HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 01-16-1997 - 3 1
i
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: January 16, 1997
Action Agenda
Item #-_
Subject: Development Impact Assessment Model
Department: Planning Public Hearing: Yes_X_No
Budget Amendment Required: Yes_X No
Attachment(s): Information Contact: Marvin Collins,Ext. 2592
Telephone Numbers:
Hillsborough 732-8181
Durham 688-7331
Mebane 227-2031
Chapel Hill 967-9251
Purpose: To receive a report on a Development Impact Assessment Model
Background: The County Commissioners' goal to assess impacts of growth and development called for a
report on the assessment methodology to be made to the BOCC in January, 1997.
The attached memorandum from Marvin Collins, Planning Director,presents an overview of
the methodology as well as an illustration of its application to a sample development.
Recommendation:
01/16/97
c:\msofice\winword\agenda\abstract\devimpac.doc
2
i
MEMORANDUM
Orange County Planning & Inspections Department
306F Revere Road Hillsborough,North Carolina 27278
Telephone: (919)732-8181 FAX: (919)644-3002
To: John Link, County Manager
From: Marvin Collins, Planning Director
Date: January 10, 1997
Subject: Development Impact Assessment Model
Copies:
At the Commissioners December 7, 1996 Goal Setting Retreat, Commissioner Gordon
inquired about the status of work on a Board goal - the impacts of growth and development. The
Board was informed that staff had obtained a copy of a Development Impact Assessment
Handbook, including a spreadsheet model to conduct such analyses. The Handbook was prepared
for the Urban Land Institute by Dr. Robert Burchell, Dr. David Listokin, and William Dolphin of
the Center for Urban Policy Research at Rutgers University. Drs. Burchell and Listokin are
recognized for their expertise in the field of impact assessment,and the Handbook was of interest to
staff because it provided an opportunity to assess a variety of effects,not just fiscal impacts.
The goal statement on the impacts of growth and development called for a report on the
assessment methodology to be made to the Board of Commissioners in January, 1997. A Work
Session has been scheduled for January 16, and this memorandum is provided for distribution to
the Board. It presents an overview of the methodology as well as an illustration of its application to
a sample development.
Development Impact Assessment
Development impact assessment is the process of estimating and reporting the effects of
residential and nonresidential construction on a local community, school district, and/or county.
The effects may take several forms: physical, market, environment, social, economic, fiscal, and
traffic. Increasingly, development impact assessment is changing from an optional to a required
element as part of land use review processes around the country. It is most often applied to large
rather than small-scale growth,to multi-family, nonresidential or planned residential projects rather
than to traditional single-family subdivisions, or to proposals for development in environmentally
sensitive areas. The most typical case also involves development impact analysis in a prescriptive
mode, e.g., what is going to happen over the short to mid-term on a communitywide basis. Finally,
development impact assessment almost always culminates in both an oral and graphic presentation
that involves a series of experts who summarize the studies they have undertaken.
3
The reports and analyses developed and presented by the various impact practitioners are
derived from information about the development itself as well as from information specific to a
particular field of expertise. In lieu of the detailed and extensive analysis, a certain amount of
generalized information relating to a particular type of impact analysis can be assembled and
computerized for a rapid scanning of aggregate development effects. While not replacing the
analysis required of any individual field of impact inquiry, the development impact analysis model
makes it possible to "obtain a feeling for" or to "preview" development impacts. The model stores
information that can be combined with a development pro forma as well as other user provided data
to produce a"snapshot" estimate of significant development effects.
Model Inputs
The model's inputs are drawn from three sources: a user worksheet, model factors, and
model calculations. The worksheet for the model consists of data entered into a form available to
the user. The model factors encompass economic, environmental,demographic,and other standards
that are incorporated into the programming of the model. The model calculations involve
intermediate outputs from the model that serve as inputs for subsequent calculations. The user
worksheet and model factors are further explained below.
The user worksheet is a form completed by a developer, public body, or other user of the
model. It asks for project and site specific information for the different fields of impact assessment.
Most of this information is typically known and readily available. For instance, under the legal
section, the user identifies both the public jurisdiction that serve the site and the nature of the land
use application. The physical planning section describes the project pro forma, and the size of the
site and its overall developability. A sample user worksheet is provided as Exhibit A.
Many of the data do not need to be project or site specific. Inputs include a host of economic,
environmental, demographic, and transportation factors such as share of household disposable
income that will be spent on retail purchases, regional input-output multipliers, per capita water
consumption for attached versus detached housing units, and trip generation by land use
category.The model encompasses 46 "built-in" model factors, including, but not limited to trip
generation values from the Institute of Transportation Engineers, parkland standards from the
National Recreation and Park Association,EMS vehicle and personnel needs from the International
Association of Fire Chiefs, and public service staffing profiles by community size and region from
the Bureau of the Census.
Model factors are identified in Exhibit B. It should be noted, however,that while the model
incorporates those factors listed in the exhibit in its programming, the user can replace the factors
with data that are more locally specific or current when such information is available. For example,
the model uses parkland standards of the National Recreation and Park Association. The parkland
requirements of the adopted Master Recreation and Parks Plan could be substituted.
4
Model Outputs
The inputs provide the basis for a series of outputs for each of the nine assessment fields.
The model's programming encompasses a series of calculations and formulas that compute the
outputs. As previously indicated,these are termed model calculations. To illustrate, for the physical
and site analyses, the user enters the number and types of residential units as well as the site's total
acreage and developable acreage. With these inputs, the model calculates a series of outputs. For
instance, the gross residential density is equal to the number of units divided by the site's
developable area. Other land use factors such as the floor/area ratio are similarly calculated by the
application of appropriate formulas.
The project pro forma, entered under the physical and site analysis, is the basis for many
other calculations. By applying the demographic multipliers - the average number of people and
school-age children residing in different type and size housing units - to the project profile, the
model determines the development's projected population. Applying the model factors for per
capita water use, sewage system use, and solid waste generation to the development population
yields an estimate of environmental effects. Applying local per capita and per pupil expenditures to
the development generated population produces the public service costs associated with growth. By
matching expenditures to the revenues generated by development, the model calculates the net
fiscal impact.
In short,the model consists of a series of input data and output information. The inputs are
based on readily available user information and factors already embodied in the model. The outputs
comprise a series of linked findings across several dimensions of impact assessment as listed and
described below.
Model Components
Administrative/Legal. The administrative/legal component of the model is largely
descriptive. It provides tracking type data on the development and signals the level of scrutiny that
the development must undergo.
Physical/Land Planning. The second component is more analytic than the first and
involves the physical setting of development impeding conditions en route to a determination of
land-holding capacity. It is also descriptive in that the development's gross housing unit numbers
and thousands of square feet of nonresidential space are initially displayed.
Market Impact. The market assessment deals with the extent to which the development's
land use components are interrelated with the regional market demand for such components. It
compares the features offered by the development to the demand for the same.
Environmental Impact. The environmental impact component scans a number of
significant environmental factors, including impacts of utility systems, the level of development in
sensitive areas,and the framework for environmental reviewing.
5
Social Impact. The social impact component focuses on the population generated by the
proposed development as well as the needs of that population. The component tabulates the total
counts of people, pupils, and employees and of specific subsectors such as the elderly and disabled.
With the population projected, the model then identifies the demands imposed by additional
residents and workers on an array of general and specialized social services.
Economic Impact. The economic impact component considers both the direct and induced
economic effects of development such as material purchases,employment generation, and spending
by the new work force. The analysis is undertaken by a proposed development's construction and
permanent operation phases.
Fiscal Impact. The fiscal impact component computes the fiscal effects of growth on the
host public jurisdictions by implementing the four basic steps of cost-revenue analysis. First, it
factors in the number of people, pupils, and employees generated by growth (as derived from the
social impact section of the model). Second, the population increment is translated into attendant
public service costs by the per capita methodology - multiplying the development generated
population by the per person/pupil/employee expenditure factors. Third, the fiscal impact
component calculates the revenues added by growth, and, fourth, compares costs to revenues to
yield the net fiscal impact.
Traffic Impact. Traffic has always been one of the most controversial topics considered
during development review. For this reason, a detailed traffic impact report often accompanies
development applications. The model of traffic assessment follows in abbreviated form the traffic
impact analysis procedure of the more detailed study. Through a series of inputs and outputs, the
model begins with consideration of existing traffic conditions and then examines site
characteristics. With a framework established, the model identified future conditions without and
with development. Because traffic impact assessments often involve consideration of traffic
improvements and financing responsibilities,the model includes a capital needs analysis.
Shared Infrastructure Costs. The infrastructure component considers the infrastructure
implications of growth by bringing together information already derived in previous portions of the
model and calculating capital needs. While, for instance, the environmental assessment section
identified the development induced demands for gallons of water, gallons of waste treatment, and
tons of solid waste, infrastructure cost inputs determine the capital cost to supply a gallon of water
or gallon of wastewater treatment, and to dispose of a ton of solid waste. The product of the
infrastructure need and cost parameters yields the development induced capital costs across an array
of categories. The model then incorporates as additional output a system for allocating these
improvement costs between the developer and the community at large. As detailed in the model,
such an allocation would proceed in practice only after careful consideration of its policy
implications. Further,it would be guided by prevailing state and local statutes.
Sample Development
The sample development assessed using the model is a mixed use project of 300 residential
units and 150,000 square feet of nonresidential space. The residential component includes 200 three
and four-bedroom single-family detached homes and 100 two-bedroom townhouses. The
nonresidential sector encompasses 100,000 square feet of office space and 50,000 square feet of
retail space.
The sample development analysis is provided in Exhibit C. As noted previously, the
model's structure consists of two parts, inputs and outputs, and each part is divided into the
following components: administrative/legal; physical/land planning; market; social; environmental;
fiscal; traffic; and shared infrastructure costs. The impact assessment of the sample development
indicates generally positive results. However, the traffic analysis projects that road improvements
are needed, and the shared infrastructure analysis indicates that a little less than half(44%)-of the
development generated capital costs will be paid for by the development.
Model Use
The model provides an assessment of the impact of development across multiple
dimensions. The results are not as detailed as those derived from technical stand-alone reports that
focus on individual impacts in specific areas. The advantage of the model, however, lies in its
ability to provide an accurate scanning of major threshold effects quickly, effectively, and at
modest cost. By contrast, technical stand-alone assessments require extensive data gathering,
increased time,and professional assistance,all of which add up to a higher cost.
If the Board feels that the model offers an effective level of development assessment, staff
will review the model to determine if more locally specific or current standards(e.g.,model factors)
should be used. Likewise, staff will select a project recently approved by the Board and assess the
effects of the development using the model. The results will be presented to the Board at a
subsequent Work Session so that it may approve the standards used in the model and the types of
development applications which would be subject to such assessment.
8
Exhibit A
User Worksheet
9
10
USER WORKSHEET
(It is recommended that the Guide to the User Worksheet,which follows,be reviewed before complet-
ing the worksheet.)
For the full preview model,the entire user worksheet should be completed.For Quickway,only the
following user worksheet entries are necessary: 1,4(portion),7,8,and 9 (portion).In the computer-
ized model—for both the preview and Quickway models—a macro guides the entry of the required
data.
I. Legal and Administrative Considerations
The following section relates to the administrative and legal aspects of the development application.
$Failure to complete this section will result in the development not being fully identified and its loca-
tion and legal status not being indicated.
1. Name of Development C6*
2. Owner C7
3. Location of Development
Block/lot number C9
Names of nearest intersecting streets C10
U.S.Census tract C11
4; Jurisdiction(s)providing public services to the development(indicate name)"
Municipality/town/village C13
County C14
School district(s)
School district 1 C15
School district 2 C16
School district 3 C17
Other service district 1 C18
Other service district 2 C19
5. Type(s)of Land Use Review
Identify the appropriate type(s)of land use review required for the development""[Enter letter(s)]
Subdivision/site plan review A C20 LETTER
Variance B C20 LETTER
Rezoning C C20 LETTER
* A cell location(column and row identification)is provided for each response.
** If field begins with number,leave a blank before first digit.
*** If multiple responses are applicable,enter multiple letters(AB or ABC)without spaces.
222
6. Stage of Land Use Review
Indicate the current stage of the land use review of the development* [Enter letter(s)]
Concept A C22 LETTER"
Preliminary B C22 LETTER
Final C C22 LETTER
H. Physical/Land Planning
The following section requests details of the proposed development and characteristics of the site
under consideration.t1t is very important to complete this section fully and accurately as it is the start-
ing basis for numerous impact assessments.
7. Development Composition
In the following tables,complete the number of units and sales price per unit for each residential
type proposed for the development. (For rental units,express in equivalent sales price or im-
puted value.)
Identify the number of units as of the projection year—the point in time in which the user wishes
to examine the development impacts(i.e.,project buildout,end of a stage of development,or
any year over which development proceeds).Identify the sales prices(or imputed values)as of
the current year—time as of the filling out of.the user worksheet.
[Complete tables on next three pages]
If multiple responses are applicable,enter multiple letters(AB or ABC)without spaces.
A cell location(column and row identification)is provided for each response.
223
12
A. Residential
Single-Family Detached Number of Units Sales Price per Unit
[Enter numbe;of units] [Enter sales price]
2 BR C32 E32
3 BR C33 E33
4 BR C34 E34
5 BR C35 E35
Garden Number of Units Sales Price per Unit
1 BR C36 E36
2 BR C37 E37
3 BR C38 E38
Townhouse Number of Units Sales Price per Unit
2 BR C39 E39
3 BR C40 E40
4 BR C41 E41
A cell location(column and row identification)is provided for each response.
224
13
A. Residential (continued)
High-Rise Number of Units Sales Price per Unit
[Enter numbe;of units] [Enter sales price]
STUDIO C42 E42
1 BR C43 E43
i
l 2 BR C44 E44
Mobile Home Number of Units Sales Price per Unit
1 BR C45 E45
2 BR C46 E46
3 BR C47 E47
Other Number of Units Sales Price per Unit
Type C48 E48
Type 2 C49 E49
Type 3 C50 E50
Elderly Number of Units Sales Price per Unit
1 BR C51 E51
2 BR C52 E52
• A cell location(column and row identification)is provided for each response.
225
14
B.Nonresidential
In the following table,complete the area(in square feet)and sales price(or imputed value)of all nonresi-
dential uses proposed for the development. Indicate the square feet as of the projection year—the point
in time in which the user wishes to examine development impacts.Identify the sales prices (or imputed
values)as of the current year.
Identify the other requested information such as net floor/area ratios*governing the nonresidential de-
velopment on the site as indicated by prevailing land use regulations.
Net
Square Dollar Value Floor/ Other as
Use Feet per Square Foot Area.. Shown
1ti atio
Office
General C58 E58 G58
Office park C59 E59 G59
Medical C60 E60 G60
Retail
Convenience C62 E62 G62 Number of
Stores t
162
Supermarket C63 E63 G63
Shopping C64 E64 G64
Restaurant C65 E65 G65 Numbe4of
Seats
165
Industrial
General light C67 E67 G67
Industrial park C68 E68 G68
Manufacturing C69 E69 G69
Warehousing C70 E70 G70
Hotel C71 E71 G71 Number offtf
Rooms
171
t For convenience store
tt For restaurant
ttt For hotel
Ratio of the square footage of an indicated type of nonresidential development to the nonresidential land square
footage,including nondevelopable acreage but excluding open space.
Complete only if you wish the preview model to examine the relationship of the size of the project pro forma to the
scale of development permitted by prevailing land use regulations.Indicate ratio to two decimal places.
A cell location(column and row identification)is provided for each response.
226
• 15
8. Development Timing
8.a. Identify the current year E74*
(time as of the filling out and entering (individual year)
of the data items in the user worksheet)
8.b. Number of years from the current year
to the anticipated beginning of construction E75
(issuance of building permits) (number of years)
8.c. Number of years from the current year
to the projection year—the point in
time at which the user wishes to examine
development impacts(i.e.,final buildout,
end of stage,or any year over which the
development proceeds) E76
(number of years)
C. Site Characteristics
The following section relates to basic site characteristics. $Failure to complete this section will result
in such information as total site size and site developability not being indicated.
9. For the development site,identify
9.a. Total development site size in acres C77
(total acres)
9.b. Overall gross residential density"
For the total development site—what is the overall maximum permissible gross residential den-
sity"'that is allowed by the prevailing and governing land use regulations?
E78
(overall site gross residential
density—units per acre)
9.c. Overall gross floor/area ratio**
For the total development site—what is the overall maximum permissible gross nonresidential
floor/area ratio—that is allowed by the prevailing and governing land use regulations?
E79
(gross nonresidential floor/area
ratio [to two decimal places])
* A cell location(column and row identification)is provided for each response.
** Complete only if you wish the preview model to examine the relationship of the size of the project pro forma to the
scale of development permitted by prevailing land use regulations.
*** Total number of residential units per acre of land,including all acreage such as nondevelopable lands and open space.
**** Ratio of the square footage of nonresidential development to total land square footage,including all acreage such as
nondevelopable lands and open space.
227
16
9.d. Size of the indicated project pro forma compared to the maximum permissible
development size!**
If the size of the project pro forma (as you have indicated in Question 7) is smaller than the maxi-
mum permissible by the prevailing and governing land use regulations(i.e.,overall development site
gross residential density and/or overall gross floor/area ratio),should the program automatically in-
crease the size of the pro forma to the maximum allowed?Enter"Yes"or"No"as appropriate.
E81!**•
Yes,automatically increase
E81
No,keep indicated pro forma
10. Identify the total number of acres(nonoverlapping) of the project site that have physical
development limitations (such as those indicated below—not including open space) that cannot
be reclaimed through engineering or design changes(i.e.,clustering versus a grid pattern)'
[Enter sum of nonoverlapping acres]
Land with nondevelopable slope conditions
Land with nondevelopable soils
Land with floodplains,wetlands,streams
Land in prime agricultural and forest areas
Land in or near historic sites or archeological areas
Land in or near endangered species habitats
Land consumed by local roads and utilities
Land in perimeter buffers and other land dedications
Land otherwise nondevelopable
Total acres with development limitations C85
11. For the total development site—how many acres of open space are required by prevailing and
governing land use regulations?
C86
[Enter required acres of open space]
* Complete only if you wish the preview model to examine the relationship of the size of the project pro forma to the
scale of development permitted by prevailing land use regulations.
** A cell location(column and row identification)is provided for each response.
228
17
12. For the development site—identify from the prevailing and governing land use regulations
the maximum net residential densities permitted for the residential land uses you have indicated
in the project pro forma(Question 7)'"
Residential Net Residential Density
(units per acre)
Single-family detached C88
Garden C89
Townhouse C90
High-rise C91
Mobile home C92
Other(if applicable) C93
Elderly C94
13. Indicate the architectural style of the proposed development[Enter letter]
Similar to the existing area architecture A E95 LETTER
Derivative B E95 LETTER
Different from existing architecture
—style initiated by the developer C E95 LETTER
Different from existing architecture
—site conditions dictate a style
different from existing style D E95 LETTER
* Total number of residential units of an indicated type per acre of residential land,including nondevelopable acreage
but excluding open space.
** Complete only if you wish the preview model to examine the relationship of the size of the project pro forma to the
scale of development permitted by prevailing land use regulations.
*** A cell location(column and row identification)is provided for each response.
229
18
III. Market Analysis
The following sections require data for the housing,retail,and office market analyses,respectively.'
$Failure to complete this section will disallow these market studies.
A.Housing Market Analysis Data
14. What is the projected population in the development's housing market area**in the following
time periods—current year and projection year?
If information by age group (i.e., 15-24,25-34,etc.) is unavailable,fill in total population and
leave the age group field (cohorts 15-65+)blank.If information by age group is known,fill in
the data and leave the total population field blank.
Age Group Current Year" Projection Year'"
Number of People Number of People
Total Population-
all age groups ✓ C104+ E104
By Population Age Group
15-24 ✓ C106 E106
25-34 ✓ C107 E107
35-44 ✓ C108 E108
45-54 ✓ C109 E109
55-65 ✓ C110 E110
65+ ✓ Cili E111
15. What is the estimated cumulative number of housing units(excludinp.the proposed
development)that will become available in the housing market area from the current year
to the projection year?Include future units that will be built as well as existing vacant housing.
housing units C115
* Items marked with"./"must be completed in all development situations where the user wishes the assessment model
to conduct a market analysis(e.g.,per capita income,as shown under the retail market section,should be indicated
even for developments containing only housing).
** The total area in which a market exists for the proposed housing project or the nearest equivalent region.
*** Current year=time as of the filling out of the user worksheet.
**** Projection year=point in time in which the user wishes to examine development impacts(e.g.,project buildout,end of
a stage of development,or any year over which development proceeds).
+ A cell location(column and row identification)is provided for each response.
230
19
B. Retail Market Analysis Data
16. Buildout Period Population
What is the projected change in total population in the retail market area*of the development
from the current year to the projection year***(or nearest time period)?
✓****persons C1191
17. Per Capita Income
What is the average per capita income as of the current year**in the retail market area*of the de-
velopment?
$ per capita C120
18. Projected Retail Space
What is the projected cumulative supply of retail space(in square feet) that will become available
in the retail market area*from the current year to the projection year***? Include planned ex-
pansions in existing retail facilities,standing vacant retail space,and retail facilities under con-
struction or planning.The space should be distinguished by retail type and should not include
the proposed development.
Shopping square feet C122
Convenience square feet C123
* The total area in which a market exists for the proposed retail project or the nearest equivalent region.
** Current year=time as of the filling out of the user worksheet.
*** Projection year=point in time in which the user wishes to examine development impacts(e.g.,project buildout,end of
a stage of development,or any year over which development proceeds).
**** Items marked with"✓"must be completed in all development situations(e.g.,per capita income,as shown under the
retail market section,should be indicated even for developments containing only housing).
+ A cell location(column and row identification)is provided for each response.
231
20
C. Office Market Analysis Data
19. Total Employment Levels
In the table below,complete in the spaces shown the total amount of employment for the appro-
priate area and years (see Guide to the User Worksheet for national and state employment
data).
Area
Office
Year/Time National State Market Area
Period Employment Employment Employment
1980 C127*** E127 G127
1991 C128 E128 G128
Projection Year C129 XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX
20. Projected Office Space
What is the projected cumulative supply of office space (in square feet) that will become available
in the office market area from the current year'to the projection year"",excluding office
space created by the proposed project?Include planned expansions in existing facilities,stand-
ing vacant office space,and office space under construction or planning.
square feet C132
21. What is the total employment(of all types)in the office market area"in the current year?
./"employment C134
* Employment for the nation and by state for 1980 and 1991 is indicated in the Guide to the User Worksheet.National
employment for the projection year can be determined by increasing the 1991 national employment by 1.6 percent
annually until the projection year is reached.Employment in the office market area will have to be determined from
state,regional,or local labor;economic development;planning;or other offices.
** The total area in which a market exists for the proposed office project or the nearest equivalent region.
*** A cell location(column and row identification)is provided for each response.
**** Projection year=point in time in which the user wishes to examine development impacts(e.g.,project buildout,end of
a stage of development,or any year over which development proceeds).
+ Current year=time as of the filling out of the user worksheet.
++ Items marked with V"must be completed in all development situations(e.g.,per capita income,as shown under the
retail market section,should be indicated even for developments containing only housing).
232
• 21
IV. Social Impact Analysis
The following section considers the population profile of the development in terms of the average
number of persons by residential type and the average number of school-age children generated
(household size and school-age children multipliers). If this information is not entered,default na-
tional multipliers for average household size and school-age children will be applied.
22. Development Composition: Population Profile
IA. Residential [Enter household size and school-age children multipliers below]
Single-Family School-Age Children
Detached People Preschool Elementary junior High School
K-6 7-9 10-12
2 BR C144* E144 G144 H14,4 I144
3 BR C145 E145 G145 H145 I145
4 BR C146 E146 G146 H146 I146
5 BR C147 E147 G147 H147 I147
School-Age Children
Garden People Preschool Elementary junior High School
K-6 7-9 10-12
1 BR C148 E148 G148 H148 I148
2 BR C149 E149 G149 H149 I149
3 BR C150 E150 G150 H150 I150
School-Age Children
Townhouse People Preschool Elementary junior High School
K-6 7-9 10-12
2 BR C151 E151 G151 H151 I151
3 BR C152 E152 G152 H152 I152
4 BR C153 E153 G153 H153 I153
' A cell location(column and row identification)is provided for each response.
233
22
School-Age Children
High-Rise People Preschool Elementary junior High School
K-6 7-9 10-12
Studio C154* E154 G154 H154 I154
1 BR C155 E155 G155 H155 I155
2 BR C156 E156 G156 H156 I156
School-Age Children
Mobile Home People Preschool Elementary junior High School
K-6 7-9 10-12
1 BR C157 E157 G157 H157 1157
2 BR C158 E158 G158 H158 I158
3 BR C159 E159 G159 H159 I159
Other School-Age Children
People Preschool Elementary junior High School
K-6 7-9 10-12
Type 1 C160 E160 G160 H160 I160
Type 2 C161 E161 G161 H161 I161
Type 3 C162 E162 G162 H162 I162
Elderly People
1 BR C163
2 BR C164
23. What is the highest grade offered in the school districts serving the development?
School district 1 highest grade E168
School district 2 highest grade E170
School district 3 highest grade E171
* A cell location(column and row identification)is provided for each response.
234
23
V. Environmental Impact Analysis
The following section considers various environmental characteristics. tFailure to complete the re-
quested information will disallow the environmental assessment as well as analysis of infrastructure
needs.
Water Capacity
For the public jurisdiction,special district,utility authority,or company serving the develop-
ment.
24. Enter the current unused water capacity of the site area (gallons/day)
gallons/day E176!**
Solid Waste Capacity
25. Enter the current unused solid waste capacity of the site area
tons/day E177
Sewage Capacity
26. Enter the current unused sewage treatment capacity of the site area
gallons/day E178
A.Environmentally Sensitive Areas
For the following environmental considerations,identify the presence of fragile areas and/or their
significance.
27. Development sitefloodplain area
Floodplain and buffer areas(in acres) E180
on development site (in acres)
28. Development site wetlands areas
Wetlands and buffer areas(in acres) E182
on development site , (in acres)
29. Development site steep slope areas
Steep slope areas(in acres)on E184
development site (in acres)
29.a. Prime agricultural and forest areas (in acres) E186
on development site (in acres)
A cell location(column and row identification)is provided for each response.
235
24
30. Identify the significance of the historic sites and/or archeological areas on the tract* [Enter lette]
A. Significant A E188**LETTER
B. Moderate B E188 LETTER
C. Minor C E188 LETTER
31. Identify the significance of the endangered species on the site
[Enter letter]
A. Significant A E190 LETTER
B. Moderate B E190 LETTER
C. Minor C E190 LETTER
32. Enter below the length of the project boundary that is located within 100 feet of a four-lane road
(feet) E193
B.Environmental Review and jurisdictional Focus
33. In the table below,indicate the major areas of environmental focus(scope of assessment)on the site*
[Enter letter]
A. Flora/fauna A E194 LETTER
B.Water/sewer/solid waste capacity B E194 LETTER
C. Soils/drainage/infrastructure C E194 LETTER
D.Wetlands/floodplains/streams D E194 LETTER
E.Historical/archeological E E194 LETTER
F. Air quality F E194 LETTER
G.Water quality G E194 LETTER
H.Visual and scenic qualities H E194 LETTER
I. Energy use and conservation I E194 LETTER
J. Other J E194 LETTER
K.Multiple K E194 LETTER
34.a. In the table below,indicate the most appropriate tier of environmental review of the site impacts*
[Enter letter]
A. Federal A E200 LETTER
B.State B E200 LETTER
C. County C E200 LETTER
D. Local D E200 LETTER
E.Multiple E E200 LETTER
34.b. Identify the lead agency for environmental filing purposes'
[Enter letter]
A. Federal A E201 LETTER
B. State B E201 LETTER
C. County C E201 LETTER
D. Local D E201 LETTER
E. Multiple E E201 LETTER
Check only one letter.
A cell location(column and row identification)is provided for each response.
236
25
VI. Fiscal Impact Analysis
This section requires information about the public service jurisdiction(s) in which the development
is proposed.This includes the population and expenditures of the jurisdiction,property values, and
revenues from taxes and intergovernmental(state and federal) aid. $Failure to complete this section
will disallow the fiscal impact and infrastructure assessments.
35. Public Service Jurisdiction Expenditure and Population Information [Enter indicated amounts]
Service Populations
Number of
Amount of Number of Number of Public
Jurisdiction Expenditures People People School-Age
Residing Working Children
A. Municipality/ C210* E210 G210
town/village
B. County C211 E211 G211
C. School district 1 C212 H212
D. School district 2 C213 H213
E. School district 3 C214 H214
F. Other service district 1 C215 E215 G215
G. Other service district 2 C216 E216 G216
* A cell location(column and row identification)is provided for each response.
237
26
36. Public Service Jurisdiction Service Information
Residential/Nonresidential Property Base [Enter indicated amounts]
Number of
Property Tax Base Property Parcels
jurisdiction $Residential $Nonresidential Residential Nonresidential
Value (total) Value(total) Parcels (total) Parcels (total)
*
A. Municipality/ C221 E221 G221 H221
town/village
B. County C222 E222 G222 H222
C. Other service C223 E223 G223 H223
district 1
D. Other service C224 E224 G224 H224
district 2
37. Public Service Jurisdiction Real Property Tax Information[Enter indicated amounts]
Real Property Tax($)
Total Levy Real Property
Total Base (Amount Tax* Assessment-to-
jurisdiction (Assessed Value) Raised) Rate Sales Ratio
A. Municipality/ C229 E229 G229 H229
town/village
B. County C230 E230 G230 H230
C. School district 1 C231 E231 G231 H231
D. School district 2 C232 E232 G232 H232
E. School district 3 C233 E233 G233 H233
F. Other service district 1 C234 E234 G234 H234
G. Other service district 2 C235 E235 G235 H235
* A cell location(column and row identification)is provided for each response.
** Express as a decimal to four places;e.g.,$1.25 per$100 assessed value is shown as.0125.
*** Express as a decimal to two places;e.g.,75 percent assessment-to-sales ratio is shown as.75.
238
27
For public service jurisdictions deriving revenues from the personal property tax.
38. Public Service jurisdiction Personal Property Tax Information[Enter indicated amounts]
Personal Property Tax
Personal
Total Levy
Property
Total Base (Amount Tax Assessment-10-
Jurisdiction (Assessed Value) Raised) Rate* Sales Ratio
A. Municipality/ C240 E240 G240 H240
town/village
B. County C241 E241 G241 H241
C. School district 1 C242 E242 G242 H242
D. School district 2 C243 E243 G243 H243
E. School district 3 C244 E244 G244 H244
F. Other service district 1 C245 E245 G245 H245
G.Other service district 2 0246 E246 G246 H246
For jurisdictions in which personal property is taxed.
39. For residential properties,what is the estimated share of personal property as a percent
of real property value?(5%=5)
%E249
(If,for example,a townhouse with a real property value of$100,000 is estimated to contain
$5,000 in personal property,then the share above would be 5 percent.)
40. For nonresidential properties,what is the estimated share of personal property as a
percent of real property value?(20%=20)
%E250
(If,for example,a retail store with a real property value of$250,000 is estimated to contain
$50,000 in personal property,then the share above is 20 percent.)
Express as a decimal to four places;e.g.,$1.25 per$100 assessed value is shown as.0125.
Express as a decimal to two places;e.g.,75 percent assessment-to-sales ratio is shown as.75.
A cell location(column and row identification)is provided for each response.
239
28
41. Public Service Jurisdiction Local Nonproperty Tax Information [Apportion the nonproperty tax
revenues found within the jurisdictions listed below between property valuation and population]
Nonproperty Tax Revenues ($)
Associated with Associated with
Jurisdiction Property Value Population
A. Municipality/ C255* E255
town/village
B. County C256 E256
C. School district 1 C257 E257
D.School district 2 C258 E258
E. School district 3 C259 E259
F. Other service district 1 C260 E260
G. Other service district 2 C261 E261
42. Public Service Jurisdiction Intergovernmental Aid(aid from federal,
state,and other units of government) [Apportion the intergovernmental aid granted to the
jurisdictions listed below between property valuation and population]
Intergovernmental Aid ($)
Associated with Associated with
Jurisdiction Property Value Population
A. Municipality/ C266 E266
town/village
B. County C267 E267
C. School district 1 C268 E268
D. School district 2 C269 E269
E. School district 3 C270 E270
F.Other service district 1 C271 E271
G. Other service district 2 C272 E272
* A cell location(column and row identification)is provided for each response.
240
29
VII. Traffic Impact Analysis
The following section concerns the road and traffic characteristics of the project site. $Failure to com-
plete this section will disallow the traffic impact and infrastructure assessments.
43. How many roads (to a maximum of three) does the site access? [Enter either 1,2, or 31
1) 1 road G279'
2) 2 roads G279
3) 3 roads G279
One road will be labeled "Road A"; two roads, "Road A" and"Road B";three roads, "Road
A," "Road B," and "Road C."
44. Identify the number of lanes in each of these roads [Enter number selection 1-4 below]
Road A 1)2 lanes(1 lane in each direction) C281 NUMBER
2)4 lanes(2 lanes in each direction) C281 NUMBER
3) 6 lanes(3 lanes in each direction) C281 NUMBER
4)8 lanes(4 lanes in each direction) C281 NUMBER
Road B*` 1)2 lanes(1 lane in each direction) E281 NUMBER
2)4lanes(2 lanes in each direction) E281 NUMBER
3) 6 lanes(3 lanes in each direction) E281 NUMBER
4) 8 lanes(4 lanes in each direction) E281 NUMBER
Road C'*' 1)2 lanes(1 lane in each direction) G281 NUMBER
2)4 lanes(2 lanes in each direction) G281 NUMBER
3)6 lanes(3 lanes in each direction) G281 NUMBER
4) 8 lanes(4 lanes in each direction) G281 NUMBER
45. Identify the terrain for each of these roads [Enter number selection 1-3 below]
Road A 1)Level C282 NUMBER
2)Rolling C282 NUMBER
3)Mountainous C282 NUMBER
Road B** 1)Level E282 NUMBER
2)Rolling E282 NUMBER
3)Mountainous E282 NUMBER
Road C*'* 1)Level G282 NUMBER
2)Romig G282 NUMBER
3)Mountainous G282 NUMBER
* A cell location(column and row identification)is provided for each response.
** Where applicable when a second road abuts the site.
*** Where applicable where three roads serve the site.
241
M
30
46. For each of these roads, what is the current Average Daily Traffic (ADT)? [Enter number of trips]
Road A (average daily traffic) ADT C284*
Road B** (average daily traffic) ADT E284
Road C`** (average daily traffic) ADT G284
47. What is the length of the site frontage on each road? [Enter feet of frontage]
Road A (site frontage) C285 feet
Road Br*(site frontage) E285 feet
Road C*** (site frontage) G285 feet
48. For each of the roads,what is the distance to the nearest intersection (in feet) as explained below?
Road A Road B* Road C**
Distance to the nearest
intersection from the
Right site boundary C286 feet E286 feet G286 feet
(Right-most point of the site)
Left site boundary C287 feet E287 feet G287 feet
(Left-most point of the site)
49. For each of the roads,what is the estimated percent of the site traffic that will turn right or left?
If this allocation is not known,the default allocation shown below should be entered.
Road A Alone
Default
Percent of site traffic turning Allocation
Right onto Road A %C289 50% MUST
Left onto Road A %C290 50% BE
Total 100% 100% ENTERED
* A cell location(column and row identification)is provided for each response.
** Where applicable when a second road abuts the site.
*** Where applicable where three roads serve the site.
**** For percents,enter 25%as 25.0.
242
31
Road A and Road B'
Default
Percent of site traffic turning ** Allocation
Right onto Road A %C289 25% MUST
Left onto Road A %C290 25%
Right onto Road B %E289 25% BE
Left onto Road B %E290 25 %
Total 100% 100% ENTERED
j Road A,Road B,* and Road C***
Default
Percent of site traffic turning *, Allocation
Right onto Road A %C289 16.6% MUST
Left onto Road A %C290 16.6%
Right onto Road B %E289 16.6%
Left onto Road B %E290 16.6% BE
Right onto Road C %G289 16.6%
Left onto Road C %G290 16.6%
• Total 100% 100% ENTERED
50. For the region,what is the projected annual percent increase in the volume of
traffic(average daily traffic [ADT])from the current year*—to the projection year'?
Estimated regional annual percent increase in ADT % E291**
If this information is not known,the regional percent increase in population will be used as a
default indicator of traffic growth.
51. What is the level of service(LOS)in the community where the proposed
development is located? (If this is unavailable,LOS D will be assumed.) [Enter either C,D,or E]
LOS C E292
LOS D ENTER
LOSE LETTER
* Where applicable when a second road abuts the site.
** For percents,enter 25%as 25.0.
*** Where applicable where three roads serve the site.
**** Current year=time as of the filling out of the user worksheet.
+ Projection year=point in time in which the user wishes to examine development impacts(e.g.,project buildout,end of
a stage of development,or any year over which development proceeds).
243
32
52. What is the cost per foot of lane for road improvements (excluding right-of-way) in the
community where the proposed development is located? (If this is unavailable,a national
"average"of$1,000,000 per mile or$189 per lane foot will be assigned.)
Cost per lane-foot of road improvement $ E293
VIII. Shared Infrastructure Costs
This section requests the local capital costs for the provision of various types of infrastructure. $Fail-
ure to complete this section will disallow the calculation of development-induced capital needs,costs,
and responsibility.
For the public jurisdiction,municipal utility authority,or private company serving the proposed de-
velopment,identify
[Enter value specified]
53. Local capital cost for water provision(per gallon) $ E300'
54. Local capital cost for sewage treatment(per gallon) $ E301
55. Local capital cost for solid waste disposal(per ton) $ E302
56. Local cost for parkland (per acre) $ E303
57. Local school capital cost per pupil(grades K-6) $ E304
(grades 7-9) $ E305
(grades 10-12) $ E306
58. Local cost for government office space(i.e.,town hall,police stations,and so on)
$ E309
(per square foot)
* A cell location(column and row identification)is provided for each response.
244
i
i 33
59. Identify, for the capital improvements indicated above (i.e., water,sewage treatment, and
solid waste disposal),how infrastructure is provided and paid for. Select from one of the
indicated codes" for each of the respective capital improvements.
Capital Improvement [Enter codes*0--41
Water supply C312"
Sewage treatment C313
Solid waste C314
Parks C315
Roads C316
Government office space C317
* Capital improvement provided/paid for from
1=Municipality—from general(i.e.,property)tax revenues
2=County—from general(i.e.,property)tax revenues
3=Other Service District 1—from general(i.e.,property)tax revenues
4=Other Service District 2—from general(i.e.,property)tax revenues
0=Infrastructure provided for
(a)privately(i.e.,from a private utility company)or
(b)publicly but paid for from separate and dedicated utility or similar charges as opposed to general tax revenues
** A cell location(column and row identification)is provided for each response.
245
34
60. In the indicated jurisdictions,what is the percent Of current expenditure allocated for
capital improvements and debt service?
Jurisdiction Percent of Expenditures for
Capital Improvements/
Debt Service
[Enter 6.5%as 6.51
Municipality C322*
County C323
School district 1 C324
School district 2 C325
School district 3 C326
Other service district 1 C327
Other service district 2 C328
61. What is the applicable capitalization rate for the indicated jurisdictions?
. (See Guide to the User Worksheet.)
jurisdiction Capitalization Rate
[Enter 10.0%as 10.01
Municipality E322
County -- E323
School district 1 E324
School district 2 E325
School district 3 E326
Other service district 1 E327
Other service district 2 E328
A cell location(column and row identification)is provided for each response.
246
35
36
Exhibit B
Model Factors
37
38
MODEL FACTORS FOR SOCIAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
PLANNING
STANDARD/
FACTOR UNIT SERVICE LEVEL TYPE SOURCE
SCHOOLS
1. Students per Classroom Per classroom
a. K-6 24 Planning standard L.W.Canter,S.F.Atkinson,
and F.Leistritz,
b. Junior high 25 Planning standard Impact of Growth.Chelsea,
WI:Lewis Publishers,1985.
c. High school 26 Planning standard
2. Student-Staff Ratio Students per staff
a. K-6 22 Planning standard L.W.Canter,S.F.Atkinson,
and F.Leistritz,
b. Junior high 20 Planning standard Impact of Growth.Chelsea,
WI:Impact Publishers,1985.
c. High school 19 Planning standard
3. Total Space Square feet per occupant
a. K-6 90 Planning standard L.W.Canter,S.F.Atkinson,
and F.Leistritz,
b. Junior high 120 Planning standard Impact of Growth.Chelsea,
WI-.Lewis Publishers,1985.
c. High school 150 Planning standard
LIBRARIES
4. Book Stock Volume per capita for
municipalities
a. under 10,000 3.5-5 Planning standard Joseph L Wheeler and
Herbert Goldhor,
b. 10,000-35,000 2.75-3 Planning standard Practical Administration of
Public Libraries.
C. 35,000-100,000 2.5-2.75 Planning standard New York:Harper,1962.
d. 100,000-200,000' 1.75-2 Planning standard
e. 200,000-500,000 115-15 Planning standard
f. 500,000 and over 1-1.25 Planning standard
5. Seats Per 1,000 population for
municipalities
a. under 10,000 10 Planning standard Joseph L.Wheeler and
Herbert Goldhor,
b. 10A00-35AW 5 Planning standard Practical Administration of
Public Libraries.
C. 35,000-100AW 3 Planning standard New York:Harper,1962.
d. 100,000-200A= 2 Planning standard
e. 200,000-500,000 1.25 Planning standard
f. 500,000 and over I PLvu-dng standard
6. Book Circulation Volume per capita for
municippalities
a. under IOA00 10 Planning standard Joseph L.Wheeler and
Herbert Goldhor,
b. 10,000-35,000 9.5 Planning standard Practical Administration of
Public Libraries.
C. 35,000-100,000 9 Planning standard New York:Harper,1962.
d. 100f000--200,000 8 Planning standard
e. 200,00-500,= 7 Planning standard
f. 500,000 and over 6.5 planning standard
7. Library Space Square feet per capita for
municipalities
a. under 10,000 0.7-0.8 Planning standard Joseph L Wheeler and
Herbert Goldhor,
b. 10,000-35,000 0.6-0.65 Planning standard Practical Administration of
Public Libraries.
C. 35,000-100,000 0.5-0.6 Planning standard New York:Harper,1962.
d. 100,000-200,000 0.4-0.5 Planning standard
e. 200,000-500,000 0.35-0.4 Planning standard
f. 500,000 and over 0.3 Planning standard
260
, 4
39
MODEL FACTORS FOR SOCIAL IMPACT ANALYSIS (continued)
PLANNING
STANDARD/
FACTOR UNIT SERVICE LEVEL TYPE SOURCE
8. Elderly Care
a. Fraction 65+in Population 0.126 Experience factor Bureau of the Census,
Current Population Report.
Series P-25,1990.
b. Nursing Home Beds per 1,000 Elderly 45 Experience factor National Center for Health
Statistics,National Nursing
Home Survey,1977.
9. Disabled
a. Fraction Developmentally Disabled 0.054 Experience factor Bureau of the Census,1980
Census of Population.
b. Fraction Mobility-Impaired 0.038 Experience factor Bureau of the Census,1980
Census of Population.
c. Fraction Chronically Mentally I11 0.010 Experience factor Bureau of the Census,1980
Census of Population.
10. Day Care
a. Fraction of Children under 3 0.156 Experience factor Bureau of the Census,Current
Requiring Daycare Population Reports,Series P-70,
No.9,Who's Minding The Kids:
Child Care Arrangements.
Winter,1984-85.Washington,
DC:USGPO,1987.
b. Fraction of Children between 3 and 5 0.320 Experience factor Bureau of the Census,Current
j Requiring Daycare Population Reports,Series P-70,
No.9,Who's Minding The Kids
�ber,1%4-85.Washington,
i DC:USGPO,1987
i c. Percent of Children between 5 and 13 0.250 Experience factor Irvine Child Care Project,
Requiring Daycare Irvine Child Care Study.
October 1987.
d. Percent of Nonresidential Employees 0.020 Experience factor Rutgers University survey.
Requiring Preschool Daycare
11.Health Services
a. Physicians Per 1,000 population 1.500 Planning standard L.W.Canter,S.F.Atkinson,
and F.Leistritz,
b. Dentists Per 1,000 population 0.530 Planning standard Impact of Growth.Chelsea,
WE Lewis Publishers,1985.
c. Nurses Per 1, nn
000 population 4.500 Planning standard
d. Mental Health Per 1,000 population .500 Planning standard
Personnel
e. Support Personnel Per 1,000 population 2.500 Planning standard
f. Hospital Beds Per 1,000 population 4.000 Planning standard
12. Emergency Medical Services(EMS)'
a. EMS Calls Per 1,000 population per 36.5 Planning standard International Association of
year Fire Chiefs"rule of thumb."
b. EMS Vehicles Per 30,000 population 1.000 Planning standard International Association
c. EMS Full-Time Per 30,000 population 4.100 Planning standard of Fire Chiefs
Personnel
13. Police'
a. Personnel Per 1,000 population 2 Planning standard L.W.Canter,S.F.Atkinson,
and F.Leistritz,
b. Vehicles Per 1,000 population 0.6 Planning standard Impact of Growth.Chelsea,
WI:Lewis Publishers,1985.
c. Facilities Square feet per 1,000 200 Planning standard
population
14. Fire`
a. Personnel Per 1,000 population 1.65 Planning standard L.W.Canter,S.F.Atkinson,
and F.Leistritz,
b. Vehicles Per 1,000 population .2 Planning standard Impact of Growth.Chelsea,
WI:Lewis Publishers,1985.
c. Facilities Square feet per 1,000 250 Planning standard
population
261
40
MODEL FACTORS FOR SOCIAL IMPACT ANALYSIS (continued)
PLANNING
STANDARD/
FACTOR UNIT SERVICE LEVEL TYPE SOURCE
15. Open Space
a. Minipark Acres per 1,000 population 0.25-0.5 Planning standard National Recreation and
Park Association,Recreation,
b, Neighborhood Park Acres per 1,000 population 1-2 Planning standard Park and Open Space Standards
and Guidelines,1983.
C. Community Park Acres per 1,000 population 5-8 Planning standard
FULL-TIME MUNICIPAL PERSONNEL
16. General Government Per 10,000 population for
municipalities
a. less than 50,000 10.9 Experience factor Bureau of the Census,
b. 50,000-99,999 10.3 Experience factor City Employment in 1986.
C. 1001000-499,999 11.2 Experience factor G9-86-N6.2,March 1988.
d. 200,000-299,999 11.6 Experience factor
e. 30000-499,999 14.1 Experience factor
f. 500,000-999,999 19.7 Experience factor
Z. 1,000,000 and over 15 Experience factor
17. Nblic Safety Per 10,000 population for
(Corrections,housing,and municipalities less than
community development, 50,000
excluding police and fire) 50,000-99,999 0.8 Experience factor Bureau of the Census,
2.2 Experience factor Cly EM loyment in 1986.
100,000-199,999 3.4 Experience factor G - o.2,March 1988.
200,000-299,999 5.5 Experience factor
300,000-499,999 5.1 Experience factor
500,000-999,999 11.9 Experience factor
1,000,000 and over 17.3 Experience factor
18. Public Works Per 10,000 population for
municipalities
a less than 50,000 14.2 Experience factor Bureau of the Census,
b. 50,000-99,999 12.4 Experience factor Ci Enll�t in 1986.
C. 100,000-199,999 13.7 Experience factor G�,_-� o.2,March 1988.
d. 200,000-299,999 14.9 Experience factor
e. 300,000-499,999 17.9 Experience factor
f. 500,000-999,999 17.7 Experience factor
1,000,000 and over 23.4 Experience factor
19. Lalth,Welfare, Per 10,000 population for
Recreation,Culture municipalities
a less than 50,000 11.9 Experience factor Bureau of the Census,
b. 50,000-99,999 15.2 Experience factor City Employment in 1986.
C. 100,000-199,999 19.7 Experience factor GE-86-No.2,March 1988.
d. 200,000-299,999 23.6 Experience factor
e. 300,000-499,999 21 Experience factor
f. 500A0-999,999 39 Experience factor
9. 1,000,000 and over 53.5 Experience factor
Planning standard=guideliries recommended by experts,professional organizations,and/or government agencies.
Service level or Experience factor--observed national or regional resource extensions.
*For police,fire,and EMS services,Model Factors 12-14 are expressed on a need per 1,000 residential population(but
including an inherent,nonresidential employment workforce)and are apportioned for the development impact assessment
between residential and nonresidential components as follows:
residential .75 of the nominal,residential population-based standard
nonresidential = .25 of the nominal,residential population-based standard
To illustrate,the model factor indicates a standard of 2 police per 1,000 population.This is apportioned as follows.
residential 1.5 police(2.0 police x.75)per 1,000 population(persons)
nonresidential .5 police(2.0 police x.25)per 1,000 workforce(employees)
This apportionment affects Model Factors 12-14.
262
41
MODEL FACTORS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
FACTOR STANDARD SOURCE
20. Water Consumption
a. Per Capita for Single-Family Units 100 gallons/day David Listokin and Carole Walker,The Subdivision and
Site Plan Handbook.New Brunswick,NJ:Rutgers
University Center for Urban Policy Research,1989.
b. Per Capita for Multifamily Units 75 gallons/day David Listokin and Carole Walker,The Subdivision and
Site Plan Handbook.New Brunswick,NJ:Rutgers
University Center for Urban Policy Research,1989.
c. Per 1,000 Square Feet of Office Space 93 gallons/day M.Greenberg,A Primer on Industrial Environmental
Impact.New Brunswick,NJ:Rutgers University Center
for Urban Policy Research,1979.
d. Per 1,000 Square Feet of Retail Space 106 gallons/day M.Greenberg,A Primer on Industrial Environmental
Impact.New Brunswick,NJ:Rutgers University Center
for Urban Policy Research,1979.
e. Per Industrial Employee 150 gallons/day David Listokin and Carole Walker,The Subdivision and
Site Plan Handbook.New Brunswick,NJ:Rutgers
University Center for Urban Policy Research,1989.
21. Solid Waste Production
a. Per Resident 0.00175 tons/day M.Greenberg,A Primer on Industrial Environmental
Impact.New Brunswick,NJ:Rutgers University Center
for Urban Policy Research,1979.
b. Per Office Employee 0.001 tons/day M.Greenberg,A Primer on Industrial Environmental
Impact.New Brunswick,NJ:Rutgers University Center
for Urban Policy Research,1979.
c. Per Retail Employee 0.001 tons/day M.Greenberg,A Primer on Industrial Environmental
Impact.New Brunswick,NJ:Rutgers University Center
for Urban Policy Research,1979.
d. Per Industrial Employee 0.00138 tons/day M.Greenberg,A Primer on Industrial Environmental
Impact.New Brunswick,NJ:Rutgers University Center
for Urban Policy Research,1979.
22. Sewage Production
a. Per Capita for Single-Family Units 65 gallons/day David Listokin and Carole Walker,The Subdivision and
Site Plan Handbook.New Brunswick,NJ:Rutgers
University Center for Urban Policy Research,1989.
b. Per Capita for Multifamily Units 65 gallons/day David Listokin and Carole Walker,The Subdivision and
Site Plan Handbook.New Brunswick,NJ:Rutgers
University Center for Urban Policy Research,1989.
c. Per 1,000 Square Feet of Office Space 79.98 gallons/day David Listokin and Carole Walker,The Subdivision and
Site Plan Handbook.New Brunswick,NJ:Rutgers
University Center for Urban Policy Research,1989.
d. Per 1,000 Square Feet of Retail Space 91.16 gallons/day David Listokin and Carole Walker,The Subdivision and
Site Plan Handbook.New Brunswick,NJ:Rutgers
University Center for Urban Policy Research,1989.
e. Per Industrial Employee 129 gallons/day David Listokin and Carole Walker,The Subdivision and
Site Plan Handbook.New Brunswick,NJ:Rutgers
University Center for Urban Policy Research,1989.
263
42
MODEL FACTORS FOR TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
FACTOR STANDARD SOURCE
23. LOS ADT Matrix Trip Level of Service
Generation Lanes/Terrain
C D E Transportation Research Board,Highway Capacity Manual.
Special Report 209.Washington,DC:TRB,1985.
a. Two-Lane
b. Level 7,901 13,500 35,500
c. Rolling 5,200 8,000 14,800
d. Mountainous 2,400 3,700 8,100
e. Four-Lane 25,200 30,900 35,500
f. Six-Lane 37,000 43,300 53,000
g. Eight-Lane 50,400 61,800 71,000
TYPICAL TRAFFIC GENERATION BASE UNITS
Type Of Land Use Daily Traffic Generation Unit Rate Institute of Transportation Engineers,Trip Generation,5th ed.
Washington,DC:ITE,1991.
24. Retail
a. Shopping For facilities under 570,000 square feet LnM=0.625 Ln(x)+5.985
For facilities over 570,000 square feet Ln(T)=0.756 Ln(x)+5.154
b. Convenience Average 740 trips per weekday
c. Restaurant 6.57 trips per seat
d. Supermarket(same as for shopping)
For shopping center uses,rates for the indicated trips are reduced
by 30 percent to factor pass-by trips to retail facilities.Convenience
centers have a pass-by rate of 40 percent.
25. Residential(Per Dwelling)
a. Single-Family Houses and Four-Bedroom Townhouses 9.6 per unit
b. All Others Except Retirement(elderly) 6.0 per unit
c. Retirement Community 3.3 per unit
26. Office
a. General LnM=0.75 Ln(x)+3.77
b. Medical 34.2 per 1,000 GFA
c. Office Park 11.4 per LOW GFA
27. Industrial
a. General Light 7.0 per 1,000 GFA
b. Industrial Park 7.0 per 1,000 GFA
c. Manufacturing 3.8 per 1,000 GFA
d. Warehousing 4.9 per 1,000 GFA
28. Hotel(per room) 8.7
29. Mixed-Use External Trip Reduction Factor -25%
30. Cost Per Foot of Road Improvement $189
GFA=Gross floor area
Ln=Natural log
T=Total trips"in"plus"out"
x=Size in 1,000 square feet of gross floor area
264
1
43
MODEL FACTORS FOR MARKET ANALYSIS
31. U.S.Headship Rates(1991)
Age Cohort Headship Rate
15-24 .1338
25-34 .4712
35114 .5413
45-54 .5748
55-64 .5951
65+ .6456
Source:Bureau of the Census,Current Population Reports,Series P-25,1992.
32. Average Retail Sales Per Square Foot
Shopping Goodsl $123
Convenience Goodsl $212
Notes
1.Junior department store=community shopping center
2 Drug store=community shopping center
Source:The Urban Land Institute,Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers 1993.Washington,DC:author,1993.
33. Space Allotment
Employment Sector Mean Number of Square Feet per Employee Employees per 1,000 Square Feet
Retail 400 2.50
Office 333 3.00
i Industrial 500 2.00
i Hotel 1,429 0.70
Public 250 4.00
Notes
Value for commercial employment is value for retail trade by Rutgers University Center for Urban Policy Research.
Value for office employment is GGA value for office.
Value for industrial employment is GGA value for light industrial.
Value for hotel is GGA value for commercial service.
Source:Gruen,Gruen and Associates(GGA),Employment and Parking in Suburban Business Parks:A Pilot Study.Washington,
DC:ULI-the Urban Land Institute,1986,p.10;Institute of Transportation Engineers,Trip Generation.Washington,DC:
author,January 1991.
265
44
MODEL FACTORS FOR ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
34.Components of Project Costs(Office)
Decimal
Building Shell and Interior 0.45
Environmental and Service Systems 0.25
Land and Site Improvements 0.18
Fees,Interest,and Contingencies 0.12
Total Construction Costs 0.70
Total 1,00
Source:The Urban Land Institute,Office Development Handbook.Washington,DC:author,1982,p.36.
35.Employee Hours per$1,000 of Contract Expenditures(1993)
Type of Labor Residential Office Retail Industrial Hotel
On-Site Construction 9.2 9.4 8.1 9.1 8.1
Off-Site Construction 1.5 1.5 1.0 0.8 1.0
Manufacturing 7.8 7.9 7.1 9.8 7.1
Trade/Transportation/Services 5.7 5.3 3.8 3.6 3.8
All Others 2.6 1.5 1.3 1.6 1.3
Notes
Values for residential development pertain to single-family development.
Values for office development are computed from data pertinent to office buildings.
Values for retail and hotel development are computed from data pertinent to commercial buildings.
Values for industrial development are computed from data pertinent to sewer plants.
1993 values are estimated from 1980 values and adjusted for changes in construction cost and productivity.
Construction cost increases are at an average annual rate of.03.This is an average annual rate of change for the 1980-1990 period of the U.S.
Department of Commerce Composite,FHA Composite,and the Turner Construction Co.Deflator.
Annual rates of productivity increase:
.007(residential construction)
.02(retail and hotel construction)
.016(office and industrial construction)
Source-.Robert Ball,"Employment Created by Contraction Expenditures,"Monthly Labor Review,December 1981;Bar-
bara Bingham,"Labor and Material Requirements for Commercial Office Building Projects,"Monthly Labor Review,May
1981;John G.Olsen,"Labor and Material Requirements for Federal Building Construction,"Monthly Labor Review,Decem-
ber 1981;and Dawn E.Dougherty,"Labor and Material Requirements for Hospital Construction,"Monthly Labor Review,
March 1982.
36.Material Purchases per$1,000 of Contract Construction
In-Region(agricultural,mining,lumber,stone/clay/glass) 105
Out of Region 315
Note
Material costs constitute 42 percent of value of contract construction.Local purchases make up 25 percent of all material purchases.
Source:Barbara Bingham,"Labor and Material Requirements for Commercial Office Building Projects'Monthly Labor Review,May 1981.
37.Average Hours per Job in the United States(1991)
On-Site Construction 1,981
Off-Site Construction 2,000
Manufacturing 2,116 Models use 2,00 hours in each case
Trade/Transportation/Services 1,719
All Others 2,085
Unweighted Average 1,895
Notes
Value for trade/transportation/services is the average of the values for trade,transportation,public utilities,and services.
Value for all others is the average of the values for mining and for finance,insurance,and real estate(FIRE).
Overall average is the average for goods-producing and service-producing.
Source:Bureau of Labor Statistics,Employment and Earnings,monthly.
266
45
MODEL FACTORS FOR ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS (continued)
38.U.S.Average Hourly Earnings in Current Dollars(1992)
Average Hourly Earning $10.77
Construction Phase
Construction(on-site and off-site) 14.16
Manufacturing 11.63
Trade/Transportation/Services 10.01
All Others 10.77
Operation Plume
Commercial 7.26
Office 10.06
Industrial 11.63
Hotel 7.67
Average for All Types 10.77
Notes
Values in table are Bureau of Labor Statistics(BLS)seasonally unadjusted values for January 1993.
Value for trade/transportation/services is the weighted average of transportation/public utilities,wholesale trade,retail trade,and services.
Value for all others is the average hourly earning.
Value for commercial employment pertains to retail.
Value for office employment is BLS value for business services.
Value for industrial employment is BLS value for manufacturing.
Value for hotel employment is BLS value for hotels and motels.
Source:U.S.Bureau of Labor Statistics,Employment and Earnings,monthly.
39.Disposition of Personal Income(1992)
Personal Income 1.00
Disposable Personal Income as a Fraction of Personal Income 0.88
Source-Bureau of Economic Analysis.Survey of Current Business,monthly.
40.Personal Consumption Expenditures as a Fraction of Disposable Personal Income(1992). 0.92
Source:U.S.Bureau of Economic Analysis.Survey of Current Business,monthly.
41.Disposition of Personal Consumption Expenditures(1992)
Shopping Goods as a Fraction of Total Personal Consumption Expenditures
Furniture and Household Equipment .044
Clothing and Shoes .054
Other .073
Total .171
Convenience Goods as a Fraction of Total Personal Consumption Expenditures
Food .154
Other Nondurable Goods .078
Total .232
All Other Consumption Expenditures as a Fraction of Total Personal Consumption Expenditures
Total All Others .597
Source:U.S.Bureau of Em-,orm Analysis,77w National Income and Product Accounts of the united States and Survey of Current Business,monthly issues.
42.Wages and Salaries as a Fraction of Output(1989)
Employment Sector
Industrial -56
Commercial .53
Office .42
Hotel .55
Notes
Value for industrial salaries is U.S.Bureau of Economic Analysis(BEA)value for manufacturing.
Value for commercial employment is BEA value for retail.
Value for office employment is BEA value for business services.
Value for hotel employment is BEA value for hotel services.
Output of households sector is the wages and salaries earned by the householders.
Sources:Computed from Gross National Product data in Table 6.1 in Survey of Current Business,April 1991,and from Wages and Salaries
data in Table 6.5C in Survey of Current Business,July 1992.
267
46
MODEL FACTORS FOR ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS (continued)
43.Input-Output Multipliers(1991)
Industrial Sector Incomel Employment
Commercial 0.85 42.2
Office 0.90 33.0
Industrial 0.56 20.3
Hotel 0.65 30.1
Notes
Multipliers for commercial sector are RIMSII values for retail trade.
Multipliers for office sector are RIMSII values for business services.
Multipliers for industrial sector are RIMSII values for fabricated metal products(mid-range values for manufacturing).
Multipliers for hotel sector are RIMSII values for hotels,lodging places,and amusements.
M Total change in earnings of households per additional dollar of output delivered to final demand from the sector(including households).
2 Total change in employment per additional million dollars of output delivered to final demand from the sector(including households).
Source:U.S.Bureau of Economic Analysis,Regional Multipliers:A Use Handbook for the Regional Input-Output Modeling System(RIMSII),May 1992.
44.Office Employment as a Fraction of Total 1mployment(1992)
Commercial .604
Office .925
Industrial .393
Hotel .350
Weighted Average .583
Notes
Office employment includes managerial and professional occupations and technical sales and administrative support.
Value for commercial employment is value for retail employment.
Value for office employment is value for FIRE employment.
Value for industrial employment is value for manufacturing employment.
Value for hotel employment is adjusted value for services employment.
Source:U.S.Department of Labor,U.S.Employment by Occupation and Industry.
45.Income•Housing Price Relationship
Estimated housing occupant income as percent of housing price. .33%
Source:Rutgers University Center for Urban Policy Research,1993.
46.Distribution of U.S.Population by Age(1991)
Percent of
Age Cohort Population
15-24 14.5
25-34 17.1
35-44 15.6
45-54 10.2
55-664 83
65+ 12.6
Source:Bureau of the Census,Current Population Reports,Series P-25.
i
r
j�
f
268
47
48
Exhibit C
Sample Development
Assessment
49
MARKET ANALYSIS 52
HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS
14. Population(pop.)in Development Market Area
Current and Projection Year Projected
Total pop.-if below age groups unavailable Current Pop. Future Pop.
By age group(if available)
15-24 177180 168000
25-34 209360 206100
35-44 192880 213000
45-54 134350 181900
55-64 117720 123600
65 and older 159750 184100
15. Estimated cumulative number of housing units that will be available
in market area from the current year to the projection year
(excluding this development) 42,575 Units
RETAIL MARKET ANALYSIS
16. Projected Total Population Change*in Project Retail Market Area
to the Projection Year 57,900 Persons
17. Per Capita Income(market area) $20,277 Current Year
18. Projected Change*in Supply of Retail Space in Market Area
(not including project)
Shopping 1,000,000 sq.ft.
Convenience 250,000 sq.ft.
*from current to projection year
OFFICE MARKET ANALYSIS
19. Total Employment Levels Office Market
National State Area
1980-Beginning Base Year 96,939,000 2,991,255 425,873
1991-Ending Base Year 116,258,143 3,756,693 547,360
End/Projection Year(nat.only) 125,137,325 - -
20. Projected Cumulative Supply of Office Space to Be
Available in the Office Market Area(not including this
development)[Current to Projection Year] 10,500,000 sq.ft.
21. Total Employment in Office Market Area in the
Current Year 569,360 employment
SOCIAL ANALYSIS
22. Development Composition:Population Profile Multipliers School-Age Children Multipliers
Preschool-Age Elementary JHS HS
Children Pupils Pupils Pupils
Unit Type and Size Persons/Unit Multipliers (K-6) (7-9) (10-12)
Single-Family 2 bedroom 2.398 0.214 0.134 0.034 0.035
3 bedroom 3.086 0.372 0.424 0.125 0.116
4 bedroom 3.771 0.379 0.686 0.252 0.200
5 bedroom 4.457 0.607 0.729 0.232 0.310
Garden Apartment 1 bedroom 1.349 0.022 0.015 0.013 0.000
2 bedroom 2.153 0.180 0.173 0.069 0.063
3 bedroom 2.909 0.174 0.483 0.086 0.266
Townhouse 2 bedroom 2.052 0.161 0.077 0.007 0.022
3 bedroom 2.813 0.357 0.257 0.059 0.127
4 bedroom 3.437 0.364 0.415 0.586 0.220
272
-- - '
^4�
y 53
f
"
High-Rise Studio 1.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0 0.000
lbed,00nn 1.327 0.000 0J00 0.000 0.000
26ed0000n 1761 0.I25 0208 0.000 0.000
Mobile Home 1 6edroom 1.677 0.150 0.000 0.000 0.000
2badr0000 2J76 0.188 0.173 0.029 0.061
i 3bedo,00` 3.I66 0.389 8.425 0.175 0.177
!
Other Type l
Type
Type 3
Elderly 1 bedroom 1.700
2 bedroom 1.800
23. Highest Grade of School District 1
(use 12 if School District 1 is the only district) 12
Highest Grade of School District 2
Highest Grade of School District 3
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
24. Unused Water Capacity(gals./day) 11000,000
25. Unused Solid Waste Capacity(tons/day) 17.50
26. Unused Sewer Capacity(gals./day) 750,000
27. Development Site Floodplain Area
Floodplain and Buffer Area(in acres) 4
28. Development Site Wetlands Area
Wetlands and Buffer Area(in acres) 3
29. Development Site Steep Slope Area
Steep Slope Area(in acres) 3
29a.Development Prime Agricultural and Forest Area
Prime Agricultural and Forest Area(in acres) 5
30. Significance of Historic Sites on Tract(one letter)
A.Significant B.Moderate C.Minor B
31. Significance of Endangered Species on Site(one letter)
A.Significant B.Moderate C.Minor C
32. Length of Development Boundary within 100 Ft.of
4-Lane Road(in feet) 100
33. Major Area(s)of Environmental Concern on the Site C
A.Flora/Fauna B.Water/Sewer/Solid Waste Capacity C.Sods/Drainage/Infrastructure
D.Wetlands/Floodplains/Streams E.Historical/Archeological F.Air Quality G.Water Quality
H.Visual and Scenic Qualities I.Energy Use and Conservation J.Other K.Multiple Areas (one letter)
34. a.Appropriate Tier(s)of Envirorunental Review C
b.Lead Agency for Filing Purposes
A.Federal B.State C.County D.Local E.Multiple tiers B (choose one letter each for 34.a and 34.b)
FISCAL ANALYSIS
35. Public Service jurisdiction—General Information
Service Population
Total Annual Population Employment Number of Public
jurisdiction Expenditures in Area in Area School-Age Children
A.Madison Twp. $17,000,000 25,000 10,000
B.Jefferson County $50,000,000 150,000 100,000
C.Madison School District $23,000,000 — — 3,5W
D.—School District 2 not used
E,—School District 3 not used
F.---Other Service District 1 not used
G.---Other Service District 2 not used
54
36. Public Service Jurisdiction—Service Information:Residential/Nonresidential(nonres.)
Property Tax Base($) Parcels(Number)
Non- Non-
Jurisdiction Residential residential Residential residential
A.Madison Twp. $600,000,000 $200,000,000 9,600 400
B.Jefferson County $5,000,000,000 $1,000,000,000 60,000 2,500
F.tether Service District 1 not used
G.—Other Service District 2 not used
37. Public Service Jurisdiction—Real Property Tax Information
Tax Base Assessment-
Assessed to-Sales Ratio
Jurisdiction Value($) Tax Levy($) Rate (as decimal)
A.Madison Twp. $800,000,000 $8500,000 0.0106 0.50
B.Jefferson County $6,000,000,000 $28,000,000 0.0047 0.50
C.Madison School District $600,000,000 $15,000,000 0.0250 0.50
D.—School District 2 not used
E.—School District 3 not used Notes
F.—Other Service District 1 not used Rate—decimal$1.25 per$100 is.0125(show 4 places)
G.—tether Service District 2 not used Ratio--decimal 3/4 of value=.75
38. Public Service Jurisdiction—Personal Property Tax Information
Tax Base
Assessed Assessment-to-Sales Ratio
Jurisdiction Value($) Tax Levy($) Rate (as decimal to 2 places)
A.Madison Twp.
B.Jefferson County
C.Madison School District
D.—School District 2 not used
E.—School District 3 not used
F.--0ther Service District 1 not used
G.---Other Service District 2 not used
For areas where personal property is taxed(see User Worksheet)
39. Residential Personal Property as Percent of Real Property Value %
40. Nonresidential Personal Property as Percent of Real Property Value
(enter zero if no personal property tax)[Note:enter 5.5 for 5.5%] %
41. Public Service Jurisdiction—Local Nonproperty Tax Revenue Information
Jurisdiction Associated with Property Value Associated with Population
A.Madison Twp. $6,000,000
B.Jefferson County $14,000,000
C.Madison School District $1,000,000
D.—School District 2 not used
E.—School District 3 not used
F.—Other Service District 1 not used
G.—Other Service District 2 not used
42. Public Service Jurisdiction—Intergovernmental Aid
Jurisdiction Associated with Property Value Associated with Population
A.Madison Twp. $2500,000
B.Jefferson County $5,000,000
C.Madison School District $7,000,000
D.School District 2 not used
E.—School District 3 not used
F.—Other Service District 1 not used
G.—Other Service District 2 not used
3
274
55
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
43. Number of Roads Accessing the Site(do not exceed 3) 2
Road A Road B Road C
44. Number of Lanes in Each of These Roads 2 2
45. Terrain of Each Road
(1=level,2=rolling,3=mountainous) 1 1
46. Existing Average Daily Traffic 13,500 15,000
47. Site Development Frontage(ft.) 1,000 2,000
48. Distance to Intersection—Right 1,000 2,000
(in feet) —Left 3,280 6,000
49. Site Trip Distribution Road A Road B Road C
(percent of total) %Right 25 25
(enter 50%as 50) %Left 25 25
50. Annual Percent Gain in ADT in Region(enter 2.0%as 2.0) 2.0
51. Community Standard Level of Service(C,D,E)[letter] D
i52. Cost per Foot of Road Improvement
SHARED INFRASTRUCTURE ANALYSIS
Local Capital Costs
53. Water Provision(per gal.) $6
54. Sewage Treatment(per gal.) $10
55. Solid Waste Disposal(per ton) $200
56. Parkland(per acre) $25,000
57. Schools per K-6 Pupil $6,000
Schools per JHS(7-9)Pupil $7,000
Schools per HS(10-12)Pupil $9,000
58. Government Office Space per Square Foot $120
59. Infrastructure Provided Publicly? Enter Appropriate Code O=No
Water Supply 1 1=Municipal
Sewage Treatment 1 2=County
Solid Waste 1 3=Oth.Serv.
Parks 1 District 1
Roads 1 4=Oth.Serv.
Government Office Space 1 District 2
60. Percent of Current Public Expenditures Allocated for Capital
Improvements and Debt Service 61. Applicable Local Capitalization Rate
(see User Worksheet discussion)(enter 5.3%as 5.3)
A.Madison Twp. 7.5% 10.0
B.Jefferson County %
C.Madison School District 7.5% 10.0
D.—School District 2 not used %
j E.—School District 3 not used %
F.---Other Service District 1 not used %
G.tether Service District 2 not used %
275
1
56
PREVIEW MODEL OUTPUTS
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT PREVIEW MODEL
OUTPUTS BY ANALYSIS COMPONENT
Current Year 1993
Start of Construction(Year) 1994
Projection Year 1998
ADMINISTRATIVE/LEGAL ANALYSIS
1. Name of Development Tree Pines
2. Name of Owner Tree Pines Associates
3. Land Parcel Involved(block/lot) Block 19 Lot 2.01
4. Nearest Intersecting Streets
5. GIS Location
GIS Location/U.S.Census Tract 218
6. Public Service Jurisdiction
Name of Municipality Madison Twp.
Name of County Jefferson County
Name of School District 1 Madison School District
Name of School District 2
Name of School District 3
Name of Other Service Dist.l
Name of Other Service Dist.2
7. Development Review Code Review for Compliance
8. Development Staging Code Preliminary Review(temporary vesting)
PHYSICAL LAND PLANNING ANALYSIS
1. Total Acres in Development 150.0
Initial Value
2. Ratio of Site Acres to Required Acres 1.1
(gross density) Enough Land
3. Site Gross Residential Density 2.7 Units per Acre
4. Site Gross Floor/Area Ratio(FAR) 0.09 FAR
5. Site Developability
Developable Acreage 140.0 acres
Percent Land Developable 93.3%
6. Site Acres in Open Space 20.0 acres
Percent of Site in Open Space 13.3%
7. Site Acreage Allocation of Land Area Other Than Open Space
Number of Developable Residential Acres 90.3
Number of Developable Nonresidential Acres 31.1
Nondevelopable,Nonopen Space Acres 8.7
8. Acres Required to Fulfill Pro forma-Current Zoning(net densities)
Residential 79.2 acres
Nonresidential 17.2 acres
Ratio of Available Developable Acres to Required Acres(net densities)
Residential 1.1 at Net
Nonresidential 1.8 Densities
Residential-Enough Land-No Change to Pro forma
9. Number of Residential Units 300 units
Residential Distribution(Type and Number of Units)
Number Percent
Single-Family 200.0 66.7%
2 bedroom 0.0
3 bedroom 100.0
4 bedroom 100.0
5 bedroom 0.0
276
57
Garden Apartment 0.0 0.0%
1 bedroom 0.0
2 bedroom 0.0
3 bedroom 0.0
Townhouse 100.0 33.3%
2 bedroom 100.0
3 bedroom 0.0
4 bedroom 0.0
High-Rise 0.0 0.0%
Studio 0.0
1 bedroom 0.0
2 bedroom 0.0
Mobile Home 0.0 0.0%
1 bedroom 0.0
2 bedroom 0.0
3 bedroom 0.0
Other 0.0 0.0%
Type 1 0.0
Type 2 0.0
Type 3 0.0
Elderly 0.0 0.0%
1 bedroom 0.0
2 bedroom 0.0
Percent of Units Detached 66.7
Attached 33.3
Nonresidential-Enough Land-No Change to Pro Forma
10. Total Nonresidential Square Feet 150,000
Nonresidential Distribution Square Feet Percent
Office 100,000 66.7%
General 100,000
Office Park 0
Medical 0
Retail 50,000 33.3%
Convenience 0
Supermarket 0
Shopping 50,000
Restaurant 0
Industrial 0 0.0%
General Light 0
Industrial Park 0
Manufacturing 0
Warehousing 0
Hotel 0 0.0%
Actual Development Land Use Intensity
11. Overall Net Residential Density 3.3 Units per Acre
12. Overall Nonresidential FAR 0.11
13. Architectural Compatibility Compatible
MARKET ANALYSIS
HOUSING
L&2. Increase in Population/Households by Age Cohort(from current to projection year)
Persons Households
15-24 (parentheses (9,180) (1,228)
25-34 indicate (3,260) (1536)
35-44 decrease) 20,120 10,891
45-54 47,550 27,332
55-64 5,880 3,499
65 and older 24,350 15,720
Total 85,460 54,678
277
Sg
3.a.Projected Increase in the Supply of Housing,
including Proposed Development 42,875 units
3. b.Ratio of Demand to Supply 1.28
4. Unmet Demand 12,103 units
5. Development's Share of Unmet Demand 2.5%
6. Development's Share of Market's Increase in Supply 0.7%
RETAIL
1. Increase in Total Income in Market Area
(from current to projection year) $1,174,038,300
2. Increase in Disposable Income $1,033,153,704
3. Increase in Personal Consumption Expenses $950,501,408
Increase in Demand Shopping Convenience
4. For Goods($) $162535,741 NA
5. For Space(sq.ft.) 1,321,429 NA
6. a.Projected Increase in Supply of Retail Space
(including project)(sq.ft.) 1,050,000 NA
6. b.Ratio of Demand to Supply 1.3 NA
7. Unmet Demand for Retail Space 321,429 NA
8. Development's Share of Unmet Demand 15.6% NA
9. Development's Share of Market's Increase
in Supply 4.8% NA
OFFICE
Constant-Share Method(employment=emp.) 1991 1980
1. State's Share of National Emp. 0.0 0.0
2. Market Area's Share of State Emp. 0.1 0.1
3. State's Employment in Projection Year 4,043,609
4. Market Area's Employment in Projection Year 589,164
Shift-Share Method-State Employment 4,408,082
5. Shift-Share Method-Market Area Employment Projection 671,626
6. Combined Constant-Share and Shift-Share Projection of
Market Area's Employment in Projection Year 630,395
7. Increase in Employment in Market Area 61,035
8. Increase in Office Employment 35,584
9. Increase in Demand for Office Space to Projection Year 11,861,208(sq.ft.)
10. a.Increase in Supply of Office Space to Projection Year 10,600,000(sq.ft.)
10. b.Ratio of Demand to Supply 1.1
11. Unmet Demand for Office Space 1,361,208(sq.ft.)
12. Development's Share of Unmet Demand 7.3%
13. Development's Share of Market's Increase in Supply 0.9%
SOCIAL ANALYSIS
Total
Annual (over 4 years)
1. Population in Development 223 891
2. Number Preschool-Age Children 23 91
School Children--Grades K-6 30 119
School Children-Grades 7-9 10 38
School Children--Grades 10-12 8 34
3. Number of Employees 106 4255
Staff/Space/Equipment Needs
4. Police Personnel(FTE) 0.4 1.5
5. Police Vehicles 0.1 0.5
6. Police Space(sq.ft.) 39 155
278
59
7. Fire Personnel(FTE) 0.3 1.3
8. Fire Vehicles 0.0 0.2
9. Fire Facility Space(sq.ft.) 48 194
10, EMS Service Calls 7.1 28.3
11. EMS Additional Vehicles 0.0 0.0
12. EMS Personnel 0.0 0.1
13, Library Space(sq.ft.) 139 557
14. Library Seats 1.1 4
13. Library Books 640 2561
16. Acres of Minipark 0.1 0.3
17. Acres of Neighborhood Park 0.3 1.3
18. Acres of Community Park 1.4 5.8
19. Elderly(65+)in Project 28 112
20. Nursing Home Beds Required 1.3 5.1
21. Preschool Daycare(slots) 7.6 30.2
22. School Children Daycare(slots) 9.8 39.3
23. Classrooms K-6 1.2 4.9
7-9 0.4 1.5
10-12 0.3 1.3
24. School Space(sq.ft.) K-6 2,671 10,686
7-9 1,151 4,604
10-12 1,267 5,067
25. School Staff K-6 1.3 5.4
7-9 0.5 1.9
10-12 0.4 1.8
26. Physicians 0.3 1.3
27. Dentists 0.1 0.5
28. Nurses 1.0 4.0
29. Mental Health Personnel 0.1 0.4
30. Support Personnel 0.6 2.2
31. Hospital Beds 0.9 3.6
32. Municipal Workers
General Government 0.2 1.0
Public Safety(all) 0.8 3.0
Public Works 0.3 1.3
Health,Welfare 0.3 1.1
Total 1.6 6-3
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1. Total Development-Generated Water Demand(gals./day) 98551
2. Water Demand/Available Capacity Ratio 0.099(9.9%used)
3. Total Development Solid Waste Production(lbs./day) 3,968
4. Solid Waste Demand/Available Capacity Ratio 0.113(11.3%used)
5. Total Development Sewer/Septic Demand(gals./day) 70,459
6. Sewer/Septic Demand/Available Capacity Ratio 0.094(9.4%used)
7. Flo6clplain Area(acres) 4.0
Percent of Total Site in Floodplain 2.7%
Floodplain avoidance objectives complied with?
8. Wetlands Area(acres) 3.0
Percent of Total Site in Wetlands 2.0%
Wetlands mitigation measures initiated?
9. Steep Slope Acres(acres) 3.0
279
60 '
Percent of Total Site in Steep Slopes 2.0
Steep slope management objectives complied with?
9. a.Prime Agricultural and Forest Areas(acres) 5.0
Percent of Total Site in Prime Agricultural Lands and Forest Areas 3.3%
Prime agricultural lands/forest area preservation goals met?
10. Historic Mitigation Requirements Moderate
11. Endangered Species Mitigation Requirements Minor
12. Roadway Noise Barrier Requirements
Running Feet of 20-Ft.-High Noise Barrier 100
13. Substance(Scope)of EIS Soils,Drainage,Infrastructure
14. a.Government Review Level(tier)of EIS County
14. b.Lead Agency for Filing Purposes State
ECONOMIC ANALYS*S
CONSTRUCTION PHASE(annual and total)
1. Value of Contract Construction $54,250,000
1. a.Construction Period(years) 4
Total
Jobs(annual) Jobs(total) Labor Hours
2. On-Site 62 248 497,000
3. Off-Site 10 40 79,625
4. Manufacturing 53 211 421,575
5. TTS(Trade/Trans./Service) 37 150 299,075
6. Others 16 63 126,875
7. Jobs Created 178 712
8. Wages and Salaries $4,357,028 $17,428,112
9. Disposable Income $3,834,185 $15,336,738
10. Consumption Expenditures $3,527,450 $14,109,799
11.a.Annual Total
11. Shopping Goods $603,194 $2,412,776
Convenience Goods $818,368 $3,273,473
Other Consumption $2,105,888 $8,423,550
(housing,health,etc.)
12. Material Purchases 12.a.Annual Total
Regionally Purchased $1,424,063 $5,696,250
Out-of-Region Purchases $4,272,188 $17,088,750
Total $5,696,250 $22,785,000
OPERATION PHASE(annual)
Direct Impacts(annual)
13.&14.Employment and Income Impacts Workers Wages
Commercial 125 $1,815,000
Office 300 $6,036,000
Industrial 0 $0
Hotel 0 $0
15. Total Workers 425
16. Total Annual Wages $7,851,000
17. Gross Output of Project $17,795,957
18. Disposable Income $6,908,880
19. Direct Consumption Expenditures $6,356,170
20. Shopping Goods $1,086,905
Convenience Goods $1,474,631
Other Consumption $3,794,633
(housing,health,etc.)
280
Total Impacts(direct and indirect)(annual)
21.&22.Employment and Income Impacts Workers Wages
Commercial 145 $2,910,849
Office 474 $12,934,286
Industrial 0 $0
Hotel 0 $0
Residential 245 $3,551,724
Total Workers 863
Total Annual Wages $19,396,858
FISCAL ANALYSIS
1. 'Expected Development Population by Housing Type
Single-Family 686
Garden Apartment 0
Townhouse 205
High-Rise 0
Mobile Home 0
Other 0
Elderly 0
Total 891
2. Expected School Children by Housing Type
K-6;7-9;10-12;Preschool (K-6) (7-9) (10-12) Preschool
Single-Family ill 38 32 75
Garden Apartment 0 0 0 0
Townhouse 8 1 2 16
High-Rise 0 0 0 0
Mobile Home 0 0 0 0
Other 0 0 0 0
Total School Children 119 38 34 91
3. Expected Employees by Nonresidential Component
Office 300
Retail 125
Industrial 0
Hotel 0
Total Employees 425
DEVELOPMENT-GENERATED EXPENDITURES
Total Residential Nonresidential
4. Total Costs--Madison Twp. $622,679 $517,917 $104,762
Total Costs—Jefferson County $288,212 $266,253 $21,958
5. Total School Costs—Madison School District $1,254,354
Total School Costs—School District 2 not used $0
Total School Costs—School District 3 not used $0
Total Costs---Other Service District 1 not used $0 $0 $0
Total Costs,--Other Service District 2 not used $0 $0 $0
7. Total Development-Generated Costs $2,165,245
DEVELOPMENT-GENERATED REVENUES
Madison Twp.Revenues
8. Assessed Value $38,750,000
9. Real Property Tax Revenue $410,750
Personal Property Tax Revenue $0
10. Nonproperty Tax Revenue $290,625
11. Intergovernmental Revenue $121,094
12. Total Development-Generated Municipal Revenue $822,469
281
6—
62 ,
Jefferson County Revenues
8. Assessed Value $38,750,000
9. Real Property Tax Revenue $180,833
Personal Property Tax Revenue $0
10. Nonproperty Tax Revenue $90,417
1L. Intergovernmental Revenue $32,292
12. Total Development-Generated County Revenue $303,542
Madison School District Revenues
8. Assessed Value $38,750,000
9. Real Property Tax Revenue $968,750
Personal Property Tax Revenue $0
10. Nonproperty Tax Revenue $64,583
11. Intergovernmental Revenue $381,760
12. Total Development-Generated School District(Dist.1)$1,415,093
-School District 2 Revenues not used
8. Assessed Value $0
9. Real Property Tax Revenue $0
Personal Property Tax Revenue $0
10. Nonproperty Tax Revenue $0
11. Intergovernmental Revenue $0
12. Total Development-Generated School District(Dist.2) $0
-School District 3 Revenues not used
8. Assessed Value $0
9. Real Property Tax Revenue $0
Personal Property Tax Revenue $0
10. Nonproperty Tax Revenue $0
11. Intergovernmental Revenue $0
12. Total Development-Generated School District(Dist.3) $0_
-Other Service District 1 Revenues not used
8. Assessed Value $0
9. Real Property Tax Revenue $0
Personal Property Tax Revenue $0
10. Nonproperty Tax Revenue $0
11. Intergovernmental Revenue $0
12. Total Development-Generated Other Service District 1 $0
-Other Service District 2 Revenues not used
8. Assessed Value $0
9. Real Property Tax Revenue $0
Personal Property Tax Revenue $0
10. Nonproperty Tax Revenue $0
11. Intergovernmental Revenue $0
12. Total Development-Generated Other Service District 2 $0
13. DEVELOPMENT-GENERATED NET FISCAL IMPACT
Madison Twp. $199,789
Jefferson County $15,330
Madison School District $160,739
-School District 2 not used $0
-School District 3 not used $0
--Other Service District 1 not used $0
-Other Service District 2 not used $0
14. Total Net Fiscal Impact $375,858
282
63
15. Fiscal Impact as Percent of Annual Budget Revenues
Madison Twp. 1.2
Jefferson County 0.0
Madison School District 0.7
-School District 2 not used 0.0
-School District 3 not used 0.0
-----Other Service District 1 not used 0.0
---Other Service District 2 not used 0.0
Total for All jurisdictions 0.4
16. Fiscal Impact as Percent of Annual Real Property Tax Levy
Madison Twp. 2.4
Jefferson County 0.1
Madison School District 1.1
-School District 2 not used 0.0
-School District 3 not used 0.0
---Other Service District 1 not used 0.0
-Other Service District 2 not used 0.0
Total for All Jurisdictions 0.7
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
Existing without Development Road A Road B Road C
1. Existing Traffic(ADT) 13,500 15,000 0
2. Existing Service(LOS) Now D Now E NA
3. Existing LOS Evaluation Satisfies std. Violates std. NA
Future without Development
4. Future Traffic(ADT) 14,850 16,500 0
5. Future Service(LOS) E E NA
6. Future LOS Evaluation Violates std. Violates std. NA
Development-Generated Traffic
7. External Trip Generation 5,325
8. Assignment of Traffic Road A Road B Road C
Traffic Turning Right 1,331 1,331 0
Traffic Turning Left 1,331 1,331 0
Future with Development(without improvements)
9. Future•Traffic(ADT) -Total 36,675
Future ADT -Right 16,181 17,831 0
-Left 16,181 17,831 0
10. Future Service(LOS) -Right E E NA
-Left E E NA
11. Future Highway Rating-Right Violates std. Violates std. NA
Left Violates std. Violates std. NA
Future with Development(with improvements)
12. Suggested
Improvements to -Right Add 2 Lanes Add 2 Lanes NA
Meet LOS Standard -Left Add 2 Lanes Add 2 Lanes NA
13. Length of Road Added(ft.)
to Main Intersection -Right 1,500 3,000 0
-Left 3,780 7,000 0
14. Total Cost of Road -Right $567,000 $1,134,000 $0
Added -Left $1,428,840 $2,646,000 $0
-Total $5,775,840
15. Total(ADT)Capacity -Right 17,400 17,400 0
Added -Left 17,400 17,400 0
-Total 69,600
16. Development Share -Right $43,378 $86,756 $0
of Roadway Cost -Left $109,312 $202,430 $0
-Total $441,876
283
64
SHARED INFRASTRUCTURE ANALYSIS
DEVELOPMENT-GENERATED CAPITAL NEEDS(COSTS)
1. Water $591,305
2. Sewage $704,587
3. Solid Waste $144,826
4. Parkland $186,513
5. Road Improvement $441,876
6. School $1,284,990
7. Government Office Space(sq.ft.) 997
8. Government Office Space Costs $119,602
9. Development-Generated Capital Costs $3,473,699
10. Total Development-Generated Capital Costs from Taxes $3,473,699
11. Fiscal Impact Credit $270,396
12. Equity Credit (See Handbook $1,678,172
13. Net Shared Infrastructure Costs for Application) $1,525,131
284