Minutes | Board of Director's Meeting - May 26, 2005 -
[Cached Version]
Published on: 5/26/2005
Last Visited: 1/19/2006
MTA Nexus Study - Presented by Doug KimDoug Kim, MTA, explained that this is an opportunity for the cities to tackle future traffic problems caused by new development.He explained that MTA has undertaken a study regarding the possibility of imposing a developer impact fee for traffic, with the idea being to ask developers to pay their fair share contribution for the kinds of congestion relief problems the MTA.He pointed out that the future projections for growth in the South Bay keep shooting up and, in the next 20-25 years, there will be about 40-45% more cars on the road-with only a 1% increase in capacity-bringing a 400% increase in average delay.He explained that the objective is to set up a regional county-wide set of fees that sub-regions and cities will be comfortable with to fund traffic improvements that cities and MTA cannot currently fund.The fee would replace the debit/credit Congestion Management program with a more streamlined impact fee process; help cities address CEQA impact problems; and generate more revenue to funds projects currently on hold because of lack of funding.Mr. Kim explained that the MTA is currently looking at ways that cities could get a match from the MTA for regional traffic projects and the MTA as a county-wide agency would provide a level playing field for developers and cities; there is a window of opportunity here---most urban regions already have a developer fee and we are hoping to learn from them; the MTA would organize the program for the 89 cities in the county to structure a program to offer incentives at the city level, but if the cities don't buy into the plan, then it won't happen; the current effort is to work with staff and elected officials to see if they believe the program is feasible because while State law (Prop 111 in 1990) gave the MTA the authority, cities must agree; councils would adopt an ordinance that sets a series of impact fees for businesses and residential development to help pay their incremental portion of the various traffic improvements that will be impacted by their development; the projects fundedwould be identified by cities as their priorities; the MTA would serve as coordinator; and cities would collect the fees similar to other developer fees.Mr. Kim explained that there are advantages for the building industry, including: it could streamline entitlements; provide them with more assurance about the entitlement process and make the process subject to less delay.The revenue potential under this scenario is estimated at $80 million to $600 million county-wide annually, with up to $15 billion over the next 25 years.Stakeholder Reaction:· Local control vs. regional control of fee revenue· Predictability of fee revenue· Project selection criteria· Ensure fee revenue goes directly to transportation projects-can be limited to city where raised, if desired.· Economic and land use issues· Housing affordability issues· Credit for local mitigation fee programs· Meeting environmental requirements-streamline the CEQA process.Mr. Kim concluded by stating that the MTA is in the middle of a two-year study and needs help at the city level.They are looking for feedback from cities and are working on phase 2, with staff and elected officials to determine the feasibility; if there is no buy-in from cities in the next year, the MTA Board will probably say no.Kim answered questions and encouraged cities to provide input regarding their interest level in this program.
21 online sources [ view sources ]
Profile is not claimed [ claim profile ]
