Infrastructure Improvements Plan 03-­‐20-­‐13

City of Yuma, Arizona

TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................. 5
ARIZONA DEVELOPMENT FEE ENABLING LEGISLATION ..........................................................................................5
NECESSARY PUBLIC SERVICES ...........................................................................................................................6
INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS PLAN ...........................................................................................................7
QUALIFIED PROFESSIONALS .............................................................................................................................8
CALCULATION METHODOLOGIES ......................................................................................................................8
Figure 1: Recommended Calculation Methodologies ......................................................................................................... 9

PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES .................................................................................... 10
OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................................................10
SERVICE AREA .............................................................................................................................................10
PROPORTIONATE SHARE ...............................................................................................................................10
IIP FOR PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES ..................................................................................................10
IIP Element #1......................................................................................................................................11
Figure 2: IIP Element #1..................................................................................................................................................... 11

IIP Element #2......................................................................................................................................11
Figure 3: IIP Element #2 – Eligible Parks............................................................................................................................ 13

IIP Element #3......................................................................................................................................14
Figure 4: IIP Element #3 –Parks ......................................................................................................................................... 14
Figure 5: IIP Element #3 – IIP and Development Fee Report............................................................................................. 15

IIP Element #4......................................................................................................................................15
Figure 6: IIP Element #4..................................................................................................................................................... 16

IIP Elements #5 and #6 ........................................................................................................................16
Figure 7: IIP Elements #5 and #6 ....................................................................................................................................... 17

IIP Element #7......................................................................................................................................17
Figure 8: Revenue Assumptions, Rates, Calculation Methodologies ................................................................................ 18
Figure 9: Revenue Characteristics of New Development .................................................................................................. 19
Figure 10: IIP Element #7................................................................................................................................................... 19
Figure 11: Future Revenue Credit for Yuma Valley Area Park Land Purchase................................................................... 20

FIRE FACILITIES ....................................................................................................................... 21
OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................................................21
SERVICE AREA .............................................................................................................................................21
PROPORTIONATE SHARE ...............................................................................................................................21
Figure 12: Calls for Service by Land Use ............................................................................................................................ 22
IIP FOR FIRE FACILITIES .................................................................................................................................22

IIP Element #1......................................................................................................................................22
Figure 13: IIP Element #1................................................................................................................................................... 23

IIP Element #2......................................................................................................................................23
Figure 14: IIP Element #2 – Stations.................................................................................................................................. 24
Figure 15: IIP Element #2 – Communications Equipment ................................................................................................. 25

IIP Element #3......................................................................................................................................25

Figure 16: IIP Element #3 – Facilities ................................................................................................................................. 26
Figure 17: IIP Element #3 – Communications Equipment ................................................................................................. 27
Figure 18: IIP Element #3 – IIP and Development Fee Report........................................................................................... 27

IIP Element #4......................................................................................................................................28
Figure 19: IIP Element #4................................................................................................................................................... 29

IIP Elements #5 and #6 ........................................................................................................................29
2

Infrastructure Improvements Plan 03-­‐20-­‐13

City of Yuma, Arizona

Figure 20: IIP Elements #5 and #6 ..................................................................................................................................... 30

IIP Element #7......................................................................................................................................30
Figure 21: Revenue Assumptions, Rates, Calculation Methodologies .............................................................................. 31
Figure 22: Revenue Characteristics of New Development ................................................................................................ 32
Figure 23: IIP Element #7................................................................................................................................................... 32

POLICE FACILITIES ................................................................................................................... 33
OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................................................33
SERVICE AREA .............................................................................................................................................33
PROPORTIONATE SHARE ...............................................................................................................................33
Figure 24: Calls for Service by Land Use ............................................................................................................................ 34

IIP FOR POLICE FACILITIES .............................................................................................................................34
IIP Element #1......................................................................................................................................34
Figure 25: IIP Element #1................................................................................................................................................... 35

IIP Element #2......................................................................................................................................35
Figure 26: IIP Element #2 – Facilities ................................................................................................................................. 36
Figure 27: IIP Element #2 – Vehicles ................................................................................................................................. 37
Figure 28: IIP Element #2 – Communications Equipment ................................................................................................. 38

IIP Element #3......................................................................................................................................38
Figure 29:
Figure 30:
Figure 31:
Figure 32:

IIP Element #3 – Facilities ................................................................................................................................. 39
IIP Element #3 – Vehicles ................................................................................................................................. 40
IIP Element #3 – Communications Equipment ................................................................................................. 41
IIP Element #3 – IIP and Development Fee Report........................................................................................... 42

IIP Element #4......................................................................................................................................42
Figure 33: IIP Element #4................................................................................................................................................... 43

IIP Elements #5 and #6 ........................................................................................................................43
Figure 34: IIP Elements #5 and #6 ..................................................................................................................................... 44

IIP Element #7......................................................................................................................................44
Figure 35: Revenue Assumptions, Rates, Calculation Methodologies .............................................................................. 45
Figure 36: Revenue Characteristics of New Development ................................................................................................ 46
Figure 37: IIP Element #7................................................................................................................................................... 46

GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITIES......................................................................................... 47
OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................................................47
SERVICE AREA .............................................................................................................................................47
PROPORTIONATE SHARE ...............................................................................................................................47
Figure 38: Functional Population ...................................................................................................................................... 48

IIP FOR GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITIES .....................................................................................................48
IIP Element #1......................................................................................................................................48
Figure 39: IIP Element #1................................................................................................................................................... 49

IIP Element #2......................................................................................................................................49
Figure 40: IIP Element #2 – City Hall.................................................................................................................................. 50

IIP Element #3......................................................................................................................................50
Figure 41: IIP Element #3 – City Hall.................................................................................................................................. 51
Figure 42: IIP Element #3 – IIP and Development Fee Report........................................................................................... 52

IIP Element #4......................................................................................................................................52
Figure 43: IIP Element #4................................................................................................................................................... 53

IIP Elements #5 and #6 ........................................................................................................................54
Figure 44: IIP Elements #5 and #6 ..................................................................................................................................... 54

IIP Element #7......................................................................................................................................54
Figure 45:
Figure 46:
Figure 47:
Figure 48:

Revenue Assumptions, Rates, Calculation Methodologies .............................................................................. 55
Revenue Characteristics of New Development ................................................................................................ 56
IIP Element #7................................................................................................................................................... 56
Revenue Credit for City Hall ............................................................................................................................. 57

STREET FACILITIES .................................................................................................................. 58
3

Infrastructure Improvements Plan 03-­‐20-­‐13

City of Yuma, Arizona

OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................................................58
SERVICE AREA .............................................................................................................................................58
PROPORTIONATE SHARE ...............................................................................................................................58
IIP FOR STREET FACILITIES .............................................................................................................................58
IIP Element #1......................................................................................................................................59
Figure 49: IIP Element #1................................................................................................................................................... 59

IIP Element #2......................................................................................................................................59

Figure 50: IIP Element #2................................................................................................................................................... 60

IIP Element #3......................................................................................................................................60
Figure 51: IIP Element #3 – Arterial Street Improvements................................................................................................ 61
Figure 52: IIP Element #3 – Arterial Intersection Improvements ...................................................................................... 62
Figure 53: IIP Element #3 – IIP and Development Fee Report........................................................................................... 63

IIP Element #4......................................................................................................................................63

Figure 54: IIP Element #4................................................................................................................................................... 64

IIP Elements #5 and #6 ........................................................................................................................65
Figure 55: IIP Elements #5 and #6 ..................................................................................................................................... 65

IIP Element #7......................................................................................................................................66
Figure 56: Revenue Assumptions, Rates, Calculation Methodologies .............................................................................. 67
Figure 57: Revenue Characteristics of New Development ................................................................................................ 68
Figure 58: IIP Element #7................................................................................................................................................... 68

APPENDIX B – TISCHLERBISE EXPERIENCE ................................................................................ 69

4

Infrastructure Improvements Plan 03-­‐20-­‐13

City of Yuma, Arizona

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Yuma has engaged TischlerBise to update its Infrastructure Improvements Plans and
development fees for several categories of necessary public services pursuant to Arizona Revised
Statutes 9-­‐463.05. TischlerBise has twice previously calculated development fees for the City, most
recently in 2006.
Municipalities in Arizona may assess development fees to offset infrastructure costs to a municipality
associated with providing necessary public services to a development. The development fees must be
based on an Infrastructure Improvements Plan. Development fees cannot be used for, among other
things: projects not included in the Infrastructure Improvements Plan, projects related to existing
development, or costs related to operations and maintenance.
This update of the City’s Infrastructure Improvements Plan and associated update to its development
fees includes the following necessary public services:
•
•
•
•
•

Parks and Recreational Facilities
Fire Facilities
Police Facilities
General Government Facilities
Streets Facilities

This update also includes all necessary elements required to be in full compliance with SB 1525.

A RIZONA D EVELOPMENT F EE E NABLING L EGISLATION
Arizona Revised Statutes 9-­‐463.05 (hereafter referred to as “development fee enabling legislation”)
governs how development fees are calculated for municipalities in Arizona. During the state legislative
session of 2011, Senate Bill 1525 (SB 1525) was introduced which significantly amended the
development fee enabling legislation. The changes included:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
5

Amending existing development fee programs by January 1, 2012.
Abandoning existing development fee programs by August 1, 2014.
New development fee program structure revolving around a unified Land Use Assumptions
document and Infrastructure Improvements Plan.
New adoption procedures for the Land Use Assumptions, Infrastructure Improvements Plan, and
development fees.
New definitions, including “necessary public services” which defines what categories and types
of infrastructure may be funded with development fees.
Time limitations in development fee collections and expenditures.
New requirements for credits, “grandfathering” rules, and refunds.

Infrastructure Improvements Plan 03-­‐20-­‐13

City of Yuma, Arizona

Governor Brewer signed SB 1525 into law on April 26, 2011. This update of the City’s development fees
will be in compliance with all of the new requirements of SB 1525.
Note: A full version of the Arizona development fee enabling legislation can be found in Appendix A of
this report.

N ECESSARY P UBLIC S ERVICES
The City of Yuma currently collects development fees for the following infrastructure categories:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Art and Cultural Facilities
Parks and Recreation
Sanitation Facilities
Police Facilities
Fire
General Government Facilities
Public Works
Transportation

Under the new requirements of the development fee enabling legislation, development fees may be
used only for construction, acquisition or expansion of public facilities that are necessary public services.
"Necessary public service" means any of the following categories of facilities that have a life expectancy
of three or more years and that are owned and operated by or on behalf of the municipality:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Water Facilities
Wastewater Facilities
Storm Water, Drainage, and Flood Control Facilities
Library Facilities
Streets Facilities
Fire and Police Facilities
Neighborhood Parks and Recreational Facilities
Any facility that was financed before June 1, 2011 and that meets the following requirements:
1. Development fees were pledged to repay debt service obligations related to the
construction of the facility.
2. After August 1, 2014, any development fees collected are used solely for the payment of
principal and interest on the portion of the bonds, notes or other debt service
obligations issued before June 1, 2011 to finance construction of the facility.

As of January 1, 2012, the City will no longer be able to assess development fees for Art and Cultural
Facilities, Sanitation Facilities, and Public Works Facilities. The City will be able to continue to collect
General Government Development Fees as a result of existing debt associated with City Hall which
meets the above requirements of necessary public services.

6

Infrastructure Improvements Plan 03-­‐20-­‐13

City of Yuma, Arizona

I NFRASTRUCTURE I MPROVEMENTS P LAN
Development fees must be calculated pursuant to an Infrastructure Improvements Plan (hereafter
referred to as the “IIP”). For each necessary public service that is the subject of a development fee, by
law, the infrastructure improvements plan shall include the following seven elements:
Element #1: A description of the existing necessary public services in the service area and the
costs to upgrade, update, improve, expand, correct or replace those necessary public services to
meet existing needs and usage and stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory
standards, which shall be prepared by qualified professionals licensed in this state, as applicable.
Element #2: An analysis of the total capacity, the level of current usage and commitments for
usage of capacity of the existing necessary public services, which shall be prepared by qualified
professionals licensed in this state, as applicable.
Element #3: A description of all or the parts of the necessary public services or facility
expansions and their costs necessitated by and attributable to development in the service area
based on the approved land use assumptions, including a forecast of the costs of infrastructure,
improvements, real property, financing, engineering and architectural services, which shall be
prepared by qualified professionals licensed in this state, as applicable.
Element #4: A table establishing the specific level or quantity of use, consumption, generation
or discharge of a service unit for each category of necessary public services or facility expansions
and an equivalency or conversion table establishing the ratio of a service unit to various types of
land uses, including residential, commercial and industrial.
Element #5: The total number of projected service units necessitated by and attributable to
new development in the service area based on the approved land use assumptions and
calculated pursuant to generally accepted engineering and planning criteria.
Element #6: The projected demand for necessary public services or facility expansions required
by new service units for a period not to exceed ten years.
Element #7: A forecast of revenues generated by new service units other than development
fees, which shall include estimated state-­‐shared revenue, highway users revenue, federal
revenue, ad valorem property taxes, construction contracting or similar excise taxes and the
capital recovery portion of utility fees attributable to development based on the approved land
use assumptions, and a plan to include these contributions in determining the extent of the
burden imposed by the development.

7

Infrastructure Improvements Plan 03-­‐20-­‐13

City of Yuma, Arizona

Q UALIFIED P ROFESSIONALS
The IIP must be developed by qualified professionals using generally accepted engineering and planning
practices. A qualified professional is defined as “a professional engineer, surveyor, financial analyst or
planner providing services within the scope of the person's license, education or experience”.
Mr. Paul Brooberg, City Engineer, and Mr. Andrew McGarvie, Assistant City Engineer, have been the
City’s project managers. Both are licensed Professional Engineers (PE) in the State of Arizona.
TischlerBise is a fiscal, economic, and planning consulting firm specializing in cost of growth services.
Our services include development fees, fiscal impact analyses, infrastructure financing analyses, user
fee/cost of service studies, capital improvement plans, and fiscal software. TischlerBise has prepared
over 800 impact fee studies over the past 30 years for local governments across the United States,
including 35 in Arizona. Mr. Christopher Cullinan, a Principal in the firm, is the author of this IIP.
Please see Appendix B for a complete description of the qualifications of TischlerBise and Mr. Cullinan.

C ALCULATION M ETHODOLOGIES
Development fees for the necessary public services made necessary by new development must be based
on the same level of service provided to existing development in the service area. There are three basic
methodologies used to calculate development fees. They examine the past, present, and future status
of infrastructure. The objective of evaluating these different methodologies is to determine the best
measure of the demand created by new development for additional infrastructure capacity.
•

•

•

Buy-­‐in methodology (past) is used in instances when a community has oversized a facility or
asset in anticipation of future development. This methodology is based on the rationale that
new development is repaying the community for its share of the remaining unused capacity.
Incremental expansion method (present) documents the current level of service for each type
of public facility. The intent is to use revenue collected to expand or provide additional facilities,
as needed to accommodate new development, based on the current cost to provide capital
improvements.
Plan-­‐based method (future) utilizes a community’s capital improvement plan and/or other
adopted plans or engineering studies to guide capital improvements needed to serve new
development.

All three methodologies are utilized in calculating the IIP. A summary is provided in Figure 1 showing
the methodologies, components, and allocations used to calculate the IIP.

8

Infrastructure Improvements Plan 03-­‐20-­‐13

City of Yuma, Arizona

PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES
O VERVIEW
ARS 9-­‐463.05 (T)(7)(g) defines the facilities and assets which can be included in the Parks and
Recreational Facilities IIP:
“Neighborhood parks and recreational facilities on real property up to thirty acres in area, or
parks and recreational facilities larger than thirty acres if the facilities provide a direct benefit to
the development. Park and recreational facilities do not include vehicles, equipment or that
portion of any facility that is used for amusement parks, aquariums, aquatic centers,
auditoriums, arenas, arts and cultural facilities, bandstand and orchestra facilities, bathhouses,
boathouses, clubhouses, community centers greater than three thousand square feet in floor
area, environmental education centers, equestrian facilities, golf course facilities, greenhouses,
lakes, museums, theme parks, water reclamation or riparian areas, wetlands, zoo facilities or
similar recreational facilities, but may include swimming pools.”
The Parks and Recreational Facilities IIP includes components for area parks and the cost of preparing
the Parks and Recreational Facilities IIP and development fees. The plan-­‐based methodology is used to
calculate the Parks and Recreational Facilities IIP.

S ERVICE A REA
The City of Yuma plans to provide a uniform level-­‐of-­‐service and equal service for parks and recreational
facilities throughout the City. The City’s parks and recreation programs are structured and provided to
make full use of the City’s inventory of facilities. As a result, the service area for the Parks and
Recreational Facilities IIP is citywide.

P ROPORTIONATE S HARE
ARS 9-­‐463.05 (B)(3) states that the development fee shall not exceed a proportionate share of the cost
of necessary public services needed to provide necessary public services to the development. The Parks
and Recreational IIP and development fees are assessed only on residential development as this type of
development creates 100% of the burden for additional parks and recreational facilities. Nonresidential
development does not create additional burden for parks and recreational facilities, thus its
proportionate share is 0% and is not assessed this IIP and development fees.

IIP FOR P ARKS

AND

R ECREATIONAL F ACILITIES

For each necessary public service that is the subject of a development fee, ARS 9-­‐463.05(E) requires the
IIP to include seven elements. This section details each of these seven elements for the Parks and
Recreational Facilities IIP.

10

Infrastructure Improvements Plan 03-­‐20-­‐13

City of Yuma, Arizona

The City currently has 113.7 acres of eligible parks serving the current peak population of 106,146
persons. The total acres include the West Wetlands Park. Per the definition of necessary public
services, the wetlands portion of this park is not included in the IIP and, therefore, would not be
included in the development fee calculations. The remaining acreage at West Wetlands (35 acres) is
larger than the 30-­‐acre threshold in the definition of necessary public services. However, given the
unique characteristics and amenities of this facility, the park provides a direct benefit to development.
The current level-­‐of-­‐service for parks is 0.0011 acres per person. The calculation for the current level-­‐of-­‐
service for residential development is as follows: (113.7 acres x 100% proportionate share)/106,146
persons = 0.0011 acres per person. The City’s Parks and Recreation Facility Plan prescribes a level-­‐of-­‐
service of 25 acres per 25,000 persons for area parks (0.0010 acres per person). The current level-­‐of-­‐
service is slightly above the design level-­‐of-­‐service.

12

Infrastructure Improvements Plan 03-­‐20-­‐13

City of Yuma, Arizona

FIRE FACILITIES
O VERVIEW
ARS 9-­‐463.05 (T)(7)(f) defines the facilities and assets which can be included in the Fire Facilities IIP:
“Fire facilities, including all appurtenances, equipment and vehicles. Fire facilities do not include
a facility or portion of a facility that is used to replace services that were once provided
elsewhere in the municipality, vehicles and equipment used to provide administrative services,
helicopters or airplanes or a facility that is used for training firefighters from more than one
station or substation.”
The Fire Facilities IIP includes components for stations (including apparatus), communications
equipment, and the cost of preparing the Fire Facilities IIP and development fees. The plan-­‐based
methodology utilizing the City’s Capital Improvement Program, Fiscal Year 2012-­‐2022 is used to
calculate each of the components of the Fire Facilities IIP.

S ERVICE A REA
The City’s Fire Services and Facilities Plan utilizes a Citywide goal of an average drive time of 4 minutes
for the first unit and 6 minutes for the second unit for emergency calls. The City’s networks of fire
stations are planned and operate as an integrated network. Depending on the number and type of calls,
apparatus can be dispatched across the City from any of the stations. As a result, the service area for
the Fire Facilities IIP is citywide.

P ROPORTIONATE S HARE
ARS 9-­‐463.05 (B)(3) states that the development fee shall not exceed a proportionate share of the cost
of necessary public services needed to provide necessary public services to the development.
The Fire Facilities IIP and development fees are assessed on both residential and nonresidential
development as both types of development create a burden for additional fire facilities. Calls for service
by land use are used to determine the proportionate share of this burden. Over the last ten years,
approximately 75% of non-­‐road related calls were to residential addresses with the remaining 25% going
to nonresidential addresses. Road related calls are omitted from this analysis because the origin and
destination of these trips is unknown and thus these calls cannot be attributed to residential or
nonresidential development.

21

Infrastructure Improvements Plan 03-­‐20-­‐13

City of Yuma, Arizona

IIP Element #4
ARS 9-­‐463.05(E)(4) requires:
“A table establishing the specific level or quantity of use, consumption, generation or discharge
of a service unit for each category of necessary public services or facility expansions and an
equivalency or conversion table establishing the ratio of a service unit to various types of land
uses, including residential, commercial and industrial.”
The number of persons per household and jobs per square foot from the Land Use Assumptions is
multiplied by the current level-­‐of-­‐service, which yields the number of units of infrastructure needed to
serve one service unit by type of development. To determine the ratio of a service unit to various types
of land uses, the number of units of infrastructure needed to serve one service unit by type of housing
unit or one square foot of nonresidential building by type is then divided by the number of units of
infrastructure needed to serve a single family house. For analytical purposes, this provides a basis for
comparing the infrastructure needs of all land use categories and types to a single family house.
However, it should be noted, this does not assume that the impacts of commercial, industrial, and
residential land uses are the same. This again, is simply an analytical technique used to provide a
common unit of measure.
Using the fire station needs of a multi-­‐family unit as an example, the number of persons per household
(2.55) is multiplied by the current level-­‐of-­‐service of 0.42 square feet per person. This results in 1.08
square feet of fire station facilities per multi-­‐family unit. This figure is then divided by the number of
square feet needed to serve a single family housing unit (1.37 square feet) which results in a ratio of
0.79. This can be read as a multi-­‐family unit having 79% of the needs of a single family unit. This
calculation is repeated for all types of development and each component of the IIP.

28

Infrastructure Improvements Plan 03-­‐20-­‐13

City of Yuma, Arizona

POLICE FACILITIES
O VERVIEW
ARS 9-­‐463.05 (T)(7)(f) defines the facilities and assets which can be included in the Police Facilities IIP:
“Police facilities, including all appurtenances, equipment and vehicles. Police facilities do not
include a facility or portion of a facility that is used to replace services that were once provided
elsewhere in the municipality, vehicles and equipment used to provide administrative services,
helicopters or airplanes or a facility that is used for training officers from more than one station
or substation.”
The Police Facilities IIP includes components for facilities, vehicles, communications equipment, and the
cost of preparing the Police Facilities IIP and development fees. The plan-­‐based methodology utilizing
the City’s Capital Improvement Program, Fiscal Year 2012-­‐2022 is used to calculate the stations and
communications equipment components of the Police Facilities IIP. The incremental expansion
methodology is used to calculate the vehicles component.

S ERVICE A REA
The City Police Department strives to provide a uniform response time across the City. The City’s
network of Police stations and substations are planned and operate as an integrated network. Patrol
vehicles and equipment are dispatched from across the City. As a result, the service area for the Police
Facilities IIP is citywide.

P ROPORTIONATE S HARE
ARS 9-­‐463.05 (B)(3) states that the development fee shall not exceed a proportionate share of the cost
of necessary public services needed to provide necessary public services to the development.
The Police Facilities IIP and development fees are assessed on both residential and nonresidential
development as both types of development create a burden for additional police facilities. Calls for
service by land use are used to determine the proportionate share of this burden. Based on three years
of call data, approximately 53% of non-­‐road related calls were to residential addresses with the
remaining 47% going to nonresidential addresses. Road related calls are omitted from this analysis
because the origin and destination of these trips is unknown and thus these calls cannot be attributed to
residential or nonresidential development.

33

Infrastructure Improvements Plan 03-­‐20-­‐13

City of Yuma, Arizona

GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITIES
O VERVIEW
ARS 9-­‐463.05 (T)(7)(f) does not include General Government Facilities as a necessary public service.
However, facilities which have been debt financed can be included in the IIP and development fees:
“Any facility that was financed and that meets all of the requirements prescribed in subsection R
of this section.
R. A municipality may continue to assess a development fee adopted before January 1, 2012 for
any facility that was financed before June 1, 2011 if:
1. Development fees were pledged to repay debt service obligations related to the
construction of the facility.
2. After August 1, 2014, any development fees collected under this subsection are used
solely for the payment of principal and interest on the portion of the bonds, notes or
other debt service obligations issued before June 1, 2011 to finance construction of the
facility.”
The City has outstanding debt service for City Hall, which meets the above criteria. Given that this
existing facility was oversized in anticipation of new development, the buy-­‐in methodology is used to
calculate this component of the General Government Facilities IIP. The cost of preparing the General
Government Facilities IIP and development fees is also included in the General Government Facilities IIP.

S ERVICE A REA
City Hall is a single, unique facility, which serves the City as a whole. This facility has a Citywide service
area.

P ROPORTIONATE S HARE
ARS 9-­‐463.05 (B)(3) states that the development fee shall not exceed a proportionate share of the cost
of necessary public services needed to provide necessary public services to the development.
The General Government Facilities IIP uses a functional population concept to allocate the proportionate
burdens and costs between residential and nonresidential development. The table distinguishes time at
home (2/3 of a day, 16 hours) versus time at work (1/3 of a day, 8 hours) and accounts for commuting
patterns in Yuma. According to 2005-­‐2009 data from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey
and Arizona Department of Commerce, 27% of workers living in the City go to work outside of the City.
Based on the total number of jobs in Yuma, there is also in-­‐migration of non-­‐resident workers.
According to the functional population analysis, residential development accounts for 83% of the
demand for General Government facilities and nonresidential development accounts for 17% of the
infrastructure demand.
47

Infrastructure Improvements Plan 03-­‐20-­‐13

City of Yuma, Arizona

STREET FACILITIES
O VERVIEW
ARS 9-­‐463.05 (T)(7)(f) defines the facilities and assets which can be included in the Street Facilities IIP:
“Street facilities located in the service area, including arterial or collector streets or roads that
have been designated on an officially adopted plan of the municipality, traffic signals and rights-­‐
of-­‐way and improvements thereon.”
The Street Facilities IIP includes components for arterial street improvement, arterial intersection
improvements, and the cost of preparing the Street Facilities IIP and development fees. The plan-­‐based
methodology utilizing the City’s Capital Improvement Program, Fiscal Year 2012-­‐2022 is used to
calculate the Street Facilities IIP.

S ERVICE A REA
The “Guiding Policy” section of the City’s Major Roadways Plan states the objective to “develop and
maintain a transportation network that provides reasonable and efficient access throughout the
community and supports existing and expanding economic activities.” The Street Facilities IIP includes
improvements to arterial streets and intersections. The Major Roadways Plan describes arterial streets
as “carrying trips of longer length and distribute traffic to the greatest geographic area”.
Since only arterials streets are included in the Streets IIP and Development Fees and given these
characteristics of how the City plans and designs its arterial street network, the service area for the
Street Facilities IIP is Citywide.

P ROPORTIONATE S HARE
ARS 9-­‐463.05 (B)(3) states that the development fee shall not exceed a proportionate share of the cost
of necessary public services needed to provide necessary public services to the development.
Trip generation rates and trip adjustment factors, from Trip Generation published by the Institute of
Transportation Engineers, are used to determine the proportionate impact of residential, commercial,
office, and industrial land uses on the City’s streets network.

IIP FOR S TREET F ACILITIES
For each necessary public service that is the subject of a development fee, ARS 9-­‐463.05(E) requires the
IIP to include seven elements. This section details each of these seven elements for the Street Facilities
IIP.

58

Infrastructure Improvements Plan 03-­‐20-­‐13

City of Yuma, Arizona

IIP Element #1
ARS 9-­‐463.05(E)(1) requires:
“A description of the existing necessary public services in the service area and the costs to
upgrade, update, improve, expand, correct or replace those necessary public services to meet
existing needs and usage and stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards,
which shall be prepared by qualified professionals licensed in this state, as applicable.”
The City’s FY2012-­‐FY2022 Capital Improvements Program identifies a total of $149,194,455 of capital
needs for Streets. Of this total, $5,992,170 is the result of new development and included in the IIP and
development fee calculations. The balance of these projects reflect the costs to upgrade, improve,
expand, correct or replace street facilities to meet existing needs and usage and stricter safety,
efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards.
Figure 49: IIP Element #1

IIP Element #2
ARS 9-­‐463.05(E)(2) requires:
“An analysis of the total capacity, the level of current usage and commitments for usage of
capacity of the existing necessary public services, which shall be prepared by qualified
professionals licensed in this state, as applicable.”
The City’s current arterial network operates at a LOS D or better on an average weekday basis. Using
the current number of 249.5 arterial lane miles in the City, current residential and nonresidential
development estimates from the Land Use Assumptions, and vehicle trip generation rates from Trip
Generation, it is possible to calculate the current average miles per trip on the City’s arterial street
network. The current average miles per trip from existing development on the City’s existing arterial
street network is 6.12 miles. The current LOS D and current average trip length will be used in
calculating the Street Facilities IIP and development fees.

59

Infrastructure Improvements Plan 03-­‐20-­‐13

City of Yuma, Arizona

is 43.9 lane miles and $4,249,070. Note: The portions of the planned expenditures, which are to be
funded with state or Federal revenues, are not included in the IIP calculations.
Based on the current LOS D, the arterial capacity standard of 8,100 vehicles per lane mile is multiplied by
the planned 43.9 lane miles of planned arterial improvements attributable to new development. This
results in 355,282 vehicle miles of travel (VMT) from new development to be accommodated by the
planned arterial improvements (8,100 vehicles per lane mile x 43.9 lane miles = 355,282 vehicle miles of
travel). The cost of the portion of the planned arterial improvements attributable to new development
($4,249,070) is divided by vehicle miles of travel from new development (355,282), yielding a cost per
VMT of $11.95.
Figure 51: IIP Element #3 – Arterial Street Improvements

City Engineering Department growth share estimates, for the portion of the planned arterial intersection
improvements that are necessitated and attributable to new development, are shown in Figure 52. The
total cost necessitated and attributable to new development is $1,743,100. Note: The portions of the
planned expenditures, which are to be funded with state or Federal revenues, are not included in the IIP
calculations.
Based on the current LOS D, the arterial capacity standard of 8,100 vehicles per lane mile is multiplied by
the planned 43.9 lane miles of planned arterial improvements attributable to new development. This
results in 355,282 vehicle miles of travel (VMT) from new development to be accommodated by the
planned arterial improvements (8,100 vehicles per lane mile x 43.9 lane miles = 355,282 vehicle miles of
61

Infrastructure Improvements Plan 03-­‐20-­‐13

City of Yuma, Arizona

travel). The cost of the portion of the planned arterial intersection improvements attributable to new
development ($1,743,100), divided by vehicle miles of travel from new development (355,282), yields a
cost of $4.90 per VMT.
Figure 52: IIP Element #3 – Arterial Intersection Improvements

The cost to prepare the Streets Facilities IIP and development fees totals $30,750. The City plans to
update its report every five years. Based on this cost, proportionate share, and five year projections of
new residential and nonresidential development from the Land Use Assumptions, the cost per trip is
$1.93.

62

Infrastructure Improvements Plan 03-­‐20-­‐13

Figure 54: IIP Element #4

64

City of Yuma, Arizona

Infrastructure Improvements Plan 03-­‐20-­‐13

City of Yuma, Arizona

IIP Elements #5 and #6
ARS 9-­‐463.05(E)(5) requires:
“The total number of projected service units necessitated by and attributable to new
development in the service area based on the approved land use assumptions and calculated
pursuant to generally accepted engineering and planning criteria.”
ARS 9-­‐463.05(E)(6) requires:
“The projected demand for necessary public services or facility expansions required by new
service units for a period not to exceed ten years.”
The Land Use Assumptions projects an additional 1,989 housing units and 2,509,247 square feet of
nonresidential buildings over the next ten years. Projected service units are multiplied by the current
levels-­‐of-­‐service, indicating new development demands an additional 43.9 lane miles of arterial streets
over the next ten years.
Figure 55: IIP Elements #5 and #6

65

Infrastructure Improvements Plan 03-­‐20-­‐13

City of Yuma, Arizona

IIP Element #7
ARS 9-­‐463.05(E)(7) requires:
“A forecast of revenues generated by new service units other than development fees, which shall
include estimated state-­‐shared revenue, highway users revenue, federal revenue, ad valorem
property taxes, construction contracting or similar excise taxes and the capital recovery portion
of utility fees attributable to development based on the approved land use assumptions, and a
plan to include these contributions in determining the extent of the burden imposed by the
development as required in subsection B, paragraph 12 of this section.”
TischlerBise has projected on-­‐going and one-­‐time revenues based on the development projections in the
Land Use Assumptions document, characteristics of new development, and the City’s current revenue
structure and rates.
The revenues included in this analysis and the applicable rates and calculation methodologies are shown
in the figure below.

66