In assessing Sacramento’s plan to enact development fees to fund transportation projects, the issue isn’t the fees themselves. The city needs the cash for road and transit improvements to keep the city livable, and the fees are a fair way to help pay for growth.
The real issue is how much the fees should be and when they should start.
On both those scores, city officials are on the right track. They are outlining fees based on the traffic a new building would generate, and are recommending that they be phased in over several years, wary of doing anything to forestall economic recovery.
Most cities in the region already have a citywide development fee for transportation. The fees that Sacramento officials proposed this week would apply only to new houses, stores, office buildings and other development, and the amounts would be competitive with Sacramento County, Elk Grove, Folsom and West Sacramento, according to comparisons put together by the city. And when other developer fees are included, the cost of building in Sacramento would still be less.
For instance, the fee would be $6,251 for a single-family house in Sacramento, bringing the total development fees to $30,359. That compares to total development “exactions” of $90,760 at North Vineyard Station in Sacramento County, $89,690 at Laguna Ridge in Elk Grove, $71,130 at Southport in West Sacramento and $61,980 at Broadstone in Folsom.
For an apartment building of 10 floors or less, the transportation fee in Sacramento would be $3,572 per unit.
To encourage mass transit and affordable housing, developers would get discounts – 25 percent less for projects near transit centers and 42.5 percent for affordable housing.
The fees would raise more than $700 million over 20 years, and would be used to draw state and federal money.
According to regional transportation plans through 2035, Sacramento is projected to add 200,000 people and to need nearly $2.6 billion – or $115 million a year – for transportation projects. They include major proposals such as the $115 million Sutter Landing Parkway, the $100 million widening of Cosumnes River Boulevard and $100 million for a new bridge spanning the Sacramento River.
While roadways would get about two-thirds of the money, transit expansions would get 15 percent, 10 percent would fund traffic signal improvements and another 10 percent would go to bike trails and walkways.
In April, the transportation fee proposal will go before the council’s Law and Legislation Committee. The full council could vote on an ordinance as soon as May. The fees are not in the upcoming budget, so the earliest they would take effect would be in mid-2011. Under one scenario, the fees would start at about 30 percent of their final amounts.
Inevitably, some developers will complain loudly and warn darkly of higher prices for homebuyers and damage to the economy. But for taxpayers, it only makes sense that developers pay their fair share; the general principle that “growth pays for growth” is a good one.
Council members should make sure the fees are sized and timed right. But they need to move forward.