Full Text
AGENDA BILL Agenda Item No. 6(B)(2) Date: September 22, 2014 To: El Cerrito City Council From: Maria Sanders, Environmental Analyst Melanie Mintz, Interim Community Development Director Sean Moss, Senior Planner Subject: San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan Fees ACTION REQUESTED Conduct a public hearing and upon conclusion, adopt a resolution amending the City’s Master Fee Schedule to add new Planning Fees and a Plan Maintenance Fee related to implementation of the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan. BACKGROUND The proposed San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan (SPASP) and Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) creates the regulatory framework for residential and non-residential development in the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan Area until 2040 or until the time in which the Plan Area reaches the projected build out of approximately 1,706 new residential units1 and 243,112 square feet of new commercial space. New planning fees are needed as the proposed Form-Based Code (FBC) in the SPASP outlines new administrative procedures and findings by which development projects in the Plan Area will be reviewed. Likewise, a new Plan Maintenance fee will help defray maintenance costs related to ongoing implementation of the Plan. ANALYSIS If adopted, the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan (SPASP) will require several new fees to be paid by project applicants in order for the City to provide the services needed to adequately process development project applications in the Plan Area as well as conduct ongoing planning activities related to the Plan’s maintenance and implementation. Planning Fees The proposed fees include additions to current planning fees, as published in the FY14- 15 Master Fee Schedule. Staff proposes that Exhibit A, San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan 1 Approximately 1,540 units to be located within El Cerrito City limits and 170 units located in Richmond. ---PAGE BREAK--- Agenda Item No. 6(B)(2) Page 2 Area 2014-2015 Planning Fees, be added to the existing city-wide Planning Fee Schedule. These fees were developed based upon the current Planning Fee Schedule, which was developed using a cost-based nexus methodology, as documented in the 2005 Citywide User Fee Study.2 Staff believes that the amount of the fees are a reasonable estimate of the costs of providing the services, based upon the Study and staff’s understanding of the time that will be necessary for processing the applications associated with each fee. In order to facilitate ease of use for applicants in the Plan Area, the new SPASP Planning Fees schedule replicates many of the same fees contained in the city-wide planning fee schedule (such as, fees for Administrative Design Review, Environmental Review, and Noticing). New Design Review and Use Permit fees have been developed to reflect the tiered planning review process in the Plan Area and to capture the time-intensive nature of the review process for the larger, more complex, mixed used projects anticipated in the Plan Area. Fees for residential and non-residential projects were consolidated and grouped into very small, small, medium, and large projects represented by up to 2,500 square feet; 2,501 to 10,000 square feet; 10,001 to 40,000 square feet and over 40,000 square feet. The fees for projects under 40,000 square feet are essentially equivalent to the existing Master Fee schedule, although the unit of measurement has changed for residential projects. Because implementation of the SPASP contemplates larger projects, new fees have been created for large projects over 40,000 square feet as shown in red in Exhibit A. Current planning fees cap out for projects with more than 11 residential units or 10,000 square feet of commercial space. Under the current fee schedule, fees would be the same for a project with 11 units or 10,000 square feet as one with 100 units or 100,000 square feet. The proposed fee schedule aims to reflect the time required of larger more complex projects. In addition to size thresholds, a project application received under the framework of the FBC will be assigned to one of four planning review tiers depending upon the particulars of the project. The tier system aims to provide the appropriate level of discretionary review, and is outlined in FBC Table 01 02.02-8) and FBC Table 03 02.02-15). In addition, the FBC regulates types of land use permitted in the various transect zones in the Plan Area in FBC Table 02 02-02-11). Land use applications are independent of the tiered design and site plan review system. The following table summarizes the entitlement processes for projects in the Plan Area: 2 City of El Cerrito. Citywide User Fee Study, Final Report. Prepared by Maximus. 2005. ---PAGE BREAK--- Agenda Item No. 6(B)(2) Page 3 Table 1: SPASP Tiers and Entitlement Processes Tier Level Applicability/ Project Type Entitlement Process Tier I Improvements to Non-Conforming structures less than 50% of the building’s appraised value and minor improvements and additions. • Administrative Design Review • Use Permit, if required Tier II New construction that complies with all standards of the Specific Plan • Design Review Board (DRB) Site Plan and Design Review • Use Permit, if required Tier III Major improvements to existing non- conforming structures equal to or exceeding 50% of the building’s appraised value • DRB Site Plan and Design Review • Use Permit, if required Tier IV High-quality new projects that comply with the intent of the SPASP but do not conform to all of the SPASP regulations. • DRB Design Review and Planning Commission Site Plan • Use Permit, if required The new size categories were established by reviewing recent projects by size to evaluate the amount of effort required to bring them through the entitlement process. In keeping with the recommendation of the Citywide User Fee Study, we maintained use of standardized fees by size category and escalated the fees between size categories in the same ratios as the current escalation between the existing size categories. Staff, however, felt that a time tracking approach for projects over 100,000 square feet would be the most feasible method of tracking the reasonable estimated cost of processing these applications, given the limited numbers of opportunities for, and the special nature of, these large projects on the Avenue. Additionally, Tier 4 project applications have a different fee schedule than Tier 2 and 3 projects due to the fact that these applications must be considered by both the Design Review Board and the Planning Commission. Tier 1-3, unless elevated to Tier 4 (or appealed), will be approved at only the Design Review Board level. These fees are essentially equivalent to the current Use/Development Permit and Design Review fees for a specified size category. Additional New Planning Fees Additional new fees that are proposed to be added through the adopted Resolution include a City hosted Community Design Charette fee, which would include the cost of facility rental and staff support for projects that opt to or are required to host a Community Design Charette per 2.02.05.02 (pg 02.02-19) of the FBC and a fee for ---PAGE BREAK--- Agenda Item No. 6(B)(2) Page 4 completion of a Specific Plan Environmental Check List and Initial Study pursuant to CEQA. Specific Plan Maintenance Fee Government Code Section 66014t enables local governments to collect fees “reasonably necessary to prepare and revise the plans and policies that a local agency is required to adopt before it can make any necessary findings and determinations.” The fees may include the costs reasonably necessary to prepare the Plan, make revisions, or implement programs needed to fulfill the goals of the Plan. However, the fees may not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged. Often called a “Maintenance Fee,” many jurisdictions have approved such fees to help defray the costs of maintaining and implementing such planning efforts as General Plan updates and Specific Plans. The proposed planning fee schedule, Exhibit A, contains the addition of a new Specific Plan Maintenance Fee. The proposed fee will help defray the costs of maintaining and implementing the SPASP, as well as preparing other studies and programs necessary to make the appropriate findings and determinations in the development process. The City of El Cerrito currently does not have fees to cover advanced planning costs related to implementing and updating the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan. Currently, any of these costs for staff time or outside consultants would be borne by the General Fund or by outside grants. Examples of work needed to maintain and monitor the SPASP include periodic parking duration, utilization and demand studies to monitor and manage on-street parking capacities, a Transportation and Parking Demand Plan to support the trip reduction and mode shift goals of the SPASP , and an open space study to establish an in-lieu fee for open space. Table 2, Anticipated Projects to Implement the SPASP, provides an estimate of SPASP projects and costs over the next 10 years. These costs and projects are estimates only and will be reviewed and adjusted each year during the normal Master Fee Schedule update. Table 2: Anticipated Projects to Implement the SPASP (2015–2025) Planning Effort Estimated Cost Phase 1 (Yrs 1-5) Sanitary Capacity Study $ 75,000 Transportation DM Plan $ 25,000 Parking DM Plan $ 50,000 Telecommunications Study $ 25,000 Open Space Assessment Study $ 10,000 Staff time $ 93,113 Subtotal $ 278,113 Phase 2 (Yrs 6-10) ---PAGE BREAK--- Agenda Item No. 6(B)(2) Page 5 Transportation Mode Split Analysis $ 25,000 Parking Capacity Analysis $ 25,000 SPASP Update $ 100,000 Parking Infrastructure CIP $ 50,000 Staff time $ 93,113 Subtotal $ 293,113 Grand Total $ 571,225 Staff recommends that the fee be charged at the time of issuing a building permit on all new construction, additions, or major alterations in the Plan Area at a rate of $160 per residential unit and $0.13 per square foot of non-residential space. This fee was calculated by taking the estimated costs of maintaining and implementing the SPASP over 10 years (Table 2) and dividing it by the estimated amount of new development in the Plan Area, expressed in terms of square footage of building space or residential units. The resulting fees were compared to similar fees in nearby jurisdictions. The method of calculating the proposed Plan Maintenance Fee and comparing it to similar fees is explained in Exhibit B. The proposed fee represents partial cost recovery during the initial years of SPASP implementation, as full cost recovery would place the fee at the higher end of similar fees in the East Bay. The scope of implementation and maintenance work will be determined based upon available Community Development Department budget each year. Given the untested market conditions for development in the Plan Area, staff recommends that a fee aimed at full cost recovery be phased in over time, assuming the market in the Plan Area improves and will be able to bear higher Plan Maintenance fees. The work plan, therefore, will be scaled to match staff and budget capacity. As always, staff will work hard to seek outside funds to further the monitoring, maintenance and implementation work associated with achieving the goals of the SPASP. Maintenance and implementation work not paid for by fees would be covered by the General Fund and grants. The fee currently being proposed is similar to the typical Plan Maintenance fees in other cities in the East Bay. Table 4 provides a list of other Plan Maintenance fees in Northern California, with a concentration on cities that have such fees in the East Bay. Generally these fees are to cover General Plan updates, though many roll in the costs of Specific Plans as a component of the General Plan. Most fees are calculated as a percentage surcharge on building valuation and issued at the time of building permit issuance. Staff used a build-out calculation for the proposed SPASP Maintenance Fee instead, as there is currently not enough information on building valuation in the Plan Area for new development. ---PAGE BREAK--- Agenda Item No. 6(B)(2) Page 6 Table 4: Other Cities Community Plan Maintenance Fees San Leandro 0.30% of building valuation Concord 0.25% of building valuation Davis 0.20% of building valuation So San Francisco 0.15% of building valuation Union City 0.10% of building valuation Oakland 0.10% of building valuation Walnut Creek 0.10% of building valuation Elk Grove 0.023% of building valuation Vallejo 7% surcharge on permits Hayward 12% of building permit Highest (Galt) 0.36% of valuation Lowest (Elk Grove) 0.023% of valuation Average 0.153% of valuation In order to compare the proposed fee with others in the area, staff applied different fees to a hypothetical 50-unit multi-family, mixed-use development project, using typical costs per square foot to calculate a building value. Staff also prepared two versions of the SPASP Maintenance Fee, one for the initial phase of partial cost recovery (Phase another for full cost recover (Phase Table 5 compares how the following plan maintenance fees would apply to a hypothetical project: the proposed El Cerrito Phase 1 Fee; an El Cerrito Phase 2 Fee; typical Plan Maintenance fee in the East Bay (0.1% of valuation), and City of Concord fees (one of the higher rates at 0.25% of valuation). To perform the comparison, El Cerrito fees had to be converted to an equivalent of building valuation. The Phase 1 Fee, at 0.104% of valuation, is very similar to the typical East Bay fee, whereas the Phase 2 rate, at 0.213%, is similar to the higher end of plan maintenance fees included in the comparison. Table 5 Impact of Various Plan Maintenance fees on a Hypothetical Multi-Family, Mixed-Use Development (50-Units with 20,000 Sq ft Commercial Space and Parking Garage) Project Component Value Sqft Units El Cerrito Phase 1 Fee El Cerrito Phase 2 Fee Typical Fee in East Bay Concord Fee Residential $ 8,287,584 59,197 50 $ 7,874 $ 16,178 $ 8,288 $ 20,719 Commercial $ 650,000 5,000 $ 665 $ 1,366 $ 650 $ 1,625 Garage $ 1,200,000 15,000 $ 1,995 $ 4,099 $ 1,200 $ 3,000 Total $10,137,584 $ 10,534 $ 21,643 $10,138 $ 25,344 Percent of Valuation Equivalent 0.104% 0.213% 0.100% 0.250% ---PAGE BREAK--- Agenda Item No. 6(B)(2) Page 7 STRATEGIC PLAN CONSIDERATIONS The proposed fees support the following Strategic Plan Goals: • Goal B, “Achieve long-term financial sustainability,” contains the objective to “ensure that revenue meets the cost of providing the services identified in the Strategic Plan.” • Goal C, “Deepen a sense of place and community identity,” contains the objective to “reimagine underdeveloped and underutilized properties through advanced planning efforts that encourage investment and/or new development.” CEQA CONSIDERATIONS Approval of fees does not constitute a “project” and is, therefore, exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) according to Section 15601(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines. Additionally, pursuant to Section 15273 of the State CEQA Guidelines the establishment of fees for the purpose of meeting operating expenses is exempt. FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS The proposed Design Review and Use Permit fees for SPASP projects allow for fees to be charged to cover the costs of entitlement for development projects and incorporate fees for larger projects than would be allowed to be collected under the City’s current fees. Current El Cerrito fees do not cover ongoing advanced planning activities, such as those required for the ongoing maintenance, monitoring and implementation of the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan. The proposed Specific Plan Maintenance fee represents a source of revenue to help defray the on-going costs of maintaining the SPASP and implementing the policies and programs needed to make appropriate findings and determinations in the planning process. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS The proposed Plan Maintenance fee is consistent with Government Code Section 66014, as it does not exceed the estimated reasonable costs for preparing and maintaining the SPASP. Per California Government Code § 66016 and 66017(a), the City is required to conduct a public hearing prior to adopting planning, building, and other new fees or fee increases. This public hearing satisfies the Government Code requirement and notification of the hearing was made in accordance with the code section. However, development fees cannot become effective until 60 days after City Council approval. Thus, these fees will become effective on November 24, 2014. ---PAGE BREAK--- Reviewed by· ~:nager - Attachments: 1. Resolution 2. Exhibit A: San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan Area 2014-2015 Planning Fees 3. Exhibit B: Summary of SP ASP Maintenance and Implementation Costs and Calculation of Plan Maintenance Fee Page 8 Agenda Item No. 6(8)(2) ---PAGE BREAK--- Agenda Item No. 6(B)(2) Attachment 1 RESOLUTION 2014–XX RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL CERRITO ADOPTING REVISIONS TO THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE TO ADD PLANNING FEES RELATED TO IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SAN PABLO AVENUE SPECIFIC PLAN WHEREAS, on September 22, 2014, the City Council amended the City of El Cerrito 1999 General Plan to provide for the creation of a specific plan for the development of property in the vicinity of San Pablo Avenue and approved the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council’s adoption of the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan (SPASP) added new substantive requirements and administrative procedures governing development projects within the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan Area. To approve development projects within the Specific Plan Area, the City must make findings and determinations that each project is consistent with the SPASP. The new administrative procedures necessitate new fees to cover the associated planning costs; and WHEREAS, the City will need to prepare additional studies, implement programs, and update the SPASP in order to make findings and determinations consistent with the SPASP; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to establish new processing fees and a Specific Plan Maintenance Fee for projects in the Specific Plan Area to cover planning costs associated with implementation of the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan. The anticipated costs of implementing and maintaining the SPASP are summarized and the method of calculating the Specific Plan Maintenance Fee is explained in Exhibit B; and WHEREAS, the City may establish the Plan Maintenance Fees under the authority provided by Government Code Section 66014, enabling local governments to collect fees reasonably necessary to prepare and revise the plans and policies that a local agency is required to adopt before it can make any necessary findings and determinations; and WHEREAS, the City’s processing fees for development applications are calculated using a cost-based approach, as documented in the 2005 Citywide User Fee Study; and WHEREAS, a public hearing has been noticed and held in accordance with Government Code Sections 6062a, 66016, 66017 and 66018. At least 10 days prior to the public hearing, the City made available to the public data indicating the estimated cost required to provide the service for which the fee and service charges are levied and the revenue sources anticipated to provide the service. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of El Cerrito finds that the San Pablo Avenue Planning Fees (as shown in Exhibit A) are a reasonable estimate of the costs of providing the services for which each fee will be charged. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby adopts the proposed addition of the San Pablo Avenue Planning Fees to the Master Fee Schedule for the City of El Cerrito (as shown in Exhibit which is hereby attached and by this reference made a part ---PAGE BREAK--- Agenda Item No. 6(B)(2) Attachment 1 hereof, for FY 2014-15. The San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan Maintenance Fee shall be applied to the types of projects, at the times, and in the amounts listed in Exhibit A. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the proposed fees, in the Master Fee Schedule will become effective on November 24, 2014, which is more than 60 days after adoption of this resolution required for development fees. I CERTIFY that at the regular meeting on September 22, 2014 the El Cerrito City Council passed this resolution by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers Benassini, Bridges, Friedman, Lyman and Mayor Abelson NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None IN WITNESS of this action, I sign this document and affix the corporate seal of the City of El Cerrito on September X, 2014. Cheryl Morse, City Clerk APPROVED: Janet Abelson, Mayor ---PAGE BREAK--- Exhibit A: SAN PABLO AVENUE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA 2014-2015 PLANNING FEES INTERIM EFFECTIVE DATE: SEPTEMBER 23,2014 EFFECTIVE DATE: NOVEMBER 24, 2014 This is the planning fee schedule for development projects in the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan Area and therefore regulated by the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan (SPASP) Form Based Code. If not noted below, all other relevant planning fees as listed in the City’s Planning Fee Schedule shall also apply, including any applicable Development Permits. Fees listed below are generally standardized to cover applications for all projects. Special Fees for Projects of Greater Complexity: Some projects may be determined by the Community Development Director to be more complex and consuming of staff time. The Community Development Director is authorized to require a deposit for estimated staff and consultant costs at the time of the application. Where a standard fee has been paid, the Community Development Director is authorized to require additional deposits to cover costs of extraordinary staff effort resulting from unforeseen complexities or time-consuming delays and extra meetings. Staff time will be calculated on an hourly basis, including full direct and indirect costs, as documented by the City of El Cerrito Citywide User Fee Study, 2005. Item/ Description SPA Specific Plan Fees Amount Design Review Tier 1 Residential and Non-Residential Projects $1,201 Tier 2 and Tier 3 Residential and Non-Residential Projects 1. Up to 2,500 sqft $2,823 2. 2,501 - 10,000 sqft $3,842 1. 10,001 – 40,000 sqft $4,898 2. 40,001 – 100,000 sqft $6,171 3. 100,001+ sqft $7,776 base fee plus $191 per hour of staff time in excess of that covered by the base fee Tier 4 Residential and Non-Residential Projects 1. Up to 10,000 sqft $7,578 2. 10,001 – 40,000 sqft $9,659 3. 40,001 – 100,000 sqft $11,796 4. 100,001 + sqft $14,694 base fee plus $191 per hour of staff time in excess of that covered by the base fee Use Permits (see FBC Table 02 in the SPASP Form Based Code for required use permits) Use Permits (All Tiers) 1. Administrative Use Permit $905 2. Use Permit (up to 2,500 sqft) $3020 ---PAGE BREAK--- Exhibit A: SAN PABLO AVENUE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA 2014-2015 PLANNING FEES INTERIM EFFECTIVE DATE: SEPTEMBER 23,2014 EFFECTIVE DATE: NOVEMBER 24, 2014 3. Use Permit (2,501 to 10,000 sqft) $3,736 4. Use Permit (10,001 – 40,000 sqft) $4,761 5. Use Permit (40,001 – 100,000 sqft) $5,625 6. Use Permit (100,001 + sqft) $6,918 Environmental Review and Special Studies 1. Specific Plan Environmental Check List and Initial Study Consultant costs, plus City administrative fee (30% of consultant cost) 2. Categorical Exemption $204 3. Negative Declaration (City Prepared) $3,669 (any consultant costs are additional) 4. Mitigated Negative Declaration (City Prepared) $10,641 (any consultant costs are additional) 5. Administrative Fee for consultant prepared environmental documents 30% of consultant cost 6. Administrative fee for consultant prepared special study 30% of consultant cost Miscellaneous 1. Staff time per hour $191 2. Pre-Application Review Meeting with Staff $0 3. Pre-Application Design Review with Written Comments (staff time per hour) $191 4. Pre-Application Study Session with Planning Commission or Design Review Board $1,985 5. Community Design Charrette (if City Hosted) $2,865 6. Public Notice Mailing List Generation $101 7. Public Notice Mailing Fee (per address) 1st class postage, plus 7 cents per envelop 8. Laserfiche/ Archiving $3 per page SPA Specific Plan Maintenance Fee Projects Applied To Amount Payable at time of building permit issuance • Construction of new structures • Additions to existing structures $ 160 per residential unit $0.13 per sq ft of non- residential 2328579.2 ---PAGE BREAK--- Exhibit B: Summary of SPASP Maintenance and Implementation Costs and Calculation of Plan Maintenance Fee 1) Specific Plan Maintenance and Implementation Costs (2015-2025) 2) San Pablo Avenue Development at Plan Build Out ~204 Studies & Plans (Yrs 1-5) Costs Notes Units SQFT Sanitary Capacity Assessment 75,000 $ Residential 1536 1,818,624 Transportation Demand Mgmt. Plan 25,000 $ Commercial 243,112 Parking Demand Mgmt. Plan 50,000 $ Total Sqft 2,061,736.00 Telecommunications Assessment 25,000 $ Open Space Assessment 10,000 $ Staff time 93,113 $ .05 FTE over 5 years at current rates Subtotal 278,113 $ Yrs 6-10 Transportation Mode Split Analysis 25,000 $ Parking Capacity Analysis 25,000 $ Average sqft per residential unit = 1184 San Pablo Ave Specific Plan Update 100,000 $ Parking Infrastructure CIP 50,000 $ Staff time 93,113 $ .05 FTE over 5 years at current rates Subtotal 293,113 $ Grand Total 571,225 $ 3) Plan Maintenance Fee (Partial and Full Cost Recovery Scenarios) a) Phase 1 Plan Maintenance Costs (Yrs 1-5) $278,113 Plan Maintenance Cost per sqft $0.13 Plan Maintenance Cost per Res Unit $160 b) Phase 2 Plan Maintenance Costs (Yrs 6-10) $571,225 Plan Maintenance Cost per sqft $0.28 Plan Maintenance Cost per Res Unit $328 From Table 1 Specific Plan Maintenance and Implementation Costs above Phase 1 Plan Maintenance Costs divided by total new sqft of Plan build out Phase 2 Plan Maintenance Costs divided by total new sqft of Plan build out 4) Other Cities Community Planning Recovery Fees (2013 or 2014) City Fee San Leandro 0.30% of building valuation Concord 0.25% of building valuation Davis 0.20% of building valuation So San Francisco 0.15% of building valuation Union City 0.10% of building valuation Oakland 0.10% of building valuation Walnut Creek 0.10% of building valuation Elk Grove 0.023% of building valuation Vallejo 7% surcharge on permits Hayward 12% of building permit Highest (Galt) 0.36% of building valuation Lowest (Elk Grove) 0.023% of building valuation Average 0.153% of building valuation Building Value Sqft Units EC Phase 1 EC Phase 2 Typical Fee Concord Fee Residential 8,288,000 $ 59,200 50 7,985.63 $ 16,401.96 $ 8,288.00 $ 20,720.00 $ Commercial 650,000 $ 5,000 674.46 $ 1,385.30 $ 650.00 $ 1,625.00 $ Garage 1,200,000 $ 15,000 2,023.39 $ 4,155.90 $ 1,200.00 $ 3,000.00 $ Total 10,138,000 $ 10,683.48 $ 21,943.17 $ 10,138.00 $ 25,345.00 $ Building Valuation Equivalent 0.105% 0.216% 0.100% 0.250% Construction value based on estimated construction costs from recent multifamily developments in El Cerrito: a) Residential = $140/sqft b) Commercial = $130/sqft c) Garage = $80/sqft Building Valuation Equivalent is equal to Total Fees divided by Total Building Value The development capacity assumed in the Specific Plan EIR includes development in the City of Richmond, specifically 170 units at 5620 Central Ave. Technically, the number of residential units proposed in the City of El Cerrito is 1706-170 = 1536 units. Average sqft per unit in recent mfd developments in El Cerrito, including circulation and common areas 5) Impact of Various Plan Maintenance Fees on Multi-Family Development (50-Units & 5,000 Sqft Commercial Space) Average sqft per unit of 1184 multiplied by Plan Maintenance Cost per sqft or $0.13 Average sqft per unit of 1184 multiplied by Plan Maintenance Cost per sqft or $0.28