Anderson Valley Community Services District, 2015

MENDOCINO Local Agency Formation Commission Ukiah Valley Conference Center ◊ 200 South School Street ◊ Ukiah, California 95482 ANDERSON VALLEY COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT SPHERE OF INFLUENCE UPDATE Prepared in accordance with Government Code §56425 Administrative Draft Workshop- September 14, 2015 Draft Hearing- December 7, 2015 Final Adoption- December 7, 2015 101 LAFCo Resolution No. 15-16-08 Redwood Valley - EXHIBIT A. Reeves Canyon Rd C . alpella FPD Burris Ln. Redwood Valley Compch e U kiah R Potter Valley CSD d . Calpella Orr Sprin 20 gs Rd. Comptche Community Service District F ly n n C re e k R d . Navarro Low Gap Rd. Ukiah 128 Talmage Philo G reenwood Rd. Clow R idge Rd Ukiah Valley FPD Elk Community Lake Service District Philo 253 McNab Rd. Boonville E Hopland as Fire Protection District t S id e R d . Hopland Mountain View Rd. Redwood Coast 101 Fire Protection District EurekaHill Rd. Yorkville R d. e s Tenm h R ock Rd. 128 Mt H o u ile R d . Fi s o rn Rd h k El South Coast FPD 1 Anchor Bay Sonoma Gualala District Boundary CSD Response Area Adopted SOI (2015) Other Districts Contract Properties Parcels 0 2 4Miles Anderson Valley Prepared for Mendocino Community Service District LAFCo by: Date: 12/11/2015 Sources: Boundaries: Mendocino County; Roads: US Census TIGER. Path: D:\Planwest_GIS\projects\current\Mendocino_LAFCo\CSD\Anderson_Valley_CSD.mxd ANDERSON VALLEY COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT SPHERE OF INFLUENCE UPDATE MENDOCINO LAFCO Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................................... 3 OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................................................................... 3 REVIEW PERIOD ............................................................................................................................................................. 3 EVALUATION CONSIDERATIONS ......................................................................................................................................... 3 General Guidelines for Determining Spheres of Influence ................................................................................................... 4 FIGURE 1. ................................................................................................................................................................... 5 OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................................................. 6 CURRENT AGENCY OPERATIONS ........................................................................................................................................ 6 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................................................... 6 MUNICIPAL SERVICE REVIEW ............................................................................................................................................ 6 SPHERE OF INFLUENCE ..................................................................................................................................................... 6 Out of District Services ................................................................................................................................................................ 6 Contracted Out of District Fire Services .............................................................................................................................................. 7 Other Services Provided ....................................................................................................................................................................... 7 DISADVANTAGED UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITIES ............................................................................................................. 8 CURRENT AND PROJECTED POPULATION ............................................................................................................................. 8 Population and Growth ................................................................................................................................................................ 8 CAPACITY AND SERVICE ................................................................................................................................................... 8 Fire Services .................................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Recreation Services ........................................................................................................................................................................ 9 Airport Services ............................................................................................................................................................................ 10 Street Lighting Services ............................................................................................................................................................... 10 Funding for Services .................................................................................................................................................................... 11 Relevant Local Agencies and Communities of Interest ........................................................................................................ 11 RELEVANT PLANNING AND SERVICE FACTORS ..................................................................................................................... 11 County of Mendocino 2009 General Plan, Chapter 6: Community – Specific Policies: ................................................. 11 Anderson Valley Planning Area ................................................................................................................................................. 11 DISCUSSION ......................................................................................................................................................... 13 ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................................................................. 14 1.) Present and Planned Land Use Determination ................................................................................................................. 14 2.) Present and Probable Need for Public Facilities and Services Determination ........................................................... 14 3.) Present Capacity of Facilities and Adequacy of Public Services Determination ......................................................... 14 4.) Social and Economic Communities of Interest Determination ..................................................................................... 14 5.) Present and Probable Need for Water, Sewer, or Fire Protection Services for Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities (DUCs) Determination ...................................................................................................................................... 14 CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................................................................................................... 14 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................................................... 15 APPENDIX A ......................................................................................................................................................... 16 FIGURE 2.AVFD DISPATCH AREA .................................................................................................................................. 16 FIGURE 3. AVFD RESPONSE AREA................................................................................................................................. 17 FIGURE 4. OVERLAY OF AVFD DISPATCH AND RESPONSE AREA .......................................................................................... 18 Adopted December 7, 2015 2 ANDERSON VALLEY COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT SPHERE OF INFLUENCE UPDATE MENDOCINO LAFCO IN TR ODU C TION OVERVIEW This update is prepared as part of a CKH Act mandated (GC §56076) process. As stated in that section, “In order to carry out its purposes and responsibilities for planning and shaping the logical and orderly development and coordination of local government agencies so as to advantageously provide for the present and future needs of the county and its communities, LAFCo shall develop and determine the Sphere of Influence (SOI) of each local governmental agency within the county”. A “SOI” under the CKH Act (GC §56076) definition is “…. a plan for the probable physical boundaries and service area of a local (government) agency”. Decisions on organizational changes must be consistent with the SOI boundary and determinations. The adopted SOI is used by LAFCo as a policy guide in its consideration of boundary change proposals affecting each city and special district in Mendocino County. Other agencies and individuals use adopted SOIs to better understand the services provided by each local agency and the geographic area in which those services will be available. Clear public understanding of the planned geographic availability of urban services is crucial to the preservation of agricultural land and discouraging urban sprawl. The following update will assess and recommend an appropriate Anderson Valley Community Services District (AVCSD) Sphere of Influence (SOI). The objective is to establish AVCSD SOI relative to current legislative directives, local policies, and agency preferences in justifying whether to (a) change or (b) maintain the designation. The update draws on information from the AVCSD 2014 Municipal Services Review (MSR), which includes the evaluation of availability, adequacy, and capacity of services provided by the District. REVIEW PERIOD SOI reviews and updates typically occur every five years, or as needed. A local agency’s services are analyzed with a twenty year planning horizon, and a sphere is determined in a manner emphasizing a probable need for services within the next 5-10 years. Actual boundary change approvals, however, are subject to separate analysis with particular emphasis on determining whether the timing of the proposed action is appropriate. EVALUATION CONSIDERATIONS When updating the SOI, the Commission considers and adopts written determinations: Sphere Determinations: Mandatory Written Statements 1. Present and planned land uses in the area, including agricultural and open space. 2. Present and probable need for public facilities and services in the area. 3. Present capacity of public facilities and adequacy of public services the agency provides or is authorized to provide. 4. Existence of any social or economic communities of interest in the area if the commission determines they are relevant to the agency. 5. If the city or district provides water, sewer, or fire, the present and probable need for those services of any disadvantaged unincorporated communities within the existing sphere. Adopted December 7, 2015 3 ANDERSON VALLEY COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT SPHERE OF INFLUENCE UPDATE MENDOCINO LAFCO Policies specific to Mendocino LAFCo are also considered along with determinations in administering the CKH Act in Mendocino County. This includes considering the merits of the SOI, or any changes, relative to the Commission’s seven interrelated policies as listed below, with respect to determining the appropriate SOI. General Guidelines for Determining Spheres of Influence The following is excerpted from Mendocino LAFCo’s 2004 Policies and Procedures, “Chapter 5: Policies That May Apply for Some Applicants”: 1. Territory that is currently receiving services from a local agency shall be considered for inclusion within that agency’s sphere. Territory that is projected to need services within the next 5-10 years may be considered for inclusion within an agency’s sphere, depending on a number of factors required to be reviewed by LAFCo. Additional territory may be considered for inclusion if information is available that will enable the Commission to make determinations as required by Section 56425. 2. Territory will not be considered for inclusion within a city’s sphere of influence unless the area is included within the city’s general plan land use or annexation element. 3. A special district that provides services, which ultimately will be provided by another agency (e.g. mergers, consolidations) will be assigned a zero sphere. 4. When more than one agency can serve an area, agency service capabilities, costs for providing services, input from the affected community, and LAFCo’s policies will be factors in determining a sphere boundary. 5. If additional information is necessary to determine a sphere boundary a partial sphere may be approved and a special study area may be designated. 6. A local agency may be assigned a coterminous sphere with its existing boundaries if: • There is no anticipated need for the agency’s services outside its existing boundaries. • There is insufficient information to support inclusion of areas outside the agency’s boundaries in a sphere of influence. • The agency does not have the service capacity, access to resources (e.g. water rights) or financial ability to serve an area outside its boundaries. • The agency’s boundaries are contiguous with the boundaries of other agencies providing similar services. • The agency’s boundaries are contiguous with the sphere of influence boundaries previously assigned to another agency providing similar services. • The agency requests that their sphere of influence be coterminous with their boundaries. 7. If territory within the proposed sphere boundary of a local agency does not need all of the services of the agency, a service specific sphere of influence may be designated. Adopted December 7, 2015 4 101 Redwood Valley - FIGURE 1. Reeves Canyon Rd C . alpella FPD Burris Ln. Redwood Valley Compch e U kiah R Potter Valley CSD d . Calpella Orr Sprin 20 Comptche Community gs Rd. Service District F ly n n C re e k R d . Navarro Low Gap Rd. Ukiah 128 Talmage Philo G reenwood Rd. Clow R idge Rd Ukiah Valley FPD Elk Community Lake Service District Philo 253 McNab Rd. Boonville Hopland E as Fire Protection District t S id e R d . Hopland Mountain View Rd. Redwood Coast 101 Fire Protection District EurekaHill Rd. Yorkville R d. e s Tenm ile R d . Fi s h R ock Rd. orn Rd 128 Mt H o u h k El South Coast FPD 1 Anchor Bay Sonoma Gualala District Boundary CSD Response Area Draft SOI (2015) Other Districts Contract Properties Parcels 0 2 4Miles Anderson Valley Prepared for Mendocino Community Service District LAFCo by: Date: 11/16/2015 Sources: Boundaries: Mendocino County; Roads: US Census TIGER. Path: D:\Planwest_GIS\projects\current\Mendocino_LAFCo\CSD\Anderson_Valley_CSD.mxd ANDERSON VALLEY COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT SPHERE OF INFLUENCE UPDATE MENDOCINO LAFCO OV ER V IEW CURRENT AGENCY OPERATIONS Anderson Valley Community Services District (District or AVCSD) provides fire protection, street lighting, airport, and recreation services to the residents of Anderson Valley. AVCSD provides fire protection services to areas outside of its boundaries and to non-residents of the District. Besides mutual aid provided to other agencies and services rendered to non-residents travelling through the District, AVCSD’s Fire Department responds to calls outside the District and provides fire protection services to individual properties near the district boundaries through individual contracts. Additionally the District has reported that they are pursuing the possibility of taking on water and sewer services (District Manager, August, 2015). AVCSD is governed by a five-member Board of Directors and has a staff of 49, of which four are paid and 45 are volunteers. Paid personnel include a general manager, a secretary, a fire chief, and a teen center coordinator. The District employs approximately two full-time equivalents (FTEs); the fire chief is the only full-time employee. All volunteers are part of the fire department and receive a stipend for their service. Paid personnel are evaluated annually by the Personnel Committee, which consists of two board members. The District’s boundary area is approximately 160 square miles. AVCSD is located in the southern portion of Mendocino County along SR 128 in Anderson Valley and includes the unincorporated communities of Boonville, Navarro, Philo, and Yorkville (see Figure 1). BACKGROUND The AVCSD was formed in 1970 as the result of a reorganization of County Service Area (CSA) No. 1. At that time, AVCSD assumed the fire protection duties of CSA No. 1. During the formation process, Boonville Street Lighting District was also dissolved and its function transferred to the newly formed CSD. AVCSD started providing recreation services in the early 1980’s and airport services in 1984. The principal act that governs the District is the State of California Community Services District Law (Government Code §61000-61226.5). Since its formation, the District undertook one annexation in 1984, known as Flynn Creek Road to Mountain House Road Annexation (LAFCo Resolution 84-6). MUNICIPAL SERVICE REVIEW A Municipal Service Review (MSR) was conducted for the AVCSD, which was adopted by the LAFCo Commission on February 3, 2014. A MSR is a part of and a prerequisite for a SOI Update; as such, much of the information contained herein comes directly from the 2014 AVCSD MSR. SPHERE OF INFLUENCE A sphere of influence (SOI) for AVCSD has not been established. Out of District Services Response Area The AVCSD’s Fire Department is dispatched to all calls within a 200 square mile area not currently within any other fire district (Dispatch Area, See Figure 2 in Appendix A). The District has also Adopted December 7, 2015 6 ANDERSON VALLEY COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT SPHERE OF INFLUENCE UPDATE MENDOCINO LAFCO defined a Response Area, which includes parcels that can be accessed off roads that AVFD is now being dispatched to and represents where the District considers itself to have the best access as local responder (See Figure 3 in Appendix A). Figure 4 in Appendix A depicts the green Dispatch Area overlaid on the red Response Area. It demonstrates that much of the response area is territory that the District is already dispatched to as the primary fire service provider. The map also distinguishes those areas that the District currently is dispatched to, which they feel could be better served by another fire-related provider. As such, the Draft SOI (2015) is proposed to include the District’s Response Area (See Figure 1 in Appendix A). Contracted Out of District Fire Services In addition to the Dispatch and Response Areas, AVCSD has properties external to the District boundaries that are contracted to receive service. These properties are included in the response area. The contracts for service include a clause stating that both the District and resident anticipate eventual annexation of the property into the District. These out of district contract areas are grouped into five general regions described in the 2014 MSR as: 1. Northeast of the Yorkville Ranch Road area; 2. Elkhorn Road area and Fish Rock Road area (southeast of Yorkville); 3. East of Highway 253 at the summit; 4. Lone Tree Ridge Road area (east of Philo); and 5. The easterly portion of Clow Ridge Road. The out of district services began in approximately 2008 as a way to charge for service outside the district boundary and avoid exposing the District to additional liability (MSR, 2014). The 2014 MSR reported 29 contracts for out of district service. Currently the AVCSD reports that they have 30 properties that were offered contract renewal as of July 1st, 2015 (District Manager, August, 2015). While each contract does not contain a specified contract expiration date, the agreements may be renewed annually upon payment of the annual fee until annexation occurs, and shall terminate upon annexation or upon written notice of cancellation by the owner, the District or LAFCo (District Manager, August, 2015). The contracts include a clause stating that both the District and resident anticipate eventual annexation into the District. Each individual contract has a clause that an out-of- area service agreement becomes effective upon LAFCo approval (MSR, 2014). Other Services Provided The airport also is used by both district residents and non-residents. Limited street lighting services are provided within the District boundary, primarily in Boonville (MSR, 2014). There are no un-served areas within AVCSD’s boundaries, with respect to the four services provided by the District. There are a number of services that may be needed but are not currently provided. These include water supply, wastewater, and utility undergrounding (MSR, 2014). Most developed parcels within the District are currently served by individual wells or private community water systems, individual septic systems, and overhead or underground electrical service. Prior studies evaluated the potential for public water systems; however, there was insufficient community support to move forward (MSR, 2014). Adopted December 7, 2015 7 ANDERSON VALLEY COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT SPHERE OF INFLUENCE UPDATE MENDOCINO LAFCO DISADVANTAGED UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITIES LAFCo is required to evaluate disadvantaged unincorporated communities (DUCs) as part of an SOI review, including the location and characteristics of any such communities. A DUC is defined as any area with 12 or more registered voters where the median household income (MHI) is less than 80 percent of the statewide MHI. Within a DUC, three basic services are evaluated: water, sewage, and fire protection. Within the AVCSD boundary, there exist two DUCs. They are Boonville, a ‘census designated place’ with an estimated population of 1,035 residents, and Philo, a ’census designated place’ with an estimated population of 349 residents, located just northwest of Boonville along State Route 128. Both Boonville and Philo qualify as DUCs because their median household incomes are less than 80% of the State median household income of $61,632. For Boonville, the median household income is $40,242 (or 65.3% of the State median household income), while Philo is $40,875 (or 66.3% of the State median household income) (MSR, 2014). The AVCSD provides fire protection services, and is therefore only responsible for assuring that this service is adequately provided to communities. The AVCSD’s Fire Department provides adequate structural fire protection to Boonville and Philo. The District maintains a strong presence in Boonville where the main fire station is located and in Philo where two satellite fire stations are located. CURRENT AND PROJECTED POPULATION Population and Growth There are approximately 3,700 residents within the District, based on census place population in the 2010 Census (MSR, 2014). AVCSD reported that the population of the District increased over the last few years, due to growth in wineries in Anderson Valley. The majority of growth occurred in the Boonville area. Additional development is generated by second-unit dwellings and housing for winery workers. The District reports that it anticipates moderate growth within its boundaries in the next few years. Small parcel subdivisions and minor subdivisions are scattered throughout Anderson Valley. Potential growth may also result from further development in the wine industry in the region and more retirees moving into the area (MSR, 2014). CAPACITY AND SERVICE AVCSD reported that current financing levels were adequate to deliver services. Additional financing opportunities identified by the District include grants for the teen center and the airport, potential impact fees, and approval of a new benefit assessment when the current assessment becomes inadequate (MSR, 2014). Fire Services The AVCSD’s Fire Department provides structural fire protection, emergency medical services, rescue, hazardous material response, and fire prevention on behalf of the AVCSD. Fire prevention is provided in the form of code inspection in State Fire Marshal mandated occupancies; voluntary inspections of public and private property with the goal of improving fire safety and prevention in occupancies where there is no enforcement authority; working with several wildland/urban interface communities to improve survivability of homes and businesses threatened by wildland fires; and providing public education on fire safety through various types of public presentations. Adopted December 7, 2015 8 ANDERSON VALLEY COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT SPHERE OF INFLUENCE UPDATE MENDOCINO LAFCO With regard to wildland fires, the District gets compensated when the department responds to wildland fires under mutual aid agreements with CALFIRE and the United States Forest Services (USFS); however, the majority of the department’s wildland fire responses are reportedly uncompensated (MSR, 2014). The District has established a billing ordinance and fee schedule to address services provided to non-residents and parcels located outside district boundaries. With regard to emergency medical calls, AVCSD’s Fire Department has 17 firefighters that are EMT I certified, two firefighters that are currently certified paramedics, and one that is an EMT II (MSR 2014). In addition to the AVCSD’s Fire Department, the Anderson Valley Ambulance Service, a private non-profit provider, is dispatched to medical calls. In most cases, fire departments arrive at scene prior to the ambulance and are expected perform necessary emergency medical interventions, stabilize the patient, gather vital signs, prepare the patient for transport, and conduct traffic control. Anderson Valley Ambulance is staffed by 18 volunteer EMTs, of which approximately 10 of these volunteer EMTs are also volunteer firefighters with the AVCSD’s Fire Department (MSR 2014). AVCSD’s Fire Department operates nine stations. In the last 15 years, four new stations were constructed and its fleet of 21 vehicles mostly replaced. Multiple stations operated by AVCSD’s Fire Department are owned by other entities. The Yorkville Station is shared with the Yorkville Community Benefits Association (YCBA). Mailliard Ranch owns facilities used at the Fish Rock Station. One apparatus bay of the Signal Ridge Station owned by Fashauer Ranch is used. Rancho Navarro Station is leased from the Rancho Navarro Home Owners Association, and the Old Philo and Navarro stations are owned by Philo Mill and Mendocino Redwood Company, respectively (MSR, 2014). Each of the nine fire stations in AVCSD serves approximately 18 square miles. AVCSD’s Fire Department has around 13 firefighters per 1,000 residents. Furthermore the District reported that it generally has sufficient capacity to provide services to its current service area and future growth (MSR, 2014). The District collaborates with other fire service providers through state and county mutual aid agreements. The District is a member of the California Special Districts Association (CSDA), the Mendocino County Fire Safe Council, and the Mendocino County Fire Chief’s Association (MSR, 2014). Recreation Services AVCSD provides a youth football program, teen center drop-in trips and summer programs, such as Paleo Camp. Most classes are provided through a contract, where an instructor runs the program through the AVCSD Recreation Department. The teen center is run directly by the AVCSD Recreation Department. AVCSD serves as a fiscal sponsor for organizations that provide recreational opportunities but do not either have insurance or need the funds channeled through a public agency. In the past it has served as a fiscal agent to a group that received an MCOG grant to study the possibility of building a recreation trail; and an organization that saved a state park from closing. The District also sponsored resurfacing of the tennis courts and the youth football program. The Anderson Valley Museum is operated by the Anderson Valley Historical Society, which rents space from the District for $1.00 per year (MSR, 2014). Both district residents and non-residents are allowed to use the District’s recreational programs. There is no difference in fees. The District reported that very few facility and program users were Adopted December 7, 2015 9 ANDERSON VALLEY COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT SPHERE OF INFLUENCE UPDATE MENDOCINO LAFCO non-residents. Membership is not required for the use of district facilities and programs (MSR, 2014). The District reported that the teen center had about 130 participants at Friday Night Drop-In from August 2010 through March 2011. Participants ranged from seventh graders to twelfth graders. Demand for recreation and teen center services has stayed the same for the last three years. According to the District, there is a need for additional recreation services but no additional funding to finance them is available (MSR, 2014). The Recreation Department applies for and receives grants to expand its activities, build new facilities, and collaborate with other agencies that are interested in new recreational opportunities for the area. Given the financial constraints, the District is providing adequate recreation opportunities for residents. AVCSD has enough capacity to provide services that are already currently provided; however, there is not enough funding for additional recreational programs (MSR, 2014). Airport Services AVCSD provides airport services at the Boonville Airport, which is mostly used for general aviation. Airport parking is provided in the form of tie-downs, for which the District charges fees. The airport is open to public, both residents and non-residents alike. Fees are the same for all customers (MSR, 2014). Airplanes based at the field are all single engine. Aircraft operations average 50 operations (takeoff or landing) per week; with about 60 percent being transient general aviation, and 40 percent local general aviation (MSR, 2014). The District reported that the demand for airport services remained the same in the last few years. AVCSD has sufficient capacity to accommodate current service demand. Boonville Airport covers 35 acres and has one runway surfaced with asphalt. There is no air traffic control tower, and the airport is unattended. The airport has a wind indicator and segmented circle (MSR, 2014). The surface condition of the runway and markings are currently considered to be ‘good’ according to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Caltrans Department of Aeronautics inspections (MSR, 2014). The District completed an engineering project in 2013 which prepared plans and specifications to widen the runway by 60-feet and resurface the entire runway. The District applied for an additional FAA grant to complete the construction phase of the runway project and finished work in June of 2015 (District Manager, August, 2015). In 2016, the District intends to acquire additional land (to widen the south property line by 15-feet) in order to provide an adequate object-free area from the runway centerline; and acquire additional land adjacent to the transient parking area for future hangar construction (MSR, 2014). Boonville Airport was last inspected by the Caltrans Division of Aeronautics on January 23, 2014. No major violations were identified. According to the Division of Aeronautics report, the conditions of the runway and markings on the runway are adequate (MSR, 2014). Street Lighting Services AVCSD provides limited street lighting services within District boundaries through a contract with Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). There are 27 public streetlights within the District, primarily located in Boonville. All lights are owned and maintained by PG&E. Electrical costs for these street lights are paid for by the District. The District reports that it receives about one service Adopted December 7, 2015 10 ANDERSON VALLEY COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT SPHERE OF INFLUENCE UPDATE MENDOCINO LAFCO call per year. There were no reported streetlight infrastructure needs. The District reported that it usually takes two to seven days to respond to a service call regarding a street light issue (MSR, 2014). Funding for Services The revenues for AVCSD for FY 11-12 were $437,058, which was designated as fire department income (80%), community services income (15%), recreation/teen center income (2%), and airport income (3%) (MSR 2014). AVCSD charges fees for some of its services. A recreation fee is $3 per person per year to participate in any classes. The airport tie down fee is $3 per night. The airport also occasionally gets some revenue through hay sales when the airport territory gets mowed (MSR 2014). AVCSD’s Fire Department receives income from a special tax in the amount of $36 per unimproved residential parcel; $72 per single residence on a residential parcel; and an extra $36 for each additional residence on the same parcel. The special tax on commercial parcels starts with a minimum of $120 up to a maximum of $600 depending on square footage. The department charges $168 per parcel per year to provide contract services to those parcels with Out-of-Area service agreements. The District’s strike team gets reimbursed for responding to wild fires when the department responds under mutual aid agreements with CALFIRE or the United States Forest Service (USFS) according to the established fee schedules. Firefighters responding on strike team assignments are paid about $22 per hour depending on the position. AVCSD’s Fire Department charges emergency fire response fees for providing services to non-residents whose owners do not have a contract with the District. The charges could vary from $50 to $175 per hour depending on personnel and apparatus involved (MSR 2014). Relevant Local Agencies and Communities of Interest The District is compensated when the department responds to wildland fires under mutual aid agreements with CALFIRE and the United States Forest Services. It collaborates with other fire service providers through statewide and countywide mutual aid agreements. Comptche Community Service District, Elk Community Services District, and Hopland FPD (formerly Sanel Valley) each share borders with AVCSD and each provides fire protection within its own district boundaries. Redwood Coast FPD and Ukiah Valley FPD are also near AVFPD boundaries and provide fire protection within their boundaries. No water or wastewater districts exist within AVCSD; most developed parcels within the District are currently served by individual wells or private community water systems, and individual septic systems (MSR, 2014). RELEVANT PLANNING AND SERVICE FACTORS County of Mendocino 2009 General Plan, Chapter 6: Community – Specific Policies: Anderson Valley Planning Area A majority of the land within the District consists of forest land, agriculture including vineyards, residential and large-lot residential, commercial and recreational uses. Major commercial enterprises include 36 wineries (20 in the Philo area, eight in the Boonville area, and eight in the Yorkville area), Adopted December 7, 2015 11 ANDERSON VALLEY COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT SPHERE OF INFLUENCE UPDATE MENDOCINO LAFCO and the Anderson Valley Brewing Company, a regional craft beer brewery located in Boonville. The land use authority for AVCSD is Mendocino County (MSR, 2014). Boonville has a mix of land uses, including residential, commercial, agricultural, and civic facilities. Philo contains mixtures of residential, commercial, agricultural, and industrial uses. Yorkville includes residential, limited commercial and agricultural uses. Navarro contains residential and limited commercial uses, with much of the property in and around the community owned by a large industrial timber company. Floodgate, south of Navarro, is a long-established commercial area. Significant pockets of residential development lie in the hills east and west of Boonville; along Greenwood Road and at Sky Ranch near Cold Springs Mountain; between Philo and Navarro on the Holmes Ranch and Nash Ranch subdivisions; at the Yorkville Ranch; and in Rancho Navarro, a large subdivision located west of Navarro (Mendocino County, 2009). State Highway 128 is a primary route from U.S. 101 to the central Mendocino Coast, which is a population center and major tourist destination. It is the main road to Anderson Valley and virtually the only route for travel between Anderson Valley’s communities. With the closure of lumber mills on the Coast, Highway 128 has become a major route for trucks hauling logs to mills in Ukiah and Cloverdale. It is the key transportation corridor for shipment of lumber and wood products milled in Philo and for other products such as grapes, apples and wine originating in Anderson Valley (Mendocino County, 2009). Anderson Valley Goals and Policies Goal CP-AV-1: Maintain and enhance Anderson Valley’s rural, agrarian character. Policy CP-AV-1: The County shall concentrate new development in the four towns in Anderson Valley (Yorkville, Boonville, Philo, and Navarro) and their immediate vicinities, and discourage new retail development outside of the four towns. Goal CP-AV-2: Expand economic and housing opportunities in Anderson Valley consistent with the desired rural agrarian character of the valley. Action Item CP-AV-2.3: Request Caltrans to work with the Community Services District to consider and, if appropriate, implement traffic calming measures Anderson Valley communities, to create a more pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly environment. Goal CP-AV-3: Focus development and community services in and around the four existing communities— Yorkville, Boonville, Philo, and Navarro—in a manner compatible with physical features and natural resources. Policy CP-AV-11: Services and infrastructure in Anderson Valley should be available to serve the level of development planned for the area, and to reduce costs and preclude unplanned growth should be sized to accommodate only the level of development shown in the Development Management Element and described in these Community Policies. Action Item CP-AV-11.1: The County will assist the Yorkville, Boonville, Philo, and Navarro communities in their efforts to provide small, decentralized water and wastewater treatment services deemed necessary to support growth consistent with the land use patterns and densities established in the General Plan. Policy CP-AV-12: The County encourages the Anderson Valley Community Services District to pursue the provision or management of water and/or wastewater treatment services. Adopted December 7, 2015 12 ANDERSON VALLEY COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT SPHERE OF INFLUENCE UPDATE MENDOCINO LAFCO Policy CP-AV-13: The County supports community fire hydrant systems in Yorkville, Boonville, Philo, and Navarro to facilitate economic development and public safety. Policy CP-AV-17: The County encourages the Community Services District to maintain the current Master Plan for Boonville Airport, but supports upgrades to the airport to accommodate economic development and emergency services. DIS C U S S ION This update focuses on the current boundaries of the AVCSD and the District’s Response Area to make the required determinations and to establish a SOI for the District. This analysis considers establishing an SOI boundary that is coterminous with the District’s Response Area. The AVCSD proposes to include approximately 177 square miles into its SOI that it currently serves outside the District’s boundaries since no other local agency is responsible for fire protection services and the District has served this area for many years. The delivery of fire protection services outside of district boundaries is often referred to as “good will service” because no local agency is responsible for providing the service to the area and the District in question provides the service out of good will rather than obligation. The Elk CSD, Redwood Coast FPD, Hopland FPD, Comptche CSD, and Ukiah Valley FPD also provide “good will” services near these areas. As a result, the Response Area boundary was reviewed in consultation with each of these fire departments. The Response Area contains 30 non-contiguous properties that have contracts with the AVCSD for fire protection services. These contracts represent a concrete need for fire protection services external to the District boundary. There are no direct estimates for population in the Response Area, but land use designations indicate restricted development and housing potential. Present need and future growth are assumed to exist but remain limited. Those properties with existing out of district service contracts are located within close proximity to AVCSD and have written agreements acknowledging future annexation of their properties into the District boundaries. AVCSD currently responds to calls for service throughout the Response Area. The weight of response and levels of service after the expansion of the SOI to match the Response Area would be substantially similar to current levels and would therefore not significantly influence owners of resource land in their decisions to convert such land to other uses. In addition, the establishment of the new district SOI would clearly define service responsibilities for the benefit of neighboring fire service providers, land use authorities, the public and other service providers. If AVCSD were to annex the SOI in the future, and potentially activate additional latent powers, that would be an appropriate time to establish possible service zones within the District, identifying where various services, such as water, are provided. LAFCO oversight during the establishment of service zones would ensure the policies of the Commission, such as preserving agricultural land and open space, are addressed. Adopted December 7, 2015 13 ANDERSON VALLEY COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT SPHERE OF INFLUENCE UPDATE MENDOCINO LAFCO A N A LY S IS 1.) Present and Planned Land Use Determination Land-use designations within the District are consistent with services provided. Present land-use designations in the Out of District Service Area are consistent with the fire protection services provided. 2.) Present and Probable Need for Public Facilities and Services Determination The needs for services currently provided within the District are expected to continue and increase into the foreseeable future. Existing out of service contracts represent a concrete need for fire protection in the Out of District Service Area. Moderate growth is anticipated within AVCSD boundaries over the next few years. 3.) Present Capacity of Facilities and Adequacy of Public Services Determination AVCSD has adequate capacity and facilities to meet the present and near-future needs of residents within the District in all facets of services provided. AVCSD has sufficient capacity to provide fire protection services to the Response Area and to the territory currently within district boundaries. 4.) Social and Economic Communities of Interest Determination There are no un-served areas within AVCSD’s boundaries with respect to the four services provided by the District. There may be a need for services currently not provided, including water, wastewater and utility undergrounding. The Out of District Service Area has substantive social and economic ties with AVCSD. 5.) Present and Probable Need for Water, Sewer, or Fire Protection Services for Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities (DUCs) Determination Within the Anderson Valley Community Service District boundary, both Boonville and Philo are considered to be DUCs. AVCSD’s Fire Department provides adequate structural fire protection to Boonville and Philo. C ON C LU S ION S As discussed previously, this update serves to establish an SOI boundary that is coterminous with the District’s Response Area, based on the following considerations: 1.) The AVCSD’s Fire Department is providing “good will service” outside the District’s boundary in the Response Area. 2.) The AVCSD has established a service relationship in the form of contracted fire protection services, and these services are anticipated to be needed in the future; 3.) The AVCSD’s Fire Department is currently being dispatched to most areas within the Response Area; and 4.) There is sufficient evidence to support AVCSD as the agency best able to provide fire protection services based on spatial proximity, service ability and capacity, and historical service precedent. Adopted December 7, 2015 14 ANDERSON VALLEY COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT SPHERE OF INFLUENCE UPDATE MENDOCINO LAFCO The AVCSD’s SOI should be established to include the District’s Response Area. See Draft SOI in Figure 1. Additionally, the District has indicated that it is pursuing the possibility of taking on water and wastewater services. The County has indicated in its General plan, in Policy CP-AV-12 that it supports the District in pursuing the provision or management of water and/or wastewater treatment services. Activation of latent powers to provide water or wastewater services would require LAFCo review and approval. R EF ER EN CES Anderson Valley Community Services District Municipal Service Review, 2014. Approved by the Commission February 3, 2014. Prepared for the Local Agency Formation Commission of Mendocino County by Policy Consulting Associates, LLC. Mendocino County General Plan, 2009. Anderson Valley Community Planning Area. (Page 6-3). Mendocino LAFCo, 2004 Policies and Procedures, Chapter 5- Policies That May Apply for Some Applicants, D. Sphere of Influence. Adopted December 7, 2015 15 APPENDIX A. FIGURE 2. AVFD Dispatch Area SH 20 Comptche Community Service District Albion - Little River S H 20 U S 1 Ukiah Valley 0 1 Elk Community Service District H 253 S S H 1 S H 128 Sanel Valley Redwood Coast S H 1 South Coast Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, TomTom, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), swisstopo, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community AVCSD's district boundary is depicted as the red outline. Locations of the District's fire Map courtesy of AVCSD stations are depicted as icons. The AVFD's Dispatch Area is denoted in green and the surrounding fire-related districts are shown in gray. FIGURE 3. AVFD Response Area Comptche Community Service District S H Albion - Little River 2 0 U S 1 0 1 Ukiah Valley Elk Community Service District H 253 S S H 128 Sanel Valley SH 175 Redwood Coast S H 1 South Coast Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, TomTom, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), swisstopo, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community Map courtesy of AVCSD. The AVCSD boundary is depicted as the red outline, the AVFD Response Area is shaded in a lighter red and is outlined in blue. The surrounding fire-related districts are depicted in gray. FIGURE 4. Overlay of AVFD Response and Dispatch Areas Comptche Community Service District S H Albion - Little River 2 0 U S 1 0 1 Elk Community H 253 Ukiah Valley S Service District S H 128 Sanel Valley SH 175 Redwood Coast S H 1 South Coast Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, TomTom, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China Map Courtesy of AVCSD (Hong Kong), swisstopo, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community The AVCSD district boundary is depicted by the red outline. Where the Response Area shown in Figure 3 and Dispatch Area shown in Figure 2 overlap is shown here in greeen-brown. The portions of the Response Area and Dispatch Area that do not overlap may be seen in their respective colors, red and green.