f m_r.�,;.r>
•;.
-i_
-
• I�va•� .3moeiY.= •�. h�:�= avL X�r?,j:"1.4§�i J7 �,t`, t? ;9rA.t'!.{7t :�� .s,��i':i.;ti ,r Y�i' + .$5 .� C1I.`rrte�`? �i .;! M"r -b't.b'O r � � 4y a?} /�'•1;sn , v.?r�_:�,�'"-st; ��.:N: ,-Y • :f:/s_�� :c='•.tJ !yj t I11:4, � � _•3 bta� .�' _ - J �seem: e &o �e���m-ac�Fe� �J s.{?�0�" s :44,.„,.,...„, A-_�': -.p-4•, :s,{`' :•xr�✓�-rq:,;a.t: r { : rK r i.i r�.{ ws •.47?I'taF tr : :,r -ttt- ,, ¢e:�arJ �% ,.: 1,,":. •CzS,trWi� }tN>'•9>.,*r _p�n _'sv�a�n _4D�man �Adjuen�FactorsivicifAMAIMete.rtea aci r.Rat■0s:a Lz �x : tfr;ZY^xr� + Cjs�� ���,%f�•v �1r4� o., r�� Y:t'if; VisSf,,
•
•
Customer ass
and MeterClSize Demand
Adjustment AWWA Meter -
Capacity Ratio SDIF
P Y
Single Family Residential Factor
(per meter size)
5/-inch 1.0 1.0
3/4 $2,567
-inch 1.0 1.5 3,850
1-inch 1.0 2.5 6,420
1%-inch 1.0 5.0 12,840
2-inch 1.0 8.0 20,540
Multifamily Residential.
- ', Demand Factor. Capacity Ratio' •
(per unit) .
Per unit 0.48 NA
y,;10.J:•'f(''"•a"'�St: •w/s 1X/,�tt�o;:-N.+ri,+.K<Y/r L,t;ff,,,exY,arFy3 :9%I-
�....{1 ,rt.•,/) .,.'!"rte (✓✓rt/1.1.h'}J Sr'.rr�.N:.r,r,i /•r:.; .. ...... •:.'.:.•
$1,230
��ommercial and Industrial
(pert meter"size) Demand Factor Capacity Ratio
S/-inch 1.6 1.0
3 $4,110
/-inch 1.6 1.5 6,170
1-inch 1.6 2.5 10,280
1/2-inch 1.6 5.0 20,550
2-inch 1.6 8.0 32,880
3-inch 1.6 16 65,760
1 4-inch 1.6 25 102,750
6-inch 1.6 50 205,500
8-inch
1.6 80 328,800
to (non-turf)
rri ain �
.,J Demand Factor Capacity Ran
o1 (per meter size)
5/-inch 1.7
1.0 $4,360
3A-inch 1.7 1.5 6,540
1-inch 1.7 2.5 10,900
11/2-inch 1.7 5.0 21,800
2-inch 1.7 8.0 34,880
3-inch 1.7 16 69,760
4-inch 1.7 25 109,000
6-inch 1.7 50 218,000
1.7 80 348,800
8-inch
Turf Uses
(per acre) _
Turf uses per acre 11.2 NA $28,800 i
March 2007 : . r
Page 18 of 2 7
• •ajr:sia■Cr r►lra:s s:es:t
4 Town ofOro ValleyWater Utility(f . , Y
1. ;_J : Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Analysis
i ,-
It should be noted that the proposed demand adjustment factors are consistently applied
to both the AWRDIF and PWSDIF. A more complete discussion of the demand
adjustment factors is provided below.
Multifamily Analysis
In 1997 the Town conducted a detailed analysis of multifamily water demands, which
was summarized in the 1997 report, entitled "Report on Oro Valley A WRDF: Fee for
Multi-Family & Turf Uses." Based on this analysis, the water consumption for a typical
multifamily customer was determined to be 48 percent of that used by a typical single
i family customer. In 2000 the Town conducted a second analysis of multifamily water
demands, which was summarized in the 2000 report entitled "Potable Water System
Development Impact Fees." Based on this analysis, the water consumption for a typical
multifamily customer was determined to be 47 percent of that used by a typical single
family customer.
Similar studies conducted by Red Oak in 2006 for Phoenix, Arizona and Chandler,
Arizona indicated multifamily water consumption within a comparable range (i.e., 49
percent in Phoenix and 51 percent in Chandler). In light of these statistics, Red Oak
applied Oro Valley's previously-determined ratio of 48 percent to the PWSDIF uniform
fee schedule. This ratio reduces the fees proportionately for the new multifamily
customer.
Commercial and Industrial Analysis
In 2000 the Town conducted an analysis of water demands, which was summarized in the
2000 report entitled "Potable Water System Development Impact Fees." Based on this
analysis, the water consumption for a typical commercial and/or industrial customer was
determined to be 2.3 the typical single family customer.
Red Oak evaluated the Town's billing statistics for commercial and industrial customers
to assess the previously-determined ratio applied in the 2000 report. Based on Red Oak's
analysis, commercial and industrial customers use an average of 1.6 times the typical
single family residential customer. In light of Red Oak's more recent analysis, the 1.6
ratio was applied to the PWSDIF uniform fee schedule. This ratio increases the fees
proportionately for the new commercial and/or industrial customer.
Irrigation (non-turf)Analysis
In 2000 the Town conducted an analysis of water demands, which was summarized in the
2000 report entitled "Potable Water System Development Impact Fees." Based on this
Mace 2Q07
Page 19 of 27 : �i:RSA K cONS ULTING f{
- - _ s . a Diyistar Or UICOCr Titbit
.
e.4177‘
_ Town of Oro Valley Water Utility
s --y---• Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Analysis
analysis, the water consumption for a typical irrigation (non-turf) customer was
determined to be 1.8 times the typical single family customer.
Red Oak evaluated the Town's billing statistics for irrigation (non-turf) customers to
assess the previously-determined ratio applied in the 2000 report. Based on Red Oak's
analysis, irrigation (non-turf) customers use an average of 1.7 times the typical single
family residential customer. In light of Red Oak's more recent analysis, the 1.7 ratio was
applied to the PWSDIF uniform fee schedule. This ratio increases the fees
proportionately for the new commercial and/or industrial customer.
Turf Uses
The PWSDIF for turf users is based on the expected water use for a typical golf course.
The Arizona Department of Water Resources provides water consumption allotments
specific to each category of water use and encourages substitution of renewable water
sources for groundwater. Turf-related facilities are given annual water allotments
calculated for each facility. The maximum annual irrigation application rate is 4.6 AF per
acre for turf or other high-water use landscaping.'
Dividing the cost of$2,567 per EDU by 1 EDU using 0.41 AF, results in a cost of$6,261
per AF. Multiplying the irrigation application rate of 4.6 AF per acre times $6,261 per
AF, results in a fee of$28,800 per acre for turf users. It should be noted, however, that
this would only apply to turf areas of less than 2 acres. Turf users greater than 2 acres are
required to connect to the Town's reclaimed water system, as described in Section 3 of
this report.
2.9 Fee Survey of Comparable Arizona Communities
Red Oak compiled water system development impact fees currently charged for a single
family residential customer (i.e., one EDU) for the Arizona communities listed below.
• Avondale, AZ • Chandler, AZ
• Flagstaff, AZ • Gilbert, AZ
• Glendale, AZ • Goodyear, AZ
1 Arizona Department of Water Resources. Third Management Plan for Tucson Active Management Area
2000-2010. December 1999.
March 2007 Page 20 of 27 '
=RSA R CONSULTING
-. - s • A OFVF11C.Of It6Lt O:Y 1,1tftt
,� Town ofOro Valley Water Utility
evel o System Water Potable Development Impact Fee p p Anal ysis
• Marana, AZ • Metropolitan Domestic Water
Improvement District,AZ
• Mesa, AZ • Peoria,AZ
• Phoenix, AZ • Prescott, AZ
• Prescott Valley, AZ • Scottsdale, AZ
• Surprise, AZ • Tempe, AZ
• Tucson,AZ
Attachment D: Water System Development Impact Fees for Comparable Communities in
Arizona, details the complete results of Red Oak's survey. Based on Red Oak's survey,
the average water system development impact fee for these communities is $2,603
(excluding the Town of Oro Valley). The Town's proposed PWSDIF is compared with
p
the average fee from similar Arizona communities below.
Comparable
Town of Oro Communities in
Valley Arizona
Proposed Fee Existing Fees
Average
$ 2,567 $ 2,606
When compared with existing fees for similar communities in Arizona, the Town's
proposed PWSDIF is within a reasonable range. It should be noted that several
communities are either considering or have proposed future fee increases that, if adopted,
will increase the overall average shown above.
Water impact fees may vary according to many factors, including but not limited to state
and local policies and regulations, growth rates, and demographics. While growth often
increases utility revenues, it also increases the demand for water and related services and
facilities. Expanding water supply infrastructure requires large expenditures for design
g p
and construction of water supply systems, purchasing water rights and/or land
acquisition, and securing necessary financing. Deciding whatp ortion of the associated
capital and financing costs should be recovered through water resources fees,
development impact fees, user rates, or other charges is a local decision that must
consider a variety of factors. Such considerations contribute to variations and differences
in one-time fees among adjacent and/or similarly situated jurisdictions.
March 2007 '- _ - _ _
Page 21 of 27 ��
- _ R A�._CONSULTING._... -.
>--
•04.LEY
Town of Oro Valley Water Utility
Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Analysis
Ni
3.0 FEE IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS
3.1 Reclaimed Water System Connections
The PWSDIF does not apply to new or existing customers that connect to the Town's
reclaimed water system. Reclaimed water system capital costs are through the Town's
AWRDIF charges. In addition, pursuant to Town Ordinance No.(0) 03-31, new
irrigation systems designed to irrigate two or more acres of turf must connect to the
Town's reclaimed water system at the time of construction, with all costs to be paid for
by the developer.
3.2 Supplemental Fire Flow System Development Fee
The Town currently charges a supplemental fire-flow system development fee for
commercial and industrial and multifamily users requiring more than 1,000 gallons per
minute of fire flow (based on the total area of development and the fire flow requirement
as determined by the fire department).
Red Oak's analysis and the uniform fee assessment schedule provided within this report
are based on the relationship of average water flows between customer categories. Red
Oak did not evaluate relative peak and/or fire flow requirements for the commercial and
industrial and multifamily customer classes. It is anticipated that commercial and
industrial and multifamily users will continue to exhibit peak and/or fire-flow demands
that exceed average flows.
The Town of Oro Valley Potable Water System Master Plan identifies growth related
capital investments for peak day demands throughout the system. Peak day demands and
fire flow are satisfied by several, new proposed booster stations. However, these booster
stations are expected to be required beyond the 10-year study period of this PWSDIF
analysis and were not included in the 10-year capital improvement projections. As a
result, it is recommended that the Town's existing fire-flow system development fee be
maintained for the anticipated costs to construct new booster stations and/or until a more
detailed study of fire-flow requirements can be performed. Fire flow development fees
are listed in Table 3-1.
_
March-2007 Page 22 of 27` ;* R -A .CoNsuLTING`-
.. .-:-:....- ::et.....C.TY. ten. -..♦ _ _ ._ _ _ _ -
r r
4!4.1%,, ck,.
Town of Oro Valley Water Utility
i°r V Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Analysis
Ai..,____....„
s�2,1•,x'• ��KaY,-,ti a '?'i=�A•_ -c .o -nt;.' C`•'•`..`,. _'u „�.' `<.-`i:.:�;:� ..._., . v r
--c sa,�• �`"�. �•�_ irk,.:..{�r t
<.` .1,. '++ ::.�•- ��. {�1%�'�' �,�,'�..!Lfi- �. � w�?sF',i- S'<,._, '7l+';C•.r:2'�'-y..
Ci ��i^_o.t*-'' • e .lS`z'*;;,',Sir -,--o'C'as,•1 .: `t�n ',�F -• it�!',.' �'••)y T'w;'3e {fit+i:b�- -�S:k,
r 1�+ft xJ2r+ w�tt r;s,� Y•rh +-.rte : -Stiff +� 'rz j;,.Y+-.r
:�- C;- •'uY F`NC 2r v ••• �,yz.o •„sfh.a M. �yi::+R 18 '•"'+7 �f it }/y-q5'y.-i•••'a.t•,i..••�
_,- y_F•- ,-_-_ ���/_ .''c-,'!"_•`''•.,'•y i"-w'^''•'sj''•�``Yy?�"- _:Y-_J': _ 7 '.r.'F ,:i• C: ,.a- Akio--`�L."•'•.}---a•Y�•�rt'c+•r`�•'•'.
,:F ,,,e,•' '_it^ •�G. As fit_./'•„•,,.� •t Yey {.-• L c [4'i- .-..
�.!�ys�.',`�4..�t, _?t �?ti wF-..¢: ;+r"FS:r' e=�Kc.' sti,� d _iyftr�+�r, :%% 1;y�',+=~is�x; =i
r� -,r..,; ?.y; "�:'_ �f`� �a��. :- ,�c<•����«�.1���� �_ ✓:` � �y d%r�,.a _ -c•.-•.cam, s;S•
Sfit?;c� G:�: .Cr'�'{�•t it s� �� a- 3/ �'• 3 � Y•l' t..a`•.'�-'•�e�v d'�-7• .t�.n'7�•`}'+. ;{ e- �.
•2-„- .�f:?/•t a1..r.()-h,,,,, ,� {_, .,.'}„° �3:,,-.ri=.. ..}Q ,�( e>,t.,-% W; ! ` fes..- !:�•4'•�_�'.S;{.•, -!t:'r'_�
A.S•'�-'/Rr!--c+,/'� -.{-• � c�K:'_ �r'3f'-1 cti; r�5`?i..1-.t.`;t�Xl-.ifs}'CST•f 1'•?+.�..� T. �.'.�Lf. /-'ti�•.,•
ti,,;r�er5:�t a.�q�w-�.aL{Fetv�_t�,s.��;,,�4� .t. --Pr},� tF ec± al• �, � �;
_ .r.'4,�'M1,.��t ;s�; ,�v.:+;[... S M t�•s�•[�,,.;••'tr,./ a�.[;�c,.r•.a.+�.y �L-•s�'t i. r':�'r- .�,:
.1 •�r�.: S.+tS}.•ft�.•���_r :.y sA���ti9. + ��� +ti.„�•�t::t'-r'-�.f+,f.-S:�r'.i +`';-C��Hi'w_v,N`,7�f.� 4•:•��+.y ~ ;,���a ifi{ 1i�.
0;W -'yy 4 •!A' 4 -a. ,,�i� :R :••'- +3'•� '•eZp *.. �d V,r "�-�' "1':•K�•ZSrr�-4,,,�
,�. ,�i'a sr,�(,•..,t:.;i�:�Q ;ii �.�?irr•.� :A�,.�'"rq��"prd• :-i,•t fir. �'.�Yt �• '•S � C X,'.'�-'fk`�-�:n.Q. r�±;i..,+,dt.%ril• r.'i'`+�i'�n'�"^✓,'.
4 r-.;+, iY-f4._�..�S-•a..{jtt.th G s�ti.-.r -c..,. !IY” �,t�'.tii4r'•.. .'r1•%5,r
a 4: 4 Z'tt, r,� q r 4:04`s
'y',:.,,., -�C�=S„� .r ti�- .� �-/.. ��tip jam' i,5�, fi ,:5," i w• `"�`cC�.t r�� '�'f� i�f,',j�
���. y_6'� ,��s.G'z,a�'w ;�r; •,R...,��',s'---,,-4;{�.�F,{ �r�'1�c�y �et="..1�•c -ar.L,;'•*i'ct;;•-_t c+,f;�;ii,'`,.',�,e���r..��{r.,�, r.��.ti..�.r �.�'`'�r�
{---c-g,&tpp emental��'�Fire'':_''Flo _,.....,..___t,--,,-.,-.„
':D" v ...:,1 ss ri �_.
;ti;-,�,,. .,,,,_,'a/•CR `r-_'�4r>�:i,''�'„..,_..: -�'+_r,..! .+:• ....:.�C;_.,.,. .ice.,. ..,,/;�.'_,... .a•' ,r i `� $:!__,.„ _. ,.s-.;i r:4...-�R�.{ },0„.•
�s� -�� v'f��y;.-� i.+_r Y�„.'� tnY.�..�t�,' ,�-. ,��f �1� c�•% t yl��.�+ f:-a 4,. 1 .n,%Tt. R'[-"
+lt.;��.;.,y�, ?. `..':!•#'s.`�+,:4-c,.�.�;�4:�tit'�''%�'x�_NS:� •. ���•'� .�%r=.`�C .;:^"�`��:`��'•r_-%�„`�'� ntis�sti!..�. t�`�� ,t 1 t.._ �c s
t�....r;.i SSC' l+�l+rst �r•��a�f [/C�`..ri rte .,ix/i- a•:r,C�,r:`.•t:. A•✓3 t�._ �,.,k-�i�.- •C.:�,;..x ,v�'•_.E.•. .:ti"`:�`Jv.^.may. H A.•-f,
sr,.w,2..2i�-..•.. •.ec•Y?-•.•r-{`�-rL--•_S•-1i.•.>i,a:- :�.��.tea..=:1.r:.•ir-l:v.�•,�:dc'X.3•.r..,,......4_,,,,...,..,-,-,- ;:S•r'+•�a..� s,
Fire Flow Requirement FFDIF
1,001 - 1,500 gpm $3,230 per meter
1,501 —2,000 gpm $14,847 per meter
2,001 —2,500 gpm $26,151 per meter
This fee applies to new commercial and industrial and master-metered residential
connections requiring more than 1,000 gpm of fire flow. There is no proposal to increase
or change this fee.
3.3 Offsets and Credits
On occasion, developers or other private parties may offer to provide or develop their
own water infrastructure (transmission, distribution, or storage) that will either partially
or wholly satisfy the water demand and/or supply for proposed commercial or residential
development. In these instances, it may be appropriate to offer an offset to the proposed
PWSDIF. Such offsets would depend upon the ability to integrate with the Town's
existing water system and would be subject to review and acceptance by the Town. This
would only apply to facilities (or similar facilities or portions thereof) as described in the
Town of Oro Valley Potable Water System Master Plan.
March 2007 Page 23 of 27
z s REMA GONS LTING -'
A*mosso r111-41.COLA Mint -
e."‘
Town of Oro Valley Water Utility
{ Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Analysis
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 Recommended Fee Schedule
As previously described in this report, development fees in Arizona must meet the
requirements of the Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS §9-463.05) and development fee case
law,namely the "rational nexus" criterion.
The PWSDIF is a one-time payment by new customers to recover costs for the
acquisition of new water supplies to support growth. PWSDIF revenue is restricted to
pay for new water system infrastructure required due to growth in the Town's service
area. PWSDIF revenue is not to be utilized for system rehabilitation efforts or operating
expenses. The fees developed in this report by Red Oak Consulting are intended to meet
these standards.
The Town's existing PWSDIF varies by meter size (34-inch through 8-inch) and customer
category (single family residential; multifamily; commercial and industrial; and non-turf
irrigation). The proposed PWSDIF maintains the existing structure, with the exception of
modifications to the assessment methodology and fee schedule, where needed to comply
with ARS 9-463.05 and fulfill the rational nexus criterion.
The proposed PWSDIF is applicable to new single family residential; multifamily
residential; commercial and industrial; and non-turf irrigation meters. The PWSDIF for
connections with meter sizes larger than 3-inch are adjusted based on their relative meter
capacities, as derived from capacity ratios published by the American Water Works
Association (AWWA). Table 4-1 provides the proposed PWSDIF schedule.
:s ..
March 2007 Page 24 of 27 :«� RED3A K CONSULTING
c0.4.....,..,,,,,,_
S
• l : _;� Town of Oro ValleyWater Utility
. f. y
X a Potable Water System Development Impact
-; ,,� p pct Fee Analysis
r77-_. _
.. _
' -_ , Table 4-1
Proposed Potable Water S stem
Y
Development Impact Fee Schedule
Customer Class AWWA Meter Proposed
Capacity Ratio PWSDIF
Single Family Residential,'
(per metersize}
5/-inch 2
1.0
3 $ ,567
A-inch 1.5 3,850
1-inch 2.5 6,420
11/2-inch 5.0 12,840
2-inch 8.0 20,540
j£k itiamif Residen
ti'al
t`eeioe.;§ 4;fiti sY:ah(peçunit) r%XC4,,,L4..&�'i it{ Z1, 44
ii tui.,-,4.4;.':
Per unit NA $1,230
t ('.ai.1x��.4�',.^Y .I'E/jy.'• v mrb�'"i?x{' ,`t"v(.�ce•}'Lt '}Z j' Sayo ;i.>>,.+7
•Sx ,A..x ar,Artvn t '...,,,. ,!!�` ..•rt.a;1,..ff 4r.‘0, r'•*b i>$i.•!:�tt v'.'' /at.`flap,$' R.<.
i;.� �. .'C��. ! �:�: r/r)j,, v`'i'ri3�tl ht.. *i'A � �1+.. Y'�r�s.� ����•� I'/Y, ���'4h'Fk�""�tr�Z?��'��.�(';,.�i�'...}�x.;t. a�..;.
��4C Illi'1,'��T��'G`Ia���C���'iC�t,�.�`�■�fCr//��� a. �� , ;;yyGyy1''�_.� ,, �{ ��.�$��t* ,f,�'�w j, � h r y���f ��~�,��
` �'�'�"r F y,K1'T l// ,� 1,,ryp ti'ter \ l a �. ,�''''liF o{'.4.Hary,"'%rv. .:*;':',,i':
=,>"1a' >' S ,Y,i~' t }.'LLI,.�,qi yu!"" y�q,��i't-0y�'
At. ^f �yp��•"pYF.f.•ia3Yr6 a> Wt�.'T.r�('.t t -♦tir� 4, ,'�.l" m�,y., �'f)i�'.- ',1..,,,,,V.:- y., ,p, y ,�' .�1 b{ ♦.(�i , IY;,Y.'�:,. /R`•rt,�`G'�7..
tj�' �,r'. ey""a �' ..//..✓�aa 'u .? .»s.t .'.,4,,,:j i,:,:4t,'•. *;t ,t.,:r• d 4',,v,':. S.4 t 4-y"" ':5' -
((//,,z. '„ ` hk size '�(y. yy „�,"' ;:',..,1,-4.,4;,,,t,,, ,b'C"` xrp`Y.�a9t' t�h'� ''').P4":",1,-,, sf 1 .
•`i�x�'6,1 � , / t - .n '+k��!`f�x .✓,....i. 4/ �,?.(tet, ,,:' „Q(.. t -a< 1h ��
,.:'`.G.ykFYv,rs`��,,„>:!;:',..�'/1i..� /.�S{r�f�t��.7ixr c �"r �h.' Y�i,jar .�-C,�} '4'1, r{j�7..t "��',ry R.-, .� b..'t�'r.�1��`.: .� ��� i fit,;.,
ir..i.. s°�:x,�<:. ,�`rv�i.'��ry'«�i;.,'J3���f'bG`,� �'r�mos d�2 ,'"""�tk�''�:>'�?.t�r�;�yvy..s�t a:>�';�'>a��i`�," rye ">i�'�ar,:.
5/-inch .y �.;. ...�:.3.tt��.{:.�
1.0 $4,110
3A-inch 1.5 6,170
1-inch 2.5 10,280
11/2-inch 5.0 20,550
2-inch 8.0 32,880
3-inch 16 65,760
4-inch 25 102,750
6-inch 50 205,500
8-inch 80 328,800
.:f'"0>f;.:qiY«!,,ri✓ a be,;;'5,if ^ii a•irrN t/4'S 4 :.! {:;.,,, >is r ii,r. 4.1 F:.
.�`,w, ,k 44 �✓ ,i.?•/i fr n� .•/ � t:i.,,ta�> �'
�;,, �/�A .'�, _ ,.,..... t'}�iii Sajsf Y4„ •>tl'apTr•�f;a x..,�>v .,�rf��N"f��f.i.v i� -„+r:r_y yt
rr� atu o A rt�N :.s t y L t 1'� 1 t.�.'>ti r5>{.�t.,y�(4'4rXr T ..,:.:,:;,,,,,,:,;,;,.,.,,,,:-:.,,,-,,,i,...:,..;1.,,,,..,.,R 7 fr wv'tir3' rt' ..s6.a'G
' tl.,�>x}%-Y 41'�ab.: .A YY-4 S':M.Y S"t' T �t �, ,( t +!') :( ll{r�(non-turf) :4 r;'.a.,:a.5 h,g';j..Jq„e�f K :C4:_*/.,,y,. 4,6r. T.•� Y./ .,,1;J...«.xi J„r .d«.,'k-.VS a ✓t �'� •Y S�e e't�'a Mt t'(,5•.Nr v.TS.{�:ar.Tt�,�v.iy.<:fY...iH �. 'N} •. yrt>;�.�.!��4Y N.'�'t itKa�<. -t � A
:K..
(perrneter'sze ..1r .+n .�y>S" f{:T Z i. .%Y`r`""..kr,•,{.., ' f, +;,�..:'/ �M 3' �!�. k:r" ,;,t»'r7..i't;..x„r�'i,.�S.F.(�.S;a /.r,,1P.,1 tRGr/ y.,yd. x 1�•i+t`�•yt� r.•;"`!%..k«u
:e*rr:'Y'fka�7`f.., .+.Qf '�„yrt Y r,.; s,tk•aT.,1• -�.ar�''�"„�y7?'.'a" t'�(�.. i-ki';,? �:t;.3 x a /�"h:x 4�,. t ,ri .f`4::1^�k?F...r•.
..ui,., �L.y;ili ,.ea.,, K Y, ;�iy,�y ♦ a�.fc' i t $ f. aj ty„> > r'I C•��!�" 'f'�J.5,,.'�'<':3•- µ }
�. �: Aix �. 6 f�M:r�+F.r'���;�{�+.f 9�F:r�>���.3,g. � E•h R f�T y,, t�4A� .a tAa' yL�at y r�'r
� >:5;i r >'7i9�•Zf,IU {� <�.y r, »:u�t f�i�aat5 t�v P f �"�•`g'4 a Art 7»�Q' t S t�"i�Cr,��'�.
d� th ,,{;i3: kw >Y '. ,f<rx s 3 -¢7 �.n £�yy��Yt>a,v,..trc !i iN;"i.�r s•o :d.. L a!- ? Vis/ d.r, tt ./.
�.,YiY.2 e 4riggg,it)...z.k.f 4✓J£tI iy�'la t,,i ; g ai {..tl- S 'gp at 'Y;,f ft �Tfi"j a.
......:o•.,. .,..L<..� .:x''4,'t<.S..F"!::? ..VJS::•.R1lh.✓�.�..�A:.fcY't'�;'ri.�i_......>.r�.�..iy'` Y :.�t�7�.S�f.;Y_!j.`tv y{fo(yt�ixsxF(. k�'Y7.
5/-inch 1.0 $4,360
3A-inch 1.5 6,540
1-inch 2.5 10,900
1%2-inch 5.0 21,800
2-inch 8.0 34,880
3-inch 16 69,760
4-inch 25 109,000
6-inch 50 218,000
8-inch 80 348,800
c�'����a-�.•�+7x� att'r•� Mv:...�st��3Y{Y {Y7.•i.;.ot s.fa;J,#M, kn.�i.t,•,saf`•�_�°� i��� _
-• �■�■tt .f�/.�s�C, ; �j ,,,ci 4__ �tp �r?�, ytf y i, ,, g;., ��. ,0x
T rFfuses ,xiaw e` H/tsX.zl Y 1' qC� �. '�
i. J;. sF'�:' T r T A y.WI 'f:, x„f,yjr; ,4 f't>y'' i "v:;'3. Uw.i -'t
3k ''�. �,. { �K� "3s�L� .�1R �S'n'3�r-►','�,: _e�f, ,a,sE}�;�4. "!�"y'L•y� i�iiy� �.�`,�, ,s?�y;�•
SK=it...sv` �{�=r3"� �"r�,t °j�{ {� �,�4. w ra✓ _ t�7,.`L�..��'�w •� 'i � ..`,�R `'• 'd r 'y _
Fi'F /.� 'YI_ +'f. Q�i. :e.,:r0.0. atiy '• f,i:P ,y� x K.r},'!r `r,k A s s �,�,- R fj"i
-�1 G Y �^+- %- t,� •,f. ���• �>-�,y 'M AY�'.'�Y?".�X.zs�p J, �cr 6' �>'a.•'a% j N>�k��i�Y y�� F��n<t.i�v -.`S�,;�+',�- r�•
If' _ aC"•:moi, �s . r i}}tyt .Y. _,j' ,c s,/k ,t4"zsY>,i,�...sa�'^'V.-4,g ,:y"•. rii"^-cl,,t,t f..;,>-,�^4+�.k_'! - '.ie•f +•v�4n v'r;r," l.. .�'., ,
�+'•y` �.'i � 1,.�,y V7a�C[,tJrC,,1 �.iy�- .t �+iYt
/fA\I�.:�;ri. ,P' f.� .�>`.ki`e:R�if`w"'S°`,.e�'1¢C t�,.a`•?st a�� _;H4i....�� ,.t- '(y�ws..�a`iwsc'£.`�S;I.td�ax�:�-;-•,�-.+i• ,e�•• .�+i;r�>.,�„r�:t:S��s�'.�,.„.e�k,1���::d�:'+!" k,gerF.�,t�s t
.i.,...w.if"'- r;;tat?gh.+ %! :.k 4 t -; {i a,*t�; r r.,� . .. t.w !�'" Cwre ,t r. t'tly ,'�'' tom ..
. ,JCir.,..Y! >Y.S'-�'J'R.���.�tt�'',c'Jf.•.�,3ia '�.�..;; ,.7 0 ., -�' �•.r(� f}.r,4'�,,A y'y,� �i�ys�
..r.,�.�,•-G.:�'kA•�. .,i..; ✓t�������,`er"��y!. �'� ir-.Y•r's"t`.'r w4'a- �•Ye •�.15.r� :^'.
Turf uses less than 2 acres NA
_ $28,800
`
P
March 2007 25 of 27 =
,_,.. - --.`.' _... .. r A DIViAlaul O!1II1iC011t►t;Mle --_
EY
ArA Town of Oro ValleyWater Utility
b
a _ .;4
r V• Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Analysis
The total PWSDIF for new master-metered residential, and commercial and industrial
connections is the sum of the fee set forth in Table 4-1 above and the fire flow
development fee based on fire flow for users requiring more than 1,000 gpm of fire flow
provided in Table 4-2 (based on the total area of development and the fire flow
determined bythe fire department).
requirement as
>'iYi '.t.� +.lY�:!•3}� ..y.•;t.U:.,1 �.)>'.,'t,4 l .<itit Sl ,i :!L•L.<;.1.,.
`'.rt•.4t• ''S:ti'.i�..�-lS: y,Y, .t„"`tr'• iq: �•l'.t. •Lf `•Y, •Y' �:,SI:r.Y' .}F�i�<}:. �'-T l'f r�.K' :t'.� T.�.+�.r �.
.f.•.r" ''�,L„f'�:35't'{'�6 .'�%"` ;•`l�r'�f;:"�,+,r>�si�;•�' ,t:i'1 i��' .•�C`+tf, fir$. �ti!tirrr..cvn;t.res.;'..,r.r:x, ..t.�. � .� }._ .;+"'.: r -t n.�.F''''.,
•:� tr:+,•,, rjK:f,y,.,.< .'�Y.k[ �,�' t .rrtLeg., <.- ..�,;;i�.,,w nC..-:'.•, ,,'X'.:.`;f. 1.. -+'+`�
tw.r..•. ,�r.j�n'> L�< G,- 'n: ,�'c j(/r•s4^�`'''Y�i-•'�`•b+_r'<•',�.•:=,'iY.t`-..r,. �`�`H.. .:., <tr s{r.Y^; .3',-� ..n:r l:�'�I�::i,.:,�bNy:,'�'�•:T'.?,^. � _tti(.
';Fp.,. .�.�'.'':J,�.\:,r *^=i. 1 / v.���'�.. _-`f�,�:; .- "`s - �.i,•_ ._.tit;`•• �;..�,t>.,*.... •r.+•.s:' :.!�.k •;.'+.,>.<, 'f:'�? .,,
• '!• r:�',`{. r.t.v, ct•.S.F.;,.. '";�.r+'!t"*.='•rK'r,�S a„+� ': " :i. '+�l'�•-'-�.Slfi•' 5�i•::�Y,' .4'v:"�.y..1• ,b_t�'/�iY;^i .� 'tc ✓. '�l
yt�t "`�'F. 4j`t- •3�;� .;.fi��`rr.� � �?+?Cl{ �f;#� �`.,�rrt;t.�il�! {� �' -�r��, •"t •c t� �r Y{' x'u:' �•.,� 'i;.;: -xc�..
r'.r'f.`;t�'`Y"�an',��`�. '?C�• •','t�'�...�• ;i•�tY "{;:y r yt t5 f✓>:'� ''' .+tr '`4-
,3�t'%, "L � C�. ` 'x�.`i k
4:'.tL�% ssCi'".''`'->t..,' "+;{;r•,..r<ad. �l '+i•+i'=+.•4 fes,;•.r- < - >3•, A' 0:ia.'y> r” , zc't%.,1 .d:t` r"slr ;
.,yeti'. 1p, ,, ,r�}��` w s. ,xr_:is •htt .,,.:.t;t��k. ..� •'` Z•,.;:b_` .tir';?S;l.,�',�s-� ,�, en�•; C:+._. ..�'•.eF j J> �.
.h`. R..i :t�'^.rst_i'�'�j�".^f•S2ti,,•,r+�•..•�e3:n+J��.'?t•��-;t7�.. r�.�:'"t'�•-,;.�:?{17�'.c •.r "� : "!..l'r l.�'K'^ 1.o:ti�,'�/clY�r;�t.�'�`��:::��'�'a.._'t" < -�"a�4 :?=t
ISO��.�` . •r'1��r,.'�f,'�i,'Kr,-'xvr>,.' !X,�,,;ry�.;c�'c:.�•;'�+v,���,l•'.;�. J�,r, ,��.r�,�,.,�-y�x,'1t«h`�fa1. '�:. L•.�V.s4;/ys%�°�'''��'�, pS�''`�' �.tf��;'d'.n;�r�A tx�.t""
\'�.;���4���r. ,�, �s;':Yi`,ix� a��`.� u,'�'dyt.a{�F?L',,�r���^i.�t• C�{� `:t' yy`�',•�C r{i lr:ui;S��`b�-' i�, t� >5 g "b, �.�;1 r°^f.
ttu�pA:r. ':4 .-.rT`:'L;J.^•".i<�i''>R.,i t};....ve;j._�u�C.'F.'.+�.•.i,"Lt ft l�'.•�a'."�-„�'.t:r-�.'^',' f '}%,A.'”:hip it+.>'r..c r a- .a .."0'•."``e• •x :.+,:L'/.} .y':, r,"t,+;%
- -J �.:r .iL'�`t .�,,� �t t`CC,. �1.. .! .G.�.����:�.�, �:yn ,� r L Y�.r ^fY"'�°Y C.-�' �'Y+. �^` .7, u51':.i/4Y�"ti{K'.aY�<aS^t:ry.t...
";�`c'::f=;s 1.' :,.G-_�t?c�,� '�rc�•Y u.�l�',c'.(,'.,F<,t..�, n4:.!''sF� C,�;C• .r}. ;.�.. •{r•'.r+.t�'`• w�><S'^� T"L'. 'I�';,;,1.r.S�i,�",y�,"f K,\•rr<':�',n''.rrii�?a'�s2y;1 ,�,�,,�j,�:,�>} .`#>i,�l�.
t.1<.-;.�."sG•`./. v3;C: •r�h`.S''< S.}� � '�. r ��! tt. ���. 'C t�'"�
:ai v Y.<}.•t{''• ��, i{�:Os i Se•• c 5.1.1 A5:•r?i• 1j.+?s f'f"�'t�•'�.t,��•o.t:.Y�i,,',ti"%�l,4;t6:.f��f t.,'r;ts ff;•u Y��%:?:�ti u�'.�:F�YCtA .1 r'!� ��'.4.v {. ,,,ri ,,�.fp r./,s � '�'i',<�y rr.
}z .K1t K•�azt ,t�'.._.1;�,t• .?�•t;. ,F .� /yrl,t'i.. ,41, t. :t> q. ,rqk',.>., .;0, r,. -'. , ,, 1' T''' ,�.i' f' ,
���F4� �'> „� y +� t� e> ✓`s h+ � 3•:tetxc a{ t` ¢;
:34��t .�t ,'•� �r.. �,X:�[b`+'.ki r.`�}�i.t :hu..v%s�'iixd3.�tjZ'r.<'�,Jr,.,..�r�'i..•.r...'�':'.T.�y,;.Lr'+4'•'-''. !� �s;�;:t,.- :-r'.�i5rr.,�•rr'i,',.:S�i•%.{�'•'..r,a�, ✓,�g,:.�i'�`; ,�r�.o.t,.s�,;�'j3;2'.`.�c�n��t"Y.,`4;�a�+,
'�. i7,,:'rVl+. ;. �:i'::�,. �;t.:C.'w•�.4'j:�q Y vi<"!r'�t.r._ �T:t:.Y;.x,. �t.�::G•• r M r.,.,-,j r-�>�!.�„�';C�,,N.�l t.fr_�.,f.�C.C'•\f:���•7x.C`� 7<-',T
stn}�.i.,,?•...;Ci�'�. r��%�'*h .'�y.✓:7CL.�(. G t.rf:.G. r y,i`K•Y�z.i.r,,nrY';i:+�,}�r�}�+�-:eY :.R"r?�k-S': '�ih+ %!r�.7 1....>.�auff�`ilzk��.r. .t',. .a .y'..,«.,,tfir,,. r�'.j� r:k.. i.�r��k t�],�,;
�y�. ,,�, Fit. •.,(r-;.f 6 •/,a'r �1�,<jT;C, ,1 F {�;
at-y:'#•?<zs,�y>.•t�>''..+-rs'.•t,-"x,!`'•:1..�1.i'M _Y i��,y'�•''f+1�a1.'"��.}S';�%i''t•{}rh$�;�4`';x�'!•'"n•ip,
: A ::� •yd�yar...•:rS�'.., �; `'fit' � +,k'••al,#r'-5.r'�'!.:y ,fzy_t.,,-',.•'j�yy': `'.p?,,fi.
rr�� s ,•/i%7 ,!r-��" �� tr;"� J(..� tr, .'!t ,.[ +.C>C ,•4`_''�>�. i{2t. ,�r'`F}} .t. ,,,(
e, � z]l�{ ..1.•,� .L;, h�,y{.,• �.'t V.r� �•/y'>?gs'',.�'�.r5�.�,:j,- ..' ItelflowiDoelopw.otif40'^t�••�"•�r '�k+t � ^fr�''.2�1.O,tii.••>•"\ ..n3S. +z r..-c•..•Y: ��4ry;.-X� G'�y`rY.V � f - :I:e:�' e•ntaeLo - Fe0 k4`�..<-!;E-PCO ;off �'� �,. ,, �,., r t ,}� {^ '� �� k i +r>�•t ,�-n.
•,� N'''y. .i ';t- + , a J�' '< 'q'+ n` n'.f isSl�, 4•f '�i: .W "�. �•.A• <'-"'fL {• ^ rJ't
A.�C elft'! ",r'.:. .,�r.����s11�.+�:�'y`�c�i•F-t;C'�•'tiZ'�kr7t�'-:"�J:[,•;�,.r/�"��'!'Jz��'� `. "/>`•r- ^Y`' ?'�, j. '•te.� Y`•5r:9}�t'. x aY. ^{,'z•�'
t,45':xn.�,Y,` `.r..•r, 7 o, : { /w ti w l,<i'.f�{. •,,/qtr L(dr>. ' r. • U 4`,4, �Cl'1SM."`>tt < . �( ..:t��•C7 S .4r 'y c�,i�S�• {s� �:t>t'y' � ' 1.1 >,< ..M { h," yf Mcwilc"' .[ < ,�,N-t>,,-, :"i:.T''._'f :3•` ,ytl�, Y. ,,1 '„;,,,,,,; t': tz',',),,,,.Y!`?:1'.rµ7, f,,,w SlS.j '".!,,,,o ,t;:,...,;t,:,,1,4 f4 "i� r,zeso,% �,.'k`,.;.. ,T >+r
Fire Flow Requirement FFDIF
1,001 — 1,500 gpm $3,230 per meter
1,501 —2,000 gpm $14,847 per meter
2,001 —2,500 gpm $26,151 per meter
This supplemental fire flow fee applies to master-metered residential and commercial and
industrial users only.
The PWSDIF assessment methodology satisfies the requirements of ARS §9-463.05 by
providing a uniform schedule of fees based on a reasonable and proportionate
relationship between the PWSDIF amount and the growth-related water system capital
improvements, as demonstrated in this report.
4.2 Future Considerations
Adjustments Due to Inflation and Other Factors
Red Oak calculated the proposed PWSDIF using the future value of the expansion related
capital projects recommended in the Town's 2006 Potable Water System Master Plan.
Barring substantial changes to the Town's capital improvement plan and/or normal
inflation in the range of 3 percent annually, the PWSDIF does not require adjustment in
the near future. However, Red Oak recommends that the Town revisit its CIP
expenditure predictions the earlier of every three years or following completion of major
capital improvements to confirm current cost projections.
As shown in Attachment C, the proposed PWSDIF generates sufficient revenue over the
25-year study period to cash-fund the proposed CIP and maintains a FY 2030-31 ending
cash balance of approximately $4.9 million. It should be noted however that elevated
reserve balances are required in the early years of the projection in order to fund major
capital expenditures in later years.
March 2007 Page 26 of 27 =..,
: :+=R MK-CONSULTING
a DM.**or NALCOI n Tut-mitt
t
4 Town of Oro Valley Water Utility
Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Analysis
sis
p y
As the Town continues to grow and the economic mix that the Utility serves changes,
growth and development assumptions also change. According to AWWA, utilities that
use impact fees as a funding source commonly update their fees at three to five year
intervals. To maintain the reasonable and proportionate relationship between the fee
amounts and growth-related capital improvements funded with fee revenue, Red Oak
recommends a comprehensive fee review at a minimum of every three years or earlier if
the Town substantially changes its capital improvement plans.
Large Meter Connections
AWWA recommends determining meter capacities for large meters (greater than 3
inches) on a case-by-case basis, when appropriate. The Town's existing PWSDIF
specifies fees for meters up to 8 inches. The Town may wish to allow for new
connections with water meters greater than 3 inches to be determined based on the new
customer's estimated water requirements. This approach provides the flexibility to
consider potentially varying capacity requirements that may be associated with larger
meter sizes. The Town may therefore choose to determine specific capacity requirements
for a large-meter customer with more or less extreme uses or potential demands than
estimated using the meter capacity ratio.
For example, if a large industrial facility is to locate within the Town's services area, an
alternate calculation method may be more appropriate than the capacity ratio method to
determine the fee specifically for that industrial facility. Red Oak recommends the fees
for large connections be calculated based on the estimated capacity needs of the
individual large-meter connector. In such cases, the developer should have the burden of
proof in demonstrating that the proposed large meter customer will have water demands
less than those established using the AWWA meter capacity approach.
March 2007 Page 27 of 27
• sCONSULTINGA K CONSULTING
• A Di•:5147{6i 1Ia LGM •AIM
Town of Oro Valley Water Utility
Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Analysis
Attachment A: Definitions
•
::; REBDAK
•• �' CONSULTING
• • • A DIVISION OF MALCOLM PIRNIEI
4680004 / DEN
Town of Oro Valley Water Utility
Potable
Water System Development Impact Fee Analysis
ATTACHMENT A
Definitions
Town of Oro Valley, Arizona
Water Impact Fee Analysis
Word or
Acronym Definition
AF Acre Feet
ASLD Arizona State Land Department
AWRDIF Alternative Water Resources Development Impact Fee
AWWA American Water Works Association
CAP Central Arizona Project
CCI Construction Cost Index
EDU Equivalent Dwelling Unit
ENR Engineering News-Record
FFSDF Fire Flow System Development Fee
FY Fiscal Year
gpm gallons per minute
PWSDIF Potable Water System Development Impact Fee
Town Town of Oro Valley, Arizona
Utility Oro Valley Water Utility Department, Town of Oro Valley,y'
March 2007._._:._ .,. .. .��. _._ _ - - -_ - -- --- -- --
Page 1ofl
I<CONSULTING -
Town of Oro Valley Water Utility
Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Analysis
•
Attachment B: Potable Water
System - Expansion Related Projects
and Costs
::; RELAK
•• �• CONSULTING
• • • A DIVISION OF MALCOLM PIRNIE
4680009 / OEN . I.
1
A t t J
r
N CO O O CD CD CD LI)1`N o 1`Cr s
N 03 Co CD CO C)C)CO CO C)CC)1`d•CD N O; a
r-1,-1,,CI) 'it t7 lit Nt Ln lr)O C)Cn M o .-t z
o N Ni. M O O co'O cD o
N a)a)CDMCD CD CD CD CD O N CD C))CDNI- CD N CC
LN) r r r r r - c-r-C7 r e- ti ..
e-.
C/)L
N n
z_
EA-
,
o
r
O O O O O O O a
0 0 0 O O O O O f
,r O O O 0 0 0 0 0 ��<
co O to N-O et V' N
p O�N 03N)1`Q)M O
F- e-CO e- cvc L6
Q
E4
CD
O
.- O O
O o
CD o ' ,t
O M v ��
N M
' >- M
M
LL
to
4 ,
,-
a O
N
>-
to
LL
O
.r O O
.- O O
_M C o
O Nr tri"
N to
>- CD
LL
to
M O
'•- O
O
U) O o
cid
Cl) M p C)) CD O
O c N Ma,
o = } "' a
LL. Co
C c N a
e-
co cn
C �- O
W O O
N CD
I'D- }
>- w,,,
COCD U LL O
Ca
O CC .�.
L U r-
a■ p (D
LL ,- , N
coCD
kl-
"til N >, O
- V)
0ct
4-;
o
0 o o c .
o o D
o vi 0 co
a� o Q) W co
_0 O` N C))
. O a
N Ca -(/� CL LL O p N
C 0 EA O
.c
CI- -- = C O O D
X
a s o Mco a C O
o co M
I � � N C) C
a� >-
E 2 � o
.....
W. ao
V > 0 c o o (,) o
8
cri
Ca cn
Z 4-' `;"- >1 LA_ CCII O O
W al O = 4 N E
C = o • c`Cj•o
V O ,L, O o o
+-' N r- li Lal
rn • O
2D
a jo
1.1 oW
U(
o a c
• I- Cil o v
ca a_ CC) _-
CC ` W ..
cs
cu C 'O
o C CO > Q—
C O Iii
E �,'� Cv o O 2
.-. C ` Ca
, C a
. C�
c) -
IL-)
c 0CC(Ts CU U p ;Q
X
o o 9, 2 cY c o t
aC N ° o o cco Ni t o E CO aiOd'iL_ mN N N , U o caU 0aCcio,°mm L ON LL c 2 c Uc - .« oer? r2-o_ c c s 2��--,e'cu� O °.1r
15 OUOimON O C m2_°NNU fl 0N w O
I'D 2 j v) O OL ,-- .Cfl CC ° C V.� OpU° LCV CL _ OvO - C•) NcNc,,Co00.) od ° UF-.Q gm m
m ao U Ti c.- c13 °
a)
a.`; .� a� ' 2-2 c 2T- 2mm o ( N a'UnW2 o va .cQ 8-: o °U o U 'O uu)r O N Y L L C C F [U m O Q as O D U U UIr . c. .r•-yu)- ia-c-c ° ° 9oc9 •Nccccc �a o�
o —Q CCO
�> '‘'Zia("
_ 4 X Cc . BLOOVNcOOa cT -L1 Z tnZZ .. CNcD
- . . • 1 ..7 '', , -
_ .
csi . - ' NZ/ 4 O - 0-O e-N el sr to CO 1,CO Cr)O e-N-_ _ .E Jz
%
a-r-e-ir--r e e-°e-e-e-.N
04-N
Town of Oro Valley Water Utility
Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Analysis
Attachmnet C: Potable Water
System Development Impact Fee
Fund - Projection of Cash Flow and
Debt Service Coverage
• ::; RELAK
• �' CONSULTING
• • • •• A DIVISION OF MALCOLM PIRN1E
DEN
O O O. . p O 0 0OOo ti , , pO ,T, ,D O rO.-- CO CO (.,,) D r O r r r O N O o Cnr.
w N N rn N , ^ S t l N t�c"g"
w�
N O CO N e- e- cD t0 to CO CO Cn LMA )•'
C N N v T Qi �./
041
{
--s s
6
w LI 7
CO O a�ti O O CO e- e-O O o
to �t O O O e- D
cD N cD O ca Co N N ' (N O O cD
e� co CSD * w
CO0 CO N N_ N cD CO t1) to 1�M 4
a- N N e- r Oi e- a
N e- :
E!3
w
0 o O to to tt'f Q O O a •• ^ ^ ^ o
to \ CI
O to 0 0 0
co o_ r a)CN CD CO O_ O C7 Co r r p r r r O CO O O CO
CD N os C7 , cri, CO t70 to to C�00 LA
`; O CCOO O CO ee- N- MCD too to �' CDD, 124
M
O N N cD :D v 0
N • ,I.,,
w
o O o Co CO Co to O to M a- ^ ^
O' Or O O o
CO O r Q0� e- e- 1� - 8 „ r O t�O O
t cD cV cD O tri tri tc5 O `� sf o t� UI
O, � . sf
N
Cy9 H
O O O co O O O tf)CD 0 � CSD U)O O o
M co O O e- a- e-
oo O r O N O C7, op ,.,,� O r OO O 0 0,
C r`"
CD ty CD CD t0 (T Cn !� !�CD r O
3j O CO O M N N CMD CO Cco a)rNr.•-.O N
r+
CD ti M
Ce- N N e- .--e-en
�N
C
W
a
cw
m
O O O, P• N- O p O o t- f-O O o
O O O M M M N N to e- e-O O CD
c� Co O r O to N N O Of Ch M . M O O C� C
Vl cD N cD N C7O o0' CA O cc .
C LL N N CO O M M CO M Cn o) R `- :.
C 0I , O CO N N N CD co to ul.-ti cis
(� O
Ll. L r CV N C5 C
a N O
LL O 2 �'
C.) d al.N w ami
w
2
CU Q v O U) 0 0 o co o co 0 0 o M co o c-,,,..) E
_ o00 o r rn� o o ( `. r•� o a cD O o
�— N VI r r p r r o c`i o o mCD 5
E (�f ca N CD i e- .- ai a M a--, .- a- O'Co O tb
•L O O W N r r CMD CMO `Cr e-•M`t
tv
eh ,-. O O CD to a-
ZE °' °'Li N a- >,
TJ > oca
w
) = 2 co o 0 o to to in p p o o to ^ 15
tom. N. tr co O O U")0 0 o t7
U �' coOO r cn N c) Cl M 6 r r p r r r O °O O C)
co
O 0�, G O Co °'N r r CMO tMA� CO co in co
In s- C15.- a.
Q t C _ th
N a N N r. �' MCA N N
U) U
w U O
L •~ -N
CL) O .� a' a- cD o to N 1.N O o o N N p ^ ((��jj o
m c '..-, M COMr CO, 0 I ,M . r p r r r O N O O O tT
_ O ti O C O O
O CD CD O e- M C� a- , O ai O CD CO 't
O O ti N a- a- t1 co-
co t` , O ti co `--
2 d 0 •- N N O O .-
O cd o
Na. O. u,
• N O LT oN0 ,%1 In O to , O o M O o o
O , r O CO M M ti t` Ch p. 1. r r . . p O o co fd
carp O O M O T
G t� O N o O cD cMo V rn a, NI-up
co '-a)
to
cD
Ga- N N a- .- Oto t-.--
N ti= C
(li
c.,--a... 2
N
w ai a.ici
g S §g to to 1 o I ti cD R o r
ai
� a- r f i tri � ciao � �
po g �. a�
O CD CD i' M O M .- C2 t >
to _ O cq O
.F, r _ e- .--CD CA U)�a
N 7`
"fa
h
w oo:B-
o:e3a c
>
a)
W o ami m
0
ai c'_o cn
5
>
w �>o
E o 0
U ouo CD
HI`-`� L
a�❑ > to o 111
W . u- ami O ti 2 ❑ LL o_o F- F- F o o ..
o
r r r Q Z 0 COZ 7 m Ca IUQU ` E.BL▪ }L
m-2-2 J w p� t� aZi nE UQQ a E'-
> , Q g t- 3 o c cn x o w m J �- E 2
> > > >g E Q o Q ���r m� �c=m TO" ami a• ni
= tv m m o 111
V W - m m N a>o-- W Q p2 ca
tY tY c a> > = o a' F- U)U cZ o r
C W LL LL LL .. J Z• > m .� ' z . O U Z C` J q Q z O O
C re ❑ ❑ ❑ Tal Q W 2 c Q W Q tl a_ y m cc o v'c� U
L i d � co co u) m �' W W Q. F- U c v -N t- _Z U `n a� ti
u)m O a W %c ., c_ p U Z E_; o
tT� v F - - F- r_o 2 m m ES•F, Z z z. - - 2 n a o
. t N d 0_ t2 LL_ to: 1- ILIA to p: 0m C70>❑I- to 1.-00 -. to m m N
41).
• �, m �: W QUUtD wWz:in �._..Zc=n G Z v� zmw U e-Csi.. CI
Q� ';4 C e-N Pi'�Q to tp 1• 00 CJS N - M �!f�D 1�00 N O e�N e+f
'v Z V. e�I-12 e-e•-e- r N N N N
O O . O CO CD CO Q O r CD . , c . , 1 O O o .6-?-
o O O e` t� `j O [ [` r O N O o CO
CO O O N N to f` LT; O N O O cO
cD N CD e- 1` I, O O cO t- CO e-- of O
N N N CA t` r r t•-- t� , In 113e-CO LC) N ..
O CO r r r CO CO r e-- ,O c0 i
N N N r a'''
v v CO!•: a
k
N r...c Z
i
O
EA 44 __1
<
Z
OO . 0 0 O 0 p ' O g O i . cO . . , O O O O o (fj p
O O O N N N �n Cc7 h N- O O CO O O CO
c0 O CDv v ti n ori CO c0 o CO o o f` _
CI CCC c*S of ai o 0 05 v id cri r`ui
N N N O CO N N ts ti In CO CO O 1,--cD N TZj
O CO r r r CO CO O O CO COO V-
N e- N N c- N N v o5 cci a
U<
0 0 r o•e- e- r p O o0 r r . O , , , O CJ)O O o
CI
O O O co coo co cn u7 t� c1" O O co O O e-
co o CA O. N N wi N CO O N O O cO 11,1
cO c. cD N oC! CO O o CO CO CD 1`cT,: N
N N N O O CO CO t� h cO t� n O t,-ti N
O CO r r r CO CO
1` O O N►n c`7N N N s- .r... v v CO co'o
• 1.`,
N
V} {R
O O • o r r e- i s 6 I I O Er O O o
O O O r r r S ii
ch er r O CO O O CO
CO O O O O cc) co
up O co O O co
CD N CD CO Nr eF N N c. O r c0 t�crCh
N N N O CD Q O co Cn c0 cfl t` e--
O CO r r r CD toCO c0 CO Q)u7
N N N r r e- `�CO o0
N .� ..
P,
p
O O O . O. co In O O o0 In O to O O o
C7 O O O CO co CO un) u7 M c'7 O O CO O O n
CO O O CO O O N N M CO N O e-O O O
C • CD CV CD O CD CD I` f` CO' o CA O tit. V'
O N N N CA r Cl) CO CO CO r O O CA cn cD s-
O CO N e- s-- CD CIDto c0 CO N N O
r' e- N N r r r v Cn tl0
CN v
O
.5 N
W
a)
r o O r o v v v o o er . . rn . . . o ac:). 0
V coOO CD CD tCDD CO N N cv , N O c n O O In1:3
O i T.
CN rn r00 ZS D ON - e-- N c ` -
CO o CO cn 0C o CO N
r r CO CO LO 1` ti N,N ai
'a N N N r Z..--. v to C
O > ti
m N a)
0 0 o a
u- U n. to w `
✓ 0 as.y m
,., C o C CO o o C o v v Nr o o v i o o 0 0
_ O O O f~ t` ti u7 d N , O f`O CO O O
MS Q. O >1 CO O C D O CD CO N N • , t` O C)O O CO
Q) C •c N ccs N cD . o" d of rn M cri f� tri cri o d
•�• C N N Q) f= N- c� c•) c7 0) CC) N CO CD r' C0
C ,O C N O O cV r CD 2 . Co CO s-U�, O
.'. v) Q Q '4 r N CV `- `'Cfi Ci
o E a s N �.
0 D
0 . ,D >v ., . o
CC) C O C O O , 00 o O c O rn O i c N c . . O o00 0 -0 N
> c. O o o 0 0) 0) 5 u� 74 v o O cD O o C) 0)
Z O CO O OCO CO CO N N r u' O OOo rn
W O 3 N ao v v cri cri ui oo Ca m
os 'cV n r� S v c,, co co cn co co r c n.
E O `- O r r CD In .. C() 1c)
u. O 00 r N N e- v v O O o C
_ C= 14
N m
U -C 3+-+
to O= cs
�.:.,,, . U F- , 0 w g d
o
Q C) 0 s CD CD c o CO CA o m o C�o o • C r
it 0 0 o r c- e- 5 Cn r) PO c'7 O CO O O r. O
I-- co O Co N O O N N M cO s- O Co 0 0 O 2 O
• C cD cD O u7 l(7 N N C7 r- t` Co- 00L.
O
O N N O CO f` of e! CO e- .r e-N C `- `
O CO N r e- CD Cn In u7 Cn CO CD O+S
O V •- N N r rte Orn N h
CQ -^ N -.CD
O• 0 ca N
:: : :
'7 $C7 • c6 g
d'Cn'e-N co wc'ON�, - 7 c7 C7 e-r Qi W >+17
Q. 2 w C
Ca Ca
E9 4, O m
O
U N
O >a)
W- N
O a)(a
To' > O>O
CC E 2 O
W
•_U U
C C0 o
W c, .3 2 Z r
w v �, co
< O W 3 N
O > o c Q D o�
GS a) o O vwi D W Z -� m
o E w o a_ ch
To E ) J R w vWj U o .c o
CC 0 CO p �' -al Lt m� QZW C) CN
m m m n 0 r pO c coZQE UQZ a E.> D
o c
S. c c ur Q �° F J 0 c u�x o W m E L o
w aci
con aci c o > . of f W LL 0 2 Q o U Q'>.
Z m m c c>E w Q Z a)N m o o UJ ici m�
CL CC Cr ai v v_d U .1— Cn 0= m m g
c WtLWW�— J Z ]17;
Z Qo (E)5-E co , 6012 X00
C] 0 0 tz Q > 2 o.a > a s i�`2 N F.Q Cr z o m U U
a a L
co cn (n m O MU'
o O i j w ct c 2 o __ O Z Z Z gE a c.. o. ,`Fc H CL CL CL tL S CO F W CL m F O m C7 C]C]F m FOO CLn a?
<aY1.1' v�co W
44. � m w CO W -- D WWZ ca o-¢°c�
C] 0 co Z - D Z co z CC]w 0 z N co
/ el^%'_,,,/r)
7 C O r N Met t... !� co O o r N t�f sA to 1...00 O O r N t7 i
,7/. ad J Z ! r r e- N N N N
.. .. ...- '.: : _. .` ..__...
6 4r ► r
x
op
4
•
I--J
O
2 u
Y+rt<
(9)3
z
s
L./o
t
Q
s 6
a
O O 1 0 7 r r r r r r r 0 r '' r r r r F r r r p r Q^j O O Q
co O O O co CO C (.0 O CO O O Z
1 a co-N cs O O CD cD' O Ch O O
CV CV O Q0 CV r`Lei'CV O
(� p D CO O O O O O CO COO CCD N.
m m
LL L a N N N N N `''tri•o C
N O
u...4) O Q)
4_, U u a
V 0 as Y2 w
13
Q. V 0 O O ' 0 0 a r o r r r r r r r o r r r r r r ....".. 1.."-'
0 0 0
co O Q),- co co C O 'O O Z O
N
c0 c0 o Lri rti co°O m o 0 o rn
C o vi c i ri r`.4r� rn
+� Q �' o CO °' 0 0 c N. rn r~ m
:•• c Q N N O a)
76
O CLI
M N N N v N `�CD�i 43
V E ca —LL C
16
U a
Z > 0, O Q. C O O r O , r r r r r r r 0• r 0 r r r r co r r r p r 0 C. < O
O O W co O 0 - .-� O N. o 0 ccoo 0 o Z O 01
C
`": 0 0 0
W O m N c0 iri t-- co o
_ 4"' ,`pOi opo m co
"� o coo a' o o~ f~ cn
O as co o c. o• cn co o c 0.
I 0 LL c >-o N N N v N `�co.cD O 1.
A 0 i
Q w- +-� afli w , w d
O .L ... O O O O O r O r r pp r O r 0 r O r r r r ^ r r r G. ^ o C N
�`� V O O O M M M In , W O O r O O o
CZ c l' a CO 0 O)o 2 ti r~ , tri o 0 0 0 0 o v oi�'
p N c0 c.1 CO 03 r.1 N N ti N. CiCO CO' c0 i,- , O
0 L N ON w 0 O O c7 c7 O O Yr c-00 `---
..;.1 O �-
a e- N N ti C7 M CD A-of
O N-
•C) N ca cK.-
0
n. a. N
w
O O r O fh r 74 r ar O O r M r r r r r r r O
co O 0 - c_ DO u, ui M OCD O O O O
O CCyD�O O c7 O R7
N N o o O o c2D c0D N 3 N tf) O >•
O CO r•- c•• e- l7 C7 N N CO 1-- 15 L.
C4'1
N N e- N N O`_'
.� r`~ f-C
f:. O
N
40
0.
O O r 0, C, D r h. r r r o r ti ' CSO r r r r Cj r r r p r `i O O O N
co O c)co N N CO N ti e- O 0 0 2
� � O C',1OO (D ��
,p O N c0..-- r\ N: O O
N O ONO 0 r ��- r N.C7 CO 'Cl. ill
CL1 -CO�Lf) N d a)
e- �' �- ti O tO a)+-'O
p o N N Ni N `'co r� co >,
EY'N O(`a:
w
CC O f-
w .
w p . •
—
c
O C75 C
>O
U 0.8
•Cii > (II^
2 •
W >O
Z O O
S U= Z(n a) tU
V a O LL 0 LL Z WW o
mrr 0 c 0n m ,a 6 `,1 ° = i
C - g
-_a,
...CD
>m a Z' r `o cv2iQoE 0<< n. E` c
m > T. L o 0
av
Z n�i m o W W a Z ami ami N t m coi" L=m iu e 2 1
m J I
z r U . ai W 0 7,E
Z o
x ((3 (c) (0 . < > O < 43 43 0.a (n .2 Q pc Z C) m v- "'a W c �� p UZC9 ai E c.� Nce Oe. F• it o ea,a)e F- ZZ_z Ce QQ.. _-._. W (�!n U []�- m F-C�D tNZ . Z g Zm2 __t• ao C7 - N e7 et.2 CO f`a0 C. O e"N e- T- e-e-e-e-e-e- e-: N N N
Town of Oro Valley Water Utility
Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Analysis
•
Attachment D: Water System
Development Impact Fees for
Comparable Communities in Arizona
• ::: REBDAK
•
• • •• CONSULTING
4680004 / DEN
I I
I
f4.3 �
.......
L Q �_
■_
..-1!..,1
Y
ri as S. 000EUD !
0 flU
_ O 0 0 N W C
o
a .� _
co L L L L L L L L 0) L Lc)
a) a) 'a-)
L L L
a _ .en a� a� a� a� a) a) a� a� a) a� a� Q a) a� CD CD
'� IYEEEE
d CO` co` d d 0`0 00
Q 'd d ` u' 00 d- 00 00
V! E >, co In In co co co E ) in Li- M M M u) -Cr) C 7 t o l
tin
0:-.
i c LL ,a; Q
-0 RS 0 U ' N E O co C3) In O O In C3) O CO �: tet" a) CO CD CD a)
Q. N '••.>+.. — co ti a) 0) (0 N d' CO ‘-- 00 N. 00
4.3 E -L Q ' N l.0 O c- _(D CD (D CO O N O oo to co N "t- C) CD
a- M CO- r- tet' CO �- r- r-- Q Q• N N- �-
a. Q 0 C�' d9 Eft E�} bF-} E Eft 69. EA- 6F} 6F� E
= V �' ,,,-' �- > Ea.
1i;E `2 c� • a) EL cv
o
ca. 0D
EL
a 4.0 o �
C E o
E0 0 L
F"
.. n
U)
0 a
Oas � ,� a)
0) -- o
•
0 �,
E 1 U
U cn
QE o 0 -
>'
C/) N N N ly N Q
a Q
0 . a N L. Q .--, ,,, N ‹ < (6 ai Q N W
ai L.= Q asa — N Q �: > < Q 0 M
M Z
.� al = ° oo, . '0 -0 -.-' IL' -ow >. C CL (6- "E 0 LS -am ..E.:0 0.6 oc- re-, 41.1.
� a) a a) o a a o , 0 W O
' .� L L C) D a) z > Ill
� - I < 017_ 0 (D0222 a. a. a. a_ c U) j-- H. < E
';'7'.±.:..-.-‘141..
jLy
Co
Ec N
r
1 0.,,,,,,,1 1,; ..z
ra
�,Yy4 4 as
� •,O
•....
•4.ati :
O 0 z:
C eli "'
0
Lt
E
Q
'2=
4,... yam.,
4) C3 <
I = C,,
aiO
0 z Q• `.:
L QC
j >,
Q E
ii
0O
Da)
a) o
E
0) g.,
4.1 cii
a► Q' a)
L. .� g 71
4.i 0 ,o
0 CI C14
0
U U
O O
Ct•I.iN
al
a) ,.�' cv
4-, 0a) 0
a' 'b N
-� O w
v) ctiw
rd
.v 0 0
N 0
0
cd `)
ctl
Ov 0
(II ' .0 RI
b a) $. 0
.5 C a) cct
E U
a) a)
C
Ct
V
C4
) .r4 ago
CD a, .
a) 0 cd
•r.
a)
o -d
. c
O . ,, bO
.Fiz's O U
a) j CO
% Cs/
,. Ge / i401
"...'4 :,,iiE Z
2
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
COUNCIL CONIMLJNICATION STUDY SESSION: March 14, 2007
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR&COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: Shirley Seng,Water Utility Administrator
Philip C Saletta,Water Utility Director
SUBJECT: Update on Potable Water System Development Impact Fees and
Alternative Water Resources Development Impact Fees
SUMMARY:
The presentation at this Study Session will include an overview of the work completed to date and the
meetings Staff has had with members of the Southern Arizona Home Builders Association (SAI-IBA), the
Metropolitan Pima Alliance and other stakeholders.
In the Council Packets on March 9, 2007, Council will receive the Final Draft Reports for the above Water
Development Impact Fees. It is requested that you bring these reports to the March 14th Study Session.
Information in the reports will be pertinent to the Water Development Impact Fees discussion. Extra copies
will be available for Council if needed. On March 12,2007,these reports and an update will also be presented
to Water Utility Commission.
On March 21, 2007 Council will be presented with two resolutions to consider adoption of Notice of Intent
to Increase the Potable Water System Development Impact Fees and Notice of Intent to Increase the
Alternative Water Resources Development Impact Fees. If adopted, the Notices of Intent will establish
Public Hearing Dates for June 6, 2007. Council would then be asked to consider adoption of the proposed
impact fees on June 20, 2007. If adopted, the new impacts fees would become effective on September 19,
2007.
FISCAL IMPACT:
If adopted, these increased impact fees will provide revenue to repay debt on growth related infrastructure for
both the potable water distribution system and the development of renewable water systems.
ATTACHMENTS:
1) Updated Proposed Fee Schedule
2) Updated Process and Implementation Schedule
n i
, , i, \ , (u A
4)-L-S4)-- \
a -r Utility Ad • trator
4 11 1---k/II r'' --?'
W er Utility Director
Watifv...„
Town Manager
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
Water Utility
Process and Schedule for Water Development Impact Fees
March 7, 2007
• 1-8-07 Water Utility Commission Meeting to Discuss Water
Development Impact Fees
• 1-9-07 Met with SAHBA to Discuss Water Development Impact
Fees Process and Schedule
• 1-24-07 Town Council Study Session — Discuss Water Development
Impact Fees
• 1-30-07 Public Information Meeting on Water Development
Impact Fees
• 2-12-07 Water Utility Commission Meeting - Considered and
Approved Recommendation on Water Development Impact
Fees
• 2-20-07 SAHBA Meeting — Presentation and Discussion on
Water Development Impact Fees
• 3-5-07 SAHBA/Stakeholders Meeting to Discuss Water
Development Impact Fees
➢ Location and Time: SAHBA Office at 3:30 p.m.
• 3-12-07 Water Utility Commission Meeting — Update on Water
Development Impact Fees
➢ Location and Time: Oro Valley Town Campus in Hopi Room
at 6:00 p.m.
• 3-14-07 Town Council Study Session - Update on Water
Development Impact Fees
➢ Location and Time: Oro Valley Town Council Chambers at
7:00 p.m.
• 3-21-07 Town Council Meeting —Adopt Notice of Intent to
increase Water Development Impact Fees
➢ Location and Time: Oro Valley Town Council Chambers at
7:00 p.m.
•
• 4-5-07 Meeting with Northern Pima County Chamber—
Government Affairs Committee
• 6-6-07 Town Council Meeting — Public Hearing to Increase
Water Development Impact Fees
➢ Location and Time: Oro Valley Town Council Chambers at
7:00 p.m
• 6-20-07 Town Council Meeting — Consider Adoption of
Increased Water Development Impact Fees
Location and Time: Oro Valley Town Council Chambers at
7:00 p.m
• 9-19-07 If adopted, New Water Development Impact Fees
become effective
CONTACT INFORMATION
Philip C. Saletta, P.E.
Utility Director
ORO VALLEY WATER UTILITY
11000 N. La Canada Drive
Oro Valley, Arizona 85737
520-229-5000
psalettagorovallev.net
Shirley Seng
Utility Administrator
ORO VALLEY WATER UTILITY
11000 N. La Canada Drive
Oro Valley, Arizona 85737
520-229-5000
ssengOorovalley.net
Dennis E. Jackson, P.E.
Senior Consultant
RED OAK CONSULTING
100 Fillmore Street, Suite 200
Denver, Colorado 80206
303-316-6537
djackson@pirnie.com
,,LtEY4944,
°7844 Town of Oro Valley Water Utility
Alternative Water Resources Development Impact Fee Analysis
Table ES-1
Corrmparison of Existing and Proposed AWRDIFs
Single Family Residential (per meter size) Existing Proposed
5 -inch $300 $4,982
3A-inch 450 7,470
1-inch 750 12,450
1'/2-inch 1,500 24,910.
2-inch 2,400 39,850
Multifamily(per unit) Existing Proposed
Per unit $144 $2,390
Commercial and Industrial (per meter size) Existing Proposed
5 -inch $300 $7,970
3A-inch 450 11,960
1-inch 750 19,930
11/2-inch 1,500 39,850_
2-inch 2,400 63,760
3-inch 4,500 127,520
4-inch 7,500 199,250
6-inch 15,000 398,500
8-inch Not Specified 637,600
Irrigation.(non-turf) (per meter size) Existing Proposed
3/4-inch $300 $8,470
3A-inch 450 12,710
1-inch 750 21,180
11A-inch 1,500 42,350,
2-inch 2,400 67,760
3-inch 4,500 135,520
4-inch 7,500 211,750
6-inch 15,000 423,500
8-inch Not Specified 677,600
Turf Uses (per acre) Existing Proposed
Golf Course Turf/All turf uses (proposed) $3,680
Lakes and Open Water 4,640
p $55,800
Cemeteries, Parks and Schools 2,880
Other Uses 2,880
March 2007 Page v : RELY CONSULTING
1 DIYISIOM OF UAtcol..•1fN1(
I
Town of Oro Valley Water Utility
J.
Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Analysis
Table ES-1
Comparison of Existing and Proposed PWSDIFs =
Single Family Residential
Existing Proposed
(per meter size)
-
5 -inch $1,774 $2,567
3A-inch 1,774 3,850
1-inch 4,435 6,420
11/2-inch 8,870 12,840
2-inch 14,192 20,540
Multifamily
Existing Proposed
(per unit)
Per unit $834 $1,230
Commercial and Industrial
meter size) Existing Proposed
(per
5/8-inch $4,080 $4,110
3A-inch 4,080 6,170
1-inch 10,200 10,280
1'/2-inch 20,400 20,550
2-inch 32,640 32,880
3-inch 65,280 65,760
4-inch 102,000 102,750
6-inch 204,000 205,500
8-inch 408,000 328,800
Irrigation (non-turf)
Existing Proposed
(per meter size)
5 -inch $3,193 $4,360
%-inch 3,193 6,540
1-inch 7,983 10,900
11/2-inch 15,965 21,800
2-inch 25,544 34,880
, 3-inch 51,088 69,760
4-inch 79,825 109,000
6-inch 159,650 218,000
8-inch 319,300 348,800
Turf Uses T_ 4
Existing ng = Proposed
ac
(per re)
Turf uses less than 2 acres $18,351 $28,800
March 2007 Page v -i REDSA _CONSULTING
•Di V.S1OM Of M•4CCll•►IMT
Town of Oro Valley Water Utility
a •. Potable Water System Development ment Im act Fee Analysis
t �
The total PWSDIF for new master-metered m tered residential and commercial and industrial
connections is the sum of the fee set forth in Table 4-1 above and the fire flow
development fee based on fire flow for users requiring more than 1,000 gpm of fire flow
provided in Table 4-2 (based on the total area of development and the fire flow
requirement as determined by the fire department).
Table 4-2
Proposed Supplemental Fire Flow Development Fees—,,
Fire Flow Requirement FFDIF
1,001 — 1,500 gpm $3,230 per meter
1,501 —2,000 gpm $14,847 per meter
2,001 —2,500 gpm $26,151 per meter
This supplemental fire flow fee applies to master-metered residential and commercial and
industrial users only.
The PWSDIF assessment methodology satisfies the requirements of ARS §9-463.05 by
providing a uniform schedule of fees based on a reasonable and proportionate
relationship between the PWSDIF amount and the growth-related water system capital
improvements, as demonstrated in this report.
4.2 Future Considerations
Adjustments Due to Inflation and Other Factors
Red Oak calculated the proposed PWSDIF using the future value of the expansion related
capital projects recommended in the Town's 2006 Potable Water System Master Plan.
Barring substantial changes to the Town's capital improvement plan and/or normal
inflation in the range of 3 percent annually, the PWSDIF does not require adjustment in
the near future. However, Red Oak recommends that the Town revisit its CIP
expenditure predictions the earlier of every three years or following completion of major
capital improvements to confirm current cost projections.
As shown in Attachment C, the proposed PWSDIF generates sufficient revenue over the
25-year study period to cash-fund the proposed CIP and maintains a FY 2030-31 ending
cash balance of approximately $4.9 million. It should be noted however that elevated
reserve balances are required in the early years of the projection in order to fund major
capital expenditures in later years.
March 2007 Page 26 of 27 Q
�=•_2 RED:,__ :.CONSULTING
• TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION MEETING DATE: March 14, 2007
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & COUNCIL
FROM: Craig Civalier, P.E., Town Engineer
SUBJECT: Municipal Operation Center Construction Plan
SUMMARY:
The Townwide Space Needs Steering Committee will discuss various options to
occupy Rancho Vistoso Neighborhood 3 Parcel B with Town facilities. Options presented will
include both interim and permanent facilities. Following is a brief description of those options:
Option 1
Build phase 1 that is recommended in the Townwide Space Needs Study Report for Council
Approval. Phase 1 includes a 30,000 sq-ft Police Headquarters building and a 21,000 sq-ft Public
Works /Water Utility Operation Maintenance building and associated maintenance facilities. The
Town would follow all Town development processes. The time frame would be three years to
occupation. Staff would wait until the construction was complete to relocate to this site.
Option 2
This option would be the same as option 1 except that an expedited time frame would be utilized.
The time frame to occupation could be reduced to two years by using design build or construction
manager at risk methods of project delivery and processing all approvals straight to Town Council.
As in option 1 staff would wait until the construction was complete to relocate to this site.
Option 3
The justification for option 3 is based on the fact that modulars and /or leased facilities are
necessary as a result of the long timeframes associated with options 1 and 2. Modulars would be
installed at the Rancho Vistoso site for the Water Utility administration and operation staff, Public
Works engineering field staff and Coyote Run. The location will be where the Water Utility
Administration, Public Works Administration and Community Development Departments
30,000 sq-ft building would be constructed during phase 2 in 2012 and 2013.
Public Works Operation staff would remain at Calle Concordia until options 1 or 2 are ready for
occupancy. The modular at Calle Concordia would be returned to the lessor as the Public Works
Operations administrative staff would occupy the vacated space in the Pink Building. The Water
Utility may explore leased space instead of relocating to a modular building in the Rancho Vistoso
site.
The Town Engineer has established a MOC Modular Team of Public Works and Water Utility staff.
This team will expedite the design, construction and occupation of the modular plan. Our target
time period for occupation is July of 2007.
Fiscal Impact
Option 1
Water Utility, Public Works Operations Bldg $ 6,988,000
Police Headquarters 11,435,000
Site and Roadway work 3,948,000
Engineering Design 500,000
Architectural Design 1,500,000
Furniture, furnishings and equipment (FFE) 5,526,900
$29,897,900
Option 2
Because of the reduce time and construction delivery method it is estimated that at least a 10 %
savings could be realized verses option 1 for all cost except the FFE. The project cost is
estimated to be $27,460,800.
Option 3
The cost of option 3 will vary depending on the choice of option 1 or 2 for the permanent
improvements. The difference lies in the length of time of leasing of the modular units.
Two year lease scenario
Modular lease $ 210,000
Modular setup 54,600
Utility Construction 100,000
Site work 750,000
Screen Wall 500,000
$1,614,600
Three year lease scenario
Modular lease $ 315,000
Modular setup 54,600
Utility Construction 100,000
Site work 750,000
Screen Wall 500,000
$1,719,600
s
ATTACHMENTS: Townwide Space Needs Study Phase 1 for Council Approval
,,) '--- —
( ,
11* /7L)
Craig Ciy tier, Town Engineer
/ 4-6,1-c- A:1;11,1/4j
Jerene Watson, Assistant Town Manager
S. _ `a..,.
David Andrews, Town Manager
C
z
n n
o ---0z
w D
r-
--i O
C lz)
0 m
H 3j
O H�
z 5
-1) z
Ill
z z
Ill
z
CA) -n 0 (A) D
-<
0 -0 o 0
c)
o CD
D0
j � o - o
D (/)
,' f�J O�
Z � W cn
m 0m -a� D
7z) 7z)D D C � � 0 m -7a m
r- � D n Z
m HO �n z =1"-- >
0 > 7j I
Z M 0
> m C >
cp — -tj
c)
c m Z D c � nco --I
r � 0
z
Z
z � � Z
c� 0 m rn-
-
m m 0 Z
Z D 0 Cl) O
Z 0
_I) n coW
� C C
Z 0 z
ru= rn F 0
o -< Z (zj0
Z
� m
coc
0
Hm > mu —ocj
--i m n G
T. *
z
n
mHmzm *
cn -07i 0 D
--II 1 El 2 07 j r_i> _InM
> X G) > 6 A)
---1 > opcc
m 1- m
0- mi M5. i r 0
0 -< H -iOm -< ip
) Z � � O H
Z o -0
CI° (I) 0
ci z
Or-G) �
00
0
0)
ce
N) -�
CO 0i -1. W � 6)
-CO CJi 01 Cil -CC, -4`, -CO
CO N O O � W CO
�I 6D O O CO CP CO
-CO CO O O O O O
O O O O O O O
0 O 0 O O O O
• • • • -1J
I
N C ND (I) D
rn C/)
O > m
� o n m __1
--1 cn cn cr 0 rn rri 0 0
.7
0 z cn
m z D C/)
>ID
-n CO r- X 0
A C D C m
> p � H Z
7J rn0Oin
H m
o 0 D 0 Cl) 0
0 CD r- CD 73 .1)
0 -1 CD
0 X Cf) 0 71 --I
C C --I -0 0
--I 0
lj 0 X 0
z 0-I � Z Z
�
z = 1 z N)
'0 � o
O z- Di
m
X O
(1) o z
C/) c
I
0
0
c
z
0
H • •
7J •
0 MI
H
o m m -ar D 0
Z 0 U) ci)
rn cn C CD
H 3Z) m z agoH
c o U) rn
n H ._.,
cp
H Li - -.
m p m o
o z0
° --i
0 0
�
0 0
(f) r- 0 ci) -1)
m H --' 0 H
n 3j ---I
�i
n 0
� o Z
rn
o z N)
I
o o 0
o � 0
N) cn (i)> Hte G
v Z
-.4 .. 10
rn cn
0
-co0
0
CD
• • 0 • • ' 0 > -.1. N)
DJ D ODç) mo Z
mo m O ° > C D--1 0 0) o 0
C < (1) W
� � mcp 0� 0 m--‹ * --1 -0
� z pfJ -<
Z m Z M
—I 3J 41
-ij Z G) C >
O * o0
CZ
� CD
II
-1
O
p OzmC 13 0 ii 1 � D ,� Us
1— M D 7J -< U) E
> 7:1 -2 D m 0 rn
Z
7:1 > .---- 0 N)
0 >
-i C 7:1
-i "lj
p O D 0
Om D n cnz (J)m DCD CD � o —i
Cn 71
7:1
,„,
Ci)
Cn 71
--I > r- H
4040
0 > H >
Apr 7:1 z -T1 0 00
(/)I 71z p z
ir x Z W
-1 o 11
o o C
z �
• Cn c
-I 7J XID
'71 -i -0
71 p D
p z 3:1
Cn
73 z
z � �
• • • • • N
m -H OcncncE m
x (nu0 -1- ) o) c E 0 . H
--I - r m �
z m �
mC) m
wZ00 > > m
�H X X Z
D m D F--C: --0 Z0 >
Cn I� D �
mcn --I --I c w p
X
7J
n o cpm
� 0
o (") n O
0=I CD Cn 0 -1
Z
__i --CI
F --I 0
--‹ 71H 0
7J Z
n
C CA)
Ci)
o 0
0
nn
x (f)
-Gq
w -Gq
m a) cn v � N)
x � o CP o cn -
G 4`, o 0 04`. o
n a) o 0 0 0) o
m 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
>
m
z
7:im
CO
71 O z
-<
71 H =1 m
0 0 >
7) (7) --i 7) m F 0 0 7 3
-I - D m * -� c C CD
mO mZO
� n
� �
vo � � o
ii?.._: Zrrirn3j
2J0-1 m > r- (f) _..1 > -
MI cn ___i -1 C (f) °
o 3j
�0 � n,
C/) 0 �
F. -I 0
7:1 CD Ci) 0
0
.-< m H Z
o -10
70 —IC)C 0
cn
o z
� CO
m
70
cf) tot,
m .60
3c] - , 01 --‘ 00
< o cn o cs, --1
7..s. co 0 0 0 4". cs,
m o CD 0 o a) bi
0 0 0 0 0 0
).. 0 0 0 0 0 0
m
z
=-1m
m
� o• ' 0 r" * • • • 0 • N)
D
ODC)DW Z
me � � c oo
m m pcnrn D o w� n cn -<
ZDZ p cnp c--1 m zm x -iZ
0 m
-0 o > F Eccn 2n >
E * x --1
O 0 c � c -1 x
v 0 A m � z m r QC1
Civ D mck
,i
r m D 0 x -1
= -< g
Z
Dx E
G7
zo 0 D
x n 3
m o 70
-I - 13 cn cn m c -
< m � � x
D > cn
0
cnmv cn '� -n � Cl)i
0 -z 0 -a
cn E 5
� H
73A -n
in cn
•-q cn
--i 0
--i D m >
Z
m
-i
5 O ..4&
Z C
cn
r
a D
-n 73
m m
--1 O
O n
-ci D
Z -1
x m
co --i
r-
0 0
v
0
1— • • • • • • • N)
� * � cncnc
ni m
CD � O m �m >710 >71 0mr- cjcj2J
mmmm � cc �z � � �
0
> r- 0
% i
o p zw c m � O ç) rn
(1) 0) --70 -1
H
o Hm > E
F- 71 0 m
� � m (f) � �
C n � c0cm-0 r m �
m
m 0 Z %.- 07J > 0 0
0 cn 0 --I -10
0 m o 5 —I
w (I) zH --I
O
z
-4‘
0
0
et) te H�
W __.1 N .4 . � N) .(50ii � O Cli N) O O 01 __I67
01 C:)
O O (Jt O O O CSi O
-0) B O O 6> O O O 67 O
O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0
O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0
i
I- • • * • • • • • cio
m
mm �
HO) C/) Cm
(I) om -i00 >
Dcmr.
Z
ODHM M mO0J > m� Dr (/
np � �
U) w -I) -7:i --i 0 (/) Z
- >
o Hm > < �m
zm ' >
c cmm 0 n HCO
r- � rn Z c p m
0 0
7J m n G) � 7:1
o 0 o ---I
ci) H z
H 0
z
.p
0
0
(f)
f:f3 -EA H
CO .4 .-09 te ___1. W .4 . --1N -EA
W V O * l CPO O CSS � CO
c) al
(r CJi O O O C.li O
-o) 0 O O d7 Co O O O) O
O O 0 0 0 0 0 0
O O
O O O O O O O O O O
• • • • n
0
z
o 7] -u D * (1)
0 m c O y 73
C7 W H
C > -=-1 2 m 0
-1) 2 u (7) 7j --i
> 0 * _i c a
z m
0 70 0 3z)3J r-1 z>
H
- D
0 (I) p� �
z
o 0' *
zo - --.
- Li- > 00 -E, -71_1 rn 7J c
rn -‹
r- � lj
0 0 � �II
7) c z 0 D
cn u i E U)rn
m
z N)
-‹
0
m
m
r-
0 O
-am
z
• • • • • •
--I T D m 7j O *
0 71 "X Z M -0 >-A m00 0 0 "I --I
r I. Z D � rn
=1mz70
m m m p ,
u'
Om ° D
--1 -.1 -- 70 ij
1E:
D >c o I
*
--i > 0 m c -",
rrl r- m (I) 0) 1/4 1
o p (I) 071
z mo (f) _
� z o o D
oJ-X m (/)m
r-
0
N
O
00
0
U)H
-Go toN .__1.
� � � J . � N
00 —I -P CJi Co � W
N) � O O co co �
O W O O CO OD N
-CO W O O O O O
O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O
a
,
...
, • 1..
• ..`- ' ". '...%-.. :;:f.t"*.
L ,--, ' • '''s'''.,.''''. * * •• , ':- ::.:);- -e"'''.,1'.';-:. ;.• * * .,,,,,,,:,.,'. .
• ' ' '''''''- ''°•,-,: •, : '. ' - ';':,‘„ •- ....,,,, ,-*:•-• ;.:',..' . '
...F., ,
„JO"''.;',1' . ' ,, • '.:, , -,''''''' ill,I:*,.. ,•:,:.;- r* ..'.4.. „A ,,- •,,4..f -,,':I,'•-•';-`;'`.4.*11-i* . ...%.,
,. .,, ,, ,, 7....,......- . ,;,, ,,..--;‘,..„--,:riii.:#.4/ eL„ - ., .,.,40...,-- ,-,..-....,..t.,,,• . ' .....,,,,,,, , ...,..,A..,"\ ,:„ ,G.,„,-,,...41i.‘,... .....;•.',...
-,-..-.t.,,,.:-....,,, .-Ifir
=,-. - .-..-,,. -- .4. ,.,,,,;.../ . „....,...,„...„,.•--. ..-,,,e,....., ,
,-,,,,,,„,,i ti,... .- ' --4.,,.-. ,../., , -..
,, -- iff -.**-..*,*''''*, -.,'.--•::-:,,,,;,'. - .:;41:.,.,,,,-4 -4:-.-...- ....44..•,e,.., . .:.,
;••• i‘,,,,,,,•;, .--8. ,,-, ~ )..,..):'.-...44,,,..",..,...,,:7-.,,,,..,,, ry- „. •„:. ,,..-;,8'8, .:„:,, ..
47). 2.' °-,. • ,_
4. ,-• 4 `....-• ,'
aril ,z _., . ,,,,- • ,.
tN4;)
..•.• . .„ .,
41.4.... - •0.,*, - i-y-- ' ,,,,„,,,, ..7117,",„ :,,,,,,,,: .„.,;. .. ., ', , • - :
._,. .•. . • k.• ...
,:.•,..: ,,,,,. .* .41' ,....1*„ s,. f 4":„,,,,,,,,,,, s,••,1..'-**....,,,.,*-.,......**;,,.1.r.:::v.•4,',:'.:.4.,.:*,''•
--; , .-• .-.8.1:.,,,.',!--...;•-.-,
.0% -4,10,- -*mem -
--. ,
..,..0:., k1/4,01„:, , .', ' -... .., '' to . " '::,.10:%,'...0'..;.•::', A..':
'wlirlii O'
74%.„
, . *
4,
„,c4 •
/
•
..0
I -,
....- ..„
t 1
. i
. ..,.
3,11I I „..
,,,
,., .. ,
.. .4. .
.. ,
... A. °
\ 1
A
. l
,.,\\\\ ! /.
1‘ I • / ; 7/ I I .....i
1 '
. ,I
4 1 ....' I,
• , ''''' ''.0° ....'.*...,
. '
/
I ....."... I I,
, '1,''
t,.‘1; I. if
\ _— -
I
t *..... '....,,,,/
—10°A
IRA
/. •
A I,
-c-_:\ 4 -i , .,‘
_ ,,,,, , //://„,
\
/ I .
,
. ,
, ....,
,,,,,,p,, I, ,
, - 1111.1„.---
,
e , —,,,
,,..,..„.
,, I \
I , !5;
ip 1,,,,
i
1
„,
,
,, 4-:_j----:, /
ii
Its
--IA*
— — — '
. ..
A -
' -- ' •' i'll
/t`1”• ii, /
104,4,--1',' - -
4 '
1,-
, A,
10 I,
••. t. *.
*
ff.1,41.).ff '
,., . ., .
.,,,, , rk:,.t,,,,,e.fr*,,,,,r
-.I
..„. . , , , •--.,...
,,_,. .. *... ,(= ::: t '''' ''1:'• ••-4
, : AOks,, .. •
',..• - . .,. E.•$1,-,,,,, .4..„,„-'., ... /..- ** *Iiii* 4 4$' -
- ' , *,
.4'1 , 4.4k, i
4,,, ' , ,
.„,,,,, ..,.: 4'''',,. , II, /* • - ,
`..',, - ,,,..
'!''',' , ,A, --1,e.. `'.. •vit 4' . 4
,1,* -*: **. '44e,•4,.'-4t.4,...-":, ,.N';', ft '. 7 1'""' ' ' _it'' ' :,.'" - '''''''z,
ic, tt ti,A7,44,,,,,,710:,,,:,,,,,,,,; ,,,,,,,,,,, '-'-,. eir,..1,.,, - ! itit--,
' '''',Nr l''''.44,---... ''' ''''' ' 4,,
/ ''''i 1 At ., -,- - 7,/,,,pe
4 '''.‘'
, .• -'‘„ ' -* ' - • ..-.04*•,.. •• ' ,'; iik t•, **V. I '•*/':;: ''' '''-*'-' 1#1* ''
- *:' ''''''Vitt17',1,.---' *,,,; s%%, 0
".,*(''' , , .„ '....r ' .. .-
.41
,
-,,,,, ,,,,, 4. ,,, 4 •.- 1.4,44„,,,,, 0,,,,,,,- 1°
, ,,,, .
. . ' '. l':','"' ''' ', - • - 11'
-,44 ,. ,, t.f:, - , -4 - .
,i, ',. ., - z
,, ,.' .. ,- -,-
N..*
,.
'''- '.* 't„..
A ',..:,.....;-: 1014
,l''''.r 1 - - — ,
.....,
t„.,
8.,.., . '''' , ;;,.:•.,-': '- '''4 ' ''' :' ' ,-,"' // ., , i-.L.40.,
, ,...,. ,,,L.,
. ,.-,
• _FI -pp:-,`',.., '''••-''''.40.2.„.t, ,t-,-, . .
i:, k ,.04.• 0 ...,.,
-...9 N`'.' - Itti• 8-'.. 1*- ,, ,' ,,,it ' -:•'",
. - .--.0,•,_
"‘,,e, ' ''Ve:4''''''''
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS CENTER CONSTRUCTION COSTS
MARCH 14, 2007
SUMMARY:
Total Square Footage 51,000
Phase I Estimated Cost: $30,000,000
Estimated Annual Debt Service $1.5 million - $2 million
FUNDING ALLOCATION:
Water- 36% (18,400 sq. feet) $540,000- $720,000
General Fund (PD) - 39% (20,000 sq. feet) $585,000 - $780,000
Hwy Fund (PW) - 25% (12,600 sq. feet) $375,000 - $500,000
POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCES:
General Fund, Water Fund, Highway Fund Cash Reserves
Excise Tax Bonds (Town Sales Taxes)
General Obligation Bonds (Secondary Property Tax)
Greater Arizona Development Authority (GADA) Loan
. . . - =- ,,--.44--#..,‘,.-4---,...-- ..,-,4 t, rt.. .. -.
• ..,.. .. .„..... ,..,
„,,,,,„._ . .., . •... •
- ---4-
\ •-. .. :•.... .., ,. _ „.z, .
... ,. . . . , . ,,..ic ..--- .
.. .
.•,.. r - .i . • ,
101 . .-,--...'' * ." ,i','„,,.,_'-',.f..•,..'-*-8—;-';',*4, --, \\44k 14-' ,..;:-/. ,:,,i,7,. -..-. -: .• . .. t 1 -:
r
•
�,.;.-4..--;;.. :7:4.-...--7.--;*-. r 3 �i• *�4 Y \, �'• ` 'rte
-
1• ♦ 4 J • rd 1 1, \ \ �- yc
_ y� • • ~y �
`' r #'\` t . �••� • C44's*�-s a. ,� . - ;'b 't "r'
• 4.i •1 • i O.
•
• .N. f
.Jr -�••, .e 4 '.Vim. '' 'P., �._ a • - - 1
� -Ilk, , � r
r
...44(.....;„, • I,,• , -;47`' v''.• + ,a-'-J” •,t-...14:.`'.-
, .. •y-,. sly -
" Sl
-
a • _1
.}*;` •-.---:.'..c:4-1"/.;---•`-,.A-.t..1.--4-. -,.... :--- - . • - •f. ,
/‘-',, N ''. -:.,,,•„ ..)-- '' ' - .-.- ,-k;'7.-. ...4., '-:-:',.- -,-?.‘,,i•
,er .1 t.F.-_--.•„,--',;1.-::;--,;,--•-2- :I....:...'1'1.•;',$.1.4- 1'-r. -'' f .-
,... .,_.....,,,,.:„.....„,„.,.,,,‘,, ,.,,;, .,......,,,,ori, ,... i:.:...ie... s . ... . .., : r.,. i, ,, ...v.-N. ....,...,,,,,,..... N - -- ,s,.!'-::::*.-41%.-.-:--ti,..I.,,,-"‘-•- .;' ::<'. ....-71:",'-ii''''-' ?,-: ;
'..- 4,..,,:`,....11'.."-,..'....'•r' 1-••'..1,,-,.•-•.. •.'•J•"':,..,1?-_-`1. - ., ,` '_. .....• • -•,.`-'• ;vs- .444t. s',•,,,.
11
i yam;�.'♦• i•,a►. +,�.• -'_. . r *„. .
" ,
------..„." ' .'
t.
b F •
*,
+,7.,,, -›---..„
AI\ i . ...
_ : , ,... .1.
•
•S •
f--4•.'
8..t t.rwf i,, •<NI• '• • if
,•;�-- ' •
a 1 e. •,
-. ---. - , %.,--*-4-0021.-..-.r. .„ : _ 4 -
• ` ...., . WATZ£R Amok PliBUC ` f i' } �.r•• <s. Y er Ll
' .t ie r_. I. WORKS ITY DE /
• * • COMMUNITY DEV ' ? r
• ' • �I * 20,000 Sf � '.
4. .. '.4 li*-t-Ait x,,,-;:...,•:-
-.:ve ' ''.-..: .-.-.
, _,....,
,. .:,tis _.;...‘,..
. ... , ...,.
.. .
•........1.!.........,-
,t • •••'• ?.x`r/ kyr C iLl�t. / MfC a .. .^ j �.` K►
j ,#
r
' A 'ISr
•y1t : Eli'.
,0 i_#;:.'..
[,• !.. • ♦•y/ '1'' / i ' s V •11.-- .te ,.
l
,
,2,,,,I;x1
•
` • ` r� •'Iff
/ PO?CE DEPARTMENT s .;'' X
e ,- :'t! - - t4EADOWRTERS } ,,
4 J ".; r"fi / r d'�`',ri•�,�'�` e. iv
r i .� ` 70,J00 SF BASEMENT \ ---k,
;� s+l.''''\r ~
• s•a.. : '- .' // ( SAT , •-,J �.I•r,� .
\ ry rte`„: +`
4,1„.
.z.„...?„,..,,. , -7,7
,-.:-:, ,
,...t. . . .„-- ..
/
r
Or•-
. . .., — - Y
, . --.--...-ip , - .
.1 ,.; .•••'. / /,I I: P - t-,- .
—,:s, .-- . .•-/ _, ..,-,. -,!..-,. t),- .:0.„..:„ - '.
! * .. „ st�,
.0/4„...
•
,-,N.- .: S.v., M GATE i ... ..... • —/�;✓--:.
• t �!`.PWRKS
•., 4re Y WAREHOUSE
,
r .ice y 10.000 SR 6 L' .
vatoCLE
•
- ,r j` L t.•. .t4''T ` $ eIVEST10AT10NIAY w
`yt :., • ... \ p 5 V1,200 SP • -_" ••-...;•-•.-- r'.,
S �t
�` t - - t+..,- i POuCE IMPOUND Y.. -'•. •+ �"•`• �• nP'
�►S't r vARO t ACRE s - i'.�.
'.. WATER i PUSUC :.AY DOWN t !� •,_ ff:/.7t1','
`
., ,. , WORKS OPERATKMS 1 i y x ti a 1, �' ,,
C ` 21 000 SF 1 A0� •
' ,\ tr l•-e. '--.-=,
-- • -:1
JJr .e. , "+i.
vs
. 1;- .tt ,....•^"'"�:_/ 'i"�-! '; ••i j,# i+,�a 4i '�yt. ,r ' ,.."
•
1 • 'r"`• ,,, '"'wry,"""+ i -- ,_ •- • �A• . .• 3 y.•r`'."2- a'•.t•y i
. 4
_ - COVERED aP •�y 4`, :1 •it
r:
- f f f '` `=' •-_ '• •••••
y._ `STORAGE {,. ,_ t ,+/
•
, '' ' \-'.. ....* \
4Jifff
1-;;.-..: '.---:, ,!.;-..- ait,.-,, , \ A �l ..,
ma•r. � •. . "
Set
,i•. ��•,' -.1
� �
...
,.. ...,... . ,. . . .
. , , ,....,
... •
........, ..
, , ...:_::•.,...., ,.: .--Y1:6,7.--..„1,-,....,r/e- ' ... . i -• ,. • .., ,./,-...,:;) -,.. ,..... ....,
, ,. .(
, k /..
''''O'.
.7", .- . 4 .- , •
..''Q,•'.:.-t ••. ..,,s-k.:„•41,.... ....., .,,
- --,-.. . -. -.-T-. -:
‘i Sjk\.*--..-..\\' - / / ,;,,"-it,-7. --tr. ,. 7.7,.-.:,... - it--•: - • i .'-• -
-
• ' 1'-7 l `• F�• COMM MAIM, "s ` Cf eCW j 5` I !.Al m ! , iTOQAStMYS I • ,..--4.
$ '..,4-.* "-4 J
., eo•-,-, ..._ — -- — ,,—- \ ispo, .,,,.• ...
r 7
. VS*,T.',0 ce 1 • f
.' .ko.\........,___;----........."7"1"
-,44.744.-}
' ter• t- a+ . X' i '2' t '
pip VAL F6.4 '�`�+' •` . .. ,„.......,-„,.•„•-...
` . _.` ... �' t • x �I f �`; .r «� �r •
-•fit 7- - _ ..-..IT r^► . ,..4 - `•• i :,L .•. .
-,•;b A GI,. A - ,, . . .--., , mss•. �. If-• :SNL 4. , ., • ,a-` .•• r^ •'- ',_ 1�',�i r' t.
•
�S-----•e� *.-,i, ;t '..^--':..-t--.47-'-';',.,, *' �r = Town Property
IllkV ti 41---4- �•y � �� +`a • � 1• iSER '< < '"' -''f,-, j.,,; pt.i',R. ,„..,4,....0,.. J •,,..`-4',•-�:. .?4-\`•. "S
ARS A
• �'►+-� r a!�+ y'lire.• .s•'+�:`.4 x2• � ":. ..>t- _ 0 50 100 Feet
March 13,2007 '► -.1,L,1•04,44'..-
''','� ;='' t .r;:%! :_. *.. �!`` y.. - �::
.,1:, ••• `J ..., yam., `..•��`. _ 'IC.2 -__y w�!'_•y •.- , _._ _ -.__.[-. ,i;1J ._
Option 1
is Townwide Space Needs Study Report for
Buildphase 1 that recommended in the p .
includes30,000 sq-ft Police Headquarters building and a
Council Approval. Phase 1 a q .
C pp • • Maintenance buildingand associated
Public Works/Water Utility Operation
21,000 sq ft The time
The Town would follow all Town development processes.
maintenance facilities. was
to occupation. Staff would wait until the construction
frame would be three years p
complete to relocate to this site.
Option 2
' except that an expedited time frame would be
This option would be the same as option 1
P to twoyears by using design build
' ' ed. The time frame to occupation could be reduced
utilrz processingall approvals
manager at risk methods of project delivery and
or construction9 � construction was
Council. As in option 1 staff would wait until the
straight to Town P
complete to relocate to this site.
Option 3
justification n the fact that modulars and I or leased facilities are
The for option 3 is based o .associated with options 1 and 2. Modulars,
necessaryas a result of the long timeframes , •
so site for the Water Utility
10,000 sq-ft would be installed at the Rancho Visto •
q field staff and Coyote Run.
• and operation staff, Public Works engineering Y
administration p .. • Public Works
near where the Water Utility Administration,
The location will be
Administration and CommunityDevelopment Departments 30,000 sq-ft building
would be
constructed during phase 2 in 2012 and 2013.
Public Works Operation staff would
remain at Calle Concordia until options 1 or 2 are
readyfor occupancy. The modular at Calle Concordia would be returned to the lessor as
staff would occupythe vacated space in the
the Public Works Operations administrative
Pink Building. The Water Utility mayexplore leased space instead of relocating to a
modular building in the Rancho Vistoso site.
Option 4
This version3. In this case 2-- 1200 sq fit modulars would be
option is a lesser of option • . .
pwould house the Water Utility operations
placed in the same location as above. These staff, the Public Works engineering in field staff and Coyote Run from Calle Concordia.
remain at Calle
Public Works Operation staff wouldConcordia until options 1 or 2 are
ready for occupancy. The modular at Calle Concordia would be returned to the lessor as
' '
ive staff would occupy the vacated space in the
the Public Works Operations administrative
' ' would lore leased space instead of relocating to a
Pink Building. The Water Utility exp
modular building in the Rancho Vistoso site.
Option Cost
Option 1
. $ 6,988,000
• • 4 erations
Water Utility, Public Works p Bldg
43 ,000
Police Headquarters 11,948 000
• 3, ,
Site and Roadway work Q
500,00
Engineering Design 504 000
Architectural Design 5,526,900
Furniture, furnishings and equipment (FFE)
g $29,897,900
Option 2
time deliverymethod it is estimated that at least
of the reduce and construction
Because a 10 % savings could be realized verses option 1 for all cost except the FFE. The
project cost is estimated to be $27,460,800.
I
Option 3
of option 1 or 2 for the permanent
cost of option 3 will vary depending on the choicep
The p
improvements. The difference lies in the length of time of leasing of the modular units.
Two year lease scenario
,
Modular lease $ 210 00054 600
Modular setup '
100,x00
Utility Construction 750 000
Site work '
,
Screen Wall 500 o00
$1,614,600
Three year lease scenario
,
Modular lease $ 315 o0054 600
Modular setup '
100,000
Utility Construction 750 000
Site work '
,
Screen Wall 500 000
$1,719,600
Option 4
Two year lease scenario
Modular lease $ 60,000
Modular setup 15,600
Utility Construction 50,000
Site Work 200,000
Security Fencing 100,000
Total cost $ 425,600
Water Utility Lease
Leased space $250,000
Move in and set up 100,000
Lease cost $350,000
Modular and Lease cost $775,000
Three year lease scenario
Modular lease $ 90,000
Modular setup 15,600
Utility Construction 50,000
Site Work 200,000
Security Fencing 100,000
Total cost $ 455,600
Water Utility Lease
Leased space $375,000
Move in and set up 100,000
Lease cost $475,000
Modular and Lease cost $930,600