23 - Laserfiche WebLink

ATTACHMENT 3 DRAFT MEMORANDUM To: City of Pleasanton From: Jason Moody and Michael Nimon Subject: EPSP Alternatives Infrastructure Cost Burden Review; EPS #121090 Date: June 11, 2013 The Economies gf Lunt, ('Sr The City of Pleasanton requested that Economic & Planning Systems (EPS) assess the potential for the East Pleasanton Specific Plan (EPSP) program alternatives to support the infrastructure cost required for C• development. This review builds on the analysis of a series of the EPSP alternatives presented to the Task Force over the last several months. To provide an initial screen on the financial feasibility of the necessary infrastrud:ure investments, EPS considered the estimated cost burden of infrastruc:ure relative to the potential finished value of each program alternative. The analysis is based on the six revised EPSP program alternatives prepared by Gates + Associates and infrastructure cost estimates prepared by Kier Wright Civil Engineers Surveyors. To conduct this broad-level financial feasibility screen, EPS studied the suite of land uses contained in each program alternative and estimated an aggregate "finished market value"for each. In EPS's experience, an infrastructure program cost burden of about 15 percent of the finished value of the real estate program is supportable. EPS also employs another infrastructure feasibility test that considers the potential annual cost burden, assuming that a Community Facility District is used to finance EPSP infrastructure, to determine whether total tax burden (property tax and CFD together) might exceed a 2.0 percent threshold. Economic&Manning Systems,Inc. 2501 Ninth Street,Suite 200 Berkeley,C4 94710-2257 510 841 9190 tel 510 841 9208 fax Berkeley Denver Los Angeles Sacramento www.spsys.com