My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA PACKET
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2024
>
121724
>
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA PACKET
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/11/2024 11:39:08 AM
Creation date
12/11/2024 11:13:09 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
12/17/2024
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
893
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Pleasanton Comprehensive Fee Update and Nexus Study November 2024 <br /> <br />9 <br /> <br /> Development Impact Fee Methodology <br />This section provides a brief overview of the nexus methodology and key assumptions <br />used in this Study. It also summarizes the demographic and land use projections <br />underlying the fee. Subsequent chapters provide more detailed calculations for each DIF <br />category. While the commercial linkage fee is considered a development impact fee, the <br />methodology for determining the maximum justifiable fee level differs slightly and will be <br />described in Chapter 5. <br />Summary of Methodology <br />While the nexus methodology employed in this study varies by fee category as <br />appropriate given the range of capital facilities and improvements covered, there are <br />basic steps common to all. Specifically, for each fee category, EPS has applied the <br />following general steps to calculate the nexus-supported fee amounts: <br />1. EPS estimated existing and future population and employment in Pleasanton <br />through buildout of the current General Plan using a variety of City and third- <br />party sources, as described in the subsequent section. <br />2. The EPS consultant team identified the universe of new infrastructure and capital <br />facility improvements needed to serve both existing and future residents and <br />employees. These needs were based on interviews with City staff and analysis of <br />existing City facility capacity and service standards. Capital facilities exclude <br />water, sewer and storm drain facilities since these are part of a separate fee <br />program. <br />3. The EPS consultant team developed cost estimates for the capital facility <br />improvements described in step 2 above. These cost estimates were developed <br />based on information provided by City departmental staff as well as additional <br />research and in-house resources. <br />4. EPS allocated the capital facility costs identified in step 3 above between existing <br />and new development to determine the share included in the DIF program. These <br />allocation shares were determined in a variety of ways depending on <br />improvement, available data, and City guidance. In cases where the improvement <br />is expected to service both the existing population and the future population <br />equally, the share of costs attributable to new development is based on the City’s <br />current versus future service population. <br />5. Once costs have been allocated between new and existing development, they are <br />further distributed among residential and commercial uses to arrive at a cost per <br />resident and a cost per employee. This distribution was based on the proportion of <br />total forecasted service population composed of residents and employees, <br />respectively. <br />6. Once costs were allocated to a “cost per resident” and “cost per employee” basis, <br />they are multiplied by the people per household for each residential fee category <br />Page 70 of 893
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.