| | - City of Lafayette
- Development Program
- Office (SF) Retail (SF)
- Residential
- (Units)
- Development
- Program (SF)
- Projected Direct Employment
- Total 360,000 1,170
- Alternative 1 - General Plan
- Total 276,000 897
- Total 350,000 1,138
- Alternative 3 - High Density
- Total 490,000 1,593
- Total Construction
- Estimated Labor Cost
- Total
- Jobs Per Year
- Ongoing Jobs
- 1,170
- 1,140
- 1,590
- 1,000
- 1,200
- 1,400
- 1,600
- 1,800
- Proposed Project Alternative 1 -
- General Plan
- Alternative 2 -
- Planning
- Subcommittee
- Alternative 3 -High Density
- Number of Jobs
- 2,830
- 1,330
- 2,780
- 3,860
- 1,000
- 1,500
- 2,000
- 2,500
- 3,000
- 3,500
- 4,000
- 4,500
- Proposed Project Alternative 1 -
- General Plan
- Alternative 2 -
- Planning
- Subcommittee
- Alternative 3 -High Density
- Number of Jobs
- Retail Square Feet
- Total Taxable
- Sales
- Annual Sales Tax Revenue
- Annual Sales Tax Revenue
- $497,000
- $381,000
- $483,000
- $676,000
- $200,000
- $400,000
- $600,000
- $800,000
- Proposed Project Alternative 1 -
- General Plan
- Alternative 2 -
- Planning
- Subcommittee
- Alternative 3 -High Density
- Total Construction
- Total Material
- Material Cost Purchased in Lafayette
- Lafayette Sales Tax Revenue
- FY 2040/41
- Gross Tax Increment
- Housing Set-Aside
- Non-Housing
- Revenue
- Gross Tax Increment
- Housing Set-Aside
- Non-Housing
- Revenue
- Total Assessed
- Value in
- FY 2040/41
- Annual
- Property Tax Revenue
- Annual
- General Fund
- Revenue
- Parking Spaces Required
- # of Spaces Subject to
- Fee Total Fees
|
Downtown Lafayette Specific Plan
Draft Economic and Fiscal
Impact Analysis
Prepared for:
City of Lafayette
February 8, 2010
Project Description
2
•
Analyze impacts of Downtown Specific Plan EIR
build-out alternatives
•
Employment generation: One-time and ongoing
•
Revenue generation: One-time and ongoing
!
Sales tax revenue to the City
!
Property tax revenue to the City and Agency
!
Development impact fee revenue to the City
•
Municipal capital and maintenance costs
Downtown Specific Plan EIR
Build-out Alternatives
•
All alternatives: mixed-use development,
same footprint
•
Development intensity based on building height
•
Number of residential units based on 1,200 SF per
unit; EIR assumed 1,000 SF per unit
Development Program
Office (SF) Retail (SF)
Residential
Back to top
(Units)
Proposed Project
180,000
180,000
1,471
Alternative 1 - General Plan
138,000
138,000
608
Alternative 2 - Planning Subcommittee
175,000
175,000
1,450
Alternative 3 - High Density
245,000
245,000
2,008
Employment Generation
4
•
Permanent employment
from commercial
development
•
One-time construction-
related employment
Permanent Employment
•
Based on square feet of building per employee
•
Range: 200-300 SF for office and 300-500 SF
for retail; average used below
Development
Program (SF)
Projected Direct
Employment
a
Proposed Project
Office
180,000
720
Retail
180,000
450
Total
360,000
1,170
Alternative 1 - General Plan
Office
138,000
552
Retail
138,000
345
Total
276,000
897
Alternative 2 - Planning Subcommittee
Office
175,000
700
Retail
175,000
438
Total
350,000
1,138
Alternative 3 - High Density
Office
245,000
980
Retail
245,000
613
Total
490,000
1,593
One-time Construction Employment
•
Based on construction costs and average
wages for construction jobs
•
Assumes 50% of construction costs are wages
•
Jobs per year assumes 30-year build-out,
except for General Plan alternative (20 years)
6
Total
Construction
Cost
Back to top
Estimated
Labor Cost
Back to top
Total
Jobs
Back to top
Jobs Per
Year
Proposed Project
$325,806,000
$162,903,000
2,831
94
Alternative 1 - General Plan
$153,108,000
$76,554,000
1,330
67
Alternative 2 - Planning Subcommittee
$320,450,000
$160,225,000
2,784
93
Alternative 3 - High Density
$444,538,000
$222,269,000
3,862
129
Permanent Employment Summary
7
•
Proposed Project: 130% of General Plan
•
High-Density alternative: 177% of General Plan
Ongoing Jobs
Back to top
1,170
900
Back to top
1,140
Back to top
1,590
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
Proposed Project
Alternative 1 -
General Plan
Alternative 2 -
Planning
Subcommittee
Alternative 3 -
High Density
Number of Jobs
One-time Employment Summary
8
•
Proposed Project: 213% of General Plan
•
High-Density alternative: 290% of General Plan
One-time Construction Jobs
2,830
Back to top
1,330
Back to top
2,780
Back to top
3,860
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
Proposed Project
Alternative 1 -
General Plan
Alternative 2 -
Planning
Subcommittee
Alternative 3 -
High Density
Number of Jobs
Fiscal revenues
9
•
Ongoing revenues
✦
Sales tax from proposed
retail uses
✦
Property tax revenue to City
and Agency
•
One-time revenues
✦
Construction-related sales tax
✦
Development impact fees
Annual Sales Tax Revenue at
Build-out
•
Potential retail mix based on existing and projected
retail uses
10
Other Retail
(40%)
Restaurant/Bar
(30%)
Grocery (15%)
Home
Furnishings
(5%)
Building
Materials (5%)
Apparel (5%)
Source: City of Lafayette, 2009 California Retail Survey, Seifel Consulting Inc.
Annual Sales Tax Revenue at
Build-out
•
Based on total retail SF
•
Average sales per SF is $307, average taxable
sales per SF is $276
•
1% sales tax rate accrues to Lafayette
11
Retail
Square Feet
Back to top
Total Taxable
Back to top
Sales
Back to top
Annual Sales
Tax Revenue
Proposed Project
180,000
$49,671,000
$497,000
Alternative 1 - General Plan
138,000
$38,081,000
$381,000
Alternative 2 - Planning Subcommittee
175,000
$48,291,000
$483,000
Alternative 3 - High Density
245,000
$67,608,000
$676,000
Comparison of Annual Sales Tax
Revenue at Build-out
12
•
Proposed Project: 130% of General Plan
•
High Density alternative: 177% of General Plan
Annual Sales Tax Revenue
$497,000
$381,000
$483,000
$676,000
$0
$200,000
$400,000
$600,000
$800,000
Proposed Project Alternative 1 -
General Plan
Alternative 2 -
Planning
Subcommittee
Alternative 3 -
High Density
One-time Construction-Related
Sales Tax Revenue
•
Material cost is estimated at 50% of total
construction cost
•
Assumes 5% of construction materials
purchased locally
13
Total
Construction
Cost
Back to top
Total Material
Cost
Back to top
Material Cost
Purchased in
Lafayette
Back to top
Lafayette
Sales Tax
Revenue
Proposed Project
$325,806,000
$162,903,000
$8,145,000
$81,000
Alternative 1 - General Plan
$153,108,000
$76,554,000
$3,828,000
$38,000
Alternative 2 - Planning Subcommittee
$320,450,000
$160,225,000
$8,011,000
$80,000
Alternative 3 - High Density
$444,538,000
$222,269,000
$11,113,000
$111,000
Property Taxes to Agency/City
14
•
Redevelopment Project Area nearly coterminous with
Specific Plan Area
•
Property taxes to Agency during life of redevelopment plan
•
Property taxes to City after redevelopment plan ends
•
City does not receive a pass-through payment from the
Agency
•
Property tax revenue based on assessed
value growth
Projected Assessed Value Growth
15
Tax Increment Revenue to Agency in
Nominal (Future) Dollars
•
Assumes TI collected through FY 2040/41
•
TI revenues could be limited by the Agency’s $75M
TI cap
•
Based on assessed values inflated at 2% per year
16
FY 2040/41
AV
Back to top
Gross Tax
Increment
Back to top
Housing
Set-Aside
Back to top
Non-Housing
Back to top
Revenue
Proposed Project
$2,669,953,000 $442,373,000 $88,475,000 $109,903,000
Alternative 1 - General Plan
$1,939,694,000 $351,941,000 $70,388,000
$76,451,000
Alternative 2 - Planning Subcommittee
$2,646,858,000 $438,122,000 $87,624,000 $108,253,000
Alternative 3 - High Density
$3,188,017,000 $521,351,000 $104,270,000 $139,935,000
Tax Increment Revenue to Agency in
Constant FY 2009/10 Dollars
•
Assumes TI collected through FY 2040/41
•
TI revenues could be limited by the Agency’s $75M
TI cap
•
Based on assessed values inflated at 2% per year
and discounted at 6% per year
17
Gross Tax
Increment
Back to top
Housing
Set-Aside
Back to top
Non-Housing
Back to top
Revenue
Proposed Project
$151,433,000 $30,287,000
$33,092,000
Alternative 1 - General Plan
$127,349,000 $25,470,000
$23,911,000
Alternative 2 - Planning Subcommittee
$150,192,000 $30,038,000
$32,602,000
Alternative 3 - High Density
$173,637,000 $34,727,000
$41,736,000
Projected Growth of Agency TI Revenue
and Obligations – Proposed Project
18
Graph 2
Projected TI Revenue to Agency – Proposed Project
Downtown Lafayette Specific Plan Economic and Fiscal Impact Analysis
-
10,000,000
20,000,000
30,000,000
40,000,000
50,000,000
60,000,000
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
Fiscal Year Ending
Nominal Dollars ($)
Gross Tax Increment
Housing Set-Aside
Non-Housing Revenue
Source: City of Lafayette, BAE, DC&E, Seifel Consulting Inc.
Debt Service Payments
Pass-Through Payments
Property Tax Revenue to City
•
City will collect property tax revenue after
redevelopment plan ends
•
City share of 1% property tax rate is 6.013%
19
Total Assessed
Back to top
Value in
Back to top
FY 2040/41
Back to top
Annual
Back to top
Property
Tax Revenue
Back to top
Annual
Back to top
General Fund
Back to top
Revenue
Proposed Project
$2,669,953,000 $26,700,000
$1,605,000
Alternative 1 - General Plan
$1,939,694,000 $19,397,000
$1,166,000
Alternative 2 - Planning Subcommittee
$2,646,858,000 $26,469,000
$1,592,000
Alternative 3 - High Density
$3,188,017,000 $31,880,000
$1,917,000
Development Impact Fees
20
•
Park Fees:
Levied on residential development to
offset costs of parkland acquisition and park
improvements
•
Walkways Fee:
Levied on residential development
to offset costs of walkways improvements
(commercial development to provide
improvements or pay in-lieu fee)
•
Lamorinda Sub-Regional Transportation Fee:
levied on commercial and residential development
to fund transportation improvements
Development Impact Fees, cont.
21
•
Drainage Fee:
levied on net new square feet of
impervious surface to offset costs of providing new
drainage facilities
•
Parking Development Payment:
in-lieu fee for
required parking not provided on site to offset the
cost of providing new surface and structured
parking facilities
Projected Impact Fee Revenues
•
Total fees by type at build-out
22
Park Fees
Walkways
Fee
Lamorinda Sub-
Regional
Transportation
Fee
Drainage
Fee
Parking
Development
Payment
Fees
Total Fees
Proposed Project
$11,598,208 $1,026,495
$6,368,838 $1,119,800 $18,772,463 $38,885,803
Alternative 1 - General
Plan
$4,793,088
$424,211
$2,933,955 $1,119,800 $11,149,875 $20,420,929
Alternative 2 - Planning
Subcommittee
$11,433,826 $1,011,947
$6,267,060 $1,119,800 $18,372,750 $38,205,383
Alternative 3 - High
Density
$15,830,207 $1,401,047
$8,690,169 $1,119,800 $25,588,613 $52,629,835
Parking Development Payment
•
Assumes 25% of required parking spaces will be
subject to the in-lieu fee
•
Assumes 50/50 split between structured ($36,900)
and surface ($19,200) PDP per space
23
Parking
Spaces
Required
Back to top
# of Spaces
Subject to
Back to top
Fee
Total Fees
Proposed Project
3,001
669 $18,774,300
Alternative 1 - General Plan
1,724
398 $11,181,600
Alternative 2 - Planning Subcommittee
2,940
655 $18,399,300
Alternative 3 - High Density
4,091
912 $25,636,200
Summary of Projected Impact Fee Revenues
24
$38,885,803
$20,420,929
$38,205,383
$52,629,835
$0
$10,000,000
$20,000,000
$30,000,000
$40,000,000
$50,000,000
$60,000,000
Proposed Project
Alternative 1 - General
Plan
Alternative 2 - Planning
Subcommittee
Alternative 3 - High
Density
Total Revenues (Constant $)
Municipal Capital and Maintenance Costs
25
•
Cost projections per September 2009 Revised
Draft Downtown Lafayette Specific Plan
Capital Costs
26
•
Includes streetscape, walkways, parking
facilities, parks, and creeks improvements
•
Total amount of capital costs excluding land
acquisition costs = $63.5M
•
Assumes a new 200-space parking garage
•
Proposed Project requires a 350-space parking
garage: additional $2.25M
•
High Density alternative requires a 450-space
parking garage: additional $3.75M
Maintenance Costs
27
•
Annual maintenance costs as follows:
✦
Parking - $100/space
✦
Streetscape - $1.30/SF
✦
Parks - $1.30/SF
✦
Creeks - $16,500/acre
•
Total annual maintenance costs: $275,213
•
Maintenance of parking for Proposed Project:
additional $150,000 per year
•
Maintenance of parking for High Density:
additional $250,000 per year
Conclusions
28
•
Higher intensity build-out alternatives result
in greater employment generation and fiscal
revenue than General Plan alternative
•
Analysis assumes full build-out, and
development according to the specified mix
of commercial and residential uses
•
Mix, location and concentration of land uses
important elements for further
consideration.
Questions and Answers
Project Team
:
Libby Seifel, President
libby@seifel.com
Jackie Tsou, Senior Consultant
jackie@seifel.com
Deric Licko, Analyst
deric@seifel.com