22-T-12 -Amending Chapter 78 Article VII Roadway Capital Recovery FeesORDINANCE NO. 22-T-12
ROADWAY CAPITAL RECOVERY FEES
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS, AMENDING THE
CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS BY
AMENDING CHAPTER 78, ARTICLE VII: ROADWAY CAPITAL RECOVERY
FEES; INCORPORATING AMENDED LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS AND
AMENDED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS FOR SUCH FACILITIES;
PROVIDING FOR COLLECTION OF IMPACT FEES; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY CLAUSE FOR
VIOLATIONS OF THIS ORDINANCE.
WHEREAS, the City of Schertz is responsible for and committed to the
provision of public facilities at levels necessary to cure any existing roadway facility
deficiencies in already developed areas and insure the provisions of adequate roadway
facilities in the future; and
WHEREAS, such facilities shall be provided by the City utilizing funds allocated
in the capital budget and capital improvements programming processes and relying upon
the funding sources indicated therein; and
WHEREAS, new residential and nonresidential development causes and imposes
increased demands upon roadway facilities that would not otherwise occur; and
WHEREAS, planning projections indicate that such development will continue
and will place ever - increasing demands on the City to provide necessary roadway
facilities improvements and expansion; and
WHEREAS, to the extent that such new development places demands upon the
roadway facility infrastructure, those demands should be satisfied by more equitably
assigning responsibility for financing the provision of such facilities from the public at
large to the developments actually creating the demands for them; and
WHEREAS, the amount of the roadway capital recovery fee to be imposed shall
be determined by the cost of the additional roadway facilities needed to support such
development, which roadway facilities shall be identified in a capital improvements
program; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has previously approved land use assumptions and
capital improvement plans for purposes of adopting roadway capital recovery fees and
adopted Ordinance 18 -M -13; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council, after careful consideration of the matter, and upon
recommendations from the Capital Improvement Advisory Committee hereby finds and
declares that roadway capital recovery fees imposed upon residential and nonresidential
development to finance specified public roadway facilities, the demand for which is
created by such development, is in the best interests of the general welfare of the City and
Page 1 of 3
its residents, is equitable, and does not impose an unfair burden on such development;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council after careful consideration of the matter and upon
the recommendation of the Capital Improvements Advisory Committee find the need to
adopt amended land use assumptions and an amended capital improvements plan
establishing new maximum assessable impact fees; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that in all things the City has complied with
said Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code as the applicable state statute in
the notice, adoption, promulgation and methodology necessary to adopt amended
Roadway Capital Recovery Fees;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS:
Section 1. The Code of Ordinances of the City of Schertz is hereby amended by
amending Chapter 78 Article VII Roadway Capital Recovery Fees as set forth in Exhibit
A and incorporated herein by reference.
Section 2. The recitals contained in the preamble hereof are hereby found to be true, and
such recitals are hereby made a part of this Ordinance for all purposes and are adopted as
a part of the judgment and findings of the Council.
Section 3. All ordinances and codes, or parts thereof, which are in conflict or
inconsistent with any provision of this Ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of
such conflict, and the provisions of this Ordinance shall be and remain controlling as to
the matters resolved herein.
Section 4. This Ordinance shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws
of the State of Texas and the United States of America.
Section 5. If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or
circumstance shall be held to be invalid, the remainder of this Ordinance and the
application of such provision to other persons and circumstances shall nevertheless be
valid, and the City hereby declares that this Ordinance would have been enacted without
such invalid provision.
Section 6. It is officially found, determined, and declared that the meeting at which this
Ordinance is adopted was open to the public and public notice of the time, place, and
subject matter of the public business to be considered at such meeting, including this
Ordinance, was given, all as required by Chapter 551, as amended, Texas Government
Code.
Section 7. This Ordinance shall be effective upon the date of final adoption hereof and
any publication required by law.
PASSED ON FIRST READING, the 5th day of April, 2022.
Page 2 of 3
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED ON SECOND READING, the 12th day of April,
2022.
CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS
R Gu fffez, ayor
ATTEST: —
r"
oPity Secretary, Br a Dennis
i Y SEAL)
EXHIBIT A: Code Amendment
EXHIBIT B: 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Program Amendment Technical Memorandum
Page 3 of 3
Exhibit A
PART II - CODE OF ORDINANCES
Chapter 78 - STREETS AND SIDEWALKS
ARTICLE VII. ROADWAY CAPITAL RECOVERY FEES
ARTICLE VII. ROADWAY CAPITAL RECOVERY FEES
Sec. 78 -170. Short title.
This article be known and cited as the Schertz Roadway Capital Recovery Fees Article.
(Ord. No. 18-M-13, § 1(Exh. A), 3 -27 -2018)
Sec. 78 -171. Purpose.
This article is intended to ensure the provision of adequate roadway facilities to serve new development in
the city by requiring each development to pay its share of the costs of such improvements necessitated by and
attributable to such new development.
(Ord. No. 18 -M -13 , § 1(Exh. A), 3 -27 -2018)
Sec. 78 -172. Authority.
This article is adopted pursuant to V.T.C.A., Local Government Code ch. 395 and the City Charter. The
provisions of this article shall not be construed to limit the power of the city to utilize all powers and procedures
authorized under V.T.C.A., Local Government Code ch. 395, or other methods authorized under state law or
pursuant to other city powers to accomplish the purposes set forth herein, either in substitution or in conjunction
with this article. Guidelines may be developed by ordinance, resolution, or otherwise to implement and administer
this article.
(Ord. No. 18 -M -13 , § 1(Exh. A), 3 -27 -2018)
Sec. 78 -173. Definitions.
Assessment means the determination of the amount of the maximum capital recovery fee per service unit
which can be imposed on new development pursuant to this article. The amount of the capital recovery fee per
service unit is a measure of the traffic impact on system facilities created by the new development.
Capital improvement means a roadway facility with a life expectancy of three or more years, to be owned
and operated by or on behalf of the city (including the city's share of costs for roadways and associated
improvements designated as a numbered highway on the official federal or state highway system). "Capital
improvement" applies to a newly constructed roadway facility or to the expansion of an existing roadway facility
necessary to serve new development.
Capital improvements plan for roadway capital recovery fees identifies the capital improvements or facility
expansions and associated costs for each roadway service area that are necessitated by and which are attributable
to new development within the service area, for a period not to exceed ten years, which capital improvements are
to be financed in whole or in part through the imposition of roadway capital recovery fees pursuant to this article.
The capital improvements plan for roadway capital recovery fees is set out in the adopted "Schertz Roadway
Impact Fee Capital Improvements Plan Final Report" adopted by resolution of the city council, and attached to Ord.
No. 18 -M -13 as exhibit B and the 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Program Amendment Technical Memorandum
attachea to Ordinance 22 -T -12 as Exhibit A.
Schertz, Texas, Code of Ordinances
(Supp. No. 20)
Page 1 of 10
Created: 2021 -08 -24 12:49:25 [EST]
Capital recovery fee or roadway capital recovery fee (also referred to as roadway impact fee) means a charge
or assessment imposed by the city, pursuant to this article, against new development in order to generate revenue
for funding or recouping the costs of capital improvements or facility expansions necessitated by and attributable
to the new development. "Capital recovery fees" or "roadway capital recovery fees" do not include road escrow
payments for site - related facilities imposed under facility agreements in existence on the effective date of this
article. The term also does not include dedication of rights -of -way or easements or construction or dedication of
drainage facilities, streets, sidewalks, or curbs if the dedication or construction is required by the subdivision
ordinance and is necessitated by and attributable to the new development.
Capital recovery plan or Impact fee plan means the plan that identifies the calculation of the maximum
assessable capital recovery fee for each service area based on the adopted capital improvements plan and land use
assumptions. The capital recovery plan is set out in the "2017 Schertz Roadway Impact Fee Final Report" and
attached to Ord. No. 18 -M -13 as exhibit C and the 2021 Roadway Impact Fee Program Amendment Technical
Mr, -�ndum attached to Ord. 22 -T -12 as Exhibit A.:
City means the City of Schertz, Texas.
Credit means:
(1) When used in the context of determining the maximum assessable capital recovery fee per service
unit, an amount equal to:
a. That portion of ad valorem tax and utility service revenues generated by new service units during
the program period that is used for the payment of improvements, including the payment of
debt, that are included in the capital improvements plan; or
b. In the alternative, a credit equal to 50 percent of the total projected cost of implementing the
capital improvements plan; or
(2) When used in the context of determining the offset for system facilities, the amount of the reduction
of an capital recovery fee designed to fairly reflect the value of any construction of, contributions to, or
dedications of a system facility agreed to or required by the city as a condition of development
approval, pursuant to rules herein established or pursuant to city council- approved administrative
guidelines which value shall be credited on a vehicle mile basis against roadway facilities capital
recovery fees otherwise due from the development and which credits are hereinafter referred to as an
"offset" or "offsets" to avoid confusion.
Development unit or development units is the expression of the magnitude of the transportation demand
created by each land use planned within a particular development and is used to compute the number of service
units consumed by each individual land use application.
Final plat recordation or recordation of o final plat means the point at which the applicant has complied with
all conditions precedent to recording an approved final plat (minor plat or record plat) in the county, including the
final completion of and acceptance by the city of any infrastructure or other improvements required by the
subdivision ordinance or any other ordinance and the plat is filed for record with the county clerk's office.
Land use assumptions means and includes a description of the service areas and the projections of
population and employment growth and associated changes in land uses, densities and intensities adopted by the
city, as may be amended from time to time, in each service area over a ten -year period upon which the roadway
improvements plan is based. The land use assumptions are set out in the adopted document " Schertz Roadway
Impact Fee Land Use Assumptions Final Report" adopted by resolution of the city council, and attached to Ord. No.
18 -M -13 as exhibit D and the 2021 Roadway Imoact Fee Program Amendment Technical Memorandum attached to
Ord. 22-T-12 as Exhibit A.
Land use vehicle -mile equivalency table or LUVMET is a table that provides the standardized measure of
consumption or use of roadway facilities attributable to a new development based on the land use category of the
(Supp. No. 20)
Page 2 of 10
Created: 2021 -08 -24 12:49:25 [EST]
development and historical data and trends applicable to the city during the previous ten years. The LUVMET
recognizes and expresses the magnitude of the transportation demand created by different land use categories
within a particular development and allow different uses of land to more accurately bear the cost and expense of
the impacts generated by such uses. The LUVMET expresses the number of service units consumed by each
individual land use application as "vehicle miles (per development unit)." The applicable LUVMET is included by
reference as Table 7 of the capital recovery plan. For land use categories with no applicability to those on Table 7,
the applicant may petition for the use of an appropriate vehicle -mile equivalent by submitting a trip generation
study including trip rates and lengths reflecting specific conditions of the proposed land use and local trip lengths.
The study must include enough data to be statistically valid and approval will be at the discretion of the city
manager or designee.
New development means a project involving the subdivision of land and /or the construction, reconstruction,
redevelopment, conversion, structural alteration, relocation, or enlargement of any structure, or any use or
extension of the use of land which has the effect of increasing the requirements for capital improvements,
measured by an increase in the number of service units to be generated by such activity, and which requires either
the approval and filing with the county of a plat pursuant to the city's subdivision ordinance or the issuance of a
building permit.
Offset or offsets means the amount of the reduction of an capital recovery fee designed to fairly reflect the
value of any construction of, contributions to, or dedications of a system facility agreed to or required by the city
as a condition of development approval, pursuant to rules herein established, using the values established in the
capital recovery plan, or pursuant to city council- approved administrative guidelines which value shall be credited
on a vehicle mile basis against roadway facilities capital recovery fees otherwise due from the development.
Preliminary plat approval means the point at which the applicant has complied with all conditions of
approval and the plat has been approved by the planning and zoning commission.
Recoup means to reimburse the city for capital improvements which the city has previously installed or
caused to be installed.
Roadway means any freeway, expressway or arterial or collector streets or roads designated in the city's
adopted master thoroughfare plan, as may be amended from time to time. The term includes the city's share of
costs for roadways designated as a numbered highway on the official federal or state highway system.
Roadway facility means an improvement or appurtenance to a roadway which includes, but is not limited to,
rights -of -way, whether conveyed by deed or easement; intersection improvements; traffic signals; turn lanes;
drainage facilities associated with the roadway; street lighting or curbs. "Roadway facility" also includes any
improvement or appurtenance to an intersection with a roadway officially enumerated in the federal or state
highway system. "Roadway facility" includes the city's share of costs for roadways and associated improvements
designated as a numbered highway on the official federal or state highway system, including local matching funds
and costs related to utility line relocation and the establishment of curbs, gutters, drainage appurtenances, and
rights -of -way. "Roadway facility" excludes those improvements or appurtenances to a roadway which are site -
related facilities.
Roadway service area or roadway benefits area means the geographic area(s) within the city's corporate
limits, which do not exceed six miles and within which geographic area(s) roadway capital recovery fees for capital
improvements will be collected for new development occurring within such area, and within which fees so
collected will be expended for those capital improvements identified in the capital improvements plan to be
located within the roadway service area. "Roadway service area" does not include any land outside the city limits.
Roadway service areas are shown on Figure 1 of the f .! %,..V ,t j,WLL : t I ° ,.� �r�� � ��5� �����i���r +i3Ciliflcai
Memorandum that �t of thr capital recovery plan.
Service unit means one vehicle mile of travel in the afternoon peak hour of traffic and is also referred to as a
"vehicle mile."
Created: 2021 -08 -24 12:49:25 [EST]
(Supp. No. 20)
Page 3 of 10
Service unit equivalent means the amount of capacity created by contribution of a capital improvement on
behalf of a new development, expressed in vehicle miles.
Single family residential lot means a lot platted to accommodate a single family or a duplex dwelling unit, as
authorized under the city's zoning regulations.
Site - related facility means an improvement or facility which is constructed for the primary use or benefit of a
new development and /or which is for the primary purpose of safe and adequate provision of roadway facilities to
serve the new development and which is not included in the roadway improvements plan and for which the
developer or property owner is solely responsible under the subdivision, and /or other applicable, regulations.
System facility means a capital improvement which is designated in the capital improvements plan and which
is not a site - related facility. A system facility may include a capital improvement which is located off -site, within, or
on and along the perimeter of the new development site.
(Ord. No. 18-M-13, § 1(Exh. A), 3 -27 -2018)
Sec. 78 -174. Applicability.
The provisions of this article apply to all new developments within the corporate boundaries of the city. The
provisions of this article apply uniformly within each roadway benefit area.
(Ord. No. 18-M-13, § 1(Exh. A), 3 -27 -2018)
Sec. 78 -175. Roadway capital recovery fees per service unit.
(a) The maximum assessable capital recovery fee per service unit (post- credit) for any use in each service area
pl_a_,tted on or before April 12, 202, shall be as calculated and documented in the capital recovery plan as
follows:
(1) The capital recovery fee per service unit in Service Area 1 is $1,647.53.
(2) The capital recovery fee per service unit in Service Area 2 is $1,327.89.
(3) The capital recovery fee per service unit in Service Area 3 is $1,044.48.
(4) The capital recovery fee per service unit in Service Area 4 is $2,392.72.
(b) The maximum assessable capital recovery fee per service unit (post- credit) for any use in each service area
platted on or after April 13, 2022 shall be as calculated and documented in the capital recovery plan per the
2021 Roadway Impact Fee Program Amendment Technical Memorandum as follows:
(1) The capital recovery fee per service unit in Service Area 1 is $1,614.54.
(2) The capital recovery fee per service unit in Service Area 2 is $1,350.25.
3 The capital recovery fee per service unit in Service Area 3 is $1061.26.
(4) The capital_recovery fee,per service unit in Service Area 4 is U,386.93.
The assessable capital recovery fee per service unit set forth herein that is assessed to new development, as
may be amended from time to time, is declared to be the roughly proportionate measure of the impact(s)
generated by a new unit of development on the city's transportation system. To the extent that the capital
recovery fee per service unit collected is less than the maximum assessable capital recovery fee per service
(Supp. No. 20)
Page 4 of 10
Created: 2021 -08 -24 12:49:25 [EST]
unit (post credit), as calculated and documented in the capital recovery plan, such difference is hereby
declared to be founded on policies unrelated to the measurement of the actual impacts of the development
on the city's transportation system. The maximum assessable capital recovery fee per service unit may be
used in evaluating any claim by an applicant, developer, or property owner that the dedication, construction,
or contribution of a capital improvement imposed as a condition of development approval pursuant to the
city's regulations is not roughly proportionate to the impact(s) of the new development on the city's
transportation system.
(Ord. No. 18-M-13, § 1(Exh. A), 3 -27 -2018)
Sec. 78 -176. Assessment of capital recovery fees.
(a) Assessment of the capital recovery fee per service unit for any new development shall be made as follows:
(1) Assessment of capital recovery fee shall be made at the time of recordation of a final plat and shall be
the amount of the maximum assessable capital recovery fee per service unit.
(2) Development on a lot for which a final plat has been recorded prior to the effective date of this article
(March 27, 2018) shall not be charged a capital recovery fee for any complete building permit
application submitted within 18 months from the effective date of this article (September 27,2019).
(3) Development on a lot for which a preliminary plat was approved prior to the effective date of this
article (March 27, 2018) shall not be charged a capital recovery fee for any complete building permit
application submitted within one year from the effective date of this article (March 27, 2019).
(4) Any other development will be charged a capital recovery fee for a complete building permit
application submitted after the date of adoption of the ordinance (March 27, 2018).
(b) Following assessment of the capital recovery fee pursuant to subsection (a), the amount of the capital
recovery fee assessed per service unit for that new development cannot be increased, unless the owner
proposes to change the approved development by the submission of a new application for final plat approval
or replat approval, in which case new assessment shall occur at the maximum assessable, applicable rate
then in effect.
(c) Following the vacating of any plat or submittal of any replat, a new assessment must be made in accordance
with section 78 -175.
(d) Approval of an amending plat pursuant to Texas Local Government Code § 212.016 and the UDC is not
subject to reassessment of a capital recovery fee hereunder provided that the use of the property remains
the same.
(Ord. No. 18 -M -13 , § 1(Exh. A), 3 -27 -2018)
Sec. 78 -177. Payment and collection of capital recovery fees.
(a) For all new developments, capital recovery fees shall be collected at the time of application for and in
conjunction with the issuance of a building permit. The capital recovery fees to be paid and collected are as
follows:
(1) The capital recovery fee per service unit for residential use shall be $600.00 beginning the effective
date of this article (March 27, 2018) until the last day of the second year from the effective date of this
article (March 26, 2020).
(Supp. No. 20)
Page 5 of 10
Created: 2021 -08 -24 12:49:25 [EST]
(2) The capital recovery fee per service unit for residential use shall be $800.00 beginning on the first day
of the third year from the effective date of this article (March 27, 2020) and continuing until the last
day of the third year from the effective date of this article (March 26, 2021).
(3) The capital recovery fee per service unit for residential use shall be $900.00 beginning on the first day
of the fourth year from the effective date of this article (March 27, 2021) and continuing until the last
day of the fourth year from the effective date of this article (March 26, 2022).
(4) The capital recovery fee per service unit for residential use shall be $1,000.00 beginning on the first day
of the fifth year from the effective date of this article (March 27, 2022) and continuing until a new rate
is adopted.
(b) The capital recovery fee per service unit for nonresidential use for all roadway service areas shall be as
follows:
(1) The capital recovery fee per service unit for nonresidential use shall be $100.00 beginning the effective
date of this article (March 27, 2018) until the last day of the third year from the effective date of this
article (March 26, 2021).
(2) The capital recovery fee per service unit for nonresidential use shall be $175.00 beginning on the first
day of the fourth year from the effective date of this article (March 27, 2021) and continuing until a
new rate is adopted.
(c) The city reserves the right to enter into an agreement with a developer for a different time and manner of
payment of capital recovery fees in which case the agreement shall determine the time and manner of
payment.
(d) The city shall compute the capital recovery fees to be paid and collected for the new development in the
following manner:
(1) Determine the number of development units for each land use category in the new development using
Table 7 of the capital recovery plan.
(2) Multiply the number of development units for each land use category in the new development by the
vehicle miles (per development unit) for each such land use category also found in Table 7 of the
capital recovery plan to determine the number of service units attributable to the new development.
(3) If an offset agreement providing for offsets and credits against capital recovery fees exists, the number
of service units attributable to the new development shall be reduced by subtracting available service
unit equivalents as provided in section 78 -178. If adequate service unit equivalents for offsets and
credits are available in an amount equal to or greater than the number of service units generated
(required) by this new development, no fee is paid, but the pool of available service unit equivalents
shall be reduced accordingly.
(4) The amount of capital recovery fees to be collected shall be determined by multiplying the number of
service units for the new development by the applicable capital recovery fee per service unit identified
herein and shall be calculated at the time of application for and in conjunction with the issuance of a
building permit.
(e) If the building permit for which a capital recovery fee has been paid has expired, and a new application is
thereafter filed, the capital recovery fees shall be computed using the LUVMET and the applicable capital
recovery fee per service unit identified herein with credits for previous payment of fees being applied against
any new fees due.
(f) Whenever the property owner proposes to increase the number of service units for a development, the
additional capital recovery fees collected for such new service units shall be determined by using the
Created: 2021 -08 -24 12:49:25 [EST]
(Supp. No. 20)
Page 6 of 10
LUVMET and applicable fee per service unit identified herein, and such additional fees shall be collected at
the times prescribed by this section.
(Ord. No. 18 -M -13 , § 1(Exh. A), 3 -27 -2018)
Sec. 78-178. Offsets and credits against capital recovery fees.
(a) The city shall offset the reasonable value of any system facility which has been dedicated to and has been
accepted by the city no more than 18 months prior to the effective date of this article (September 27, 2016),
or offset the amount of any contributions to such facility, against the amount of the roadway capital
recovery fees due, in accordance with the rules set forth in this section. The value of an offset must be stated
in service units.
(b) This subsection applies only to an offset associated with a capital improvement on the capital improvement
plan contributed to the city no more than 18 months prior to the effective date of this article (September 27,
2016).
(1) For purposes of this subsection (b), an offset associated with a capital improvement on the roadway
improvement plan contributed to the city no more than 18 months prior to the effective date of this
article (September 27, 2016) is created at the time that the city accepts the system facility for
dedication or as may be otherwise stipulated in a binding agreement for the facility pursuant to the
city's subdivision regulations.
(2) At the time the offset is created, if no offset agreement exists, the developer shall apply for an offset
agreement, and the agreement thereafter shall be enforced in accordance with the following terms,
providing:
a. Identification of the plat with which the offset is to be associated;
b. The amount of the capacity created by the system facility, expressed in service unit equivalents;
C. A provision stating that the offset may be used to reduce capital recovery fees imposed on new
developments contained within the land subject to the associated plat after the effective date of
the agreement; and
d. A provision that the amount of the offset shall be determined by estimating the number of
service unit equivalents of capacity supplied by the system facility (as set forth in the capital
recovery plan), reduced by:
The number of service units developed within the plat since the contribution of the system
facility, using the LUVMET;
The amount of the city's participation in the excess costs of the system facility (expressed
in service unit equivalents); and
The amount of any payments received from other new developments utilizing the system
facility (expressed in service unit equivalents); and
e. A provision for reimbursement of any unused offsets consistent with subsection (b)(4) of this
section.
(Supp. No. 20)
A provision stating that in those instances where the city determines the unique characteristics of
a roadway segment (such as drainage, topography, easements required, absence of roadway
segments remaining in service area) and the projected cost to construct a section of roadway is
not roughly proportionate to the dollar value of the vehicle mile credits which may be awarded
for that roadway section, the city may consider, upon request of the developer, awarding capital
recovery fee offsets based upon the developer's verified, actual costs of said roadway section.
Page 7 of 10
Created: 2021 -08 -24 12:49:25 [EST]
The developer may assign the offset agreement with the city's consent, but in no event shall the
offsets provided for in the agreement be transferred to any development not subject to the plat
associated with such offsets.
(3) The developer may petition the city council for offsets for contribution of a capital improvement,
including road right -of -way, which is not identified in the capital improvements plan, if the
improvement will supply capacity to new developments other than to the development seeking the
offset, at the time the facility is accepted by the city or a binding facilities agreement for the facility is
executed pursuant to the city's subdivision regulations. If the petition is granted, the terms shall be
incorporated into an offset agreement as provided in subsection (b)(2) hereof. The agreement shall
also provide that the amount of the offset shall not exceed the capacity of the capital improvement
that is estimated to be provided.
(4) As provided in the offset agreement required by subsection (b)(2), hereof, the developer may apply for
reimbursement of excess offsets following either completion of all development subject to the plat
with which the offsets are associated or after ten years following execution of the offset agreement.
The following rules apply to such reimbursement, and shall be incorporated into the offset agreement.
a. The developer must apply for reimbursement within six months following either:
1. Completion of all development subject to the plat with which the offsets are associated; or
2. Ten years after the date of execution of the offset agreement.
b. The following terms shall be incorporated into the reimbursement agreement and the agreement
shall be enforced in accordance with such terms:
1. A provision stating that the amount to be reimbursed shall be equal to the number of
unused offsets (expressed as a number of service units) multiplied by a fraction equal to
the capital recovery fee per service unit to be collected, as set forth herein in effect on the
date of execution of the offset agreement, divided by the maximum assessable capital
recovery fee per service unit, as set forth herein and in the capital recovery plan in effect
on the date of execution of the offset agreement;
2. A provision stating that the amount to be reimbursed may be further equitably reduced, if
fewer than 50 percent of the number of service units in the plat with which the system
facility giving rise to the offset have been developed on the date of application for
reimbursement;
3. A provision stating that repayment shall be made within five years from the date of
execution of the reimbursement agreement, from roadway capital recovery fees collected
within the same roadway service area in which the property in question is located, subject
to the availability of such funds;
4. A provision that termination or reduction of the city's authority under state law to impose
capital recovery fees for roadway facilities shall terminate or correspondingly reduce any
obligation of the city to make payments under the offset agreement; and
5. A provision stating that, in converting the offsets from service unit equivalents to a dollar
value, the number of service unit equivalents shall be multiplied by the value of a service
unit expressed in dollars using the rates set forth herein in effect at the time the offset
agreement was executed.
C. Execution of a reimbursement agreement shall automatically terminate any offsets associated
with a plat pursuant to an offset agreement. Thereafter, new development within the area
subject to the plat shall pay roadway capital recovery fees in accordance with schedule 1 then in
effect.
(Supp. No. 20)
Page 8 of 10
Created: 2021 -08 -24 12:49:25 [EST]
(Ord. No. 18-M-13, § 1(Exh. A), 3 -27 -2018)
Sec. 78 -179. Use of proceeds of roadway capital recovery fees.
(a) The capital recovery fees collected within each roadway benefit area may be used to finance, pay for or to
recoup the costs of any roadway facility identified in the capital improvements plan for the roadway benefit
area, including the construction contract price, surveying and engineering fees, land acquisition costs
(including land purchases, court awards and costs, attorney's fees, and expert witness fees), and amounts
designated in any reimbursement agreements executed pursuant to this article.
(b) Capital recovery fees may be used to pay for the contract services of an independent qualified engineer or
financial consultant preparing or updating the capital improvements plan who is not an employee of the
political subdivision.
(c) Capital recovery fees also may be used to pay the principal sum and interest and other finance costs on
bonds, notes or other obligations issued by or on behalf of the city to finance such capital improvement.
(Ord. No. 18 -M -13 , § 1(Exh. A), 3 -27 -2018)
Sec. 78 -180. Appeals.
(a) The property owner or applicant for a new development may appeal the following administrative decisions
to the city council:
(1) The applicability of a capital recovery fee to the new development;
(2) The amount of the capital recovery fee due;
(3) The availability of, the amount of, or the expiration of an offset or a credit;
(4) The application of an offset against a capital recovery fee due;
(5) The amount of the capital recovery fee in proportion to the benefit received by the new development;
or
(6) The amount of a refund due, if any.
(b) The appellant shall state the basis for the appeal in writing with particularity. The burden of proof shall be on
the appellant to demonstrate that the amount of the fee or the amount of the offset was not calculated
according to the rules set forth in this article or by administrative guideline adopted by the city council. The
appellant shall submit any traffic study or other documents upon which he relies to the city with the request
for appeal.
(c) The appellant must file a notice of appeal with the city secretary within 30 days following the decision. If the
notice of appeal is accompanied by a bond or other sufficient surety with offices for local presentment in a
form satisfactory to the city attorney in an amount equal to the original determination of the capital
recovery fee due, the development application may be processed while the appeal is pending.
(d) The appellant shall promptly pay to the city the full amount of the capital recovery fee determined to be due
by the city council regarding such appeal. Failure to promptly pay such capital recovery fee within five
business days after the city council's determination on the appeal shall serve as authority for the city to
present the bond or other surety to the bonding company or financial institution for performance with no
other or further notice or contact with the appellant.
(Ord. No. 18 -M -13 , § 1(Exh. A), 3 -27 -2018)
(Supp. No. 20)
Page 9 of 10
Created: 2021 -08 -24 12:49:25 [EST]
Sec. 78 -181. Refunds.
(a) Any capital recovery fee or portion thereof collected pursuant to this article which has not been expended
within the applicable roadway service area for an authorized purpose within ten years from the date of
payment shall be refunded, upon application, to the record owner of the property at the time the refund is
paid or, if the capital recovery fee, was paid by another governmental entity, to such governmental entity,
together with interest calculated from the date of collection to the date of refund at the statutory rate as set
forth in the Texas Finance Code § 302.002 of or its successor statute. The application for refund pursuant to
this section shall be submitted in writing within 60 days after the expiration of the ten -year period for
expenditure of the fee. A capital recovery fee shall be considered expended on a first -in, first -out basis.
(b) A capital recovery fee collected pursuant to this article shall be considered expended if the total
expenditures for capital improvements authorized in this article within the roadway service area within ten
years following the date of payment exceed the total fees collected for such improvements during that time
period.
(c) If a refund is due pursuant to subsections (a) or (b), the city shall prorate the refund by dividing the
difference between the amount of expenditures and the amount of the fees collected by the total number of
service units assumed within the roadway service area for the period to determine the refund due per
service unit. The refund to the record owner shall be calculated by multiplying the refund due per service
unit by the number of service units for the new development for which the fee was paid, and interest due
shall be calculated upon that amount.
(d) If the building permit for a new development for which a capital recovery fee has been paid has expired and
a modified or new application has not been filed within six months of such expiration, the city shall, upon
written application, refund the amount of the capital recovery fee to the applicant. The city may establish
guidelines for refunding of capital recovery fees collected for which construction plans have been
abandoned.
(Ord. No. 18 -M -13 , § 1(Exh. A), 3 -27 -2018)
Sec. 78 -182. Relief procedures.
(a) Any person who has paid a capital recovery fee or an owner of land upon which an capital recovery fee has
been paid may petition the city council to determine whether any duty required by this article has not been
performed within the time so prescribed. The petition shall be in writing and shall state the nature of the
unperformed duty and request that the act be performed within 60 days of the request. If the city council
determines that the duty is required, pursuant to the ordinance and is late in being performed, it shall cause
the duty to commence within 60 days of the date of the request and to continue until completion.
(b) The city council may grant a variance or waiver from any requirement of this article, upon written request by
a developer or owner of property subject to the ordinance, following a public hearing, and only upon finding
that a strict application of such requirement would when regarded as a whole result in confiscation of the
property.
(c) If the city council grants a variance or waiver to the amount of the capital recovery fee due for a new
development under this section, it may cause to be appropriated from other city funds the amount of the
reduction in the capital recovery fee to the account, for the roadway benefit area, in which the property is
located.
(Ord. No. 18 -M -13 , § 1(Exh. A), 3 -27 -2018)
(Supp. No. 20)
Page 10 of 10
Created: 2021 -08 -24 12:49:25 [EST]
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SCHIERTZ
COMMUNITY* SERVICE* OPPORTUNITY
2021 Roadway Impact Fee
Program Amendment
March 2, 2022
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SSCHIERTZ
COMMUNITY* SERVICE* OPPORTUNITY
2021 Roadway Impact Fee
Program Amendment
sa��ICUn�R
FREESE AND NICHOLS, INC.
TEXAS REGISTERED
ENGINEERING FIRM
F -2144
Table of Contents
Methodology
1
Service Areas
2
Land Use Assumptions
2
Projected Vehicle -Miles of New Demand
_ 4
Capital Improvements Plan
5
Eligible Projects _
5
Eligible Costs
5
Capital Improvements Plan
6
Projected Vehicle -Miles Capacity Available for New Growth
9
Cost of Roadway Improvements
10
Calculation of Impact Fees _ _
11
Cost Attributable to New Development
11
Credit Analysis
12
Cost per Service Unit
12
Appendices
15
Appendix A: Roadway Improvement Plan Projects
16
Appendix B: Roadway improvement Plan Cost Analysis _
20
Appendix C: Roadway Service Area Analysis Summary _
24
In response to annexations which occurred in 2021, the City of Schertz authorized Freese and
Nichols, Inc. (FNI) to perform an impact fee analysis update on the City's roadway systems to
incorporate revised city limit boundaries from recent annexations and programmed capital
improvements consistent with the Master Thoroughfare Plan in these areas. This analysis of
roadways systems serves as an interim update to the initial Impact Fee program adopted March 27,
2018 (Ordinance 18- M -13). The purpose of this technical memorandum is to update the service
areas and capital improvements, as necessary, for the update of the unit cost to provide service
(cost per roadway vehicle- mile). It was determined that there would be no change in Land Use
Assumptions after a review of city growth rates and consultation with City Staff. The methodology
used herein satisfies the requirements of the Texas Local Government Code Chapter 395 and is
consistent with the methodological approach of the initial program in 2018.
Annexations occurred in Service Areas 1, 2 and 3. There were no changes made within Service Area
4. The analyses will focus on these service areas with documentation of all service areas located in
the Appendices.
As part of the impact fee update, FNI conducted meetings with the city's Capital Improvements
Advisory Committee (CIAC), City Staff, and the City Council. The C1AC's role included review and
comment to (no change in) land use assumptions, Impact Fee Capital Improvements Plans (IFCIP),
and comments to the City Council.
METHODOLOGY
To update the roadway impact fee program, a series of work tasks were undertaken and are
described below.
1. Meetings were held with the City of Schertz Staff to review the annexations, changes in the
impact fee C1P, and the methodology to be used in the update.
2. Roadway service area structure was updated for areas affected by annexations.
3. Vehicle -miles of travel in the PM peak hour were retained as the service unit measure for
roadway impact fee calculations.
4. A roadway conditions inventory was updated for newly annexed roadways to include lane
geometries, roadway classifications and segment lengths, as necessary, of facilities in the
impact fee program.
5. Projected growth (service units) by service area over the ten -year planning period was
retained using the initial Land Use Assumptions and Land Use Equivalency Table.
6. The roadway impact fee capital improvements program (IFCIP) was reviewed to
incorporate additional projects in the annexed areas.
7. Roadway cost data of construction, engineering, and right -of -way for amended impact fee
projects were compiled by service area.
2021 Schertz Roadway Impact Fee Study Update 1
B. The cost of capacity provided, maximum cost per service unit, and cost attributable to new
development were calculated for each service area.
9. A technical memorandum was prepared to document the procedures and findings of the
analysis.
2021 Schertz
SERVICE AREAS a Sovi Amu
service Amu
1
Roadway service areas define areas to be 2
served by impact fee projects. More w;Q_Sii_ {--d
importantly, these geographic areas are
defined to ensure that facility improvements
are near new growth generating the need.
Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government
Codes mandates that service areas for
roadway programs be limited to a maximum:
six miles and within city limits.
Schertz's service areas for roads were
established in the City's initial impact fee ;
program and were adjusted to incorporate
the development annexations within Service
Areas 1, 2, and 3 (highlighted in the image to
the right). Figure 1 illustrates the amended
roadway impact fee service area structure.
LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
Growth defined in terms of land use assumptions, serve to determine the need and timing of capital
improvements to serve future development. This ten -year forecast examined population and
employment net growth between 2017 and 2027 and was rooted in analysis of historic growth
trends over the past 3, 5, and ten -years and documented as part of the impact fee program
implementation process. Given the recent nature of the land use assumptions analysis, the
pandemic and economic slowdown, and resurgence /continued growth, the initial ten -year forecast
was deemed acceptable for this programmatic update. Hence, no changes were made to the initial
ten -year assumptions. Table 1 and Table 2, summarize the forecasted population and employment
growth which, in addition to the roadway impact fee capital improvement plan, will serve as basis
for the cost per service unit calculation.
2021 Schertz Roadway Impact Fee Study Update 2
2021 Schertz Roadway Impact Fee Study Update 3
1: Inllial Impact Fee Population Projections
Roadway Service
Areas
1
2017
Population
2027
P__oimlation
12,211
32,169
9,239
2
28,280
3
2,809
12,454
4 11 68
City Total 40,339 56,902
Source: 2017 Schertz Roadway Impact Fee Study
Roadway Service
Area
1
_ 2
3 408
4 0
11,201
Roadway impact Fee Study
Pop. Added
2,972
3,889
9,645
Pct. Change
32%
14%
343%
57
518%
16,563
41%
Table Initial Impact Fee Employment Projections
Total Em
2017
7 MA
7
2027
Emp. Added
Pct. Chair
3,812
1,606
73%
11,304
2,717
32%
1,111
703
172%
20
20
--
16,247
5,046
45%
Prn'rer:ted Vehirle- Miles of Nevv Demand
Projected vehicle -miles of demand were calculated based on this net population and employment
growth forecasted to occur over the 10 -year planning period and the service unit generation for
each of the population and employment data components. These values were retained from the
2017 Impact Fee Study, as summarized in Table 3.
2021 Schertz Roadway Impact Fee Study Update
.9
TECHNICAL ....- :i.• _
Fable 3: Impact Fee 10 -Year Projected I Unit Growth
1 10,461
2 17,905
3 14,918
4 124
City Total l 43,408
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
The impact fee capital improvements plan is aimed at facilitating the implementation of the ultimate
thoroughfare network. Projects incorporated into the impact fee program are rooted in the city's
official Thoroughfare Plan.
Efigible Project
Legislative mandate stipulates that the impact fee CIP contain only those roadways which are
included on the City's official Thoroughfare Plan that are classified as arterial or collector status
facilities. A review of the Thoroughfare Plan identified projects which were eligible for
consideration by impact fees. Impact fee legislation also allows for the recoupment of costs for
previously constructed facilities. Only costs incurred by the City may be considered for impact fees.
Roadways constructed with private funding cannot be included for impact fee consideration.
Additionally, state facilities are eligible for inclusion to the impact fee system; however, only costs
incurred by the City may be eligible for consideration.
In general, those costs associated with the design, right -of -way acquisition, and construction and
financing of all items necessary to implement the roadway projects identified in the capital
improvements plan are eligible. It is important to note that upon completion of the capital
improvements identified in the CIP, the city must recalculate the impact fee using the actual costs
and make refunds if the actual cost is less than the impact fee paid by greater than 10 percent. To
prevent this situation, conservative estimates of project cost are considered.
Only the cost necessitated by new development will be utilized for impact fee consideration. For
example, if only 60% of the capacity provided by the impact fee CIP is needed over the ten -year
window, then only 60% of the cost associated with those facilities is considered in the cost per
service unit calculation.
2021 Schertz Roadway Impact Fee Study Update 5
Capital Improvements Plan
Using the initial impact fee program capital improvements plan as the base for this update, several
projects were added to the capital improvement projects or modified. These project additions were
coordinated through City Staff and are listed below in Table 4.
Table 4: IFCIP Project Additions /Modifications; 2021 Update
New
0.06
2
Residential Collector
1
25BJC
Big John Lane Eckhardt
City Limits
Now
0.55
Comment lncnrporaffon olPanrlands 11 Addieon
Secondary Arterial
1
25C
Blg John Lane City Limits
Eastern City Limlls
Comment lnoorpomPon clParklands ll Addldon
1
27
WS Connector(1)1Cibolo Valley IN 35
Old Wledersieln Rd
Comment Amended prcJecfcosro1$1 31Wper DevelopmentAgrasment on Cftlo Valley orive.
2
BSA
E1W Connector (7pTejas Way W City Limits
Doan Lane
Comment Annexation of pmpwW and lnmpordon of fhoroughMm exbenabn
31X
51
RAF • Bumelte Schaefer Rd
E City Limas
Comment Annexation ofSadlebmok Addldon
3
54A
Lauver Seguin Rd W of Canopy Bend
E City Limits
Comment. Annexation ofSadlebmok Addition
3
54B
Lower Seguin Rd W of Canopy Send
E City LIm"s
CommarM Annexation ofSadlebrook Adddbn.
3
55
WS Connector (3) S. of SchaeledRal 8umatle
Low Seguin Rd
i
Comment AnnexebonofSadlebrookAdddfon
3
57B
WS Connector (4) Lower Seguin Rd
S City LimWCarmel Rench
Comment Annexation of Carmel Rench Addldon.
New
0.06
2
Residential Collector
New
0.68
2
Residential Collector
Now
0.55
4
Secondary Arterial
New 0.65 3 Commercial Collector A
New 0.55 4 Secondary Arterial
New 1.08 4 Secondary Artedel
New
0.23
4
Secondary Arterial
Now
0.66
4
Principal Arterial
New
0.24
2
Residential Collector
Project cost estimates were prepared for new additions to the program using a unit cost approach
consistent with the methodology of the initial program. Project costs for the initially identified IFCIP
program were unchanged unless a project was completed, in which then actual costs were input
into the database. Figure 2 and Table 5 illustrate and list the capital improvement projects and
their associated total cost for the impact fee system. The full list of IFCIP projects and cost for all
service areas can be found in the Appendices.
2021 Schertz Roadway Impact Fee Study Update 6
2021 Schertz Roadway Impact Fee Study Update
Table 5: IFCIP Project Listing
sery
Project
Project
Length
No, of Type
Pat. In
Total Project
Area
No.
Roadwa,
From
To _
Status
Inil
Lance
RdwySorv.Arms
cost
1
1
FM 2252
IH35
FM 482
New
0.32
4
DA
i00%
$1,586,800
1
2
FM 2252
FM 482
Railroad Tracks
New
0.64
4
DA
i00%
$3,146,000
1/j(
3
FM 2252
Railroad Tracks
N City Limits
New
0.22
4
DA
50%
$509,850
112
4
WS Connector (1)
IH 35
Railroad Tracks
New
1.25
4
DA
59%
$3,202,6511
1
5
ENV Connector (1)
WS Connector (1)
FM 2252
New
0.99
4
DA
1oD%
$5,513,000
1
6
E/W Connector (2)
WS Connector (1)
FM 2252
New
0.99
2
UC
1oD%
$4,269,000
1
7
FM 482
FM 2252
H iberlus Rd
New
1.05
4
DA
10D%
$5.456,100
1
8
FM 482
Hubertus Rd
Railroad Tracks
New
1.00
4
DA
loD%
$5,147,800
1
9
FM 482
800' W of Friesenhahn
Friesenhahn Ln
New
0.15
4
DA
t00%
$754,100
1/X
10
FM 482
Friesenhahn Ln
Schveb Rd
New
0.59
4
DA
5D%
$1,530,000
1
11
FM 482
Schwab Rd
E City Units
New
1.20
4
DA
100%
$6,205,5DD
1
12
Hubertus Rd
IH 35
FM 482
Now
0.57
4
DA
100%
$2,855,701)
1
13
Hubertus Rd
FM 482
N City Units
New
0.30
4
DA
1o0%
$1,572,300
1
14
Friesenhahn Ln
IH 35
FM 482
New
0.72
3
SC
100%
$1,343.600
1
15
SctmiBb Rd
IH 35
FM 482
New
0.63
6
DA
100%
$4,374,700
1
16
ENV Connector (3)
Hubertus Rd
Dauld tack Bhd
New
1.59
3
SC
10D%
$6,110.000
1
17A
EcMmrdt Rd
Froboese Ln
Green Valley Rd
New
1.11
2
UC
100%
$3,727,100
1
18
Schwab Rd
IH 35
S City units
New
1.14
4
DA
100%
$5,660,700
1
19
Froboese Ln
Schwab Rd
Eckhardt Rd
New
0.57
2
UC
i00%
$2,030,401)
1
20
Froboese Ln
22M E of Eckhardt
E City Units
New
0.25
2
UC
100%
$69,000
1
21
Green Valley Rd
W City Emits
E City Units
New
0.87
4
DA
t00%
$4,199,500
1
22
Homestead PIN
End Ex Homestead Pkwy
S City Units
New
0.33
2
UC
i00%
$1,178,500
1
23
Country Club Bhd
Scenic Unks
S City Units
New
0.35
2
UC
io0%
$1,257,100
1
24
E/W Connector (4)
Country Club Bhd
Homestead Pkwy
New
0.77
2
UC
i00%
$2,671,200
1
25A
EIW Connector (4)
Schwab Rd
Eckhardt Rd
New
0.45
2
UC
100%
$1,802,000
1/X
25B
Big John Lane
Eckhardt Rd
City Units
New
0.06
2
UC
60%
$50,675
1/X
25C
E/W Connector (4)
City Lints
E. City Lillie
New
0.68
2
UC
50%
5608,625
1
26
FM 1103
IH 35
Old Wiederstein Rd
New
0.70
4
DA
10D%
$2,000,000
1
27
NG Conn. (i)ICibolo Valley
IH 35
Old Wiederstein Rd
New
0.55
4
DA
100%
$1,300,000
1
28
WS Connector (2)
IH 35
Old Wisderstain Rd
New
0.73
4
DA
i00%
$3,635,700
1
29
E/W Connector (5)
WS Connector (1)
FM 1103
New
2.00
2
UC
i00%
$7,097,201)
11X
90
Old Wiederstein Rd
WS Connector 1
Cherry Tree Dr
j N
2.17
4
DA
w%
$5.143.800
Sabrotol $A 1
24.96
$98,6290100
2
31
Doerr Ln
N City Units
Lookout Rd
New
0.91
3
SC
t00%
$U49,000
211
4
WS Connector (1)
IH 35
Railroad Tracts
New
1.25
4
DA
5096
33,130,900
2
32
EJW Connector (2)
FM 3009
NIS Connector (1)
New
0.81
2
UC
i00%
$3,386,200
2
33
EfW Connector (6)
FM 3009
WS Connector (1)
New
0.81
2
UC
i00%
$3,386,100
2
34
Mid-Cities Pkwy
IH 35
FM 3009
New
0.96
3
SC
i00%
$3,203,700
2
35
ENV Connector (1)
FM 3009
WS Connector (1)
New
0.81
4
DA
i00%
$4,190,900
2
36
EJW Conn. (7yNas Way
W City Units
Doerr Ln
Recoup
0.65.
3
SC
loD%
52231,100
2
36A
Tejas Way
EAsting Tejas Way
UP F8i/City Unit
Now
0.52
3
SC
100%
$1.647,800
2
37
Lookout Rd
Td-County Pkwy
Scharm P"
New
0.74
3
SC
700%
$2,743,600
2
38
Four Oaks Ln
End of Ex .Four Oaks Ln
WS Connector (1)
New
0.54
3
SC
t00%
$1,977,300
2
39
Wledersleln Rd
E City Units
FM 3009
New
0.64
4
DA
=%
83,079,61)0
2
40
Wiederskln Rd
Scimu Pkwy
W City Units
Now
OA1
2
UC
i00%
$1,294,700
2
41
Baptist Health Dr
RFpps- Kreuser
Wiederstein Rd
Now
0.27
3
SC
100%
$992,900
2
42
Ripps- Wousler
Baptist Hearth Dr
End of Mops Kreusler
New
0.22
3
SC
100%
$BD am
2
43
Meske Rd
FM 1518
Oak St
New
0.54
3
SC
t00%
$1,827,800
2
44
Maske Rd Riedgnment
Oak St
SdW& Pkwy
New
0.88
2
UC
t00%
$3,645,200
2
45
FM 151 Min $t
Masks Rod
Oak St
New
1.30
3
SA
t00%
$4,494,500
2
46
FM 1518
N City Units
SA 3 Unit
New
0.36
6
DA
loD%
$435,300
213
47
FM 1518
SA 3 Limit
Scheria Pkwy EA
New
0.39
6
DA
50%
$222,650
2
48
FM78/John Peterson Bhd
W City Urrits
E City Units
New
1.81
6
DA
10D%
$2,653,780
Subtotal SA 2
14.66
598,716,630
2021 Schertz Roadway Impact Fee Study Update 8
Table `3 (cmilintied): IMP Project Listing
Sery
Project
Total Project
Lame
Rce.:..So..Aro
Project
Length
Area
No.
Roadwai-
From
To
Status
•rti!
312
47
FM 1518
SA 2 Lint
Schatz Pkwy EA
New
0.39
3
49
FM 1518
Schertz Pkwy E#.
IH 10
New
4.09
3
50
Schaefer Rd
W City Units
FM 1518
New
0.48
31X
51
RAF - Burnetle
Schaefer Rd
E City Cants
New
0.55
31X
52
Lower Seguin Rd
W City Units
E of Totes Dr
New
0.35
3
53
Lower Seguin Rd
E of Totes Dr
W or Canopy Bend
New
1.75
3
54A
Lower Seguin Rd
W of Canopy Bend
E City Units
New
1.08
3
54B
Lower Seguin Rd
W of Canopy Bend
E City Units
New
0.23
3
55
WS Connector (3)
S. of Schaefer /Raf Burnette Lower Seguin Rd
New
0.66
3
56
WS Connector (3)
N City Units
S City Units
New
0.27
3
57A
NIS Connector (4)
N City Units
S City Units
New
0.25
3
57B
PIS Connector (4)
Lower Seguin Rd
S City UnilICarmel Reach
New
0.24
3
58
NIS Connector (4)
N City Units
S City Units
New
0.21
31X
59
W Ware Seguin Rd
W City Limits
Boeing Dr
New
0.57
3
60
W Ware Seguin Rd
Boeing Dr
WS Connector (5)
New
0.67
3
61
WS Connector (5)
Lower Seguin Rd
W Ware Soon Rd
New
1.10
3
62
WS Connector (5)
W Ware Seguin Rd
E Were Seguin Rd
New
0.93
3
63
Trainer Hate Rd (WS)
Weir Rd
IH 10
New
1.66
3
64
Trainer Hate Rd (FJW)
FM 1518
Trainer Hale Rd (WS)
Now
1.51
3
65
Ware Seguin Rd
Greytovm Rd
WS Connector (5)
New
1.35
3
66
E Ware Seguin Rd
WS Connector (5)
FM 1518
Naw
1.41
3/4
67
Cxaytom Rd
Boeing Dr
IH 10
New
1.11
3
68
WS Connector (6)
Ware Seguin Rd
IH 10
Now
0.47
3
69
FJW Connector, 8
IH 10
E City Units
NOW
2 33
Sub -ODW SA 3
23.67
4/3
67
Graytown Rd
Boeing Dr
IH 10
New
1.11
4
70
Bird- Engleman Rd
W City Units
Graylam Rd
New
1.30
4
,L1
Scenic Lake Dr
Binx- Ennleman Rd
1H 10
New
Sub-"I SA 4
1.19
Totals: 66.68
Notes:
DA- Divided arterial
SA- Special arierial (with two way left turn lane)
SC- Special collector (with two vsy left turn lane)
UC- Undhided collector
. " VPhitlP -Miles CanacitV '-I - 1- h,: C,- , New r:
No. of TWO
Pd. In
Total Project
Lame
Rce.:..So..Aro
Cost
6
DA
5096
5222,650
6
DA
100%
$5,165,000
2
UC
100%
$1,536,700
4
DA
100%
$2,558,000
3
SA
50%
$688,450
3
SA
100%
66,988,900
4
DA
10D%
$4,817,900
4
DA
1oD%
$1,063,700
4
DA
100%
$3,336,500
4
DA
100%
$1,380,400
2
UC
1OD%
3694,600
2
t1C
100%
$836,000
2
UC
ioD% I
$725,000
2
UC
50%
$900,550
2
uC
100%
$2,236,900
2
UC
1DD%
$3,760,500
2
UC
1oD%
$3,227,400
4
DA
1oD%
$6,020,500
4
DA
10096
$7,710,300
3
SA
100%
$4,736,300
3
SA
1oD%
$4,739,900
3
SA
50%
$2,000,600
3
SC
100%
$1,712,500
3
SC
100%
$8.482,
$77,$74,660
3
SA
50%
$2,000,600
3
SA
t00%
$4,667,000
3
SC
10096
$2.777.400
$9,445,000
$232.667,660
The vehicle -miles of new capacity supply were calculated consistent with the initial program for
capacity supplied. The equation used was:
Vehicle -Miles of New Capacity =Link capacity per peak hour per lane x No. of Lonesx Length ofsegment (miles)
Vehicle -miles of new capacity provided by the CIP are listed in Table 6. Also depicted is the net
capacity provided by the CIP (removal of existing traffic consuming capacity from improvements).
The Appendix contains details of the capacity calculations provided by the CIP program for all
service areas.
2021 Schertz Roadway Impact Fee Study Update
G•�
Table 6: Updated Vehicle -Miles of IFCIP Capacity Provided
1
45,583
2,747
43,835
18,785
0
43,835
2
25,783
6,998
0
18,785
3
4
47,756
3,359
7,311
40,446
3,229.
0
40,446
130
0
3,229
L City Total
122,481
17,186 1
105,295
1 0 1
105,295
A comparison of net capacity provided by the updated CIP relative to 10 -year demands (from land
use assumptions) reveals sufficient capacity to address growth attributable to new development.
Table 7 summarizes the percentage of CIP attributable to new development.
Table 7: Projected demand and Percent Attributable to 10 Year Growth
1
43,835
10,461
24.4
2
18,785
17,905
95.3
3
40,446
14,918
36.9
4
f 3,229
124
3.8
City Total
105,295
43,408
41.2
Cost of Roadway Improvement,
The total cost, including study update costs, and cost of net capacity supplied to implement the
roadway improvements plan projects by service area are shown in Table 8. If traffic exists on
proposed CIP project roadways or there are any deficiencies present on the current network within
each respective service area (existing utilization), the total system cost is adjusted to reflect the net
capacity being made available by the impact fee program. In other words, only the excess or unused
portion of the CIP and its associated costs are considered eligible. Per state law, a credit for the
2021 Schertz Roadway Impact Fee Study Update
10
portion of ad- valorem tax revenues generated by improvements over the program period, or a
credit equal to 50% of the total projected cost of implementing the capital improvements plan, must
be given. A detailed listing by project segment in each service area can be found in the Appendix.
Table 8: Summary of IFCIP Cost and Cost of Net Capacity Provided
1
$96,666,616
$5,826,582
$90,840,034
2
$48,739,881
$13,228,990
$35,510,891
3
$77,913,641
$11,927,108
$65,986,533
4
$9,447,742
$365,721
$9,082,022
Total
$232,767,880
$31,348,401
201,419,479
CALCULATION OF IMPACT FEES
The cost attributable to new development within this cost of net capacity is calculated by comparing
the projected vehicle -miles of demand to the net capacity supplied by the IFCIP. If the demand is
higher than the net IFCIP capacity provided, then the full cost of the net capacity is attributable to
new development. If there is more net capacity than required to meet the project demand, then the
cost attributable to new development is the proportional amount of the cost of net capacity based
on the ratio of projected demand to net capacity supplied by the IFCIP.
For this update, all of Schertz's roadway service areas are projected to have a demand by new
development that consumes only a portion of the full net capacity supplied by the IFCIP. This is
shown in Table 9.
2021 Schertz Roadway Impact Fee Study Update 11
i I L:
Table 9: Roadway Improvements Plan Cost Attributable to New Development
1 $90,840,034
2 $35,510,891
24.4 $22,184,410
95.3 $33,846,739
$2,679,760
$3,978,291
$24,864,170
$37,825,030
3 $65,986,533
36.9 $24,339,036
$2,865,171
$27,204,207
4 $9,082,022
3.8 $349,633
$41,588
$391,221
Total 201,419,479 I 41.2 I $80,719,818 $9,564,810 $90,284,628
Credit Analysis
Per Chapter 395, the cost of the CIP must be credited for ad- valorem tax generated through new
development either through a credit analysis or a flat 50% credit. The City of Schertz opted to
perform the credit analysis in lieu of the 50% credit to determine the maximum allowable fee per
service unit. No changes were made to the credit analysis as there were no changes in the 10 -year
Land Use Assumptions (and hence the resultant VMT growth). Table 10 lists the CIP credit and
resultant CIP cost attributable to growth (less credit).
Table 10: P 11, Credit and Resultant Cost Attributable to New Development
Cost per
The cost per service unit is calculated by dividing the cost of the CIP necessitated and attributable
to new demand (net cost) by the projected service units of growth over the 10 -year planning period.
2021 Schertz Roadway Impact Fee Study Update 12
1
$24,864,170
$7,974,490
$16,889,680
2
$37,825,030
$13,649,051
$24,175,979
3
$27,204,207
$11,371,991
$15,832,216
4
$391,221
$94,525
$296,696
Total
$90,284,628
$33,090,057
$57,194,571
Cost per
The cost per service unit is calculated by dividing the cost of the CIP necessitated and attributable
to new demand (net cost) by the projected service units of growth over the 10 -year planning period.
2021 Schertz Roadway Impact Fee Study Update 12
Table 11 lists the calculation and results of the cost per service unit calculation by service area. The
actual cost per service unit reflects the true burden to the City for the implementation of the
roadway capital improvements program. Based on the credit analysis, the maximum rate after
credit reflects the maximum amount per service unit that can be charged to comply with state
statute. The Appendix details the maximum fee per service unit calculation for each service area.
Table 11: Cost per Service Unit Summary
1
10,461
$24,864,170
$16,889,680
$2,409.84
$1,614.54
2
17,905
$37,825,030
$24,175,979
$2,090.20
$1,350.25
3
14,918
$27,204,207
$15,832,216
$1,806.78
$1,061.26
4
124
$391,221
$296,696
$3,155.02
$2,386.93
Total
43,408
$90,284,628
$57,194,571
These updated cost per service unit rates (maximum allowable) are compared in Table 12 to the
rates calculated in the initial Impact Fee study as well as the current collection rates set at the
conclusion of that study. There are slight variations to the cost per service unit in each service area.
The updated cost per service unit do not have a negative effect to existing collection rates if the
same collection rate is desired to be maintained.
2021 Schertz Roadway Impact Fee Study Update 13
Table 12: Cost per Service Unit Comparison to Initial Impact Fee Study
2021 Schertz Roadway Impact Fee Study Update 14
Appendices
2021 Schertz Roadway Impact Fee Study Update
APPENDIX A: ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PLAN PROJECTS
2021 Schertz Roadway Impact Fee Study Update
Definitions
LANES The total number of lanes in both directions available for travel.
TYPE The type of roadway (used in determining capacity):
UC = undivided collector
DC = divided collector
UA = undivided arterial
DA = divided arterial
SC = special collector (roadway with continuous left turn)
SA = special arterial (roadway with continuous left turn)
OW = one -way roadway
PK -HR VOLUME The existing volumes of cars on the roadway segment traveling during the afternoon
(P.M.) peak hour of travel.
% IN SERVICE AREA If the roadway is located on the boundary of the service area (with the city limits
running along the centerline of the roadway), then half of the roadway is inventoried
in the service area and the other half is not. This value is either 50% or 100 %.
VEH -Ml SUPPLY TOTAL The number of total service units (vehicle - miles) supplied within the service area,
based on the length, and established capacity of the roadway type.
VEH -Ml TOTAL The total service unit (vehicle -mile) demand created by existing traffic on the
DEMAND PK -HR roadway segment in the afternoon peak hour.
EXCESS CAPACITY The number of service units supplied but unused by existing traffic in the
PK -HR VEH -MI afternoon peak hour.
2021 Schertz Roadway Impact Fee Study Update
0 c o c o a 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 o o 0 o 0 0 0 o 0 0 o 0 0 0 o 0 0 cola 0 o 0 0 o o 0 0 o 0
F4 M
U
9
gg g 9e v� 0 0 o g 0 m o o o o gI 0 0 o O o 0 0 c
U_
0 o R 0 0 0 0 0 S o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o ry 0
� Xff :F iiii
om
x
Y
gW
it Q
F D O O D O O Q O p 4V1 G y O 7 O 7 7 7 0 O fq 7 8 9 0M y y 8
ZJ Q Q Q Q Q N Q Q Q Q Q Q Q W cp OI N Q N N Q N N N N N N Q Q Q N Q W Q N N O1 Q lq f7 p1 P1
f. 88tsR RPd2�rP^ig rz O 8O O 8, °2n8
r , r O O r O O C r , O O O O O C O N NI N
O r C O O O O O O 0
W
J
C C g P E
Jt
�z °� � vi`w' Zggo�cUi c8.9 iW w$$$�r ��zZ��(4)�
w L 5
03 :F3 . e xg
LU
IL
c
01 N
to d ftc�i is g00
Ix LL LL LL LL LL lLL iL LL LL W W f!1 LL $ ��11 m LL pppp pp�� pO
O r N l7 V N m f� 67 N w r R W R N N N N O N N N N l9�
C Z N N
CL
i
y W
r r r .- r .- r r r r r r r r�
2021 Schertz Roadway Impact Fee Study Update
3
N a N N N N N N N N
TECHNICALMEMORANDUN?
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CIO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 C O C C O M 0 0 0 01 O O O OI O O
WE CD
a
G
So m o o S° wI $ 'J3 S Pn o of ° �I
TCL. f• a m in � r
N
C IS bo F]I F R iV N N N m N F� 07 A Q
CL
0 0 0 0 0 g g o gt o o mw o
o m
s
d
`o
d
Z ,
ffi
y
Is
91
0 9 8 8 V slull) o A Qo O O 7 O r¢n to O G O 0 7 7 7 7 7 0 0 f/3 f/3 (¢/J J1 N I N 8
V N M M M N M 0 W m 0 0 N V M M a a a V N N N N N N N Q W M M M M M M Cl) M
t1 N a s 8 A 9 ao q 9 O@ is A A O P 8 ri N N N Y7 m O' 9 8 n tR a r v 2 ® � A M� a
0 0 0 0 0 0 .z O O: r O V C O O z 'r^ G O O O O O C C ' C +: +- -- -- .z C '4 A. r r OA g
1111 MI J111111 i Jim
t
U
C
IL CL IL
V
(a9 0) W N= W W W W W W N 97
is
ME i2
E U = {`ryp° gr �g�i U QM y� Q tL��f c3 'S 'b S ?g $�
LL W W S m �L V Z �fS ? i!� f/J '� iJl W '� '� M Z Z J Z m J} �L
C
CD ED 17' CD m
m I.L. LL LL LL `Ji 3 3 3 3 3 1 r r
�
H N
W
co W
2021 Schertz Roadway Impact Fee Study Update
APPENDIX B: ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PLAN COST
ANALYSIS
2021 Schertz Roadway Impact Fee Study Update
Definitions
LANES The total number of lanes in both directions available for travel.
TYPE The type of roadway (used in determining capacity):
UC = undivided collector
DC = divided collector
UA = undivided arterial
DA = divided arterial
SC = special collector (roadway with continuous left turn)
SA = special arterial (roadway with continuous left turn)
OW = one -way roadway
% IN SERVICE AREA If the roadway is located on the boundary of the service area (with the city
limits running along the centerline of the roadway), then half of the
roadway is inventoried in the service area and the other half is not This
value is either 50% or 100 %.
TOTAL SEGMENT COST The estimated cost (in dollars) of the entire segment of the proposed
improvement.
TOTAL COST IN SERVICE AREA The estimated cost (in dollars) of the portion of the proposed roadway
improvement within the service area.
2021 Schertz Roadway Impact Fee Study Update
8° m S
FE
. %s2yi �.. 1mo Iv pp
aa5:
�aa��amS�s€131ss�sssWaa a�a��asga�$a�a
a 2w
& &4RRR §Isa &ssssassI€IS8 § § § §gaa§s R kN§@RPRaa@ §0g11 § §§
K c o` oaa69AaOOOOO86 s9o99`09s'ss39s68956 536ss8a528 88g88889g
d 3 (Qy Qpp V d Q Q� p N�� O p O Q q Q Q O p Q ��Myy (t�0 qqM N Q N {�Npp Q N y N�� A N N m N N p Q Q p Q p N Q M N Q N N M Q M M M M a Q N M ��My Mpp pNp p M
Ol m N W Ol D O N N Yf M h 1O YI N N r1 M F O r n 8^ A N 0 6 m m INB A fp Y N N N m M
O G O O C + d G C C C G O O O O D N G O O C O O C O O O C O o G G
9
eo� 1U�U wc3��
LLZvLLLL
92° aa
i2 a
ul
3 �
N a N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
M a w
2021 Schertz Roadway Impact Fee Study Update
8� M;f1§
elfr
r
.,..JJ€�HJs €YY:ro.(
W
� N
w
�tpp 1� Amy ® pmp ®N YO} Ep mN mY a {ap V (NQ N SNP N ^N N N pfp f �Wpp Wroro M N 1N�I mm
69 n n O Q 1A PJ h O ry t0 lY fD ® h A O � O qj � �� 1z �
d d d e o o d .- . o 0 0 0 o d o 0 d .= o N p d
g
r U $ S t� U V U U [7! 7+ Ty
is
W W 3 W W N W W m Y �i. W= F 1 fi S S W S I
L
z 3 cqi 3cK 3W33c6z z z3 33 i 1'dS3SI 3
vc 15 s
cKa� 9 i °i�i33334r�1wt�;
M S E 2 s s s 1-0 a a] roP .
3 s
ei d
2021 Schertz Roadway Impact Fee Study Update
APPENDIX C: ROADWAY SERVICE AREA ANALYSIS
SUMMARY
2021 Schertz Roadway impact Fee Study Update
k
}
�
�
!
�
k
§
■
� kk�
�
�
s ¥
2�
� ■& |
_
■ § | §�$�§@
|
� «�
°$ #■ :
![��}!
'!
■ #`
® E
Hill
■
\j \/]■!£
_
§ §
■{
�
:I
2.E
m•� ■ -
B §■ k §�°
$a2,�
�
� '
§a ■§�| � |
■ ■ ■b§k §(| §2
����el�
\2 \E§2�
a
k
�
� j„
:
2021 5 h rtz Roadway Imp Fee Study Up ke