Closed Session Desk Item.Item #1 - TIFPREPARED BY: Wendy Wood, Town Clerk
Reviewed by: Town Manager
110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● (408) 354-6832
www.losgatosca.gov
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
SPECIAL COUNCIL AGENDA
MEETING DATE: 04/02/2024 ITEM NO: 1DESK ITEM
DATE: April 2, 2024
TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: Laurel Prevetti, Town Manager
SUBJECT: CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Significant Exposure To Litigation Pursuant to Subdivision (d) of Government
Code Section 54956.9: 1 case (1/16/24 Desk Item with email regarding
adequacy of transportation impact fee nexus study).
REMARKS:
Attachment 1 contains public comment received before 11:00 a.m. on Tuesday, April 2, 2024.
Attachment Received with the Addendum:
1.Public Comment received before 11:00 a.m. on Tuesday, April 2, 2024.
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
From:Laurel Prevetti
To:Wendy Wood; Nicolle Burnham
Cc:Gabrielle Whelan
Subject:Fwd: Special Meeting - April 2, 2024
Date:Tuesday, April 2, 2024 8:25:59 AM
Attachments:Transportation-Impact-Fee-Justification-Study.pdf
Desk item, thank you
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Phil Koen
Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2024 8:22 AM
To: Mary Badame <MBadame@losgatosca.gov>; Matthew Hudes <MHudes@losgatosca.gov>;
Rob Rennie <RRennie@losgatosca.gov>; Rob Moore <RMoore@losgatosca.gov>; Maria Ristow
<MRistow@losgatosca.gov>
Cc: Gabrielle Whelan <GWhelan@losgatosca.gov>; Laurel Prevetti
<LPrevetti@losgatosca.gov>; Rick Van Hoesen
Subject: Special Meeting - April 2, 2024
[EXTERNAL SENDER]
Dear Honorable Mayor and Council Members,
In reviewing the agenda for the Special Meeting, I noted David
Taussig of David Taussig and Associates would be attending. I
have attached a copy of a TIF analysis they did for the City of
Paso Robles. If you look at Table 4-1 of the report, they
correctly allocated the facility cost to new development.
Exhibit C of the report shows the magnitude of the allocation.
This is the critical flaw in the Town’s Nexus Study in that DKS
failed to fairly allocate the infrastructure cost to new
development.
There is no question the Nexus Study is inconsistent with
Mitigation Fee Act. Given the amount of new development
planned within the Town, I am concerned that unless the
ATTACHMENT 1
Town rescinds the actions taken on January 16 and revises the
nexus study to fairly allocate the infrastructure cost to new
development, the Town is exposed to potential litigation from
any developers having to pay the new TIF. I am sure Mr. Jarvis
can confirm this risk.
It is unfortunate the Town Council finds itself in this position,
but there is time to correct this mistake. In addition to
rescinding the actions taken on January 16, 2024, the Town
Council should seek to reclaim all fees paid to DKS. The Town
should never pay a consultant for work that fails to fully
comply with State Law and fails a reasonable expectation of
professional and complete work. Given the failings of the
Housing Element consultant, this is a major issue with
residents and cannot go unaddressed. This council has a
fiduciary duty to residents to be stewards of the Town’s
resources. It maybe embarrassing to some members of the
Town Council to take this action, but it is the right thing to do.
Thank you for receiving these comments.
Phil Koen
A.
B.
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE
JUSTIFICATION STUDY
CITY OF PASO ROBLES
JANUARY 25, 2019
Prepared by:
DAVID TAUSSIG & ASSOCIATES, INC.
5000 BIRCH STREET, SUITE 6000
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660
(800)969-4382
ASSOCIATES, INC.
Public Finance
Public Private Partnerships
Urban Economics
TAUSSIG
Newport Beach
Riverside
San Francisco
San Jose
Dallas
DAVID
&
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 13 of 152
EXHIBIT "C" TO RESOLUTION 19-017
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ I
I. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1
II. LEGAL REQUIREMENTS TO JUSTIFY DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES ..................................... 3
III. DEMOGRAPHICS ............................................................................................................ 7
IV. THE NEEDS LIST ............................................................................................................ 10
V. METHODOLGY UTILIZED TO CALCULATE FACILITIES IMPACT FEE .................................... 13
VI. SUMMARY OF FEES ...................................................................................................... 23
APPENDIX A FEE DERIVATION WORKSHEETS
APPENDIX B DEPARTMENT CONTACT LIST
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 14 of 152
City of Paso Robles Page i
Development Impact Fee Justification Study January 24, 2019
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In order to adequately plan for new development and identify the public facilities and costs
associated with mitigating the direct and cumulative impacts of new development, David
Taussig & Associates, Inc. (“DTA”) was retained by the City of Paso Robles (the “City”) to update
the existing impact fee program by preparing an updated AB 1600 Fee Justification Study (the
“Fee Study”). The Fee Study is intended to comply with Section 66000 et. seq. of the
Government Code, which was enacted by the State of California in 1987, by identifying
additional public facilities required by new development (“Future Facilities”) and determining
the level of fees that may be imposed to pay the costs of the Future Facilities. Specifically, this
Fee Study is limited to transportation impact fees to pay for Future Facilities needed to meet
the needs of new development over the planning horizon through 2045 (the “TIF Program”).
The Future Facilities and associated construction costs are identified in the Needs List, which is
included in Section IV of the Fee Study. A description of the methodology used to calculate the
fees is included in Section V. All new development may be required to pay its “fair share” of the
cost of the new infrastructure through the development fee program.
ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT
Section I of this report provides an introduction to the study including a brief description of City
surroundings, and background information on development impact fee financing. Section II
provides an overview of the legal requirements for implementing and imposing the TIF amounts
identified in the Fee Study. Section III includes a discussion of projected new development and
demand variables, i.e. average daily trips (“ADTs”), assuming current growth trends in housing,
hospitality, commercial, and industrial development based on data provided by the City.
Section IV includes a description of the Needs List, which identifies the facilities needed to serve
new development over the development horizon through 2045 that are eligible for funding by
the TIF Program. The Needs List provides the total estimated facilities costs, offsetting
revenues, net costs to the City and costs allocated to new development for all facilities listed in
the Needs List. This list is a compilation of projects and costs identified by the City Community
Development Department (“City CDD”). Section V discusses the findings required under the
Mitigation Fee Act and requirements necessary to be satisfied when establishing, increasing or
imposing a fee as a condition of new development, and satisfies the nexus requirements for
each facility included as part of this study. Section V also contains the description of the
methodology used to determine the fees for the TIF Program. Section VI includes a summary of
the proposed fees justified by this Fee Study. Appendix A includes the calculations used to
determine the various fee levels. Appendix B provides a list of the City officials responsible for
selecting the facilities on the Needs List, as well as contact information for these officials.
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 15 of 152
City of Paso Robles Page ii
Development Impact Fee Justification Study January 24, 2019
IMPACT FEE METHODOLOGY AND SUMMARY
DTA utilized demographic projections derived from the updated Citywide Traffic Demand
Model, as of September 2018 (“TDM”) to determine how much development, by Land Use
Category, is anticipated within the City by 2045. Notably, based on the distribution of Future
Facilities in the City and to more accurately assign future development’s fair share for a number
of Future Facilities, the City defined three (3) study areas: Area “A”, Area “B”, and Area “C”
(collectively, the “Fee Areas”), shown in Figure 1 below, and provided demographic projections
for each. These projections were then compared with existing development Land Use Category
information by Fee Area, also derived from the TDM. By assigning Average Daily Trip (“ADT”)
data to specific Land Use Categories within each of the Fee Areas, DTA was able to determine
future development's fair share of Future Facilities costs on a facility-by-facility basis, as further
explained below. Table ES-1 below, summarizes existing and projected development by Land
Use Category and Fee Area.
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 16 of 152
City of Paso Robles Page iii
Development Impact Fee Justification Study January 24, 2019
FIGURE 1
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE - FEE AREAS
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 17 of 152
City of Paso Robles Page iv
Development Impact Fee Justification Study January 24, 2019
TABLE ES-1
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE – DEMOGRAPHIC ASSUMPTIONS
Fee Area
Land Use Units Year “A” “B” “C” A+B+C
Singe Family
Residential1 DU 2017 7,932 5 530 8,467
2045 8,440 5 2,401 10,846
Multi-family
Residential2 DU 2017 3,539 125 370 4,034
2045 5,778 125 1,303 7,206
Hotel Rooms 2017 1,180 141 65 1,386
2045 2,169 848 985 4,002
Fuel Stations W/
Convenience
Market
SF
2017 182,328 16,100 5,905 204,333
2045 198,292 16,100 5,905 220,297
Drive-Thru
Food/Beverage
Outlets4
SF
2017 22,930 15,000 8,320 46,250
2045 24,938 16,313 9,048 50,299
Commercial3 SF 2017 1,900,991 550,960 161,590 2,613,541
2045 2,789,788 1,250,747 750,862 4,791,397
Office SF 2017 514,965 30,990 127,010 672,965
2045 730,694 50,990 177,010 958,694
Light Industrial SF 2017 1,793,490 1,028,806 2,164,231 4,986,527
2045 2,082,208 1,204,806 4,015,120 7,302,134
Heavy Industrial SF 2017 36,400 0 97,800 134,200
2045 36,400 0 297,800 334,200
Notes:
1. Includes single family and rural residential uses.
2. Includes multi-family and mobile home uses.
3. Includes downtown, regional retail, and neighborhood retail. Office category has been blended into the Commercial land
use.
4. DTA assumed that the rate of increase in Drive-Thru Food/Beverage Outlets over the buildout period within a specific Study
Area would match the rate applied to the Fuel Stations W/ Convenience Market Land Use within Study Area “A”.
*This table was created using the information provided initially by Central Coast Transportation Consulting. The following
Land Uses were added as directed by the City of Paso Robles: Gas Stations, Fast Food Outlets.
Next, based on the City’s Draft Circulation Element Update prepared by Central Coast
Transportation Consultants, dated September 2018 (the “Circulation Element Update”), the
Future Facilities and associated costs were identified by the City Community Development
Department as being necessary to meet the needs of future development within the City
through 2045. These Future Facilities, all of which fully or partially support future
development, include roads, bridges, and traffic signals. By being included on the Needs List,
these Future Facilities became eligible for funding through the TIF Program. The total cost of
the facilities selected for the Needs List by City is $203,396,500.
Utilizing data derived from the TDM, DTA was able to compare the difference in ADTs
generated by existing development and future development by Fee Area and Land Use
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 18 of 152
City of Paso Robles Page v
Development Impact Fee Justification Study January 24, 2019
Category, and appropriately assign new development’s fair share of the cost based on the
specific traffic impacts associated with each of the Future Facilities.
The total fee amounts required to finance new development’s share of the costs of facilities
identified in the Needs List are summarized in Table ES-2 below. Fees within this Fee Study
reflect the maximum fee levels that may be imposed on new development.
TABLE ES-2
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE SUMMARY
Land Use Fee Area
“A”
Fee Area
“B”
Fee Area
“C”
Single Family (Per Unit) $2,848 $3,780 $9,773
Multi Family (Per Unit) $1,963 $2,605 $6,735
One Bedroom Units (Per Unit) [1] $1,107 $1,469 $3,798
Studio Units (Per Unit) [1] $738 $979 $2,532
Commercial Lodging Motel/Hotel (Per Room) $1,778 $2,360 $2,449
RV Parks & Campgrounds (Per Space) $1,778 $2,360 $2,449
Commercial (Per Sq. Ft.) $8.27 $10.97 $11.39
Assisted Living (Per Sq. Ft.) [2] $0.94 $1.25 $1.30
Fuel Stations w/ Convenience Market (Per Sq. Ft.) $30.97 $57.13 $61.15
Drive-Thru Food / Beverage Outlets (Per Sq. Ft.) $31.37 $60.39 $64.85
Light Industrial (Per Sq. Ft.) $1.65 $2.19 $2.28
Heavy Industrial (Per Sq. Ft.) $0.66 $0.87 $0.90
[1]Fee based on a reduction of the Multi-Family per unit fee, based on 1.0 person per household
(“PPH”) for Studio Units and 1.5 PPH for One Bedroom Units, as compared to the estimated PPH for
Multi-Family Units of 2.66.
[2] Fee based on a reduction of the Commercial per Sq. Ft. fee, based on 2.50 trips per 1,000 Sq. Ft. for
Assisted Living.
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 19 of 152
City of Paso Robles Page 1
Development Impact Fee Justification Study January 24, 2019
I. INTRODUCTION
As background, the City Paso Robles (the “City”), is situated at the Northern San Luis Obispo
County–Southern Monterey County line. Approximately midway between Los Angeles and San
Francisco, the City is nestled in the coastal mountain range of central California at the southern
end of the fertile Salinas River Valley. With a population of over 31,000, the community makes
excellent use of its close proximity to mountains, beaches, and deserts, as it boasts a unique
climate suitable for growing a variety of crops. Previously known as the “Almond City,” the City
has since reinvented itself by cultivating its own niche in the wine-growing industry. Offering
the charm of a rural community with all the amenities of family life, including attractive and
affordable housing, the City also understands the importance of staying relevant and has thus
placed a high priority on maintaining ample City services, state-of-the-art recreational facilities,
easy access retail shopping, excellent public schools, and safe neighborhoods.
In order to adequately plan for new development over the planning horizon through 2045 and
identify the public facilities and costs associated with mitigating the direct and cumulative
impacts of new development, David Taussig & Associates, Inc. (“DTA”) was retained by the City
to update the existing impact fee program by preparing a new AB 1600 Fee Justification Study
(the “Fee Study”). The need for this Fee Study is driven by changes in demographics, facility
requirements, and time inflated facility costs. Notably, this Fee Study is limited to
transportation impact fees (“TIFs”) to pay for Future Facilities needed to meet the needs of new
development over the planning horizon through 2045 (the “TIF Program”).
The Fee Study is intended to comply with Section 66000 et. seq. of the Government Code,
which was enacted by the State of California in 1987, by identifying additional public facilities
required by new development (“Future Facilities”) and determining the level of fees that may
be imposed to pay the costs of the Future Facilities. Fee amounts have been determined that
will finance facilities at levels identified by various City departments as being necessary to meet
the needs of new development over the planning horizon through 2045. The Future Facilities
and associated construction costs are identified in the Needs List, which is included in Section IV
of the Fee Study. All new development may be required to pay its “fair share” of the cost of the
new infrastructure through the development fee program.
Currently the City expects to generate new residents and workers within the City limits over the
planning horizon through 2045. The City will need to expand its services and facilities to
accommodate this new growth. The levy of impact fees in conformance with AB 1600
legislation will help finance new transportation projects, which are needed to mitigate the
impacts of this expected new growth. The steps followed in the Fee Study include:
1. Demographic Assumptions: Identify future growth that represents the increased
demand for facilities.
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 20 of 152
City of Paso Robles Page 2
Development Impact Fee Justification Study January 24, 2019
2. Facility Needs and Costs: Identify the amount of public facilities required to
support the new development and the costs of such facilities. Facilities costs and
the Needs List are discussed in Section IV.
3. Cost Allocation: Allocate costs per average daily trip.
4. Fee Schedule: Calculate the fee per residential unit, per hotel room, or per non-
residential square foot.
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 21 of 152
City of Paso Robles Page 3
Development Impact Fee Justification Study January 24, 2019
II. LEGAL REQUIREMENTS TO JUSTIFY DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
Prior to World War II, development in California was held responsible for very little of the cost
of public infrastructure. Public improvements were financed primarily through jurisdictional
general funds and utility charges. It was not uncommon during this period for speculators to
subdivide tracts of land without providing any public improvements, expecting the closest city
to eventually annex a project and provide public improvements and services.
Starting in the late 1940s, however, the use of impact fees grew with the increased planning
and regulation of new development. During the 1960s and 1970s, the California Courts
broadened the right of local government to impose fees on developers for public improvements
that were not located on project sites. Beginning in 1978, with the passage of Proposition 13,
the reductions in local government revenues available for new infrastructure have resulted in
new development being held responsible for a greater share of public improvements, and both
the use and levels of impact fees have grown substantially. Higher fee levels were undoubtedly
driven in part by a need to offset the decline in funds for infrastructure development from
other sources.
The levy of impact fees by local governments in California is one authorized method of
financing the transportation, transit and related facilities necessary to mitigate the impacts of
new development, as the levy of such fees provides funding to maintain an agency's service
standard required for an increased service population. A fee is “a monetary exaction, other
than a tax or special assessment, which is charged by a local agency to the applicant in
connection with approval of a development project for the purpose of defraying all or a portion
of the cost of public facilities related to the development project...” (California Government
Code, Section 66000). A fee may be levied for each type of capital improvement required for
new development, with the payment of the fee occurring prior to the beginning of construction
of a dwelling unit or non-residential building (or prior to the expansion of existing buildings of
these types). Fees are often levied at final map recordation, issuance of a certificate of
occupancy, or more commonly, at building permit issuance.
As explained in detail below, the City has identified the need to impose TIFs to pay for
transportation infrastructure. A detailed list of required Future Facilities (the “Needs List”) is
contained within Section IV herein. The TIFs presented in this Fee Study will finance facilities on
the Needs List at levels identified by the City as appropriate to mitigate the impacts of future
development through 2045. Upon the adoption of the Fee Study and required legal documents
by the City Council, all new development will be required to pay its “fair share” of the cost of
facilities on the Needs List through these fees at rate structures set in the adopting ordinance.
Section 66000 et seq. of the Government Code mandates that there is a nexus between fees
imposed, the use of the fees, and the development projects on which the fees are imposed.
Furthermore, there must be a relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the
improvements. To impose a fee as a condition for a development project, a public agency must
do the following:
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 22 of 152
City of Paso Robles Page 4
Development Impact Fee Justification Study January 24, 2019
Identify the purpose of the fee.
Identify the use to which the fee is to be applied. If the use is financing public facilities,
the facilities must be identified.
Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the fee’s use and the type of
development project on which the fee is imposed.
Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the need for a public facility
and the type of development project on which the fee is being imposed.
Addressing these items will enable an impact fee to meet the nexus and rough proportionality
requirements established by Dolan versus City of Tigard, Koontz versus St. Johns River
Management District and other court cases. These findings and the nexus test for the TIFs are
presented in Section V of the Fee Study. As mentioned previously, current State financing and
fee assessment requirements only allow future development to pay its fair share of facilities’
costs. Any current deficiencies resulting from the needs of existing development must be
funded through other sources. Therefore, a key element to establishing legally defensible
impact fees is to determine what share of the benefit or cost of a particular improvement can
be equitably assigned to existing development, even if that improvement has not yet been
constructed. By removing this factor, the true impact of new development can be assessed and
equitable fees assigned.
A. Purpose of the Fee (Government Code Section 66001(a)(1))
The purpose of the proposed TIF is to fund Future Facilities required as a result of
projected development within the City from 2017 through the year 2045. A review of
the City's Traffic Demand Model (“TDM”) as further explained in Section III, below,
projects the construction of 5,551 single and multi-family units and 5.0 million square
feet of various non-residential land uses. The future residents and workers housed
within this future development will create an additional demand for transportation
facilities that existing facilities alone cannot accommodate. In brief, to mitigate the
effects of future development in an orderly manner while maintaining the current
quality of life in the City, the facilities on the Needs List (see below) will need to be
constructed.
The projected direct and cumulative effect of future development has necessitated a TIF
Program. Future development will contribute to the need for the Future Facilities,
including new roads, bridges, and traffic signals. Without future development, many of
the proposed transportation facilities would not be necessary. Future development
exclusively drives the need for some of the Future Facilities, while others of these
facilities share costs between future and existing development due to the need to cure
existing facilities’ deficiencies. The proposed TIFs will be used for the acquisition,
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 23 of 152
City of Paso Robles Page 5
Development Impact Fee Justification Study January 24, 2019
installation, and construction of the Future Facilities identified on the Needs Lists to
mitigate the direct and cumulative impacts of future development in the City through
2045.
The discussion in this section of the Fee Study sets forth the purpose of the impact fees
as required by Section 66001(a)(1) of the California Government Code.
B. THE USE TO WHICH THE FEE IS TO BE PUT (GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 66001(A)(2))
The TIFs will be used for the acquisition, installation, and construction of the Future
Facilities identified on the Needs List included in Section IV of the Fee Study. The TIF will
provide a source of revenue to the City to fund such facilities, which in turn will both
preserve the quality of life in the City and protect the health, safety, and welfare of its
existing and future residents and employees.
The discussion presented in this section of the Fee Study identifies the use to which the
fee is to be put as required by Section 66001(a)(2) of the California Government Code.
C. DETERMINE THAT THERE IS A REASONABLE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE FEE’S USE AND THE TYPE OF
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT UPON WHICH THE FEE IS IMPOSED (BENEFIT RELATIONSHIP) (GOVERNMENT
CODE SECTION 66001(A)(3))
The TIFs collected will be used for the construction of Future Facilities within the City.
The types of development that will be paying these fees are new residential and non-
residential projects within the City between June 1, 2019 and December 31, 2045. This
expected development will generate new residents and employees that will increase the
burden on existing transportation infrastructure in the form of increased traffic and
roadway usage. In order to maintain existing service standards, the fees to be imposed
on new development, as recommended in this Fee Study, will ensure that new
development contributes its fair share of funds to mitigate the impacts caused by such
development.
For the foregoing reasons, there is a reasonable relationship between the acquisition,
construction, and installation of the facilities on the Needs Lists and new development
as required under Section 66001(a)(3) of the Mitigation Fee Act.
D. DETERMINE HOW THERE IS A REASONABLE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE NEED FOR THE PUBLIC FACILITY
AND THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT PROJECT UPON WHICH THE FEE IS IMPOSED (IMPACT RELATIONSHIP)
(GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 66001(A)(4))
As determined by technical analysis using average daily trips (“ADTs”) derived from the
TDM, the benefit to each Fee Area and subsequent Land Use Category from the Future
Facilities listed in Section IV was calculated so that it would correspond directly to the
impact generated by new development. For example, the projected growth of
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 24 of 152
City of Paso Robles Page 6
Development Impact Fee Justification Study January 24, 2019
residential homes (“dwelling units”) and the growth of retail, office and industrial
development (“square footage”) translate to additional traffic on City streets as
reflected by increased ADTs. In order to prevent congestion, streets need to be created
or widened and signals need to be installed. All new development within the City,
irrespective of location, contributes to the direct and cumulative impacts of
development on public facilities and creates the need for new facilities to accommodate
growth. Without future development, the facilities on the Needs Lists would not be
necessary.
For the reasons presented herein and in Section V, there is a reasonable relationship
between the need for the public facilities included on the Needs List and all new
development within the City as required under Section 66001(a)(4) of the Mitigation Fee
Act.
E. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE AMOUNT OF THE FEE AND THE COST OF THE PUBLIC FACILITIES
ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE DEVELOPMENT UPON WHICH THE FEE IS IMPOSED (“ROUGH PROPORTIONALITY”
RELATIONSHIP) (GOVERNMENT CODE 66001(A)
This Fee Study uses various methodologies to apportion the cost of the Future Facilities
to future development according to the magnitude of the impacts that drive the need
for these facilities. Fee amounts for the various Land Use Categories are determined by
apportioning costs according to their appropriate demand factors, which in this case
consist of ADTs. Section V, “Methodology and Fee Calculation,” explains how ADTs were
used to determine Future Facilities benefits based on Fee Area and Land Use Category,
describes the methodologies utilized for apportioning costs, and presents the
calculations that justify the proposed TIFs for each Land Use Category by Fee Area.
As set forth in part F below, as well as throughout Section V and Appendix A of the Fee
Study, the proposed fee amounts are roughly proportional to the impacts resulting from
new development. Thus, there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the
fee and the cost of the facilities.
F. AB 1600 NEXUS TEST AND APPORTIONMENT OF FACILITIES COSTS
Section 66000 of the Government Code requires that a reasonable relationship exist
between the need for public facilities and the type of development on which a fee is
imposed. Roads, bridges, and traffic signals benefit residents and employees in
providing safe and efficient vehicular access to properties. It has been well documented
by transportation engineers that different land uses generate trips at different rates.
Therefore, transportation costs are apportioned on the basis of ADTs. Notably, DTA
analyzed fees for eight (8) land use categories to acknowledge the difference in impacts
resulting from various Land Use Categories.
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 25 of 152
City of Paso Robles Page 7
Development Impact Fee Justification Study January 24, 2019
III. DEMOGRAPHICS
In order to determine the transportation facilities needed to serve new development as well as
establish fee amounts to fund such facilities, the Fee Study must quantify the number of
residential dwelling units and retail, office, and industrial square footages for both existing and
projected future development. Estimates of existing and future residential units and square
footage of commercial development through 2045 were provided by the City through its TDM,
which was in turn based on the City's General Plan and the 2018 Circulation Element Update.
Table 3-1 below depicts the anticipated growth in residential units and non-residential square
footage through 2045, which was utilized by DTA to calculate the amount of the TIFs to be
imposed on new development in the City, as described in Section V of this Fee Study.
TABLE 3-1
CITY OF PASO ROBLES
EXISTING AND FUTURE DEMOGRAPHICS
Fee Area
Land Use Units Year “A” “B” “C” A+B+C
Singe Family
Residential1 DU 2017 7,932 5 530 8,467
2045 8,440 5 2,401 10,846
Multi-family
Residential2 DU 2017 3,539 125 370 4,034
2045 5,778 125 1,303 7,206
Hotel Rooms 2017 1,180 141 65 1,386
2045 2,169 848 985 4,002
Fuel Stations W/
Convenience
Market
SF
2017 182,328 16,100 5,905 204,333
2045 198,292 16,100 5,905 220,297
Drive-Thru
Food/Beverage
Outlets4
SF
2017 22,930 15,000 8,320 46,250
2045 24,938 16,313 9,048 50,299
Commercial3 SF 2017 1,900,991 550,960 161,590 2,613,541
2045 2,789,788 1,250,747 750,862 4,791,397
Office SF 2017 514,965 30,990 127,010 672,965
2045 730,694 50,990 177,010 958,694
Light Industrial SF 2017 1,793,490 1,028,806 2,164,231 4,986,527
2045 2,082,208 1,204,806 4,015,120 7,302,134
Heavy Industrial SF 2017 36,400 0 97,800 134,200
2045 36,400 0 297,800 334,200
Notes:
1. Includes single family and rural residential uses.
2. Includes multi-family and mobile home uses.
3. Includes downtown, regional retail, and neighborhood retail. Office category has been blended into the Commercial land
use.
4. DTA assumed that the rate of increase in Drive-Thru Food/Beverage Outlets over the buildout period within a specific
Study Area would match the rate applied to the Fuel Stations W/ Convenience Market Land Use within Study Area “A”.
*This table was created using the information provided initially by Central Coast Transportation Consulting. The following
Land Uses were added as directed by the City of Paso Robles: Gas Stations, Fast Food Outlets.
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 26 of 152
City of Paso Robles Page 8
Development Impact Fee Justification Study January 24, 2019
Based on the data from the TDM shown above, DTA categorized developable residential land
uses as Single Family and Multi-Family. Developable non-residential land uses within the City’s
are categorized as Hotel/RV Park, Commercial, Fuel Station with Convenience Market, Drive-
Thru Food and Beverage Outlets, Light Industrial, or Heavy Industrial respectively, details are
included in the table below. Based on these designations, DTA established fees for the
following eight (8) land use categories to acknowledge the difference in impacts resulting from
various land uses and to make the resulting fee program implementable.
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 27 of 152
City of Paso Robles Page 9
Development Impact Fee Justification Study January 24, 2019
TABLE 3-2
CITY OF PASO ROBLES
DESCRIPTION OF LAND USE CATEGORIES
Land Use Classification for Fee Study Definition
Single Family Residential Includes single family detached homes, town homes, condominium units,
mobile homes, and pre-fabricated homes.
Multi-Family Residential Includes buildings comprised of two or more attached dwelling units
under common ownership, including apartments.
Hotel/RV Park
Includes, but is not limited to, buildings used as the following (each as
further defined in Table LU-4 of the General Plan):
Resort/Lodging
Mobile Home Park/Subdivision
Commercial
Includes, but is not limited to, buildings (exclusive of Drive-Thru Food and
Beverage Outlets) used as the following (each as further defined in Table
LU-4 of the General Plan):
Neighborhood Commercial
Office Professional
Community Commercial
Regional Commercial
Commercial Service
Fuel Station with Convenience Market
Includes, but is not limited to, fuel stations that have a building used as
the following (each as further defined in Table LU-4 of the General Plan):
Neighborhood Commercial
Community Commercial
Regional Commercial
Drive-Thru Food and Beverage Outlets
Includes, but is not limited to, restaurant buildings, with a drive through
component, used as the following (each as further defined in Table LU-4 of
the General Plan):
Neighborhood Commercial
Community Commercial
Regional Commercial
Community Service
Light Industrial
Includes, but is not limited to, buildings used as the following (each as
further defined in Table LU-4 of the General Plan):
Business Parks,
Manufacturing, fabrication, assembly, research and development,
Industrial services, wholesale distribution
Convenience commercial uses, particularly those supporting
industrial uses
Heavy Industrial
Includes, but is not limited to, buildings used as the following:
Warehousing
Airport Hangers
Open Sided Structures,
Mini-Storage and Self-Storage
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 28 of 152
City of Paso Robles Page 10
Development Impact Fee Justification Study January 24, 2019
IV. THE NEEDS LIST
Identification of the public facilities to be financed is a critical component of any development
impact fee program. In the broadest sense, the purpose of impact fees is to protect the public
health, safety, and general welfare by providing for adequate public facilities. “Public Facilities”
per Government Code 66000 include “public improvements, public services, and community
amenities.” Fees imposed for a public capital facility improvement cannot be used for
maintenance or services.
Government Code 66000 requires that if impact fees are going to be used to finance public
facilities, those facilities must be identified. Identification of the facilities may be made in an
applicable general or specific plan, other public documents, or by reference to a Capital
Improvement Program (CIP) or Capital Improvement Plan. For purposes of the City's TIF
Program, the Needs List is intended to be the official public document identifying the Facilities
eligible to be financed, in whole or in part, through the levy of a uniform development fee on
future development in the City.
Government Code 66000 requires that if impact fees are going to be used to finance public
facilities, those facilities must be identified. Identification of the facilities may be made in an
applicable general or specific plan, other public documents, or by reference to a Capital
Improvement Program (CIP) or Capital Improvement Plan. DTA has worked closely with City
staff to develop the list of facilities to be included in the Fee Study ("the Needs List"), which was
based on information obtained from three sources:
Circulation Element Update (2018)
Town Center Plan
The Uptown Plan
The Needs List is organized by facility element (or type) and includes a cost section consisting of
five columns, which are listed in Table 4-1 below:
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 29 of 152
City of Paso Robles Page 11
Development Impact Fee Justification Study January 24, 2019
TABLE 4-1
CITY OF PASO ROBLES NEEDS LIST
EXPLANATION OF COST SECTION
Column Title Contents Source
Facilities Costs to City
The total estimated facility cost including
construction, land acquisition, and equipment (as
applicable) allocable to City.
City Departments
Off-Setting Revenues
Any funds on hand that are allocated for a given
facility, such as funds from previous DIF programs
earmarked for facilities identified on this needs list.
This column does not include potential funding from
Federal & State sources that cannot be confirmed.
Calculated by DTA
based on input
from City staff
Net Costs to City
The difference between the Facilities Costs to City
and the Off-Setting Revenues (column 1 minus
column 2)
Calculated by DTA
Percent of Costs Allocated
to New Development
Percentage of facility cost allocated to new
development as calculated in Appendix A Calculated by DTA
Costs Allocated to New
Development
Dollar amount representing the roughly proportional
impact of new development on the needed facilities. Calculated by DTA
Through discussions between DTA, City staff, and meetings with the Housing Constraints
and Opportunities Committee, the Needs List has gone through a series of revisions to
fine-tune the needs, costs, and methodologies used in allocating the costs for each
facility. The Needs List (Table 4-2) identifies those facilities needed to serve future
development through 2045, consistent with the Circulation Element Update.
DTA categorized the Future Facilities into the following:
Citywide Facilities – Future Facilities that were determined to benefit the entire
City
Fee Area “A”, “B”, and “C” Facilities – Future Facilities anticipated to benefit
existing and new development in the applicable Fee Area
Other Planned Facilities – Future Facilities for which specific ADT projections
were allocated to each Fee Area based on the TDM.
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 30 of 152
{1}{2}{3}{4}{5}{6}{7}
Facilities Anticipated Percent of Costs Costs
Project Costs Off-Setting Funding From Net Costs Allocated to New Allocated to New Policy Background
ID Facility Name to City Revenues [1]Other Sources to City Development [2]Development or Objective
A. TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES
CITY-WIDE FACILITIES
1 $0 $0 $0 $0 36.69%$0 Circulation Element
3 $12,190,000 ($288,620)$0 $11,901,380 36.69%$4,367,029 Circulation Element
3a $1,630,000 ($38,593)$0 $1,591,407 36.69%$583,942 Circulation Element
3c $2,400,000 ($56,824)$0 $2,343,176 36.69%$859,792 Circulation Element
3d $2,400,000 ($56,824)$0 $2,343,176 36.69%$859,792 Circulation Element
4 $460,000 ($10,891)$0 $449,109 36.69%$164,794 Circulation Element
5 $1,870,000 ($44,276)$0 $1,825,724 36.69%$669,922 Circulation Element
9 $10,000,000 ($236,768)$0 $9,763,232 36.69%$3,582,469 Circulation Element
10 $0 $0 $0 $0 36.69%$0 Circulation Element
11 $2,290,000 ($54,220)$0 $2,235,780 36.69%$820,385 Circulation Element
13a $5,000,000 ($118,384)$0 $4,881,616 36.69%$1,791,234 Circulation Element
15 $1,180,000 ($27,939)$0 $1,152,061 36.69%$422,731 Circulation Element
16 $1,960,000 ($46,407)$0 $1,913,593 36.69%$702,164 Circulation Element
17 $2,836,500 ($67,159)$0 $2,769,341 36.69%$1,016,167 Circulation Element
18 $3,900,000 ($92,340)$0 $3,807,660 36.69%$1,397,163 Circulation Element
19 $1,600,000 ($37,883)$0 $1,562,117 36.69%$573,195 Circulation Element
21 $500,000 ($11,838)$0 $488,162 36.69%$179,123 Circulation Element
23 $940,000 ($22,256)$0 $917,744 36.69%$336,752 Council Objective
25 $1,000,000 ($23,677)$0 $976,323 36.69%$358,247 Council Objective
25a $8,000,000 ($189,415)$0 $7,810,585 36.69%$2,865,975 Circulation Element
27 $1,000,000 ($23,677)$0 $976,323 36.69%$358,247 Circulation Element
32 $41,000,000 ($970,749)($26,900,000)$13,129,251 36.69%$4,817,578 Circulation Element
35a $10,000,000 ($236,768)$0 $9,763,232 36.69%$3,582,469 Circulation Element
6 $730,000 ($17,284)$0 $712,716 20.77%$148,005 Circulation Element
7 $320,000 ($7,577)$0 $312,423 20.77%$64,879 Circulation Element
8 $1,160,000 ($27,465)$0 $1,132,535 20.77%$235,186 Circulation Element
20 $5,000,000 ($118,384)$0 $4,881,616 20.77%$1,013,733 Town Centre-Uptown Plan
22 $600,000 ($14,206)$0 $585,794 20.77%$121,648 Uptown Plan
24 $4,000,000 ($94,707)$0 $3,905,293 20.77%$810,987 Town Centre-Uptown Plan
26 $2,000,000 ($47,354)$0 $1,952,646 20.77%$405,493 Town Centre Plan
27 $1,330,000 ($31,490)$0 $1,298,510 20.77%$269,653 Circulation Element
29 $750,000 ($17,758)$0 $732,242 20.77%$152,060 Town Centre Plan
30a $7,300,000 ($172,841)$0 $7,127,159 44.13%$3,145,331 Circulation Element
31 $1,160,000 ($27,465)$0 $1,132,535 44.13%$499,806 Circulation Element
3b $2,800,000 ($66,295)$0 $2,733,705 64.38%$1,760,076 Circulation Element
33a $14,280,000 ($338,105)$0 $13,941,895 77.59%$10,817,401 Circulation Element
33b $1,340,000 ($31,727)$0 $1,308,273 77.59%$1,015,078 Circulation Element
33c $2,560,000 ($60,613)$0 $2,499,387 54.00%$1,349,669 Circulation Element
33d $2,970,000 ($70,320)$0 $2,899,680 54.00%$1,565,827 Circulation Element
33e $1,440,000 ($34,095)$0 $1,405,905 54.00%$759,189 Circulation Element
35 $1,500,000 ($35,515)$0 $1,464,485 77.59%$1,136,282 Circulation Element
2 $25,000,000 ($591,920)$0 $24,408,080 37.58%$9,171,501 Circulation Element
30
Highway 101/46East-Dual Left- 17th Street Ramps
Connection Road 46E to Airport Road, bridge over Huer Huero Road
Union Rd/Wisteria Lane roundabout
Tractor St. / Golden Hill roundabout
Huer Huero Bridge Connector Parkway
Airport Road - Dry Creek Road Intersection Improvement
Dry Creek Road - Warbirds to Prairie Rd.
Creston Road - River Road to EŝďůŝĐŬRoad
Creston Road - Lana Street
Creston Road - Niblick Road to Scott Street intersection (Signal)
Niblick / Creston Rd. Intersection widening
Creston Road -Myrtlewood to Meadowlark Road Intersection (Signal)
Charolais Road - S. River Road Roundabout
Union Road - Kleck Road to Golden Hill Road
Union Road - Golden Hill Road Roundabout
Union Road - Golden Hill Road to East City Limits
Spring Street Traffic Signal Coordination
24th Street - Mountain Springs Road
24th Street - Ysabel Avenue to Riverside Avenue
24th Street - St. Railroad Bridge Upgrade
4th Street - Pine Street to Riverside - 101 Ramps (One-way WB undercrossing)
Bike Master Plan Facilities (NCE cost estimate in progress) [2]
Niblick Road - TDM and optimization improvements
FEE AREA A FACILITIES
River Oaks Drive - N. River Road
Buena Vista Drive - Cuesta College Frontage
Buena Vista Drive - Highway 46E Dual Left Turns
Spring Street - 1st to 36th Streets (Frontage improvement completion)
Vine Street - 32nd to 36th Streets (Street completion)
Riverside Ave - 4th Street to Black Oak Drive (Frontage improvement completion)
Railroad Street - 10th Street to 14th Street (Frontage improvement completion)
Paso Robles Street Off-Ramp roundabout
Paso Robles Street
FEE AREA B FACILITIES
S. Vine Realignment and Bridge
Theatre Drive to South City Limits (Widening to 3 lanes)
FEE AREA C FACILITIES
Tractor St. extension and roundabout
Airport Road - Union Road to Sherwood Road with Bridge
Airport Road - Sherwood to Linne
Sherwood Road - Fontana to Airport Road
Sherwood Road - Airport Road to Linne
Airport Road / Sherwood Road roundabout
Airport Road - Meadowlark Road to Creston Road
OTHER PLANNED FACILITIES [3]
Union Road - Highway 46E Interchange
Highway 101/46W Interchange (City's Allocation)$15,000,000 ($355,152)$0 $14,644,848 10.86%$1,590,370 Circulation Element
TOTAL - TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES $203,396,500 ($4,815,781)($26,900,000)$176,496,500 37.59%$66,341,345
CITY OF PASO ROBLES
PUBLIC FACILITIES NEEDS LIST THROUGH 2045 ([KLELW&
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 31 of 152
City of Paso Robles Page 13
Development Impact Fee Justification Study January 24, 2019
V. METHODOLGY UTILIZED TO CALCULATE FACILITIES IMPACT FEE
Pursuant to the nexus requirements of Government Code 66000, a local agency is required to
“determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost
of the public facility or portion of the public facility attributable to the development on which
the fee is imposed.” It is impossible to accurately determine the impact that a specific new
residential unit, hotel project, commercial project, or industrial development will have on
existing facilities. Predicting future residents’ or employees’ specific behavioral patterns, park
and transportation, and health and welfare requirements is extremely difficult, and would
involve numerous assumptions that are subject to substantial variances. Recognizing these
limitations, the Legislature drafted AB 1600 to specifically require that a “reasonable”
relationship be determined, not a direct cause and effect relationship.
There are many methods or ways of calculating fees, but they are all based on determining the
cost of needed improvements and assigning those costs equitably to various types of
development. Fees for the facilities analyzed in this study have been calculated utilizing an
average daily trip (“ADT”) methodology.
Table 5-1 below lists existing and projected ADT data, by Fee Area, used throughout Section V.
TABLE 5-1
CITY OF PASO ROBLES
AVERAGE DAILY TRIPS
Facility Type Service Factor Existing
ADTs
Projected
ADTs Total*
Citywide Transportation Facilities Average Daily Trips 193,285 112,031 305,315
Fee Area “A” Transportation
Facilities Average Daily Trips 189,025 49,541 238,566
Fee Area “B” Transportation
Facilities Average Daily Trips 25,591 20,215 45,806
Fee Area “C” Transportation
Facilities Average Daily Trips 25,458 46,022 71,481
* Totals may not sum due to rounding.
The following sections present the reasonable relationship for benefit, impact, and rough
proportionality tests for each fee element (i.e. transportation facilities) and the analysis
undertaken to apportion costs for each type public facility on the Needs List. More detailed fee
calculation worksheets for each type of facility are included in Appendix A.
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 32 of 152
City of Paso Robles Page 14
Development Impact Fee Justification Study January 24, 2019
A. TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES
The Circulation Element of the General Plan includes facilities necessary to provide safe and
efficient vehicular access throughout the City. In order to meet the transportation demands of
new development through 2045, the City updated this list to include various roadway
improvements including rights of way, signalization, widening of roads, paving, and bridges as
shown in the Needs List.
1. Nexus Requirement of AB 1600
TABLE 5-2
TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES
AB 1600 NEXUS TEST
Identify Purpose of Fee Transportation Improvements
Identify Use of Fee Various roadway improvements including rights of way,
signalization, widening of roads, paving, and bridges
Demonstrate how there
is a reasonable
relationship between
the need for the public
facility, the use of the
fee, and the type of
development project
on which the fee is
imposed
New residential and non-residential development will
generate additional residents and employees who will create
additional vehicular and non-vehicular traffic. Bridges and
interchanges will have to be constructed to meet the
increased demand and provide for city-wide circulation.
Traffic signals, interchanges, bridges and roads will have to
be improved or extended to meet the increased demand
resulting from new development. Thus there is a
relationship between new development and the need for
new transportation facilities. Fees collected from new
development will be used exclusively for transportation
facilities on the Needs List.
2. Apportionment of Transportation Facilities Costs
Roads, traffic signals, and bridges will benefit residents and employees by
providing safe and efficient vehicular access to properties. Road, traffic signals
and bridge fees were calculated for each of the eight (8) land use categories
based on the number of (“ADTs”) generated by each land use.
Total average ADTs were calculated by applying these trip rates to the various
dwelling unit counts and non-residential square feet within each Fee Area and
Citywide, as identified in the demographics section of this report. The total
facilities cost assigned Citywide and to each Fee Area was then divided by the
total number of ADTs for that the applicable area to establish a uniform cost per
ADT. This unit cost was then applied to the various land uses and their respective
trip generation rates to determine the proposed fees. Expected revenue from
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 33 of 152
City of Paso Robles Page 15
Development Impact Fee Justification Study January 24, 2019
new development was also calculated as a check, insuring that collected fees
match the calculated cost responsibility of new development.
Importantly, DTA applied discount factors to the ADT data to account for pass-
through trips and diverted trips. As part of the ADT analysis within each Fee
Area, DTA relied on pass-through rates published by the Institute of Traffic
Engineer’s (“ITE”) for various land uses. Notably, a 33% pass-through rate was
assumed for Commercial (i.e. 33% of the ADTs associated with Commercial were
not considered new trips). This pass-through rate has been weighted to account
for the fact that the Commercial category includes Office, for which there is no
pass-through rate. Moreover, a 66% pass-through rate was assumed for Fuel
Stations with Convenience Markets, and a 50% pass-through rate was assumed
for Drive-Thru Food/Beverage Outlets.
When considering the Citywide Future Facilities, DTA assumed larger pass-
through rates for Fuel Stations with Convenience Markets and Drive-Thru
Food/Beverage Outlets. Essentially, the Citywide Future Facilities include major
arterials that provide north/south and east/west access to the City. Therefore,
these Land Use Categories will have higher pass-through rates, as locations with
such Land Use Categories are much more likely to be pass-through stops on-
route to a different destination in the City. Therefore, a pass-through rate of 95%
was applied to both Fuel Stations with Convenience Markets and Drive-Thru
Food/Beverage Outlets.
Once the ADTs for existing and new development in each Fee Area had been
determined, the costs for Future Facilities were allocated to that Fee Area based
on the Needs List in Section IV.
For Future Facilities that have been deemed “local” to each respective Fee Area
(i.e. collector streets), 100% of the cost of Future Facilities has been assigned to
that Fee Area. This cost has then been allocated between existing development
and new development within the respective Fee Area, based on the percentage
of build out ADTs for each. Notably, the costs associated with Citywide Future
Facilities have also been allocated between existing development and new
development Citywide, based on the percentage of build out ADTs.
For Future Facilities that are more regional (i.e. interchanges and on/off ramps),
DTA relied on data from the TDM to assign a percentage of the cost of such
Future Facilities to each Fee Area. Again, this cost was then allocated between
existing development and new development within the respective Fee Area,
based on the percentage of build out ADTs for each.
Finally, for a number of Future Facilities, the City used the TDM to determine
specific percentage allocations applicable to new development in each Fee Area.
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 34 of 152
City of Paso Robles Page 16
Development Impact Fee Justification Study January 24, 2019
Based on this information, DTA assigned the appropriate percentage of the cost
of such Future Facilities to each Fee Area, then allocated 100% of these assigned
costs to new development.
Importantly, in Fee Area “C”, DTA determined that it was necessary to isolate the
impacts of the specific plan developments that are largely residential (i.e. Olsen-
Chandler and Beechwood). Traffic impacts for these two Specific Plans were
estimated by Central Coast Transportation, specifically related to improvements
on Airport Road (south of Hwy 46) and Sherwood Road. Consistent with the
methodology discussed in the previous paragraph, DTA applied 100% of the cost
of these Future Facilities, allocated to the Fee Area, to new development.
However, since both specific plan developments are largely residential with very
small commercial components (likely intended to serve only these residential
developments), DTA isolated the TIF calculation associated with these Future
Facilities to future residential development in Fee Area “C”.
The following tables provide a summary of (i) the cost of Future Facilities
attributable to each Fee Area, and the percentage allocation between existing
and future development.
TABLE 5-3
CITY OF PASO ROBLES
CITYWIDE
Facility Type Total Cost Allocated
To Area Basis for Allocation Allocated to New
Development
Citywide
Transportation Facilities $89,728,151 100% Citywide Transportation
Network Improvements 36.69%
Fee Area “A” Transportation
Facilities
Fee Area
Improvements $15,513,775 100% Local Fee Area
Improvements 20.77%
Other Planned
Facilities $39,052,927 25.13% TDM 20.77%
Fee Area “B” Transportation
Facilities
Fee Area
Improvements $1,132,535 100% Local Fee Area
Improvements 44.13%
Other Planned
Facilities $39,052,927 14.5% TDM 44.13%
Fee Area “C” Transportation
Facilities See Table Below
* Totals may not sum due to rounding.
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 35 of 152
City of Paso Robles Page 17
Development Impact Fee Justification Study January 24, 2019
TABLE 5-4
CITY OF PASO ROBLES
CITYWIDE
Facility Type Total Cost Allocated
To Area
Basis for
Allocation
Allocated to New
Development
Fee Area “C”
Transportation Facilities
Fee Area Improvements $2,733,705 100% Local Fee Area
Improvements 35.62%
Other Planned Facilities $39,052,927 30.75% TDM 35.62%
Other Fee Area
Improvements
- All Land Uses
- Residential $23,519,626 8.6%
62.53%
TDM
TDM
35.62%
100%
* Totals may not sum due to rounding.
Fee amounts for each Fee Area to finance the roads, traffic signals, and bridge
facilities on the Needs List are presented in Tables 5-5 to 5.9, below. Details
regarding the analysis related to transportation facilities are included in
Appendix A-1. Importantly, the total TIF associated with each Fee Area will
equal to the Citywide TIF, plus the applicable Fee Area TIF.
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 36 of 152
City of Paso Robles Page 18
Development Impact Fee Justification Study January 24, 2019
TABLE 5-5
TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES
CITYWIDE COMPONENT
SUMMARY
Land Use Type
Trip Generation
Rate per Unit / per
1,000 Non-Res SF [1]
Future Units
/ Non-Res SF
Total
Future
ADTs
Development
Impact Fee per
Unit / per 1,000
Non-Res SF
Transportation
Facilities Costs
Financed by Fees
Single Family 7.56 2,379 17,985 $2,222 $5,285,625
Multi-Family 5.21 3,172 16,526 $1,531 $4,856,809
Hotel/RV Park 4.72 2,616 12,348 $1,387 $3,628,773
Commercial 21.95 2,463,585 54,065 $6,450 $15,888,933
Fuel Stations w/
Convenience Market 31.21 15,964 498 $9,172 $146,425
Drive-Thru
Food/Beverage Outlets 23.55 4,049 95 $6,920 $28,024
Industrial 1.74 200,000 348 $511 $102,273
Total 112,031 $32,924,372
Gross Costs Allocated to Existing Development $56,803,779
Total Gross Transportation Facilities Costs $89,728,151
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 37 of 152
City of Paso Robles Page 19
Development Impact Fee Justification Study January 24, 2019
TABLE 5-6
TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES
FEE AREA “A” COMPONENT
SUMMARY
Land Use Type
Trip Generation
Rate per Unit / per
1,000 Non-Res SF [1]
Future Units
/ Non-Res SF
Total
Future
ADTs
Development
Impact Fee per
Unit / per 1,000
Non-Res SF
Transportation
Facilities Costs
Financed by Fees
Single Family 7.56 508 3,840 $803 $407,700
Multi-Family 5.21 2,239 11,665 $553 $1,238,360
Hotel/RV Park 4.72 989 4,668 $501 $495,557
Commercial 21.95 1,104,526 24,239 $2,330 $2,573,227
Fuel Stations w/
Convenience Market 212.23 15,964 3,388 $22,530 $359,666
Drive-Thru
Food/Beverage Outlets 235.48 2,008 473 $24,998 $50,187
Industrial 1.74 0 0 $185 $0
Total 49,541 $5,259,249
Gross Costs Allocated to Existing Development $20,066,574
Total Gross Transportation Facilities Costs $25,325,823
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 38 of 152
City of Paso Robles Page 20
Development Impact Fee Justification Study January 24, 2019
TABLE 5-7
TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES
FEE AREA “B” COMPONENT
SUMMARY
Land Use Type
Trip Generation
Rate per Unit / per
1,000 Non-Res SF [1]
Future Units
/ Non-Res SF
Total
Future
ADTs
Development
Impact Fee per
Unit / per 1,000
Non-Res SF
Transportation
Facilities Costs
Financed by Fees
Single Family 7.56 0 0 $1,121 $0
Multi-Family 5.21 0 0 $773 $0
Hotel/RV Park 4.72 707 3,337 $700 $495,038
Commercial 21.95 719,787 15,796 $3,256 $2,343,302
Fuel Stations w/
Convenience Market 212.23 0 0 $31,483 $0
Drive-Thru
Food/Beverage Outlets 235.48 1,313 309 $34,932 $45,878
Industrial 1.74 0 0 $258 $0
Total 20,215 $2,998,836
Gross Costs Allocated to Existing Development $3,796,373
Total Gross Transportation Facilities Costs $6,795,209
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 39 of 152
City of Paso Robles Page 21
Development Impact Fee Justification Study January 24, 2019
TABLE 5-8
TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES
FEE AREA “C” COMPONENT
SUMMARY
Land Use Type
Trip Generation
Rate per Unit / per
1,000 Non-Res SF [1]
Future Units
/ Non-Res SF
Total
Future
ADTs
Development
Impact Fee per
Unit / per 1,000
Non-Res SF
Transportation
Facilities Costs
Financed by Fees
Single Family 7.56 1,871 14,145 $7,623 $14,262,422
Multi-Family 5.21 933 4,861 $5,253 $4,901,365
Hotel/RV Park 4.72 920 4,342 $1,107 $1,018,429
Commercial 21.95 639,272 14,029 $5,147 $3,290,285
Fuel Stations w/
Convenience Market 212.23 0 0 $49,774 $0
Drive-Thru
Food/Beverage Outlets 235.48 728 172 $55,226 $40,231
Industrial 1.74 200,000 348 $408 $81,617
Total 46,022 $25,500,012
Gross Costs Allocated to Existing Development $5,970,771
Total Gross Transportation Facilities Costs $31,470,784
The total expected revenues from TIF for Future Facilities are $66,682,470. If
development takes place as projected in Section III, the fee amounts presented
in Tables 5-9 are expected to finance 38.84% of the net costs of the
transportation facilities identified on the Needs List. The remaining 61.16% of
the net costs of transportation facilities will be funded through other sources.
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 40 of 152
City of Paso Robles Page 22
Development Impact Fee Justification Study January 24, 2019
TABLE 5-9
CITY OF PASO ROBLES
CITYWIDE
Facility Type Total Cost Cost Funded by
Fees
Costs Allocated to
Existing Development
Citywide
Transportation Facilities $89,728,151 $32,924,372 $56,803,779
Fee Area “A”
Transportation Facilities $15,513,775 $3,221,645 $12,292,130
Fee Area “B”
Transportation Facilities $1,132,535 $499,806 $632,729
Fee Area “C”
Transportation Facilities $26,253,330 $17,768,249 $8,485,081
Other Planned Facilities $39,052,927 $12,268,398 $26,784,529
Total $171,680,718 $66,682,470 $104,998,248
* Totals may not sum due to rounding.
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 41 of 152
City of Paso Robles Page 23
Development Impact Fee Justification Study January 24, 2019
VI. SUMMARY OF FEES
The total impact fee amounts to finance new development’s share of the costs of facilities in
the Needs Lists are summarized in Table 6-1.
TABLE 6-1
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE SUMMARY
Land Use Fee Area
“A” [1]
Fee Area
“B” [1]
Fee Area
“C” [1]
Single Family (Per Unit) $2,848 $3,780 $9,773
Multi Family (Per Unit) $1,963 $2,605 $6,735
One Bedroom Units (Per Unit) [1] $1,107 $1,469 $3,798
Studio Units (Per Unit) [1] $738 $979 $2,532
Commercial Lodging Motel/Hotel (Per Room) $1,778 $2,360 $2,449
RV Parks & Campgrounds (Per Space) $1,778 $2,360 $2,449
Commercial (Per Sq. Ft.) $8.27 $10.97 $11.39
Assisted Living (Per Sq. Ft.) [2] $0.94 $1.25 $1.30
Fuel Stations w/ Convenience Market (Per Sq. Ft.) $30.97 $57.13 $61.15
Drive-Thru Food / Beverage Outlets (Per Sq. Ft.) $31.37 $60.39 $64.85
Light Industrial (Per Sq. Ft.) $1.65 $2.19 $2.28
Heavy Industrial (Per Sq. Ft.) $0.66 $0.87 $0.90
[1]Fees derived based on a reduction of the Multi-Family per unit fee, based on 1.0 person per
household (“PPH”) for Studio Units and 1.5 PPH for One Bedroom Units, as compared to the estimated
PPH for Multi-Family Units of 2.66.
[2]Fee derived based on a reduction of the Commercial per Sq. Ft. fee, based on 2.50 trips per 1,000 Sq.
Ft. for Assisted Living.
CC Resolution 19-017 Page 42 of 152