repository.asu.edu...final draft-infrastructure improvements plan city of casa grande, arizona 2...

FINAL DRAFT-Infrastructure Improvements Plan City of Casa Grande, Arizona

1

FINAL DRAFT - INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS PLAN

Prepared for:

City of Casa Grande, Arizona

July 27, 2012

4701 Sangamore Road, Suite S240 Bethesda, Maryland

301.320.6900 www.tischlerbise.com

http://www.tischlerbise.com/


2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 7 ARIZONA DEVELOPMENT FEE ENABLING LEGISLATION .......................................................................................... 7 NECESSARY PUBLIC SERVICES ........................................................................................................................... 8 INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS PLAN ........................................................................................................... 9 QUALIFIED PROFESSIONALS ............................................................................................................................. 9 CALCULATION METHODOLOGIES .................................................................................................................... 10

Figure 1: Recommended Calculation Methodologies ..................................................................... 11 NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES ......................................................... 12

OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................................................. 12 SERVICE AREA ............................................................................................................................................. 12 PROPORTIONATE SHARE ................................................................................................................................ 12 IIP FOR NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES .......................................................................... 13

IIP Element #1 ...................................................................................................................................... 13 Figure 2: IIP Element #1 .................................................................................................................. 13

IIP Element #2 ...................................................................................................................................... 14 Figure 3: IIP Element #2 – Eligible Community Parks ...................................................................... 14 Figure 4: IIP Element #2 – Eligible Regional Parks........................................................................... 15 Figure 5: IIP Element #2 – Eligible Recreation Facilities .................................................................. 16 Figure 6: IIP Element #2 – Eligible Trails ......................................................................................... 17

IIP Element #3 ...................................................................................................................................... 17 Figure 7: IIP Element #3 –Community Parks ................................................................................... 18 Figure 8: IIP Element #3 –Regional Parks ........................................................................................ 19 Figure 9: IIP Element #3 –Recreation Facilities ............................................................................... 20 Figure 10: IIP Element #3 –Trails ..................................................................................................... 21 Figure 11: IIP Element #3 –Maintenance Facility ............................................................................ 22 Figure 12: IIP Element #3 – IIP and Development Fee Report ........................................................ 22

IIP Element #4 ...................................................................................................................................... 23 Figure 13: IIP Element #4 ................................................................................................................ 23

IIP Elements #5 and #6 ......................................................................................................................... 24 Figure 14: IIP Elements #5 and #6 ................................................................................................... 25

IIP Element #7 ...................................................................................................................................... 25 Figure 15: Revenue Assumptions, Rates, Calculation Methodologies ............................................ 26 Figure 16: Revenue Characteristics of New Development .............................................................. 27 Figure 17: IIP Element #7 ................................................................................................................ 27 Figure 18: Future Revenue Credit for Neighborhood Parks and Recreation Facilities ................... 28 Figure 19: Capital Projects to be funded with Construction Sales Tax Revenues ........................... 29

LIBRARY FACILITIES ............................................................................................................... 30 OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................................................. 30 SERVICE AREA ............................................................................................................................................. 30 PROPORTIONATE SHARE ................................................................................................................................ 30 IIP FOR LIBRARY FACILITIES ............................................................................................................................ 30


IIP Element #2 ...................................................................................................................................... 31 Figure 21: IIP Element #2 - Facilities ............................................................................................... 32

IIP Element #3 ...................................................................................................................................... 32


3

Figure 22: IIP Element #3 –Facilities................................................................................................ 33 Figure 23: IIP Element #3 – IIP and Development Fee Report ........................................................ 33



IIP Element #7 ...................................................................................................................................... 35 Figure 26: Revenue Assumptions, Rates, Calculation Methodologies ............................................ 36 Figure 27: Revenue Characteristics of New Development .............................................................. 37 Figure 28: IIP Element #7 ................................................................................................................ 38 Figure 29: Future Revenue Credit for Library Facilities ................................................................... 39 Figure 30: Capital Projects to be funded with Construction Sales Tax Revenues ........................... 40

POLICE FACILITIES ................................................................................................................. 41 OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................................................. 41 SERVICE AREA ............................................................................................................................................. 41 PROPORTIONATE SHARE ................................................................................................................................ 41

Figure 31: Calls for Service by Land Use .......................................................................................... 42 IIP FOR POLICE FACILITIES ............................................................................................................................. 42


IIP Element #2 ...................................................................................................................................... 43 Figure 33: IIP Element #2 – Police Share of Public Safety Building ................................................. 44 Figure 34: IIP Element #2 – Police Vehicles ..................................................................................... 45 Figure 35: IIP Element #2 – Police Communications Equipment .................................................... 46 Figure 36: IIP Element #2 – Animal Control Facilities ..................................................................... 47 Figure 37: IIP Element #2 – Animal Control Vehicles ...................................................................... 48

IIP Element #3 ...................................................................................................................................... 48 Figure 38: IIP Element #3 – Police Share of Public Safety Building ................................................. 49 Figure 39: IIP Element #3 – Vehicles ............................................................................................... 50 Figure 40: IIP Element #3 – Communications Equipment ............................................................... 51 Figure 41: IIP Element #3 – Animal Control Facilities ..................................................................... 52 Figure 42: IIP Element #3 – Animal Control Vehicles ...................................................................... 53 Figure 43: IIP Element #3 – IIP and Development Fee Report ........................................................ 53



IIP Element #7 ...................................................................................................................................... 57 Figure 46: Revenue Assumptions, Rates, Calculation Methodologies ............................................ 58 Figure 47: Revenue Characteristics of New Development .............................................................. 59 Figure 48: IIP Element #7 ................................................................................................................ 59 Figure 49: Future Revenue Credit for Public Safety Building .......................................................... 60 Figure 50: Capital Projects to be funded with Construction Sales Tax Revenues ........................... 61

FIRE FACILITIES ..................................................................................................................... 62 OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................................................. 62 SERVICE AREA ............................................................................................................................................. 62 PROPORTIONATE SHARE ................................................................................................................................ 62

Figure 51: Calls for Service by Land Use .......................................................................................... 63


4

IIP FOR FIRE FACILITIES ................................................................................................................................. 63 IIP Element #1 ...................................................................................................................................... 63

Figure 52: IIP Element #1 ................................................................................................................ 64 IIP Element #2 ...................................................................................................................................... 64

Figure 53: IIP Element #2 – Fire Share of Public Safety Building .................................................... 65 Figure 54: IIP Element #2 – Fire Stations ........................................................................................ 66 Figure 55: IIP Element #2 – Fire Apparatus and Vehicles ................................................................ 68 Figure 56: IIP Element #2 – Fire Communications Equipment ........................................................ 69

IIP Element #3 ...................................................................................................................................... 69 Figure 57: IIP Element #3 – Fire Share of Public Safety Building .................................................... 70 Figure 58: IIP Element #3 – Fire Stations ........................................................................................ 70 Figure 59: IIP Element #3 – Fire Apparatus and Vehicles ................................................................ 72 Figure 60: IIP Element #3 – Communications Equipment ............................................................... 73 Figure 61: IIP Element #3 – IIP and Development Fee Report ........................................................ 74



IIP Element #7 ...................................................................................................................................... 77 Figure 64: Revenue Assumptions, Rates, Calculation Methodologies ............................................ 78 Figure 65: Revenue Characteristics of New Development .............................................................. 79 Figure 66: IIP Element #7 ................................................................................................................ 79 Figure 67: Future Revenue Credit for Fire Facilities ........................................................................ 80 Figure 68: Capital Projects to be funded with Construction Sales Tax Revenues ........................... 81

GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITIES ....................................................................................... 82 OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................................................. 82 SERVICE AREA ............................................................................................................................................. 82 PROPORTIONATE SHARE ................................................................................................................................ 82

Figure 69: Functional Population .................................................................................................... 83 IIP FOR GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITIES...................................................................................................... 83


IIP Element #2 ...................................................................................................................................... 84 Figure 71: IIP Element #2 – City Hall ............................................................................................... 85 Figure 72: IIP Element #2 – Northern Operations Center ............................................................... 86 Figure 73: IIP Element #2 – Courthouse .......................................................................................... 88

IIP Element #3 ...................................................................................................................................... 89 Figure 74: IIP Element #3 – City Hall ............................................................................................... 89 Figure 75: IIP Element #3 – North Operations Center .................................................................... 90 Figure 76: IIP Element #3 – Courthouse .......................................................................................... 90 Figure 77: IIP Element #3 – IIP and Development Fee Report ........................................................ 91



IIP Element #7 ...................................................................................................................................... 94 Figure 80: Revenue Assumptions, Rates, Calculation Methodologies ............................................ 95 Figure 81: Revenue Characteristics of New Development .............................................................. 96


5

Figure 82: IIP Element #7 ................................................................................................................ 96 Figure 83: Revenue Credit for General Government Facilities ....................................................... 97 Figure 84: Capital Projects to be funded with Construction Sales Tax Revenues ........................... 98

STREET FACILITIES................................................................................................................. 99 OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................................................. 99 SERVICE AREA ............................................................................................................................................. 99 PROPORTIONATE SHARE ................................................................................................................................ 99 IIP FOR STREET FACILITIES ............................................................................................................................. 99

IIP Element #1 .................................................................................................................................... 100 Figure 85: IIP Element #1 .............................................................................................................. 100

IIP Element #2 .................................................................................................................................... 100 Figure 86: IIP Element #2 – Planned Arterial Street Improvements ............................................. 101 Figure 87: IIP Element #2 – Planned Interchange Improvements ................................................ 101 Figure 88: IIP Element #2 – VMT’s on Planned Street Improvements .......................................... 102

IIP Element #3 .................................................................................................................................... 102 Figure 89: IIP Element #3 – Planned Arterial Street Improvement Costs ..................................... 103 Figure 90: IIP Element #3 – Planned Interchange Improvement Costs ........................................ 104 Figure 91: IIP Element #3 – IIP and Development Fee Report ...................................................... 104


IIP Elements #5 and #6 ....................................................................................................................... 106 Figure 93: IIP Elements #5 and #6 ................................................................................................. 106

IIP Element #7 .................................................................................................................................... 106 Figure 94: Revenue Assumptions, Rates, Calculation Methodologies .......................................... 107 Figure 95: Revenue Characteristics of New Development ............................................................ 108 Figure 96: IIP Element #7 .............................................................................................................. 108 Figure 97: Capital Projects to be funded with Construction Sales Tax Revenues ......................... 109

WASTEWATER FACILITIES ..................................................................................................... 110 OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................................ 110 SERVICE AREA ........................................................................................................................................... 110

Figure 98: Wastewater Facilities Service Areas ............................................................................ 111 PROPORTIONATE SHARE .............................................................................................................................. 111 IIP FOR WASTEWATER FACILITIES ................................................................................................................. 111


IIP Element #2 .................................................................................................................................... 112 Figure 100: IIP Element #2 – Wastewater Demand Factors ......................................................... 113 Figure 101: IIP Element #2 – Projected Wastewater Demand ...................................................... 113

IIP Element #3 .................................................................................................................................... 114 Figure 102: IIP Element #3 – Wastewater Treatment Buy-in Costs - Citywide ............................. 114 Figure 103: IIP Element #3 – Planned Rodeo Road Sewer Interceptor Costs – Zone B Service Area ........................................................................................................................................................ 114 Figure 104: IIP Element #3 – Planned Kortsen Road and Eastside Sewer Line Costs – Zone B Service Area ................................................................................................................................... 115 Figure 105: IIP Element #3 – Burris Road Sewer Line Buy-in Costs – Zone A Service Area ........... 115 Figure 106: IIP Element #3 – Planned Highway 84 Interceptor – Zone A Service Area ................ 115 Figure 107: IIP Element #3 – Collection Lines per 1 Square Mile Planned Costs – Citywide ........ 116 Figure 108: IIP Element #3 – Managed Recharge System Planned Costs – Citywide ................... 116


6

Figure 109: IIP Element #3 – IIP and Development Fee Report .................................................... 117 IIP Element #4 .................................................................................................................................... 117

Figure 110: IIP Element #4 ............................................................................................................ 118 IIP Elements #5 and #6 ....................................................................................................................... 118

Figure 111: IIP Elements #5 and #6 ............................................................................................... 119 IIP Element #7 .................................................................................................................................... 119

Figure 112: Revenue Assumptions, Rates, Calculation Methodologies ........................................ 120 Figure 113: Revenue Characteristics of New Development.......................................................... 121 Figure 114: IIP Element #7 ............................................................................................................ 121 Figure 115: Future Revenue Credit for Wastewater Facilities ...................................................... 122 Figure 116: Capital Projects to be funded with Construction Sales Tax Revenues ....................... 123

APPENDIX A – ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES 9-463.05 ............................................................ 124 APPENDIX B – TISCHLERBISE EXPERIENCE, PROJECT MANAGER RESUME .................................. 136


7

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The City of Casa Grande has engaged TischlerBise to update its Infrastructure Improvements Plans and development fees for several categories of necessary public services pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS) 9-463.05. TischlerBise previously calculated development fees for the City in 1999, 2003, 2006, and 2008.

Municipalities in Arizona may assess development fees to offset infrastructure costs to a municipality associated with providing necessary public services to a development. The development fees must be based on an Infrastructure Improvements Plan (also referred to as an “IIP”). Development fees cannot be used for, among other things: projects not included in the Infrastructure Improvements Plan, projects related to existing development, or costs related to operations and maintenance.

This update of the City’s Infrastructure Improvements Plan and associated update to its development fees includes the following necessary public services:

• Neighborhood Parks and Recreational Facilities • Library Facilities • Police Facilities • Fire Facilities • General Government Facilities • Streets Facilities • Wastewater Facilities

This update also includes all necessary elements required to be in full compliance with SB 1525.

ARIZONA DEVELOPMENT FEE ENABLING LEGISLATION

Arizona Revised Statutes 9-463.05 (hereafter referred to as “development fee enabling legislation”) governs how development fees are calculated for municipalities in Arizona. During the state legislative session of 2011, Senate Bill 1525 (SB 1525) was introduced which significantly amended the development fee enabling legislation. The changes included:

• Amending existing development fee programs by January 1, 2012. • Abandoning existing development fee programs by August 1, 2014. • New development fee program structure revolving around a unified Land Use Assumptions

document and Infrastructure Improvements Plan. • New adoption procedures for the Land Use Assumptions, Infrastructure Improvements Plan, and

development fees. • New definitions, including “necessary public services” which defines what categories and types

of infrastructure may be funded with development fees. • Time limitations in development fee collections and expenditures. • New requirements for credits, “grandfathering” rules, and refunds.


8

Governor Brewer signed SB 1525 into law on April 26, 2011. This update of the City’s development fees will be in compliance with all of the new requirements of SB 1525.

Note: A full version of the Arizona development fee enabling legislation can be found in Appendix A of this report.

NECESSARY PUBLIC SERVICES

The City of Casa Grande currently collects development fees for the following infrastructure categories:

• Parks and Recreational Facilities • Library Facilities • Police Facilities • Fire Facilities • General Government Facilities • Streets Facilities • Wastewater Facilities

Under the new requirements of the development fee enabling legislation, development fees may be used only for construction, acquisition, or expansion of public facilities that are necessary public services. "Necessary public service" means any of the following categories of facilities that have a life expectancy of three or more years and that are owned and operated by or on behalf of the municipality:

• Water Facilities • Wastewater Facilities • Storm Water, Drainage, and Flood Control Facilities • Library Facilities • Streets Facilities • Fire and Police Facilities • Neighborhood Parks and Recreational Facilities • Any facility that was financed before June 1, 2011 and that meets the following requirements:

1. Development fees were pledged to repay debt service obligations related to the construction of the facility.

2. After August 1, 2014, any development fees collected are used solely for the payment of principal and interest on the portion of the bonds, notes, or other debt service obligations issued before June 1, 2011 to finance construction of the facility.

The City can continue to assess all of its current categories of development fees, but these fees will have to be amended to some degree to comply with the new definition of necessary public services.


9

INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS PLAN

Development fees must be calculated pursuant to an Infrastructure Improvements Plan. For each necessary public service that is the subject of a development fee the infrastructure improvements plan shall include, by law, the following seven elements:

Element #1: A description of the existing necessary public services in the service area and the costs to upgrade, update, improve, expand, correct or replace those necessary public services to meet existing needs and usage and stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards, which shall be prepared by qualified professionals licensed in this state, as applicable.

Element #2: An analysis of the total capacity, the level of current usage and commitments for usage of capacity of the existing necessary public services, which shall be prepared by qualified professionals licensed in this state, as applicable.

Element #3: A description of all or the parts of the necessary public services or facility expansions and their costs necessitated by and attributable to development in the service area based on the approved land use assumptions, including a forecast of the costs of infrastructure, improvements, real property, financing, engineering and architectural services, which shall be prepared by qualified professionals licensed in this state, as applicable.

Element #4: A table establishing the specific level or quantity of use, consumption, generation or discharge of a service unit for each category of necessary public services or facility expansions and an equivalency or conversion table establishing the ratio of a service unit to various types of land uses, including residential, commercial and industrial.

Element #5: The total number of projected service units necessitated by and attributable to new development in the service area based on the approved land use assumptions and calculated pursuant to generally accepted engineering and planning criteria.

Element #6: The projected demand for necessary public services or facility expansions required by new service units for a period not to exceed ten years.

Element #7: A forecast of revenues generated by new service units other than development fees, which shall include estimated state-shared revenue, highway users revenue, federal revenue, ad valorem property taxes, construction contracting or similar excise taxes and the capital recovery portion of utility fees attributable to development based on the approved land use assumptions, and a plan to include these contributions in determining the extent of the burden imposed by the development.

QUALIFIED PROFESSIONALS

The IIP must be developed by qualified professionals using generally accepted engineering and planning practices. A qualified professional is defined as “a professional engineer, surveyor, financial analyst or planner providing services within the scope of the person's license, education or experience”.


10

TischlerBise is a fiscal, economic, and planning consulting firm specializing in cost of growth services. Our services include development fees, fiscal impact analyses, infrastructure financing analyses, user fee/cost of service studies, capital improvement plans, and fiscal software. TischlerBise has prepared over 800 impact fee studies over the past 30 years for local governments across the United States, including 35 in Arizona. Mr. Christopher Cullinan, a Principal in the firm, is the author of this IIP.

Please see Appendix B for a complete description of the qualifications of TischlerBise and Mr. Cullinan.

CALCULATION METHODOLOGIES

Development fees for the necessary public services made necessary by new development must be based on the same level of service provided to existing development in the service area. There are three basic methodologies used to calculate development fees. They examine the past, present, and future status of infrastructure. The objective of evaluating these different methodologies is to determine the best measure of the demand created by new development for additional infrastructure capacity.

• Buy-in methodology (past) is used in instances when a community has oversized a facility or asset in anticipation of future development. This methodology is based on the rationale that new development is repaying the community for its share of the remaining unused capacity.

• Incremental expansion method (present) documents the current level of service for each type of public facility. The intent is to use revenue collected to expand or provide additional facilities, as needed to accommodate new development, based on the current cost to provide capital improvements.

• Plan-based method (future) utilizes a community’s capital improvement plan and/or other adopted plans or engineering studies to guide capital improvements needed to serve new development.

All three methodologies are utilized in calculating the IIP. A summary is provided in Figure 1 showing the methodologies, components, and allocations used to calculate the IIP.


11

Figure 1: Recommended Calculation Methodologies

Community Parks

Regional Parks

Recreation Facil ities

Trails

Maintenance Facil ity

Library Facil ities Library Facil ities

Police Share Public Safety Building

Vehicles

Communications Equipment

Animal Control Facil ity

Animal Control Vehicles

Fire Share Public Safety Building

Fire Stations

Apparatus

Communications Equipment

City Hall

North Operations Center

Courthouse

Arterial Street Improvements

Interchanges

Treatment-Citywide

Rodeo Road Sewer Interceptor-Zone B

Kortsen Road and East Side Sewer Line - Zone B

Burris Road Sewer Line - Zone A

Highway 84 Interceptor - Zone A Collection System Lines per 1 Square Mile - Citywide

Managed Recharge System - Citywide

Methodology

Necessary Public Service Component Buy-in Incremental Expansion

Plan-based

Wastewater Facil ities

Street Facil ities

Parks and Recreational Facil ities

Police Facil ities

Fire Facil ities

General Government Facil ities


12

NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES OVERVIEW

ARS 9-463.05 (T)(7)(g) defines the facilities and assets which can be included in the Neighborhood Parks and Recreational Facilities IIP:

“Neighborhood parks and recreational facilities on real property up to thirty acres in area, or parks and recreational facilities larger than thirty acres if the facilities provide a direct benefit to the development. Park and recreational facilities do not include vehicles, equipment or that portion of any facility that is used for amusement parks, aquariums, aquatic centers, auditoriums, arenas, arts and cultural facilities, bandstand and orchestra facilities, bathhouses, boathouses, clubhouses, community centers greater than three thousand square feet in floor area, environmental education centers, equestrian facilities, golf course facilities, greenhouses, lakes, museums, theme parks, water reclamation or riparian areas, wetlands, zoo facilities or similar recreational facilities, but may include swimming pools.”

The Neighborhood Parks and Recreational Facilities IIP includes components for community parks, regional parks, recreation facilities, trails, a maintenance facility and the cost of preparing the Neighborhood Parks and Recreational Facilities IIP and Development Fees. The plan-based methodology utilizing the City’s Capital Improvements Plan for FY 2013 – 2017 is used to calculate the majority of the components including community parks, regional parks, trails, and the maintenance facility. A combination of the buy-in and plan-based methodologies is used for the recreation facility component to reflect the City’s past investments and future plans to provide a planned LOS.

A credit for future revenues to be used to retire debt service associated with Parks and Recreation infrastructure is also included in the IIP.

SERVICE AREA

The City plans to provide a uniform level-of-service and equal access to parks and recreational facilities throughout the City. The City’s parks and recreation programs are structured and provided to make full use of the City’s total inventory of facilities. As a result, the service area for the Parks and Recreational Facilities IIP is citywide.

PROPORTIONATE SHARE

ARS 9-463.05 (B)(3) states that the development fee shall not exceed a proportionate share of the cost of necessary public services needed to provide necessary public services to the development. The Neighborhood Parks and Recreational Facilities IIP and development fees are assessed only on residential development as this type of development creates 100% of the burden for additional parks and recreational facilities. Nonresidential development does not create additional burden for parks and recreational facilities, thus its proportionate share is 0% and is not assessed this IIP and development fees.


13

IIP FOR NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES

For each necessary public service that is the subject of a development fee, ARS 9-463.05(E) requires the IIP to include seven elements. This section details each of these seven elements for the Neighborhood Parks and Recreational Facilities IIP.

IIP Element #1

ARS 9-463.05(E)(1) requires:

“A description of the existing necessary public services in the service area and the costs to upgrade, update, improve, expand, correct or replace those necessary public services to meet existing needs and usage and stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards, which shall be prepared by qualified professionals licensed in this state, as applicable.”

A total of $52,976,083 of capital needs for Parks and Recreation has been identified. This includes planned projects from the City’s Capital Improvement Plan and outstanding debt service payments for existing debt for parks and recreation facilities over the next ten years. Of this total, $9,067,741 is the result of new development and is included in the IIP and development fee calculations. The balance of these projects reflect the costs to upgrade, improve, expand, correct or replace parks and recreational facilities to meet existing needs and usage and stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards.

Figure 2: IIP Element #1

Total Parks and Recreation Capital Needs 1 $52,976,083

New Development's Share of Capital NeedsIIP Subtotal $9,067,741

Balance 2 $43,908,341

1. City of Casa Grande, Capital Improvement Plan FY 2013- FY 2017 plus projected debt service payments over

next 10 years. 2. Reflects costs to upgrade, update, improve, expand, correct or replace those necessary public services to meet existing needs and usage and stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards.


14

IIP Element #2


“An analysis of the total capacity, the level of current usage and commitments for usage of capacity of the existing necessary public services, which shall be prepared by qualified professionals licensed in this state, as applicable.”

The City currently has 210.7 acres of community parks serving the current population of 49,183 persons. The new definition of necessary public services for neighborhood parks and recreational facilities includes parks or facilities on real property up to thirty acres in area, or parks and facilities larger than thirty acres if the facilities provide a direct benefit to the development. Of the City’s seven community parks, only the Linden Property is larger than 30 acres. Given the uniqueness of this park and the amenities it can accommodate, this park provides a direct benefit to development and is included in the Neighborhood Parks and Recreational Facilities IIP and Development Fees.

The current LOS for community parks is 0.0043 acres per person ((210.7 acres x 100% proportionate share) /49,183 persons = 0.0043 acres per person).

Figure 3: IIP Element #2 – Eligible Community Parks

AcresLinden Property1 120.0Dave White 20.0Carr-McNatt Park 20.0Ed Hooper Park 20.0O'Neil Park 10.0Peart Park 4.0Vil lago Park 16.7

TOTAL 210.7

1. This park is in excess of 30 acres. In addition to providingits unique size and amenities, one of the goals of this parkis to pre-empt the need for additional community parks throughout the City. Thus, this park provides a direct benefit to development.

Level of Service (LOS) StandardsResidential

Total Acreage 210.7Proportionate Share 100%FY 2012 Demand Units Served (population) 49,183Current LOS: Acres per Person 0.0043

NonresidentiaTotal Acreage 210.7Proportionate Share 0%FY 2012 Demand Units Served (jobs) 13,768Current LOS: Acres per Job 0.0000

Eligible Community Parks


15

The City currently has one 140.0 acre regional park serving the current population of 49,183 persons. The new definition of necessary public services for neighborhood parks and recreational facilities includes parks or facilities on real property up to thirty acres in area, or parks and facilities larger than thirty acres if the facilities provide a direct benefit to the development. Given that the City has only one regional park, this park provides a direct benefit to development and is included in the Neighborhood Parks and Recreational Facilities IIP and Development Fees.

The current LOS for regional parks is 0.0028 acres per person ((140.0 acres x 100% proportionate share)/49,183 persons = 0.0028 acres per person).

Figure 4: IIP Element #2 – Eligible Regional Parks

The new definition of necessary public services excludes recreation facilities over 3,000 square feet, with the exception of facilities debt financed prior to June 1, 2011 for which development fee will be used to repay new development’s share of debt service. Only 24,800 square feet of the City’s recreation facilities are eligible for inclusion in the LOS calculation. The City’s current recreation facilities are projected to provide sufficient capacity for current and new residential development through FY 2020. The planned LOS for recreation facilities is 0.43 square feet per person. This calculation is as follows: (24,800 square feet x 100% proportionate share)/57,782 persons in FY 2020 = 0.43 square feet per person.

AcresEd Hooper Park1 140.0

TOTAL 140.0

1. This park is in excess of 30 acres. Given the unique amentities and improvements at this park, TischlerBise assumes this park provides a direct benefit to development.


Total Acreage 140Proportionate Share 100%FY 2012 Demand Units Served (population) 49,183Current LOS: Acres per Person 0.0028

NonresidentiaTotal Acreage 140Proportionate Share 0%FY 2012 Demand Units Served (jobs) 13,768Current LOS: Acres per Job 0.0000

Eligible Regional Parks


16

Figure 5: IIP Element #2 – Eligible Recreation Facilities

The City currently has 3.00 miles of trails. The current LOS for trails is 0.0001 miles per person. This calculation is as follows: (3.00 miles x 100% proportionate share)/49,183 persons = 0.0001 miles per person.

Square FeetBoys and Girls Club 3,000Dorothy Powell Senior Adult Center 3,000Peart Center 3,000Len Colla Center1 12,800Woman's Club Building 3,000

TOTAL 24,800

1. The City debt financed this facility prior to July 1, 2010 andintends to have new development fund its proportionate share of the debt service with development fees.


Total Square Footage 24,800Proportionate Share 100%FY 2020 Demand Units Served (population) 57,782Planned LOS: SF per Person 0.43

NonresidentialTotal Square Footage 24,800Proportionate Share 0%FY 2020 Demand Units Served (jobs) 28,765Current LOS: SF per Job 0.0000

Eligible Facilities


17

Figure 6: IIP Element #2 – Eligible Trails

IIP Element #3


“A description of all or the parts of the necessary public services or facility expansions and their costs necessitated by and attributable to development in the service area based on the approved land use assumptions, including a forecast of the costs of infrastructure, improvements, real property, financing, engineering and architectural services, which shall be prepared by qualified professionals licensed in this state, as applicable.”

The City plans to purchase 71 acres of community parkland over the next five years at a total cost of $19,350,000; an average of $272,535 per acre ($19,350,000/71 acres = $272,535 per acre). These planned acquisitions are projected to serve both existing and new residential development for a period of ten years after their completion through FY 2026. The City’s population in FY 2026 is projected to be 67,154 persons of whom 49,183 are from existing development with the remaining 17,972 persons coming from new development. Based on these projections, 73% of the planned community parks are attributable to existing development with new development accounting for the remaining 27%.

New development’s share of the planned community parks totals 19 acres (71 acres x 27% = 19 acres). The planned LOS to be provided to new development is 0.0011 acres person (19 acres/17,972 persons from new development through FY 2026 = 0.0011 acres per person). Based on the planned cost of $272,535 per acre and planned LOS of 0.0011 acres per person, the planned cost per person is $288.14 ($272,535 per acre x 0.0011 acres per person = $288.14 per person).

MilesSan Carlos East 0.53San Carlos West 1.37Mission Valley 1.10

TOTAL 3.00


Total Miles 3.00Proportionate Share 100%FY 2012 Demand Units Served (population) 49,183Current LOS: Miles per Person 0.0001

NonresidentiaTotal Miles 3.00Proportionate Share 0%FY 2012 Demand Units Served (jobs) 13,768Current LOS: Miles per Job 0.0000

Trails


18

Figure 7: IIP Element #3 –Community Parks

The City plans to purchase 73 acres of regional parkland over the next five years at a total cost of $5,500,000; an average of $75,342 per acre ($5,500,000/73 acres = $75,342 per acre). This planned acquisition is projected to serve both existing and new residential development for a period of ten years after their completion through FY 2026. The City’s population in FY 2026 is projected to be 67,154 persons of whom 49,183 are from existing development with the remaining 17,972 persons coming from new development. Based on these projections, 73% of the planned community parks are attributable to existing development with new development accounting for the remaining 27%.

New development’s share of the planned regional parks totals 20 acres (73 acres x 27% = 20 acres). The planned LOS to be provided to new development is 0.0011 acres person (20 acres/17,972 persons from new development through FY 2026 = 0.0011 acres per person). Based on the planned cost of $75,342 per acre and planned LOS of 0.0011 acres per person, the planned cost per person is $81.90 ($75,342 per acre x 0.0011 acres per person = $81.90 per person).

Project FY 2012-2013

FY 2013-2014

FY 2014-2015

FY 2015-2016

FY 2016-2017 &

TOTAL

Community Parkland Design and Development

$500,000 $2,300,000 $2,300,000 $0 $0 $5,100,000

Land Acquisition for Parks $0 $4,250,000 $5,000,000 $5,000,000 $0 $14,250,000

TOTAL $500,000 $6,550,000 $7,300,000 $5,000,000 $0 $19,350,000

Planned Acres 71

Average Cost per Acre $272,535

Persons % Attributable Existing Population 49,183 73%Population from New Development 17,972 27%TOTAL POPULATION FY 2026 67,154 100%

AcresAcres for Existing Development 52Acres for New Development 19TOTAL 71

LOS for New Development: SF per Person 0.0011

Planned Cost per Acre $272,535

Planned Cost per Person $288.14

Source: City of Casa Grande Capital Improvement Plan FY 2013 to FY 2017. The land acquisition is in excess of 30 acres. In addition to providing its unique size and amenities, one of the goals of this park is to pre-empt the need for additional community parks throughout the City. Thus, this park provides a direct benefit to development.


19

Figure 8: IIP Element #3 –Regional Parks

The recreation facilities component of the IIP includes a buy-in component and a plan-based component to provide the planned LOS of 0.25 square feet per person. The City has previously invested $2,481,440 to expand the Len Colla Center by 12,800 square feet. The City also plans to construct a 60,000 square foot community recreation center, of which only 3,000 square feet is eligible for inclusion in the IIP and development fees. The 15,800 square feet of completed and planned recreation facilities is projected to serve both existing and new residential development for a period of ten years after completion of the community center; through FY 2023. The City’s population in FY 2023 is projected to be 62,258 persons of whom 49,183 are from existing development with the remaining 13,075 persons coming from new development. Based on these projections, 79% of the recreation facilities are attributable to existing development with new development accounting for the remaining 21%.

The eligible costs for the expansion of the Len Colla Center and the new community recreation center totals $4,074,399 and encompasses 15,800 square feet; an average cost of $258 per square foot ($4,074,399/15,800 square feet = $258 per square foot). Based on the planned LOS of 0.25 square feet per person, this equates to a per person cost of $65.44 (0.25 square feet per person x $258 per square foot = $65.44 per person).


FY 2013-2014

FY 2014-2015

FY 2015-2016

FY 2016-2017 &

TOTAL

Regional Parkland Design and Development

$0 $500,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $0 $5,500,000

TOTAL $0 $500,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $0 $5,500,000

Planned Acres 73

Average Cost per Acre $75,342


AcresAcres for Existing Development 53Acres for New Development 20TOTAL 73


Planned Cost per Acre $75,342


Source: City of Casa Grande Capital Improvement Plan FY 2013 to FY 2017. This park is in excess of 30 acres. In addition to providing its unique size and amenities, one of the goals of this park is to pre-empt the need for additional regional parks throughout the City. Thus, this park provides a direct benefit to development.


20

Figure 9: IIP Element #3 –Recreation Facilities

The City plans to construct 11 miles of trails costing $5,050,000. When completed in FY 2017, the trails are projected to provide sufficient capacity for an additional 10 years of future development through FY 2027. The projected population in FY 2027 is 69,160 persons. Based on the current population estimate of 49,183 persons, the facility will serve an additional 19,977 persons. These additional persons represent 29% of total demand served by planned trails (19,977 persons/69,160 persons = 0.29 or 29%). Thus, 29% of the planned trails are attributable to new development. This equates to 3 miles of the planned 11 miles.

The planned LOS is 0.0002 miles per person (3 miles/19,977 persons = 0.0002 miles per person). Based on a planned cost of $452,239 per mile, the planned cost per person is $73.02 ($452,239 per mile x 0.0002 miles per person = $73.02 per person).

Project Prior Years FY 2012-2013

FY 2013-2014

FY 2014-2015

FY 2015-2016

FY 2016-2017 & beyond

TOTAL

Len Colla Center Expansion1 $2,481,440 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,481,440

Community Recreation Center2 $0 $1,592,959 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,592,959

TOTAL $2,481,440 $1,592,959 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,074,399

Planned Square Feet 15,800

Cost per Square Foot $257.87


Square FeetSquare Feet for Existing Development 12,482Square Feet for New Development 3,318TOTAL 15,800


Planned Cost per SF $258


1. Original construction cost plus financing costs. This facility is larger than 3,000 square feet. The City debt financed this facility prior to July 1, 2010 and intends to have new development fund its proportionate share of the debt service with development fees.2. City of Casa Grande Capital Improvement Plan FY 2013 to FY 2017. Includes projected financing costs. The cost reflects 3,000 square feet of theplanned facility per the definition of "necessary public services".


21

Figure 10: IIP Element #3 –Trails

The City plans to construct a 1,200 square foot parks maintenance facility for $385,000. When completed in FY 2016, the maintenance facility is projected to provide sufficient capacity for an additional 10 years of future development through FY 2026. The projected population in FY 2026 is 67,154 persons. Based on the current population estimate of 49,183 persons, the facility will serve an additional 17,972 persons. These additional persons represent 27% of total demand served by the planned maintenance facility (17,972 persons/67,154 persons = 0.27 or 27%). Thus, 27% of the planned maintenance facility is attributable to new development. This equates to 321 square feet of the planned 1,200 square feet.

The planned LOS is 0.0179 square feet per person (321 square feet/17,972 persons = 0.0179 square feet per person). Based on a planned cost of $321 per square foot, the planned cost per person is $5.73 ($321 per square foot x 0.0179 square feet per person = $5.73 per person).


FY 2013-2014

FY 2014-2015

FY 2015-2016

FY 2016-2017 & beyond

TOTAL

Casa Grande Mountain Trails Design and Development

$100,000 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $200,000

Santa Cruz Linear Park Trail Design and Development

$150,000 $900,000 $900,000 $900,000 $0 $2,850,000

Trail System Development $0 $100,000 $900,000 $100,000 $900,000 $2,000,000

TOTAL $250,000 $1,100,000 $1,800,000 $1,000,000 $900,000 $5,050,000

Planned Miles 11

Cost per Mile $452,239


MilesMiles for Existing Development 8Miles for New Development 3TOTAL 11

LOS for New Development: Miles per Person 0.0002

Planned Cost per Mile $452,239


Source: City of Casa Grande Capital Improvement Plan FY 2013 to FY 2017.


22

Figure 11: IIP Element #3 –Maintenance Facility

The cost to prepare the Neighborhood Parks and Recreational Facilities IIP and development fees totals $8,800. The City plans to update its report every five years. Based on this cost, proportionate share, and five year projections of new residential development from the Land Use Assumptions, the cost per person is $1.77.

Figure 12: IIP Element #3 – IIP and Development Fee Report


FY 2013-2014

FY 2014-2015

FY 2015-2016

FY 2016-2017 & beyond

TOTAL

Maintenance shop building $0 $0 $0 $385,000 $0 $385,000

Planned Square Feet 1,200

Cost per Square Foot $321


Square FeetSquare Feet for Existing Development 879Square Feet for New Development 321TOTAL 1,200




Source: City of Casa Grande Capital Improvement Plan FY 2012 to FY 2017.

Necessary Public Service

Cost Assessed AgainstProportionate

ShareUnits FY2012 FY2017 Change

Library Facilities $4,300 Residential 100% Population 49,183 54,146 4,963 $0.87Parks and Recreational Facilities

$8,800 Residential 100% Population 49,183 54,146 4,963 $1.77

Residential 63% Population 49,183 54,146 4,963 $1.02Nonresidential 37% Nonres Trips 88,956 142,956 54,000 $0.06Residential 51% Population 49,183 54,146 4,963 $0.92Nonresidential 49% Jobs 13,768 26,460 12,692 $0.34Residential 91% Population 49,183 54,146 4,963 $0.24Nonresidential 9% Jobs 13,768 26,460 12,692 $0.01

Street Facilities $14,100 Res. and Nonres. 100% Trips 195,445 257,199 61,754 $0.23Wastewater Facilities $6,700 Res. and Nonres. 100% Gallons 5,003,998 5,751,198 747,200 $0.01

TOTAL $52,200

General Government Facilities

$1,300

Demand Units Cost per Demand

Unit

Police Facilities $8,100

Fire Facilities $8,900


23

IIP Element #4


“A table establishing the specific level or quantity of use, consumption, generation or discharge of a service unit for each category of necessary public services or facility expansions and an equivalency or conversion table establishing the ratio of a service unit to various types of land uses, including residential, commercial and industrial.”

The number of persons per household from the Land Use Assumptions is multiplied by the LOS standards which yield the number of units of infrastructure needed to serve one service unit by type of housing unit. To determine the ratio of a service unit to various types of land uses, the number of units of infrastructure needed to serve one service unit by type of housing unit is then divided by the number of units of infrastructure need to serve a single family house. This results in an equivalent demand unit (EDU) which serves as a basis for comparing the infrastructure needs of various land uses to a single family house.

Using the community parks component for a multi-family unit as an example, the number of persons per household (2.09) is multiplied by the level-of-service of 0.0011 acres per person. This results in 0.0022 acres of community parks per multi-family unit. This figure is then divided by the number of acres needed to serve a single family housing unit (0.0033 acres) which results in a ratio of 0.67 per EDU. This can be read as a multi-family unit having 67% of the needs of a single family unit. This calculation is repeated for all types of development and each component of the IIP.


RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT

Type Service Unit# of

Persons 1

Community Parks

Planned LOS: Acres per Person 2

Community Park Acres per Service

Unit

Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Regional Parks Planned LOS:

Acres per Person 3

Regional Park Acres per Service

Unit

Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Recreation Facilities

Current LOS: SF per Person 4

Linear Feet per Service

Unit

Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Trails LOS: Miles per Person 5

Linear Feet per Service

Unit

Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Single Family 1 Unit 3.11 0.0011 0.0033 1.00 0.0011 0.0034 1.00 0.25 0.79 1.00 0.0001 0.0002 1.00Multi-family 1 Unit 2.09 0.0011 0.0022 0.67 0.0011 0.0023 0.67 0.25 0.53 0.67 0.0001 0.0001 0.67Mobile Home/Park Model 1 Unit 2.42 0.0011 0.0026 0.78 0.0011 0.0026 0.78 0.25 0.61 0.78 0.0001 0.0001 0.78All Other Types of Housing 1 Unit 1.76 0.0011 0.0019 0.57 0.0011 0.0019 0.57 0.25 0.45 0.57 0.0001 0.0001 0.57



Persons 1

Maintenance Facility

Planned LOS: SF per

Person 6

SF per Service Unit

Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

IIP and Development

Fee Study: Cost per Person 7

Cost per Service Unit

Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Single Family 1 Unit 3.11 0.0179 0.0556 1.00 $1.77 $5.52 1.00Multi-family 1 Unit 2.09 0.0179 0.0373 0.67 $1.77 $3.70 0.67Mobile Home/Park Model 1 Unit 2.42 0.0179 0.0432 0.78 $1.77 $4.29 0.78All Other Types of Housing 1 Unit 1.76 0.0179 0.0315 0.57 $1.77 $3.13 0.57

1. Land Use Assumptions Document .2. Taken from Figure 7.3. Taken from Figure 8.4. Taken from Figure 9.5. Taken from Figure 10.6. Taken from Figure 11.7. Taken from Figure 12.


24

IIP Elements #5 and #6


“The total number of projected service units necessitated by and attributable to new development in the service area based on the approved land use assumptions and calculated pursuant to generally accepted engineering and planning criteria.”


“The projected demand for necessary public services or facility expansions required by new service units for a period not to exceed ten years.”

The Land Use Assumptions projects an additional 4,509 housing units and 12,434 persons over the next ten years. These projected service units are multiplied by the levels-of-service for each of the IIP components. The results for each component of the Neighborhood Parks and Recreation IIP are shown in the following figure.


25

Figure 14: IIP Elements #5 and #6

IIP Element #7


“A forecast of revenues generated by new service units other than development fees, which shall include estimated state-shared revenue, highway users revenue, federal revenue, ad valorem

Projection FiscalYear Year

1 2013 472 1,112 1.2 1.2 4772 2014 347 925 1.0 1.0 3973 2015 400 1,073 1.1 1.2 4604 2016 430 1,212 1.3 1.3 5205 2017 430 1,212 1.3 1.3 5206 2018 430 1,212 1.3 1.3 5207 2019 430 1,212 1.3 1.3 5208 2020 430 1,212 1.3 1.3 5209 2021 570 1,632 1.7 1.8 701

10 2022 570 1,632 1.7 1.8 701

10 YEAR TOTAL 4,509 10 YEAR TOTAL 12,434 13.1 14 5,337


1 2013 472 1,112 0.1 20 $1,9722 2014 347 925 0.1 17 $1,6403 2015 400 1,073 0.1 19 $1,9024 2016 430 1,212 0.1 22 $2,1495 2017 430 1,212 0.1 22 $2,1496 2018 430 1,212 0.1 22 $2,1497 2019 430 1,212 0.1 22 $2,1498 2020 430 1,212 0.1 22 $2,1499 2021 570 1,632 0.1 29 $2,894

10 2022 570 1,632 0.1 29 $2,894

10 YEAR TOTAL 4,509 10 YEAR TOTAL 12,434 0.8 222 $22,046

1. Land Use Assumptions Document .2. Taken from Figure 7.3. Taken from Figure 8.4. Taken from Figure 9.5. Taken from Figure 10.6. Taken from Figure 11.7. Taken from Figure 12.

Service Units 1 housing unit Demand Units persons

Projected Service Units Necessitated

by New Development in

Service Area 1

Projected Demand Units Necessitated by New

Development in Service Area 1

Type of Development

Residential Type of Development

Residential

Projected Demand for Necessary Public Services or Facility Expansion @ Buy-in

LOS 6


Maintenance Facility

Unit of Measurement

square feet

Projected Demand for Necessary Public Services or

Facility Expansion @ Current LOS 5



Service Area 1




Facility Expansion @ Planned LOS 2


Facility Expansion @ Planned LOS 3


LOS 4

Trails

Type of Development


Residential Necessary Public Service

Community Parks


Regional Parks


Recreation Facilities


miles

Service Units 1 housing unit Demand Units persons Unit of Measuremen

acres Unit of Measurement

acres Unit of Measurement

square feet

Unit of Measuremen

10 YEAR TOTAL

10 YEAR TOTAL 10 YEAR TOTAL 10 YEAR TOTAL

10 YEAR TOTAL 10 YEAR TOTAL


Facility Expansion 7


IIP and Developmen

Unit of Measurement

cost


26

property taxes, construction contracting or similar excise taxes and the capital recovery portion of utility fees attributable to development based on the approved land use assumptions, and a plan to include these contributions in determining the extent of the burden imposed by the development as required in subsection B, paragraph 12 of this section.”

TischlerBise has projected on-going and one-time revenues based on the development projections in the Land Use Assumptions document, characteristics of new development, and the City’s current revenue structure and rates. The revenues included in this analysis and the applicable rates and calculation methodologies are shown in the figure below.

Figure 15: Revenue Assumptions, Rates, Calculation Methodologies

The figure below lists the revenue characteristics of new development that is used to forecast revenues.

Current Rate/Revenue Source Formula Applicability

Property Tax

$1.5296 per $100 assessed value (combined primary and

secondary rates), 20% assessment ratio for

nonresidential development, 10% assessment ratio for residential development

All development

State Shared Revenues1

FY 2012 budget amounts/FY 2012 population = state shared

rev/capita2

Residential development

State Grant Revenues1


rev/capita2


Federal Grant Revenues1


rev/capita2


1. Includes Sales Tax, Revenue Sharing, Auto-in-Lieu, HURF. LTAF is notincluded since state now keeps these revenues and does not remit to municipalities.2. TischlerBise calculation methodology.

Commercial development

Sales Tax

Construction Sales Tax

All development

2.00%

4.00%


27

Figure 16: Revenue Characteristics of New Development

TischlerBise’s forecast of revenues for the next ten years is shown in the figure below based on the development projections from the Land Use Assumptions, revenue assumptions and rates, and revenue characteristics of new development.


Single Family Detached $136,000 $13,600 $88,400 N/A $804 $665Multi-family $110,000 $11,000 $71,500 N/A $540 $446All Other Types of Housing $55,000 $5,500 $35,750 N/A $625 $517

Commercial/Retail $121 $24 $79 $425 N/A N/AOffice /Institutional $191 $38 $124 N/A N/A N/AIndustrial/Flex $61 $12 $40 N/A N/A N/A

1. Examples of recent construction in City of Casa Grande from zillow.com, trulia.com, loopnet.com, showcase.com.2. 65% of market/assessed value.3. Average based on data taken from annual reports from Wal-Mart, Safeway, Albertsons, and Target.4. TischlerBise methodology and calcuation.

Residential Development

Nonresidential Development

State Shared Revenue per

Unit (revenues per capita x persons per

household) 4

State Shared Revenue per Square Foot

State and Federal Grant Revenue per Unit

(revenues per capita x persons per household) 4

Market Value per Unit 1

Market Value per Square

Foot of Building 1

State Grant Revenue per Square Foot

Assessed Value per Unit

(10% assessment

ratio)

Assessed Value per SF

(20% assessment

ratio)

Construction Value per Unit for Construction Sales Tax Calculations 2

Construction Value per Square

Foot for Construction Sales Tax Calculations 2

Annual Retail Sales

Generatd per Unit for Sales

Tax Calculations 3

Annual Retail Sales

Generated per Square Foot

for Sales Tax Calculations 3

Fiscal Property Taxes 1

Year TOTAL2012 $728,911 $15,836,163 $6,508,043 $165,871 $137,103 $23,376,0912013 $945,341 $17,791,163 $2,494,570 $287,636 $237,749 $21,756,4592014 $1,450,873 $21,488,663 $4,797,208 $239,242 $197,748 $28,173,7342015 $1,964,332 $25,186,163 $4,931,966 $277,402 $229,290 $32,589,1532016 $2,144,963 $25,589,063 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $30,478,0972017 $2,325,595 $25,991,963 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $31,061,6282018 $2,506,227 $26,394,863 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $31,645,1602019 $2,686,858 $26,797,763 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $32,228,6922020 $2,867,490 $27,200,663 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $32,812,2232021 $3,104,879 $27,591,663 $2,896,353 $422,105 $348,897 $34,363,8972022 $3,342,267 $27,982,663 $2,896,353 $422,105 $348,897 $34,992,285

TOTAL $24,067,735 $267,850,793 $35,382,145 $3,381,622 $2,795,124 $333,477,420

1. This is an on-going revenue source as illustrated by the cumulative increase over the projection period. 2. This is a one-time revenue source realized at the time of construction.3. These revenues are considered one-time given the irregularity and uncertainty of the City receiving these funds.

State and Federal Grant

Revenues 3

Transaction Privledge Tax-Retail Sales 1

Transaction Privledge Tax-Construction 2

State-Shared Revenues 3


28

Note: the previous figure should not be interpreted as the total fiscal impact of new development as there is no forecast of ongoing and one-time costs resulting from new development.

The debt service associated with expansion of the Len Colla facility and the planned Community Recreation Center will be repaid with future revenues. Thus, these contributions from new development are used in determining the extent of the burden imposed by new development. The figure below calculates a credit for future revenue contributions, which will be applied against the cost of serving new development in the development fee calculations. A net present value calculation is used to account for the value of future revenues in current dollars.

Figure 18: Future Revenue Credit for Neighborhood Parks and Recreation Facilities

The City’s transaction privilege tax rate for construction contracting is 4.00% which is 2.00% higher than rate of 2.00% for the majority of the City’s transaction privilege tax classifications. ARS 9-463.05 (B)(12) includes the following requirement:

Community Fiscal Len Colla Rec. Center Projected Credit per Year Principal & Int. Principal & Int. TOTAL Population Person2013 $78,606 $737,647 $816,253 49,824 $16.382014 $77,174 $998,153 $1,075,328 50,936 $21.112015 $75,742 $992,742 $1,068,484 51,861 $20.602016 $74,208 $1,081,448 $1,155,656 52,934 $21.832017 $75,401 $1,155,330 $1,230,731 54,146 $22.732018 $88,220 $1,149,048 $1,237,267 55,358 $22.352019 $92,106 $1,179,871 $1,271,977 56,570 $22.492020 $97,670 $1,207,989 $1,305,658 57,782 $22.602021 $103,588 $1,280,459 $1,384,047 58,994 $23.462022 $99,606 $1,253,400 $1,353,006 60,626 $22.322023 $96,333 $1,226,342 $1,322,675 62,258 $21.252024 $97,731 $1,222,812 $1,320,543 63,890 $20.672025 $96,205 $1,170,871 $1,267,075 65,522 $19.342026 $95,957 $1,096,753 $1,192,710 67,154 $17.762027 $0 $1,119,459 $1,119,459 69,160 $16.192028 $0 $1,092,400 $1,092,400 71,166 $15.352029 $0 $1,182,988 $1,182,988 73,172 $16.172030 $0 $1,511,518 $1,511,518 75,177 $20.112031 $0 $1,541,565 $1,541,565 77,183 $19.972032 $0 $1,670,271 $1,670,271 79,189 $21.092033 $0 $1,035,212 $1,035,212 81,195 $12.752034 $0 $1,067,918 $1,067,918 83,195 $12.842035 $0 $1,237,741 $1,237,741 85,195 $14.532036 $0 $1,183,624 $1,183,624 87,195 $13.572037 $0 $3,463,624 $3,463,624 89,195 $38.83

TOTAL $1,248,548 $31,859,184 $33,107,732 $496.28

True Interest Cost 3.94%

Net Present Value $315.56


29

“Beginning August 1, 2014, for purposes of calculating the required offset to development fees pursuant to this subsection, if a municipality imposes a construction contracting or similar excise tax rate in excess of the percentage amount of the transaction privilege tax rate imposed on the majority of other transaction privilege tax classifications, the entire excess portion of the construction contracting or similar excise tax shall be treated as a contribution to the capital costs of necessary public services provided to development for which development fees are assessed, unless the excess portion was already taken into account for such purpose pursuant to this subsection.”

The figure below details the projects the City plans to fund with revenues from the Construction Sales Tax differential. These projects are not included in the IIP and development fee calculations. Thus a credit will not be required for the Construction Sales Tax differential.

Figure 19: Capital Projects to be funded with Construction Sales Tax Revenues

Project Funding SourceFY 2012-

2013FY 2013-

2014FY 2014-

2015FY 2015-

2016

FY 2016-2017 & beyond

TOTAL

Casa Grande Ave Construction Sales Tax $120,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $120,000

Peart Road Construction Sales Tax $600,000 $0 $0 $0 $600,000

West Mcmurray Blvd. Construction Sales Tax $450,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $450,000

Thornton Road reconstruction Construction Sales Tax $475,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $475,000

Downtown Street Reconstruct-phase 3 Construction Sales Tax $0 $0 $4,000,000 $0 $0 $4,000,000

Mccartney Road - phase I and II Construction Sales Tax $0 $0 $0 $3,000,000 $5,000,000 $8,000,000

Copper vista drainage channel improvements Construction Sales Tax $1,600,000 $2,400,000 $0 $0 $0 $4,000,000

Countrywalk drainage improvements construction phase i i Construction Sales Tax $0 $1,650,000 $2,500,000 $0 $0 $4,150,000

TOTAL $3,245,000 $4,050,000 $6,500,000 $3,000,000 $5,000,000 $21,795,000

Source: City of Casa Grande Capital Improvement Plan FY 2013 to FY 2017 .


30

LIBRARY FACILITIES OVERVIEW

ARS 9-463.05 (T)(7)(g) defines the facilities and assets which can be included in the Library Facilities IIP:

“Library facilities of up to ten thousand square feet that provide a direct benefit to development, not including equipment, vehicles or appurtenances.”

The Library Facilities IIP includes a buy-in component for recent capacity improvements to the Main Library and Vista Grande Library and the cost of preparing the Library Facilities IIP and Development Fees.

A credit for future revenues to be used to retire debt service associated with Library infrastructure is also included in the IIP.

SERVICE AREA

The City has one main library and one branch library. Given the centralized nature of these facilities, the service area for the Library Facilities IIP is citywide.

PROPORTIONATE SHARE

ARS 9-463.05 (B)(3) states that the development fee shall not exceed a proportionate share of the cost of necessary public services needed to provide necessary public services to the development. The Library Facilities IIP and development fees are assessed only on residential development as this type of development creates 100% of the burden for additional library facilities. Nonresidential development does not create additional burden for library facilities, thus its proportionate share is 0% and is not assessed this IIP and development fees.

IIP FOR LIBRARY FACILITIES

For each necessary public service that is the subject of a development fee, ARS 9-463.05(E) requires the IIP to include seven elements. This section details each of these seven elements for the Library Facilities IIP.


31

IIP Element #1



The debt service associated with the improvements to the Main Library and Vista Grande Library totals $1,917,309 over the next ten years. Of this total, $662,693 is projected to be new development’s share of the planned debt service and is included in the IIP and development fee calculations. The balance of this cost reflects the costs to upgrade, improve, expand, correct or replace library facilities to meet existing needs and usage and stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards.


IIP Element #2



The Main Library encompasses 19,050 square feet while the Vista Grande Library encompasses 16,000 square feet. The new definition of necessary public services excludes library facilities over 10,000 square feet, with the exception of facilities debt financed prior to June 1, 2011 for which development fees will be used to repay new development’s share of debt service. Both the Main Library and Vista Grande Library meet this requirement, thus the total square footage of these facilities are eligible for inclusion in the IIP and development fees.

Total Library Capital Needs 1 $1,917,309

New Development's Share of Capital NeedsIIP Subtotal $662,963

Balance 2 $1,254,346

1. Debt service payments for Vista Grande Library and expandingMain Library over next 10 years.2. Reflects costs to upgrade, update, improve, expand, correct or replace those necessary public services to meet existing needs and usage and stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards.


32

The City constructed these library projects with excess capacity to serve to future residential development. The buy-in methodology is used to calculate this component of the Library Facilities IIP and Development Fees. These projects will provide sufficient capacity for existing and new residential development through FY 2030. The projected population in FY 2030 is 75,177 persons. Based on the current population estimate of 49,183 persons, the facility will serve an additional 25,995 persons. These additional persons represent 35% of total demand served by the library facilities (25,995 persons/75,177 persons = 0.35 or 35%). Thus, 35% of the library facilities are attributable to new development. This equates to 12,120 square feet of the total 35,050 square feet.

The buy-in LOS for the library is 0.47 square per person. This is calculated as follows: (12,120 square feet attributable to new development x 100% proportionate share)/25,995 additional persons to be served = 0.47 square feet.

Figure 21: IIP Element #2 - Facilities

IIP Element #3


“A description of all or the parts of the necessary public services or facility expansions and their costs necessitated by and attributable to development in the service area based on the approved land use assumptions, including a forecast of the costs of infrastructure, improvements, real

Square FeetMain Library1 19,050Vista Grande Library1 16,000

35,050

1. The City debt financed these facilities prior to July 1, 2010 andintends to have new development fund its proportionate share of the debt service with development fees. Thus these facilitiesare permissable under the definition of library facilities under"necessary public services".


Square FeetSquare Feet for Existing Development 22,930Square Feet for New Development 12,120TOTAL 35,050


Eligible Facilities


33

property, financing, engineering and architectural services, which shall be prepared by qualified professionals licensed in this state, as applicable.”

The total, original cost of the library projects was $4,042,880, or $212.78 per square foot ($4,042,880/19,000 square feet = $212.78 per square foot). The buy-in LOS is 0.47 square feet per person. The buy-in cost per person is calculated as follows: 0.47 square feet per person x $212.78 per square foot = $99.21 per person.

Figure 22: IIP Element #3 –Facilities

The cost to prepare the Library Facilities IIP and development fees totals $4,300. The City plans to update its report every five years. Based on this cost, proportionate share, and five year projections of new residential development from the Land Use Assumptions, the cost per person is $0.87.


Vista Grande Library1 $2,695,253Main Library Expansion2 $1,347,627TOTAL $4,042,880

Square Feet Added 19,000

Cost per SF $212.78

1. Original construction cost plus financing costs.2. Planned construction cost plus financing costs.











TOTAL $52,200


$1,300


Unit




34

IIP Element #4



The number of persons per household from the Land Use Assumptions is multiplied by the level-of-service standards which yields the number of units of infrastructure needed to serve one service unit by type of housing unit. To determine the ratio of a service unit to various types of land uses, the number of units of infrastructure needed to serve one service unit by type of housing unit is then divided by the number of units of infrastructure need to serve a single family housing unit. This results in an equivalent demand unit (EDU) which serves as a basis for comparing the infrastructure needs of various land uses to a single family house.

Using the library facilities component of a multi-family unit as an example, the number of persons per household (2.09) is multiplied by the buy-in LOS of 0.47 square feet per person. This results in 0.97 square feet of library facilities per multi-family unit. This figure is then divided by the number of square feet needed to serve a single family housing unit (1.45 square feet) which results in a ratio of 0.67 per EDU. This can be read as a multi-family unit having 67% of the needs of a single family unit. This calculation is repeated for all types of development and each component of the IIP.







Persons 1

Library Facilities Buy-

in LOS: SF per Person 2

SF per Service Unit

Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

IIP and Development

Fee Study: Cost per Person 3


Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Single Family 1 Unit 3.11 0.47 1.45 1.00 $0.87 $2.69 1.00Multi-family 1 Unit 2.09 0.47 0.97 0.67 $0.87 $1.81 0.67Mobile Home/Park Model 1 Unit 2.42 0.47 1.13 0.78 $0.87 $2.10 0.78All Other Types of Housing 1 Unit 1.76 0.47 0.82 0.57 $0.87 $1.53 0.57

1. Land Use Assumptions Document .2. Taken from Figure 21.3. Taken from Figure 23.


35



The Land Use Assumptions projects an additional 4,509 housing units and 12,434 persons over the next ten years. These projected service units are multiplied by the levels-of-service for each of the IIP components. The results for each component of the Library Facilities IIP are shown in the figure below.


IIP Element #7


“A forecast of revenues generated by new service units other than development fees, which shall include estimated state-shared revenue, highway users revenue, federal revenue, ad valorem property taxes, construction contracting or similar excise taxes and the capital recovery portion of utility fees attributable to development based on the approved land use assumptions, and a plan to include these contributions in determining the extent of the burden imposed by the development as required in subsection B, paragraph 12 of this section.”


1 2013 472 1,112 519 $9642 2014 347 925 431 $8013 2015 400 1,073 500 $9294 2016 430 1,212 565 $1,0505 2017 430 1,212 565 $1,0506 2018 430 1,212 565 $1,0507 2019 430 1,212 565 $1,0508 2020 430 1,212 565 $1,0509 2021 570 1,632 761 $1,414

10 2022 570 1,632 761 $1,414

10 YEAR TOTAL 4,509 10 YEAR TOTAL 12,434 5,797 $10,773

1. Land Use Assumptions Document .2. Taken from Figure 21.3. Taken from Figure 23.



Service Area 1



10 YEAR TOTAL10 YEAR TOTAL

Projected Demand for Necessary Public Services or Facility

Expansion 3

Unit of Measurement

costUnit of Measurement

square feet

IIP and Development



Library Facilities


LOS 2

Service Units 1 housing unit Demand Units persons

Type of Development


Residential


36

TischlerBise has projected ongoing and one-time revenues based on the development projections in the Land Use Assumptions document, characteristics of new development, and the City’s current revenue structure and rates. The revenues included in this analysis and the applicable rates and calculation methodologies are shown in the following figure.


The following figure lists the revenue characteristics of new development that is used to forecast revenues.


Property Tax




All development



rev/capita2




rev/capita2




rev/capita2




Sales Tax


All development

2.00%

4.00%


37










household) 4






Foot of Building 1



(10% assessment

ratio)


(20% assessment

ratio)




Annual Retail Sales


Tax Calculations 3

Annual Retail Sales




38


Note: the above figure should not be interpreted as the total fiscal impact of new development as there is no forecast of ongoing and one-time costs resulting from new development.

The debt service associated with library projects will be repaid with future revenues. Thus, these contributions from new development are used in determining the extent of the burden imposed by new development. The figure below calculates a credit for future revenue contributions, which will be applied against the cost of serving new development in the development fee calculations. A net present value calculation is used to account for the value of future revenues in current dollars.


Year TOTAL2012 $728,911 $15,836,163 $6,508,043 $165,871 $137,103 $23,376,0912013 $945,341 $17,791,163 $2,494,570 $287,636 $237,749 $21,756,4592014 $1,450,873 $21,488,663 $4,797,208 $239,242 $197,748 $28,173,7342015 $1,964,332 $25,186,163 $4,931,966 $277,402 $229,290 $32,589,1532016 $2,144,963 $25,589,063 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $30,478,0972017 $2,325,595 $25,991,963 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $31,061,6282018 $2,506,227 $26,394,863 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $31,645,1602019 $2,686,858 $26,797,763 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $32,228,6922020 $2,867,490 $27,200,663 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $32,812,2232021 $3,104,879 $27,591,663 $2,896,353 $422,105 $348,897 $34,363,8972022 $3,342,267 $27,982,663 $2,896,353 $422,105 $348,897 $34,992,285

TOTAL $24,067,735 $267,850,793 $35,382,145 $3,381,622 $2,795,124 $333,477,420



Revenues 3





39

Figure 29: Future Revenue Credit for Library Facilities



The following figure details the projects the City plans to fund with revenues from the Construction Sales Tax differential. These projects are not included in the IIP and development fee calculations. Thus a credit will not be required for the Construction Sales Tax differential.

Main Library Fiscal Vista Grande Expansiton Projected Credit per Year Principal & Int. Principal & Int. TOTAL Population Person2013 $104,808 $52,404 $157,212 49,824 $3.162014 $102,899 $51,449 $154,348 50,936 $3.032015 $100,990 $50,495 $151,485 51,861 $2.922016 $98,944 $49,472 $148,417 52,934 $2.802017 $100,535 $50,268 $150,803 54,146 $2.792018 $117,626 $58,813 $176,439 55,358 $3.192019 $122,808 $61,404 $184,212 56,570 $3.262020 $130,226 $65,113 $195,339 57,782 $3.382021 $138,117 $69,059 $207,176 58,994 $3.512022 $132,808 $66,404 $199,212 60,626 $3.292023 $128,444 $64,222 $192,667 62,258 $3.092024 $130,308 $65,154 $195,462 63,890 $3.062025 $128,273 $64,136 $192,409 65,522 $2.942026 $127,943 $63,972 $191,915 67,154 $2.86

TOTAL $1,664,730 $832,365 $2,497,095 $43.27

True Interest Cost 3.94%



40



2013FY 2013-

2014FY 2014-

2015FY 2015-

2016

FY 2016-2017 & beyond

TOTAL









TOTAL $3,245,000 $4,050,000 $6,500,000 $3,000,000 $5,000,000 $21,795,000



41

POLICE FACILITIES OVERVIEW

ARS 9-463.05 (T)(7)(f) defines the facilities and assets which can be included in the Police Facilities IIP:

“Police facilities, including all appurtenances, equipment and vehicles. Police facilities do not include a facility or portion of a facility that is used to replace services that were once provided elsewhere in the municipality, vehicles and equipment used to provide administrative services, helicopters or airplanes or a facility that is used for training officers from more than one station or substation.”

The Police Facilities IIP includes components for Police facilities, Police vehicles, Police communications equipment, the Animal Control Facility, Animal Control vehicles, and the cost of preparing the Police Facilities IIP and Development Fees. The buy-in methodology is used to calculate the Police facilities components of the Police Facilities IIP and Development Fees. The incremental expansion methodology based on the current level-of-service is used to calculate the components for Police vehicles, Police communications equipment, and Animal Control vehicles. The plan-based methodology is used to calculate the Animal Control facilities component.

The Police Facilities IIP also includes a credit for future revenues to be used to retire debt service associated with Police infrastructure.

SERVICE AREA

The City’s Police Department strives to provide a uniform response time citywide. The City’s Police and Animal Control facilities are centralized. Vehicles and equipment are dispatched from across the City. As a result, the service area for the Police Facilities IIP is citywide.

PROPORTIONATE SHARE ARS 9-463.05 (B)(3) states that the development fee shall not exceed a proportionate share of the cost of necessary public services needed to provide necessary public services to the development.

The Police Facilities IIP and development fees are assessed on both residential and nonresidential development as both types of development create a burden for additional police facilities. Calls for service by land use are used to determine the proportionate share of this burden. Based on call data for fiscal years 2006, 2009, and 2011, approximately 63% of non-road related calls were to residential addresses with the remaining 37% going to nonresidential addresses. Road related calls are omitted from this analysis because the origin and destination of these trips is unknown and thus these calls cannot be attributed to residential or nonresidential land uses.


42

Figure 31: Calls for Service by Land Use

The Animal Control components of the Police Facilities IIP and Development Fees are assessed only on residential development as this type of development creates 100% of the burden for additional animal control infrastructure. Nonresidential development does not create additional burden for animal control infrastructure, thus its proportionate share is 0% and is not assessed this IIP and development fees.

IIP FOR POLICE FACILITIES

For each necessary public service that is the subject of a development fee, ARS 9-463.05(E) requires the IIP to include seven elements. This section details each of these seven elements for the Police Facilities IIP.

IIP Element #1



A total of $14,531,826 of capital needs for Police has been identified. This includes planned projects from the City’s Capital Improvement Plan and outstanding debt service payments for existing debt for Police facilities over the next ten years. Of this total, $7,479,695 is the result of new development and is included in the IIP and development fee calculations. The balance of these projects reflect the costs to upgrade, improve, expand, correct or replace Police facilities to meet existing needs and usage and stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards.

2006 1 2009 2 2011 2 TOTALResidential 1,442 14,070 14,166 29,678 63%Nonresidential 971 9,326 7,458 17,755 37%Total 2,413 23,396 21,624 47,433 100%

Source: City of Casa Grande Police Department. Excludes road-related calls for service.

1. One month data set.2. One year data set.


43


IIP Element #2



The City constructed the Public Safety Building to serve to future residential and nonresidential development. The buy-in methodology is used to calculate the Police Department’s share of this building. Based on discussions with City staff and development projections from the Land Use Assumptions document, the station will have sufficient capacity to serve existing and future development through FY 2030.

The buy-in LOS for Police facilities is 0.50 square per person and 0.13 square feet per nonresidential vehicle trip. The buy-in LOS for residential development is calculated as follows: 12,981 square feet attributable to new development/25,995 persons from new residential development through FY 2030 = 0.50 square feet per person. This calculation is repeated for nonresidential development using the nonresidential factors.

Total Police Capital Needs 1 $14,531,826


Balance 2 $7,052,130

1. City of Casa Grande, Capital Improvement Plan FY 2013- FY 2017 plus projected debt service payments for

Police share of Public Safety Building over next 10 years.2. Reflects costs to upgrade, update, improve, expand, correct or replace those necessary public services to meet existing needs and usage and stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards.


44

Figure 33: IIP Element #2 – Police Share of Public Safety Building

The City’s current fleet of police vehicle totals 69 eligible units serving the current population of 49,183 persons and 88,956 nonresidential vehicle trips. The current level-of-service for residential development for police vehicles is 0.0009 units per person. The calculation for the current level-of-service for residential development is as follows: (69 units x 63% proportionate share)/49,183 persons = 0.0009 units per person. This calculation is repeated using nonresidential factors resulting in a current level-of-service for nonresidential development of 0.0003 units per nonresidential vehicle trip.

Square FeetPolice Share of Public Safety Building 60,000

Proportionate Share Residential Calls for Service 63% Nonresidential Calls for Service 37% TOTAL 100%

Residential DevelopmentPersons % Attributable

Existing Res. Development 49,183 65%New Res. Development 25,995 35%TOTAL POPULATION FY 2030 75,177 100%

Square FeetSquare Feet for Existing Res. Development 24,560Square Feet for New Res. Development 12,981TOTAL 37,541

LOS for Existing Res. Development: SF per Perso 0.50LOS for New Res. Development: SF per Person 0.50


Vehicle Trips % Attributable Existing Nonres. Development 88,956 52%New Nonres. Development 81,658 48%TOTAL TRIPS FY 2030 170,614 100%

Square FeetSquare Feet for Existing Nonres. Development 11,710Square Feet for New Nonres. Development 10,749TOTAL 22,459

LOS for Existing Res. Development: SF per Trip 0.13LOS for New Res. Development: SF per Trip 0.13

Eligible Facilities


45

Figure 34: IIP Element #2 – Police Vehicles

The City’s current inventory of eligible communications equipment totals 235 units. The current level-of-service for Police communications equipment for residential development is 0.0030 units per person. The calculation for the current level-of-service for residential development is as follows: (235 units x 63% proportionate share)/49,183 persons = 0.0030 units per person. This calculation is repeated using nonresidential factors resulting in a current level-of-service for nonresidential development of 0.0010 units per nonresidential vehicle trip.

Eligible Vehicles # of Units

Patrol Sedan 33Patrol SUV 5Patrol Motorcycle 4Patrol Quad 2Prisoner Van 2SO/CID Sedan 13Support Van 1ID Van 1CID Pickup Truck 4Armored SWAT Vehicle 1Mobile Command Post 1SWAT Truck 1Ranger 1

TOTAL 69

1. City of Casa Grande Police Department. Includes all equipment needed to place the unit is service.


Total Number of Units 69Proportionate Share (calls for service) 63%FY 2012 Demand Units Served (population) 49,183Current LOS: Units per Person 0.0009

NonresidentialTotal Number of Units 69Proportionate Share (calls for service) 37%FY 2012 Demand Units Served (trips) 88,956Current LOS: Units per Trip 0.0003


46

Figure 35: IIP Element #2 – Police Communications Equipment

The City’s current animal control facility has 32 kennels. The current LOS being provided to existing residential development is 0.0007 kennels per person. This is calculated as follows: (32 kennels x 100% residential proportionate share)/49,183 persons = 0.0007 kennels.

Eligible Equipment # of Units

Portable Radios 120Mobile Radios 60Radio Voter Sites 5Base Radios 4Dispatch Consoles 5Remote Microwaves 6Microwave 10G Main 1Dispatch Room Support Equipment 1150' Tower 1Computer Infrastructure 1Mobile Data Computers 30110' Monopole 1

TOTAL 235

1. City of Casa Grande Police Department.





47

Figure 36: IIP Element #2 – Animal Control Facilities

The City’s current fleet of animal control vehicles totals 3 eligible units serving the current population of 49,183 persons. The current level-of-service for residential development for animal control vehicles is 0.0001 units per person. The calculation for the current level-of-service for residential development is as follows: (3 units x 100% residential proportionate share)/49,183 persons = 0.0001 units per person.

KennelsAnimal Control Facil ities 32


Kennels 32Proportionate Share 100%FY 2012 Demand Units Served (population) 49,183Current LOS: Kennels per Person 0.0007

NonresidentialKennels 32Proportionate Share 0%FY 2012 Demand Units Served (trips) 88,956Current LOS: Kennels per Trip 0.0000


48

Figure 37: IIP Element #2 – Animal Control Vehicles

IIP Element #3



The original cost of the Police Department’s share of the Public Safety Building totals $36,562,048; an average of $609 per square foot ($36,562,048/60,000 square feet = $609 per square foot). The buy-in LOS is 0.50 square feet per person and 0.13 square feet per nonresidential vehicle trip. The buy-in cost per person is calculated as follows: 0.50 square feet per person x $609 per square foot = $304.30 per person. The buy-in cost per nonresidential vehicle trip is calculated as follows: 0.13 square feet per trip x $609 per square foot = $80.21 per nonresidential vehicle trip.

Eligible Vehicles # of UnitsPickup Truck 1Pickup Truck with Box 2

TOTAL 3

1. City of Casa Grande Police Department. Includes all equipment needed to place the unit in service.





49

Figure 38: IIP Element #3 – Police Share of Public Safety Building

The City’s current fleet of 69 eligible police vehicles has a current replication value of $3,872,000; an average cost of $56,116 per vehicle. Based on the current residential level-of-service of 0.0009 vehicles per person, the cost per person equals $49.26 (0.0009 vehicles per person x $56,116 per vehicle = $49.26 per person). This calculation is repeated for nonresidential development resulting in a cost per nonresidential vehicle trip of $16.29 (0.0003 vehicles per nonresidential vehicle trip x $56,116 per vehicle = $16.29 per nonresidential vehicle trip).

Police Share Public Safety Building 1 $36,562,048


Cost per SF $609

1. Original construction cost plus financing costs.

LOS for New Res. Development: SF per Person 0.50LOS for New Nonres. Development: SF per Trip 0.13


Buy-in Cost per Person $304.30Buy-in Cost per Trip $80.21


50

Figure 39: IIP Element #3 – Vehicles

The Police Department’s current inventory of communications equipment has a current replication value of $2,655,000; an average cost of $11,298 per unit. Based on the current residential level-of-service of 0.0030 units per person, the cost per person equals $33.78 (0.0030 units per person x $11,298 per unit = $33.78 per person). This calculation is repeated for nonresidential development resulting in a cost per nonresidential vehicle trip of $11.17 (0.0010 units per nonresidential vehicle trip x $11,298 per unit = $11.17 per nonresidential vehicle trip).

Eligible Vehicles# of

UnitsReplication

Value/Unit 1

Total Replication

ValuePatrol Sedan 33 $56,000 $1,848,000Patrol SUV 5 $60,000 $300,000Patrol Motorcycle 4 $40,000 $160,000Patrol Quad 2 $8,000 $16,000Prisoner Van 2 $35,000 $70,000SO/CID Sedan 13 $24,000 $312,000Support Van 1 $20,000 $20,000ID Van 1 $22,000 $22,000CID Pickup Truck 4 $28,000 $112,000Armored SWAT Vehicle 1 $350,000 $350,000Mobile Command Post 1 $600,000 $600,000SWAT Truck 1 $50,000 $50,000Ranger 1 $12,000 $12,000

TOTAL 69 $3,872,000

Average Cost per Unit $56,116

1. City of Casa Grande Police Department. Includes all equipment neededto place the unit in service.

Cost AnalysisResidential

Current LOS: Units per Person 0.0009Average Cost per Unit $56,116Cost per Person $49.26

NonresidentialCurrent LOS: Units per Trip 0.0003Average Cost per Unit $56,116Cost per Nonresidential Trip $16.29


51

Figure 40: IIP Element #3 – Communications Equipment

The City plans to spend $60,000 to construct an additional 12 kennels; an average of $5,000 per kennel. The current LOS is 0.0007 kennels per person. The planned cost per person is calculated as follows: 0.0007 kennels per person x $5,000 per kennel = $3.25 per person.

Eligible Vehicles# of Units

Replication Value/Unit 1

Total Replication

ValuePortable Radios 120 $2,000 $240,000Mobile Radios 60 $2,000 $120,000Radio Voter Sites 5 $60,000 $300,000Base Radios 4 $20,000 $80,000Dispatch Consoles 5 $70,000 $350,000Remote Microwaves 6 $75,000 $450,000Microwave 10G Main 1 $100,000 $100,000Dispatch Room Support Equipm 1 $120,000 $120,000150' Tower 1 $250,000 $250,000Computer Infrastructure 1 $150,000 $150,000Mobile Data Computers 30 $9,000 $270,000110' Monopole 1 $225,000 $225,000

TOTAL 235 $2,655,000


1. City of Casa Grande Police Department.





52

Figure 41: IIP Element #3 – Animal Control Facilities

The City’s current fleet of 3 eligible animal control vehicles has a current replication value of $111,000; an average cost of $37,000 per vehicle. Based on the current residential level-of-service of 0.0001 vehicles per person, the cost per person equals $2.26 (0.0001 vehicles per person x $37,000 per vehicle = $2.26 per person).

Planned Expenditures1 $60,000

Kennels 12

Cost per Kennel $5,000

1. City of Casa Grande Capital Improvement Plan FY 2012 to FY 2017 .

Current LOS: Kennels per Person 0.0007

Planned Cost per Kennel $5,000



53

Figure 42: IIP Element #3 – Animal Control Vehicles

The cost to prepare the Police Facilities IIP and development fees totals $8,100. The City plans to update its report every five years. Based on this cost, proportionate share, and five year projections of new residential and nonresidential development from the Land Use Assumptions, the cost per person is $1.02 and per nonresidential vehicle trip is $0.06.


Eligible Vehicles # of UnitsReplication Value/Unit 1

Total Replication

ValuePickup Truck 1 $27,000 $27,000Pickup Truck with Box 2 $42,000 $84,000

TOTAL 3 $111,000


1. City of Casa Grande Police Department. Includes all equipment neededto place the unit in service.











TOTAL $52,200


$1,300


Unit




54

IIP Element #4



The number of persons per household and vehicle trips per square foot from the Land Use Assumptions is multiplied by the level-of-service standards for each component, which yields the number of units of infrastructure needed to serve one service unit by type of development. To determine the ratio of a service unit to various types of land uses, the number of units of infrastructure needed to serve one service unit by type of housing unit or one square foot of nonresidential building by type is then divided by the number of units of infrastructure needed to serve a single family house. This results in an equivalent demand unit (EDU) which serves as a basis for comparing the infrastructure needs of various land uses to a single family house. However, it should be noted, this does not assume that the impacts of commercial, industrial, and residential land uses are the same. This again, is simply an analytical technique used to provide a common unit of measure.

Using the police facility needs of a multi-family unit as an example, the number of persons per household (2.09) is multiplied by the buy-in level-of-service of 0.50 square feet per person. This results in 1.04 square feet of police facilities per multi-family unit. This figure is then divided by the number of square feet needed to serve a single family housing unit (1.55 square feet) which results in a ratio of 0.67 per EDU. This can be read as a multi-family unit having 67% of the needs of a single family unit. This calculation is repeated for all types of development and each component of the IIP.


55







Persons 1

Buy-in Police Facilities LOS:

Square Feet per Person 2

Facilities Square Feet per Service

Unit

Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Current Police Vehicles LOS:

Units per Person 3

Vehicles per Service Unit

Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Current Comm. Equip LOS:

Units per Person 4

Units per Service Unit

Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Single Family 1 Unit 3.11 0.50 1.55 1.00 0.0009 0.0027 1.00 0.0030 0.0093 1.00Multi-family 1 Unit 2.09 0.50 1.04 0.67 0.0009 0.0018 0.67 0.0030 0.0062 0.67Mobile Home/Park Model 1 Unit 2.42 0.50 1.21 0.78 0.0009 0.0021 0.78 0.0030 0.0072 0.78All Other Types of Housing 1 Unit 1.76 0.50 0.88 0.57 0.0009 0.0015 0.57 0.0030 0.0053 0.57

NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT


Adjusted Trip Ends 1

Buy-in Police Facilities LOS:

Square Feet per Trip 2


Unit

Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Current Police Vehicles LOS: Units per Trip 3


Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Current Comm. Equip LOS:

Units per Trip 5

Units per Service Unit

Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Commercial/Retail Development 0 - 100,000 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.01426 0.13 0.00188 0.00121 0.0003 0.0000041 0.00152 0.0010 0.0000141 0.00152 100,001 - 200,000 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.01279 0.13 0.00168 0.00108 0.0003 0.0000037 0.00136 0.0010 0.0000126 0.00136 Over 200,001 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.01129 0.13 0.00149 0.00096 0.0003 0.0000033 0.00120 0.0010 0.0000112 0.00120Office/Institutional 0 - 100,000 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.0067 0.13 0.00088 0.00057 0.0003 0.0000019 0.00071 0.0010 0.00000660 0.00071 100,001 - 200,000 square feet 0.0057 0.13 0.00075 0.00048 0.0000 0.0000000 0.00000 0.0000 0.00000000 0.00000 Over 200,001 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.0049 0.13 0.00064 0.00041 0.0003 0.0000014 0.00052 0.0010 0.00000480 0.00052Business Park 1 sq ft of building 0.0064 0.13 0.00084 0.00054 0.0003 0.0000019 0.00068 0.0010 0.00000631 0.00068Light Industrial 1 sq ft of building 0.0035 0.13 0.00046 0.00030 0.0003 0.0000010 0.00037 0.0010 0.00000345 0.00037Warehousing 1 sq ft of building 0.0018 0.13 0.00023 0.00015 0.0003 0.0000005 0.00019 0.0010 0.00000176 0.00019Manufacturing 1 sq ft of building 0.0019 0.13 0.00025 0.00016 0.0003 0.0000006 0.00020 0.0010 0.00000189 0.00020Hotel (per room) 1 room 2.815 0.13 0.37056 0.23856 0.0003 0.0008173 0.29934 0.0010 0.00278362 0.29934



Persons 1

Buy-in Animal Control

Facilities LOS: Kennels per

Person 5

Kennels per Service Unit

Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Current Animal Control

Vehicles LOS: Units per Person 6


Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

IIP and Dev Fee Study Cost per

Person 7


Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Single Family 1 Unit 3.11 0.0007 0.0020 1.00 0.0001 0.0002 1.00 $1.02 $3.18 1.00Multi-family 1 Unit 2.09 0.0007 0.0014 0.67 0.0001 0.0001 0.67 $1.02 $2.13 0.67Mobile Home/Park Model 1 Unit 2.42 0.0007 0.0016 0.78 0.0001 0.0001 0.78 $1.02 $2.47 0.78All Other Types of Housing 1 Unit 1.76 0.0007 0.0011 0.57 0.0001 0.0001 0.57 $1.02 $1.80 0.57




Buy-in Animal Control

Facilities LOS: Square Feet

per Trip 5


Unit

Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Current Animal Control

Vehicles LOS: Units per Trip 6


Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)


Trip 7


Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Commercial/Retail Development 0 - 100,000 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.01426 0.0000 0.0000000 0.00000 0.0000 0.0000000 0.00000 $0.06 $0.001 0.00025 100,001 - 200,000 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.01279 0.0000 0.0000000 0.00000 0.0000 0.0000000 0.00000 $0.06 $0.001 0.00023 Over 200,001 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.01129 0.0000 0.0000000 0.00000 0.0000 0.0000000 0.00000 $0.06 $0.001 0.00020Office/Institutional 0 - 100,000 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.0067 0.0000 0.0000000 0.00000 0.0000 0.00000000 0.00000 $0.06 $0.0004 0.00012 100,001 - 200,000 square feet 0.0057 0.0000 0.0000000 0.00000 0.0000 0.00000000 0.00000 $0.06 $0.0003 0.00010 Over 200,001 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.0049 0.0000 0.0000000 0.00000 0.0000 0.00000000 0.00000 $0.06 $0.0003 0.00009Business Park 1 sq ft of building 0.0064 0.0000 0.0000000 0.00000 0.0000 0.00000000 0.00000 $0.06 $0.0004 0.00011Light Industrial 1 sq ft of building 0.0035 0.0000 0.0000000 0.00000 0.0000 0.00000000 0.00000 $0.06 $0.0002 0.00006Warehousing 1 sq ft of building 0.0018 0.0000 0.0000000 0.00000 0.0000 0.00000000 0.00000 $0.06 $0.0001 0.00003Manufacturing 1 sq ft of building 0.0019 0.0000 0.0000000 0.00000 0.0000 0.00000000 0.00000 $0.06 $0.0001 0.00003Hotel (per room) 1 room 2.815 0.0000 0.0000000 0.00000 0.0000 0.00000000 0.00000 $0.06 $0.16 0.04976

1. Land Use Assumptions Document2. From Figure 33.3. From Figure 34.4. From Figure 35.5. From Figure 36.6. From Figure 37.7. From Figure 43.


56



The Land Use Assumptions projects an additional 4,509 housing units and 3,974,400 square feet of nonresidential buildings over the next ten years. These projected service units are multiplied by the levels-of-service standards for each of the IIP components. The projected demand of new development over the next ten years is shown in the figure below.



1 2013 472 350,000 1,112 4,090 1,094 2.2 72 2014 347 951,000 925 10,647 1,864 3.9 133 2015 400 951,000 1,073 10,647 1,937 4.0 144 2016 430 232,400 1,212 2,010 870 1.6 65 2017 430 232,400 1,212 2,010 870 1.6 66 2018 430 232,400 1,212 2,010 870 1.6 67 2019 430 232,400 1,212 2,010 870 1.6 68 2020 430 232,400 1,212 2,010 870 1.6 69 2021 570 280,200 1,632 2,442 1,136 2.1 7

10 2022 570 280,200 1,632 2,442 1,136 2.1 7

10 YEAR TOTAL 4,509 3,974,400 10 YEAR TOTAL 12,434 40,319 11,516 22.6 77

Necessary

Unit of


1 2013 472 350,000 1,112 4,090 0.72 0.07 $1,3652 2014 347 951,000 925 10,647 0.60 0.06 $1,5423 2015 400 951,000 1,073 10,647 0.70 0.07 $1,6934 2016 430 232,400 1,212 2,010 0.79 0.07 $1,3505 2017 430 232,400 1,212 2,010 0.79 0.07 $1,3506 2018 430 232,400 1,212 2,010 0.79 0.07 $1,3507 2019 430 232,400 1,212 2,010 0.79 0.07 $1,3508 2020 430 232,400 1,212 2,010 0.79 0.07 $1,3509 2021 570 280,200 1,632 2,442 1.06 0.10 $1,804

10 2022 570 280,200 1,632 2,442 1.06 0.10 $1,804

10 YEAR TOTAL 4,509 3,974,400 10 YEAR TOTAL 12,434 40,319 10 YEAR TOTAL 8 0.8 $14,960

1. Land Use Assumptions Document2. From Figure 33.3. From Figure 34.4. From Figure 35.5. From Figure 36.6. From Figure 37.7. From Figure 43.

Animal Control Facility

Projected Demand for Necessary Public Services or Facility Expansion @ Buy-in LOS 5

Kennel

Type of Developme

Residential Nornes. Type of Development

Residential

Projected Service Units Necessitated by New


Projected Demand Units Necessitated by New Development in Service Area 1

Projected Demand for Necessary Public Services or Facility Expansion @ Buy-inLOS 2


Expansion @ Current LOS 3

Service Units

1 housing unit

1 square foot of building

Demand Units persons trips Unit of Measurement

square feet Unit of Measurement

Nornes. Necessary Public Service

Police Facilities Necessary Public Service

Police Vehicles

vehicles


Type of Developme

Residential Nornes.Type of

Development Residential








Animal Control Vehicles

Service Units

1 housing unit


Demand Units persons trips

Unit of Measurement

units

Nornes.


Communications Equip.


Unit of Measurement

units

10 YEAR TOTAL

10 YEAR TOTAL


Expansion 7

Unit of Measurement

cost

10 YEAR TOTAL

IIP and Development



57

IIP Element #7



TischlerBise has projected ongoing and one-time revenues based on the development projections in the Land Use Assumptions document, characteristics of new development, and the City’s current revenue structure and rates. The revenues included in this analysis and the applicable rates and calculation methodologies are shown in the figure below.


58




Property Tax




All development



rev/capita2




rev/capita2




rev/capita2




Sales Tax


All development

2.00%

4.00%


59










Unit (revenues per

capita x persons per household) 4






Foot of Building 1


Assessed Value per Unit (10%

assessment ratio)


(20% assessment

ratio)

Construction Value per Unit for


Calculations 2


Foot for Construction

Sales Tax Calculations 2

Annual Retail Sales


Tax Calculations 3

Annual Retail Sales

Generated per Square

Foot for Sales Tax

Calculations 3


Year TOTAL2012 $728,911 $15,836,163 $6,508,043 $165,871 $137,103 $23,376,0912013 $945,341 $17,791,163 $2,494,570 $287,636 $237,749 $21,756,4592014 $1,450,873 $21,488,663 $4,797,208 $239,242 $197,748 $28,173,7342015 $1,964,332 $25,186,163 $4,931,966 $277,402 $229,290 $32,589,1532016 $2,144,963 $25,589,063 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $30,478,0972017 $2,325,595 $25,991,963 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $31,061,6282018 $2,506,227 $26,394,863 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $31,645,1602019 $2,686,858 $26,797,763 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $32,228,6922020 $2,867,490 $27,200,663 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $32,812,2232021 $3,104,879 $27,591,663 $2,896,353 $422,105 $348,897 $34,363,8972022 $3,342,267 $27,982,663 $2,896,353 $422,105 $348,897 $34,992,285

TOTAL $24,067,735 $267,850,793 $35,382,145 $3,381,622 $2,795,124 $333,477,420



Revenues 3





60


The debt service associated with the Public Safety Building will be repaid with future revenues. Thus, these contributions from new development are used in determining the extent of the burden imposed by new development. The figure below calculates a credit for future revenue contributions, which will be applied against the cost of serving new development in the development fee calculations. A net present value calculation is used to account for the value of future revenues in current dollars.

Figure 49: Future Revenue Credit for Public Safety Building


“Beginning August 1, 2014, for purposes of calculating the required offset to development fees pursuant to this subsection, if a municipality imposes a construction contracting or similar excise tax rate in excess of the percentage amount of the transaction privilege tax rate imposed on the majority of other transaction privilege tax classifications, the entire excess portion of the construction contracting or similar excise tax shall be treated as a contribution to the capital costs of necessary public services provided to development for which development fees are

Police ShareFiscal Public Safety Build Prop. Share Projected Credit per Prop. Share Projected Credit perYear Principal and Int. 63% Population Person 37% Trips Trip2013 $1,151,438 $720,435 49,824 $14.46 $431,003 115,561 $3.732014 $1,140,364 $713,506 50,936 $14.01 $426,858 119,652 $3.572015 $1,129,289 $706,576 51,861 $13.62 $422,713 130,299 $3.242016 $1,210,711 $757,520 52,934 $14.31 $453,190 140,946 $3.222017 $1,220,402 $763,584 54,146 $14.10 $456,818 142,956 $3.202018 $1,193,562 $746,791 55,358 $13.49 $446,771 144,966 $3.082019 $1,182,649 $739,963 56,570 $13.08 $442,686 146,976 $3.012020 $1,196,469 $748,609 57,782 $12.96 $447,859 148,986 $3.012021 $1,255,703 $785,672 58,994 $13.32 $470,032 150,997 $3.112022 $1,348,239 $843,570 60,626 $13.91 $504,669 153,438 $3.292023 $1,250,183 $782,218 62,258 $12.56 $467,965 155,880 $3.002024 $1,368,517 $856,257 63,890 $13.40 $512,260 158,321 $3.242025 $1,435,131 $897,937 65,522 $13.70 $537,195 160,763 $3.342026 $1,493,219 $934,281 67,154 $13.91 $558,938 163,204 $3.422027 $1,868,091 $1,168,832 69,160 $16.90 $699,259 165,057 $4.242028 $1,478,392 $925,004 71,166 $13.00 $553,388 166,909 $3.322029 $1,522,373 $952,522 73,172 $13.02 $569,851 168,762 $3.382030 $1,468,901 $919,066 75,177 $12.23 $549,835 170,614 $3.222031 $2,151,540 $1,346,181 77,183 $17.44 $805,359 172,467 $4.672032 $2,156,644 $1,349,374 79,189 $17.04 $807,269 173,724 $4.652033 $2,059,421 $1,288,544 81,195 $15.87 $770,877 174,982 $4.412034 $2,212,199 $1,384,134 83,195 $16.64 $828,065 176,239 $4.70

TOTAL $32,493,437 $20,330,576 $312.98 $12,162,861 $78.03

True Interest Cost 3.94% True Interest Cost 3.94%

Net Present Value $204.69 Net Present Value $50.43

Residential Nonresidential


61

assessed, unless the excess portion was already taken into account for such purpose pursuant to this subsection.”




2013FY 2013-

2014FY 2014-

2015FY 2015-

2016

FY 2016-2017 & beyond

TOTAL









TOTAL $3,245,000 $4,050,000 $6,500,000 $3,000,000 $5,000,000 $21,795,000



62

FIRE FACILITIES OVERVIEW

ARS 9-463.05 (T)(7)(f) defines the facilities and assets which can be included in the Fire Facilities IIP:

“Fire facilities, including all appurtenances, equipment and vehicles. Fire facilities do not include a facility or portion of a facility that is used to replace services that were once provided elsewhere in the municipality, vehicles and equipment used to provide administrative services, helicopters or airplanes or a facility that is used for training officers from more than one station or substation.”

The Fire Facilities IIP includes components for the Fire Department’s share of the Public Safety Building, fire stations, apparatus, communications equipment, and the cost of preparing the Fire Facilities IIP and Development Fees. The buy-in methodology is used to calculate the Public Safety Building component while a combination of the buy-in/plan-based methodologies is used for the fire station component. The incremental expansion methodology based on the current level-of-service is used to calculate the apparatus and communications equipment components of the Fire Facilities IIP and Development Fees.

The Fire Facilities IIP also includes a credit for future revenues to be used to retire debt service associated with Fire infrastructure.

SERVICE AREA

The City’s Fire Department strives to provide a uniform response time citywide. The City’s networks of fire stations are planned and operate as an integrated network. Depending on the number and type of calls, apparatus can be dispatched across the City from any of the stations. As a result, the service area for the Fire Facilities IIP is citywide.


The Fire Facilities IIP and development fees are assessed on both residential and nonresidential development as both types of development create a burden for additional police facilities. Calls for service by land use are used to determine the proportionate share of this burden. Based call data for FY 2009 and FY 2011, approximately 51% of non-road related calls were to residential addresses with the remaining 49% going to nonresidential addresses. Road related calls are omitted from this analysis because the origin and destination of these trips is unknown and thus these calls cannot be attributed to residential or nonresidential land uses.


63

Figure 51: Calls for Service by Land Use

IIP FOR FIRE FACILITIES

For each necessary public service that is the subject of a development fee, ARS 9-463.05(E) requires the IIP to include seven elements. This section details each of these seven elements for the Fire Facilities IIP.

IIP Element #1



A total of $31,203,078 of capital needs for Fire has been identified. This includes planned projects from the City’s Capital Improvement Plan and outstanding debt service payments for existing debt for the Fire Department’s share of the Public Safety Facility and Fire Station 504 over the next ten years. Of this total, $13,593,936 is the result of new development and is included in the IIP and development fee calculations. The balance of these projects reflect the costs to upgrade, improve, expand, correct or replace Fire facilities to meet existing needs and usage and stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards.

2009 2011 TOTALResidential 2,391 3,272 5,663 51%Nonresidential 2,450 2,942 5,392 49%Total 4,841 6,214 11,055 100%

Source: City of Casa Grande Fire Department. Excludes road-related calls for service.


64


IIP Element #2



The City constructed the Public Safety Building to serve to future residential and nonresidential development. The buy-in methodology is used to calculate the Fire Department’s share of this building. Based on discussions with City staff and development projections from the Land Use Assumptions document, the facility will have sufficient capacity to serve existing and future development through FY 2030.

The buy-in LOS for the Public Safety Building is 0.03 square per person and 0.06 square feet per job. The buy-in LOS for residential development is calculated as follows: 850 square feet attributable to new development/25,995 persons from new residential development through FY 2030 = 0.03 square feet per person. This calculation is repeated for nonresidential development using the nonresidential factors.

Total Fire Capital Needs 1 $31,203,078


Balance 2 $17,609,142

1. City of Casa Grande, Capital Improvement Plan FY 2013- FY 2017 plus projected debt service payments for

Fire share of Public Safety Building and Station 504 over next 10 years.2. Reflects costs to upgrade, update, improve, expand, correct or replace those necessary public services to meet existing needs and usage and stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards.


65

Figure 53: IIP Element #2 – Fire Share of Public Safety Building

The City currently has 29,276 square feet of fire stations which were oversized in anticipation of future development. Discussions with City staff indicate these facilities have sufficient capacity to serve existing and new development through FY 2014. The current LOS for residential development for fire facilities is 0.29 square feet per person. The calculation for the current level-of-service for residential development is as follows: 516 square feet attributable to new residential development/1,754 persons from new residential development through FY 2014 = 0.29 square feet per person. This calculation is repeated using nonresidential factors resulting in a current level-of-service for nonresidential development of 0.74 square feet per job.

Square FeetFire Share of Public Safety Building 4,800




Square FeetSquare Feet for Existing Res. Development 1,609Square Feet for New Res. Development 850TOTAL 2,459

LOS for Existing Res. Development: SF per Person 0.03LOS for New Res. Development: SF per Person 0.03


Jobs % Attributable Existing Nonres. Development 13,768 37%New Nonres. Development 23,420 63%TOTAL JOBS FY 2030 37,188 100%

Square FeetSquare Feet for Existing Nonres. Development 867Square Feet for New Nonres. Development 1,474TOTAL 2,341

LOS for Existing Res. Development: SF per Job 0.06LOS for New Res. Development: SF per Job 0.06

Eligible Facilities


66

Figure 54: IIP Element #2 – Fire Stations

Square FeetStation 501 8,131Station 502 3,000Station 503 5,600Station 504 12,545TOTAL 29,276




Square FeetSquare Feet for Existing Res. Development 14,481Square Feet for New Res. Development 516TOTAL 14,997






Eligible Facilities


67

The City’s current fleet of fire apparatus and vehicles totals 26 eligible units serving the current population of 49,183 persons and 13,768 jobs. The current level-of-service for residential development for fire apparatus is 0.0003 units per person. The calculation for the current level-of-service for residential development is as follows: (26 units x 51% proportionate share)/49,183 persons = 0.0003 units per person. This calculation is repeated using nonresidential factors resulting in a current level-of-service for nonresidential development of 0.0009 units per job.


68

Figure 55: IIP Element #2 – Fire Apparatus and Vehicles

Eligible Vehicles # of Units

Fire Engine 5100' Platform Truck 1114' Articulating Platform Truck 155' Skyboom Truck 1Water Tender 1Water Tender CAFS 1Heavy Rescue 1Hazardous Materials Truck 1Rescue Ambulance 1Brush Truck 70/35 1Brush Truck 250/125 1BC Command Vehicle 1AFC Command Vehicle 1Fire Marshall 1Fire Inspector 1Prevention Van 1Cub Cadet 4X6 1Special Event Trailer 1Scotty Public Education Trailer 1Burn Trailer 1Mass Casualty Trailer 1Fire Extinguisher Trailer 1

TOTAL 26

1. City of Casa Grande Fire Department. Includes all equipment neededto place the unit in service.



NonresidentialTotal Number of Units 26Proportionate Share (calls for service) 49%FY 2012 Demand Units Served (jobs) 13,768Current LOS: Units per Job 0.0009


69

The City’s current inventory of eligible communications equipment has a current replication value of $300,000. The current cost for Fire communications equipment for residential development is $3.12 per person. The calculation for the current cost for residential development is as follows: ($300,000 x 51% proportionate share)/49,183 persons = $3.12 per person. This calculation is repeated using nonresidential factors resulting in a current cost for nonresidential development of $10.63 units per job.

Figure 56: IIP Element #2 – Fire Communications Equipment

IIP Element #3



The original cost of the Fire Department’s share of the Public Safety Building includes 4,800 square feet with an original cost of $2,924,964; an average of $609 per square foot. The buy-in LOS is 0.03 square feet per person and 0.06 square feet per job. The buy-in cost per person is calculated as follows: 0.03

ReplicationValue 1

Current communications system including base stations, repeaters, frequencies, base radios, mobile radios.

1. City of Casa Grande Fire Department.


Total Replication Value $300,000Proportionate Share (calls for service) 51%FY 2012 Demand Units Served (population) 49,183Cost per Person $3.12

NonresidentiaTotal Replication Value $300,000Proportionate Share (calls for service) 49%FY 2012 Demand Units Served (jobs) 13,768Cost per Job $10.63

$300,000


70

square feet per person x $609 per square foot = $19.93 per person. The buy-in cost per job is calculated as follows: 0.06 square feet per job x $609 per square foot = $38.36 per job.

Figure 57: IIP Element #3 – Fire Share of Public Safety Building

The City recently completed Station 504 and plans to build Station 505. The total cost of these stations is $10,109,067, or $403 per square foot ($10,109,067/25,090 square feet = $403 per square foot). The current LOS is 0.29 square feet per person and 0.74 square feet per job. The cost per person is calculated as follows: 0.29 square feet per person x $403 per square foot = $118.63 per person. The cost per job is calculated as follows: 0.74 square feet per job x $403 per square foot = $296.21 per job.

Figure 58: IIP Element #3 – Fire Stations

Fire Share Public Safety Building 1 $2,924,964


Cost per SF $609


LOS for New Res. Development: SF per Person 0.03LOS for New Nonres. Development: SF per Job 0.06


Buy-in Cost per Person $19.93Buy-in Cost per Job $38.36

Station 504 1 (completed) $5,109,067Station 505 2 (planned) $5,000,000TOTAL $10,109,067


Cost per SF $403






71

The City’s current fleet of 26 fire apparatus units and vehicles has a current replication value of $12,913,500, an average cost of $496,673 per unit. Based on the current residential level-of-service of 0.0003 vehicles per person, the cost per person equals $134.50 (0.0003 vehicles per person x $496,673 per vehicle = $134.50 per person). This calculation is repeated for nonresidential development resulting in a cost per job of $457.47 (0.0009 vehicles per job x $496,673 per vehicle = $457.47 per job).


72

Figure 59: IIP Element #3 – Fire Apparatus and Vehicles

Eligible Vehicles# of Units

Replication Value/Unit 1

Total Replication

ValueFire Engine 5 $835,000 $4,175,000100' Platform Truck 1 $1,350,000 $1,350,000114' Articulating Platform Truc 1 $1,389,000 $1,389,00055' Skyboom Truck 1 $1,175,000 $1,175,000Water Tender 1 $725,000 $725,000Water Tender CAFS 1 $725,000 $725,000Heavy Rescue 1 $650,000 $650,000Hazardous Materials Truck 1 $1,450,000 $1,450,000Rescue Ambulance 1 $215,000 $215,000Brush Truck 70/35 1 $165,000 $165,000Brush Truck 250/125 1 $330,000 $330,000BC Command Vehicle 1 $55,000 $55,000AFC Command Vehicle 1 $55,000 $55,000Fire Marshall 1 $45,000 $45,000Fire Inspector 1 $35,000 $35,000Prevention Van 1 $40,000 $40,000Cub Cadet 4X6 1 $35,000 $35,000Special Event Trailer 1 $12,000 $12,000Scotty Public Education Trailer 1 $120,000 $120,000Burn Trailer 1 $135,000 $135,000Mass Casualty Trailer 1 $25,000 $25,000Fire Extinguisher Trailer 1 $7,500 $7,500

TOTAL 26 $12,913,500


1. City of Casa Grande Fire Department. Includes all equipment neededto place the unit in service.



NonresidentialCurrent LOS: Units per Job 0.0009Average Cost per Unit $496,673Cost per Job $457.47


73

The City’s current inventory of eligible communications equipment has a current replication value of $300,000. The current cost for Fire communications equipment for residential development is $3.12 per person. The calculation for the current cost for residential development is as follows: ($300,000 x 51% proportionate share)/49,183 persons = $3.12 per person. This calculation is repeated using nonresidential factors resulting in a current cost for nonresidential development of $10.63 units per job.

Figure 60: IIP Element #3 – Communications Equipment

The cost to prepare the Fire Facilities IIP and development fees totals $8,900. The City plans to update its report every five years. Based on this cost, proportionate share, and five year projections of new residential and nonresidential development from the Land Use Assumptions, the cost per person is $0.92 and per job is $0.34.

ReplicationValue 1

Current communications system including base stations, repeaters, frequencies, base radios, mobile radios.

1. City of Casa Grande Fire Department.


Total Replication Value $300,000Proportionate Share (calls for service) 51%FY 2012 Demand Units Served (population) 49,183Cost per Person $3.12

NonresidentiaTotal Replication Value $300,000Proportionate Share (calls for service) 49%FY 2012 Demand Units Served (jobs) 13,768Cost per Job $10.63

$300,000


74


IIP Element #4



The number of persons per household and vehicle trips per square foot from the Land Use Assumptions document is multiplied by the level-of-service standards for each component of the IIP, which yields the number of units of infrastructure needed to serve one service unit by type of development. To determine the ratio of a service unit to various types of land uses, the number of units of infrastructure needed to serve one service unit by type of housing unit or one square foot of nonresidential building by type is then divided by the number of units of infrastructure needed to serve a single family house. This results in an equivalent demand unit (EDU) which serves as a basis for comparing the infrastructure needs of various land uses to a single family house. However, it should be noted, this does not assume that the impacts of commercial, industrial, and residential land uses are the same. This again, is simply an analytical technique used to provide a common unit of measure.

Using the demands of a multi-family unit for the Fire Department’s share of the Public Safety Building as an example, the number of persons per household (2.09) is multiplied by the buy-in level-of-service of 0.03 square feet per person. This results in 0.07 square feet of facilities per multi-family unit. This figure is then divided by the number of square feet needed to serve a single family housing unit (0.10 square feet) which results in a ratio of 0.67 per EDU. This can be read as a multi-family unit having 67% of the needs of a single family unit. This calculation is repeated for all types of development and each component of the IIP.








TOTAL $52,200


$1,300


Unit




75







Persons 1

Buy-in Fire Share Pub. Safety Build. LOS: Square Feet

per Person 2


Unit

Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Buy-in Fire Station LOS: Square Feet per Person 3


Unit

Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Current Fire Apparatus LOS:

Units per Person 4


Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Single Family 1 Unit 3.11 0.03 0.10 1.00 0.29 0.92 1.00 0.0003 0.0008 1.00Multi-family 1 Unit 2.09 0.03 0.07 0.67 0.29 0.61 0.67 0.0003 0.0006 0.67Mobile Home/Park Model 1 Unit 2.42 0.03 0.08 0.78 0.29 0.71 0.78 0.0003 0.0007 0.78All Other Types of Housing 1 Unit 1.76 0.03 0.06 0.57 0.29 0.52 0.57 0.0003 0.0005 0.57


Type Service Unit # of Jobs 1

Buy-in Fire Share Pub. Safety Build. LOS: Square Feet

per Job 2


Unit

Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Buy-in Fire Station LOS: Square Feet

per Job 3


Unit

Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Current Fire Apparatus LOS: Units per Job 4


Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Commercial/Retail Development 0 - 100,000 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.00250 0.06 0.00016 0.00155 0.74 0.00184 0.0020 0.0009 0.0000023 0.0027 100,001 - 200,000 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.00222 0.06 0.00014 0.00137 0.74 0.00163 0.0018 0.0009 0.0000020 0.0024 Over 200,001 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.00200 0.06 0.00013 0.00124 0.74 0.00147 0.0016 0.0009 0.0000018 0.0022Office/Institutional 0 - 100,000 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.0037 0.06 0.00023 0.00229 0.74 0.00272 0.0030 0.0009 0.0000034 0.0040 100,001 - 200,000 square feet 0.0035 0.06 0.00022 0.00216 0.74 0.00257 0.0028 0.0000 0.0000000 0.0000 Over 200,001 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.0033 0.06 0.00021 0.00204 0.74 0.00242 0.0026 0.0009 0.0000030 0.0036Business Park 1 sq ft of building 0.0032 0.06 0.00020 0.00196 0.74 0.00232 0.0025 0.0009 0.0000029 0.0035Light Industrial 1 sq ft of building 0.0023 0.06 0.00015 0.00143 0.74 0.00170 0.0019 0.0009 0.0000021 0.0025Warehousing 1 sq ft of building 0.0009 0.06 0.00006 0.00057 0.74 0.00068 0.0007 0.0009 0.0000008 0.0010Manufacturing 1 sq ft of building 0.0018 0.06 0.00011 0.00111 0.74 0.00132 0.0014 0.0009 0.0000016 0.0020Hotel (per room) 1 room 0.44 0.06 0.02770 0.27228 0.74 0.32347 0.3532 0.0009 0.0004053 0.4811



Persons 1

Current Comm. Facilities LOS:

Cost per Person 5


Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

IIP and Dev Fee Study Cost

per Person 6


Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)Single Family 1 Unit 3.11 $3.12 $9.72 1.00 $0.92 $2.86 1.00Multi-family 1 Unit 2.09 $3.12 $6.52 0.67 $0.92 $1.92 0.67Mobile Home/Park Model 1 Unit 2.42 $3.12 $7.56 0.78 $0.92 $2.22 0.78All Other Types of Housing 1 Unit 1.76 $3.12 $5.51 0.57 $0.92 $1.62 0.57


Type Service Unit # of Jobs 1Current Comm. Facilities LOS: Cost per Job 5


Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)


per Job 6


Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)Commercial/Retail Development 0 - 100,000 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.00250 $10.63 $0.03 0.003 $0.34 $0.000006 0.0000022 100,001 - 200,000 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.00222 $10.63 $0.02 0.002 $0.34 $0.000005 0.0000017 Over 200,001 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.00200 $10.63 $0.02 0.002 $0.34 $0.000004 0.0000014Office/Institutional 0 - 100,000 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.0037 $10.63 $0.04 0.004 $0.34 $0.000014 0.0000048 100,001 - 200,000 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.0035 $10.63 $0.04 0.004 $0.34 $0.000012 0.0000043 Over 200,001 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.0033 $10.63 $0.03 0.004 $0.34 $0.000011 0.0000038Business Park 1 sq ft of building 0.0032 $10.63 $0.03 0.003 $0.34 $0.000010 0.0000035Light Industrial 1 sq ft of building 0.0023 $10.63 $0.02 0.003 $0.34 $0.000005 0.0000019Warehousing 1 sq ft of building 0.0009 $10.63 $0.01 0.001 $0.34 $0.000001 0.0000003Manufacturing 1 sq ft of building 0.0018 $10.63 $0.02 0.002 $0.34 $0.000003 0.0000011Hotel (per room) 1 room 0.44 $10.63 $5 0.481 $0.34 $0.19 0.07

1. Land Use Assumptions Document2. From Figure 53.3. From Figure 54.4. From Figure 55.5. From Figure 56.6. From Figure 61.


76



The Land Use Assumptions projects an additional 4,509 housing units and 3,974,400 square feet of nonresidential buildings over the next ten years. These projected service units are multiplied by the levels-of-service standards for each of the IIP components. The projected demand of new development over the next ten years is shown in the figure below.



1 2013 472 350,000 1,112 979 98 1,047 1.22 2014 347 951,000 925 3,134 228 2,577 3.13 2015 400 951,000 1,073 3,134 232 2,620 3.24 2016 430 232,400 1,212 768 88 922 1.05 2017 430 232,400 1,212 768 88 922 1.06 2018 430 232,400 1,212 768 88 922 1.07 2019 430 232,400 1,212 768 88 922 1.08 2020 430 232,400 1,212 768 88 922 1.09 2021 570 280,200 1,632 969 114 1,193 1.3

10 2022 570 280,200 1,632 969 114 1,193 1.3

10 YEAR TOTAL 4,509 3,974,400 10 YEAR TOTAL 12,434 13,026 1,227 13,237 15.4


1 2013 472 350,000 1,112 979 $13,876 $1,3562 2014 347 951,000 925 3,134 $36,201 $1,9223 2015 400 951,000 1,073 3,134 $36,662 $2,0574 2016 430 232,400 1,212 768 $11,952 $1,3765 2017 430 232,400 1,212 768 $11,952 $1,3766 2018 430 232,400 1,212 768 $11,952 $1,3767 2019 430 232,400 1,212 768 $11,952 $1,3768 2020 430 232,400 1,212 768 $11,952 $1,3769 2021 570 280,200 1,632 969 $15,397 $1,831

10 2022 570 280,200 1,632 969 $15,397 $1,831

10 YEAR TOTAL 4,509 3,974,400 10 YEAR TOTAL 12,434 13,026 $177,293 $15,877

1. Land Use Assumptions Document2. From Figure 53.3. From Figure 54.4. From Figure 55.5. From Figure 56.6. From Figure 61.

Type of Developme


Residential








Apparatus

Service Units

1 housing unit


Demand Units persons jobs Unit of Measurement



Fire share Pub. Safety Build.


Fire Stations Necessary Public Service


units

10 YEAR TOTAL 10 YEAR TOTAL 10 YEAR TOTAL







Expansion 6

Type of Developme

Residential Nornes.Type of

Development Residential Nornes. Necessary Public Service

Communications Equip.


IIP and Dev. Fee Study

cost


Service Units

1 housing unit



cost Unit of Measurement


77

IIP Element #7





78


The figure below lists the revenue characteristics of new development that is used to forecast revenues.


Property Tax




All development



rev/capita2




rev/capita2




rev/capita2




Sales Tax


All development

2.00%

4.00%


79


TischlerBise’s forecast of revenues for the next ten years is shown in the figure below based on the development projections from the Land Use Assumptions document, revenue assumptions and rates, and revenue characteristics of new development.








Unit (revenues per







Foot of Building 1



assessment ratio)


(20% assessment

ratio)



Calculations 2




Annual Retail Sales


Tax Calculations 3

Annual Retail Sales


Foot for Sales Tax

Calculations 3


Year TOTAL2012 $728,911 $15,836,163 $6,508,043 $165,871 $137,103 $23,376,0912013 $945,341 $17,791,163 $2,494,570 $287,636 $237,749 $21,756,4592014 $1,450,873 $21,488,663 $4,797,208 $239,242 $197,748 $28,173,7342015 $1,964,332 $25,186,163 $4,931,966 $277,402 $229,290 $32,589,1532016 $2,144,963 $25,589,063 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $30,478,0972017 $2,325,595 $25,991,963 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $31,061,6282018 $2,506,227 $26,394,863 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $31,645,1602019 $2,686,858 $26,797,763 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $32,228,6922020 $2,867,490 $27,200,663 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $32,812,2232021 $3,104,879 $27,591,663 $2,896,353 $422,105 $348,897 $34,363,8972022 $3,342,267 $27,982,663 $2,896,353 $422,105 $348,897 $34,992,285

TOTAL $24,067,735 $267,850,793 $35,382,145 $3,381,622 $2,795,124 $333,477,420



Revenues 3





80


The debt service associated with the Public Safety Building and Station 504 will be repaid with future revenues. Thus, these contributions from new development are used in determining the extent of the burden imposed by new development. The figure below calculates a credit for future revenue contributions, which will be applied against the cost of serving new development in the development fee calculations. A net present value calculation is used to account for the value of future revenues in current dollars.

Figure 67: Future Revenue Credit for Fire Facilities



Fire Share Fiscal Public Safety Build Station 504 Prop. Share Projected Credit per Prop. Share Projected Credit perYear Principal and Int. Principal and Int. TOTAL 51% Population Person 49% Jobs Trip2013 $92,115 $131,010 $223,125 $114,297 49,824 $2.29 $108,828 18,444 $5.902014 $91,229 $128,624 $219,853 $112,621 50,936 $2.21 $107,232 19,423 $5.522015 $90,343 $126,237 $216,580 $110,945 51,861 $2.14 $105,636 22,557 $4.682016 $96,857 $123,680 $220,537 $112,972 52,934 $2.13 $107,566 25,692 $4.192017 $97,632 $125,669 $223,301 $114,388 54,146 $2.11 $108,914 26,460 $4.122018 $95,485 $147,033 $242,518 $124,231 55,358 $2.24 $118,286 27,228 $4.342019 $94,612 $153,510 $248,122 $127,102 56,570 $2.25 $121,020 27,996 $4.322020 $95,717 $162,783 $258,500 $132,419 57,782 $2.29 $126,082 28,765 $4.382021 $100,456 $172,646 $273,103 $139,899 58,994 $2.37 $133,204 29,533 $4.512022 $107,859 $166,010 $273,869 $140,291 60,626 $2.31 $133,578 30,502 $4.382023 $100,015 $160,555 $260,570 $133,479 62,258 $2.14 $127,091 31,471 $4.042024 $109,481 $162,885 $272,366 $139,522 63,890 $2.18 $132,845 32,440 $4.102025 $114,810 $160,341 $275,151 $140,948 65,522 $2.15 $134,203 33,409 $4.022026 $119,458 $159,929 $279,387 $143,118 67,154 $2.13 $136,269 34,377 $3.962027 $149,447 $0 $149,447 $76,555 69,160 $1.11 $72,892 35,080 $2.082028 $118,271 $0 $118,271 $60,585 71,166 $0.85 $57,686 35,783 $1.612029 $121,790 $0 $121,790 $62,388 73,172 $0.85 $59,402 36,485 $1.632030 $117,512 $0 $117,512 $60,196 75,177 $0.80 $57,316 37,188 $1.542031 $172,123 $0 $172,123 $88,171 77,183 $1.14 $83,952 37,890 $2.222032 $172,531 $0 $172,531 $88,380 79,189 $1.12 $84,151 38,387 $2.192033 $164,754 $0 $164,754 $84,396 81,195 $1.04 $80,357 38,883 $2.072034 $176,976 $0 $176,976 $90,657 83,195 $1.09 $86,319 39,380 $2.19

TOTAL $2,599,475 $2,080,913 $4,680,388 $2,397,561 $38.97 $2,282,827 $77.99

True Interest Cost 3.94% True Interest Cost 3.94%

Net Present Value $27.38 Net Present Value $55.59



81




2013FY 2013-

2014FY 2014-

2015FY 2015-

2016

FY 2016-2017 & beyond

TOTAL









TOTAL $3,245,000 $4,050,000 $6,500,000 $3,000,000 $5,000,000 $21,795,000



82

GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITIES OVERVIEW

ARS 9-463.05 (T)(7)(f) does not include General Government Facilities as a necessary public service. However, facilities which have been debt financed can be included in the IIP and development fees:

“Any facility that was financed and that meets all of the requirements prescribed in subsection R of this section.

R. A municipality may continue to assess a development fee adopted before January 1, 2012 for any facility that was financed before June 1, 2011 if:


2. After August 1, 2014, any development fees collected under this subsection are used solely for the payment of principal and interest on the portion of the bonds, notes or other debt service obligations issued before June 1, 2011 to finance construction of the facility.”

The City has outstanding debt service for City Hall, the North Operations Center (NOC), and Courthouse which meets the above criteria. Given that these existing facilities were oversized in anticipation of new development, the buy-in methodology is used to calculate the General Government Facilities IIP. The cost of preparing the General Government Facilities IIP and development fees is also included in the General Government Facilities IIP.

The IIP also includes a credit for future revenues to be used to retire debt service associated with General Government infrastructure.

SERVICE AREA

The General Government facilities are one-of-a-kind, unique facilities which serves the City as a whole. Thus, the General Government Facilities have a citywide service area.


The City Hall and NOC components of the General Government Facilities IIP uses a functional population concept to allocate the proportionate burdens and costs between residential and nonresidential development. The table distinguishes time at home (2/3 of a day, 16 hours) versus time at work (1/3 of a day, 8 hours) and accounts for commuting patterns in Casa Grande. According to data from the Census Bureau, 66% of workers living in the City go to work outside of the City. Based on the total


83

number of jobs in Casa Grande, there is also in-migration of non-resident workers. According to the functional population analysis, residential development accounts for 91% of the demand for General Government facilities and nonresidential development accounts for 9% of the infrastructure demand.

Figure 69: Functional Population

The Courthouse component of the General Government Facilities IIP utilizes the same proportionate share factors as the Police Facilities IIP due to relationship between the functions of these two facilities.

IIP FOR GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITIES

For each necessary public service that is the subject of a development fee, ARS 9-463.05(E) requires the IIP to include seven elements. This section details each of these seven elements for the General Government Facilities IIP.

IIP Element #1



ResidentialPopulation1 49,183

Residents Not Working 37,877 24 909,040 Workers Living in City2 11,306

Residents Working in City2 3,836 16 61,376 Residents Working Outside City 7,470 16 119,520

Residential Subtotal 1,089,936 91%

NonresidentialJobs Located in City1 13,768

Residents Working in City2 3,836 8 30,688 Non-Resident Workers 9,932 8 79,456

Nonresidential Subtotal 110,144 9%

TOTAL 1,200,080 1. Land Use Assumptions document.2. U.S.Census Bureau, OnTheMap, Application, Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) statistics.


84

The City is projected to pay $6,142,061 of debt service payments on City Hall, the NOC, and Courthouse over the next ten years. Of this total, $433,587 is projected to be funded with development fees. The balance of these costs reflect the costs to upgrade, improve, expand, correct or replace general government facilities to meet existing needs and usage and stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards.


IIP Element #2



The current City Hall encompasses 31,500 square feet and was oversized in anticipation of serving new development. Based on discussions with City staff and development projections from the Land Use Assumptions document, the facility will have sufficient capacity to serve existing and future development through FY 2017.

The buy-in LOS for City Hall is 0.53 square feet per person and 0.11 square feet per job. The buy-in LOS for residential development is calculated as follows: 2,628 square feet attributable to new development/4,963 persons from new residential development through FY 2017 = 0.53 square feet per person. This calculation is repeated for nonresidential development using the nonresidential factors.

Total General Government Capital Needs 1 $6,142,061

New Development's Share of Capital NeedsIIP Subtotal $433,587

Balance 2 $5,708,474

1. City of Casa Grande, Capital Improvement Project List Fiscal Year 2012- 2013 plus projected debt service payments for

City Hall, North Operations Center, and Courthouse overnext ten years.2. Reflects costs to upgrade, update, improve, expand, correct or replace those necessary public services to meet existing needs and usage and stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards.


85

Figure 71: IIP Element #2 – City Hall

The NOC encompasses 63,700 square feet and was oversized in anticipation of serving new development. Based on discussions with City staff and development projections from the Land Use Assumptions document, the facility will have sufficient capacity to serve existing and future development through FY 2020.

Square Feet

City Hall 31,500

Proportionate Share Residential Development 91% Nonresidential Development 9% TOTAL 100%

RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTPersons % Attributable



LOS for Existing Res. Development: SF per Perso 0.53LOS for New Res. Development: SF per Person 0.53





Eligible Facilities


86

The buy-in LOS for the NOC is 1.00 square foot per person and 0.20 square feet per job. The buy-in LOS for residential development is calculated as follows: 8,627 square feet attributable to new development/8,599 persons from new residential development through FY 2020 = 1.00 square feet per person. This calculation is repeated for nonresidential development using the nonresidential factors.

Figure 72: IIP Element #2 – Northern Operations Center

Square Feet

North Operations Center 63,700

Proportionate Share Residential Development 91% Nonresidential Development 9% TOTAL 100%









Eligible Facilities


87

The Courthouse encompasses 12,233 square feet and was oversized in anticipation of serving new development. Based on discussions with City staff and development projections from the Land Use Assumptions document, the facility will have sufficient capacity to serve existing and future development through FY 2029.

The buy-in LOS for the Courthouse is 0.10 square feet per person and 0.03 square feet per nonresidential vehicle trip. The buy-in LOS for residential development is calculated as follows: 2,509 square feet attributable to new development/23,989 persons from new residential development through FY 2029 = 0.10 square feet per person. This calculation is repeated for nonresidential development using the nonresidential factors.


88

Figure 73: IIP Element #2 – Courthouse

Square Feet

Courthouse 12,233

Proportionate Share Police Calls to Residential Development 63% Police Calls to Nonresidential Development 37% TOTAL 100%






Trips % Attributable Existing Nonres. Development 88,956 53%New Nonres. Development 79,806 47%TOTAL TRIPS FY 2029 168,762 100%


LOS for Existing Res. Development: SF per Trip 0.03LOS for New Res. Development: SF per Trip 0.03

Eligible Facilities


89

IIP Element #3



The original cost of the City Hall expansion was $7,224,498; an average of $229 per square foot ($7,224,498/31,500 square feet = $229 per square foot). The buy-in LOS is 0.38 square feet per person and 0.11 square feet per job. The buy-in cost per person is calculated as follows: 0.38 square feet per person x $229 per square foot = $87.45 per person. The buy-in cost per job is calculated as follows: 0.11 square feet per job x $229 per square foot = $24.57 per job.

Figure 74: IIP Element #3 – City Hall

The original cost of the NOC was $6,626,290; an average of $104 per square foot ($6,626,290/63,700 square feet = $104 per square foot). The buy-in LOS is 1.00 square feet per person and 0.20 square feet per job. The buy-in cost per person is calculated as follows: 1.00 square feet per person x $104 per square foot = $104.36 per person. The buy-in cost per job is calculated as follows: 0.20 square feet per job x $104 per square foot = $20.73 per job.

City Hall Expansion 1 $7,224,498 Square Feet 31,500







90

Figure 75: IIP Element #3 – North Operations Center

The original cost of the Courthouse was $4,143,927; an average of $339 per square foot ($4,143,927/12,233 square feet = $339 per square foot). The buy-in LOS is 0.10 square feet per person and 0.03 square feet per nonresidential vehicle trip. The buy-in cost per person is calculated as follows: 0.10 square feet per person x $339 per square foot = $35.43 per person. The buy-in cost per nonresidential vehicle trip is calculated as follows: 0.03 square feet per trip x $339 per square foot = $9.19 per nonresidential vehicle trip.

Figure 76: IIP Element #3 – Courthouse

North Operations Center 1 $6,626,290 Square Feet 63,700




Planned Cost per Square Foot $104


Courthouse 1 $4,143,927 Square Feet 12,233



LOS for New Res. Development: SF per Person 0.10LOS for New Nonres. Development: SF per Trip 0.03


Buy-in Cost per Person $35.43Buy-in Cost per Trip $9.19


91

The cost to prepare the General Government Facilities IIP and development fees totals $1,300. The City plans to update its report every five years. Based on this cost, proportionate share, and five year projections of new residential and nonresidential development from the Land Use Assumptions, the cost per person is $0.24 and per job is $0.01.


IIP Element #4



The number of persons per household and jobs per square foot from the Land Use Assumptions is multiplied by the current level-of-service, which yields the number of units of infrastructure needed to serve one service unit by type of development. To determine the ratio of a service unit to various types of land uses, the number of units of infrastructure needed to serve one service unit by type of housing unit or one square foot of nonresidential building by type is then divided by the number of units of infrastructure needed to serve a single family house. For analytical purposes, this provides a basis for comparing the infrastructure needs of all land use categories and types to a single family house. However, it should be noted, this does not assume that the impacts of commercial, industrial, and residential land uses are the same. This again, is simply an analytical technique used to provide a common unit of measure.

Using the buy-in demand of a multi-family unit for City Hall as an example, the number of persons per household (2.09) is multiplied by the buy-in level-of-service of 0.38 square feet per person. This results in 0.80 square feet of City Hall space per multi-family unit. This figure is then divided by the number of square feet needed to serve a single family housing unit (1.19 square feet) which results in a ratio of 0.67. This can be read as a multi-family unit having 67% of the needs of a single family unit. This calculation is repeated for all types of development and each component of the IIP.








TOTAL $52,200


$1,300


Unit




92







Persons 1

Buy-in City Hall LOS: Square Feet

per Person 2


Unit

Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Buy-in NOC LOS: Square

Feet per Person 3


Unit

Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)


Person 4


Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Single Family 1 Unit 3.11 0.38 1.19 1.00 1.00 3.12 1.00 $0.24 $0.74 1.00Multi-family 1 Unit 2.09 0.38 0.80 0.67 1.00 2.09 0.67 $0.24 $0.50 0.67Mobile Home/Park Model 1 Unit 2.42 0.38 0.92 0.78 1.00 2.43 0.78 $0.24 $0.58 0.78All Other Types of Housing 1 Unit 1.76 0.38 0.67 0.57 1.00 1.77 0.57 $0.24 $0.42 0.57


Type Service Unit # of Jobs 1Buy-in City Hall

LOS: Square Feet per Job 2


Unit

Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Buy-in NOC LOS: Square Feet per Job 3


Unit

Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)


Job 4


Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Commercial/Retail Development 0 - 100,000 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.00250 0.11 0.00027 0.00023 0.20 0.0005 0.0002 $0.01 $0.000023 0.000031 100,001 - 200,000 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.00222 0.11 0.00024 0.00020 0.20 0.0004 0.0001 $0.01 $0.000020 0.000028 Over 200,001 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.00200 0.11 0.00021 0.00018 0.20 0.0004 0.0001 $0.01 $0.000018 0.000025Office/Institutional 0 - 100,000 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.0037 0.11 0.00040 0.00033 0.20 0.0007 0.0002 $0.01 $0.000034 0.000046 100,001 - 200,000 square feet 0.0035 0.11 0.00037 0.00032 0.20 0.0007 0.0002 $0.01 $0.000032 0.000043 Over 200,001 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.0033 0.11 0.00035 0.00030 0.20 0.0007 0.0002 $0.01 $0.000030 0.000041Business Park 1 sq ft of building 0.0032 0.11 0.00034 0.00029 0.20 0.0006 0.0002 $0.01 $0.000029 0.000039Light Industrial 1 sq ft of building 0.0023 0.11 0.00025 0.00021 0.20 0.0005 0.0001 $0.01 $0.000021 0.000029Warehousing 1 sq ft of building 0.0009 0.11 0.00010 0.00008 0.20 0.0002 0.0001 $0.01 $0.000008 0.000011Manufacturing 1 sq ft of building 0.0018 0.11 0.00019 0.00016 0.20 0.0004 0.0001 $0.01 $0.000017 0.000022Hotel (per room) 1 room 0.44 0.11 0.04714 0.03975 0.20 0.0877 0.0281 $0.01 $0.004056 0.005471



Persons 1

Buy-in Courthouse LOS: Square Feet

per Person 5


Unit

Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Single Family 1 Unit 3.11 0.10 0.33 1.00Multi-family 1 Unit 2.09 0.10 0.22 0.67Mobile Home/Park Model 1 Unit 2.42 0.10 0.25 0.78All Other Types of Housing 1 Unit 1.76 0.10 0.18 0.57




Buy-in Courthouse LOS: Square Feet

per Trip 5


Unit

Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Commercial/Retail Development 0 - 100,000 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.01426 0.03 0.0004 0.0012 100,001 - 200,000 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.01279 0.03 0.0003 0.0011 Over 200,001 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.01129 0.03 0.0003 0.0009Office/Institutional 0 - 100,000 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.0067 0.03 0.0002 0.0006 100,001 - 200,000 square feet 0.0057 0.03 0.0002 0.0005 Over 200,001 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.0049 0.03 0.0001 0.0004Business Park 1 sq ft of building 0.0064 0.03 0.0002 0.0005Light Industrial 1 sq ft of building 0.0035 0.03 0.0001 0.0003Warehousing 1 sq ft of building 0.0018 0.03 0.0000 0.0001Manufacturing 1 sq ft of building 0.0019 0.03 0.0001 0.0002Hotel (per room) 1 room 2.815 0.03 0.0764 0.23

1. Land Use Assumptions Document2. From Figure 71.3. From Figure 72.4. From Figure 77.5. From Figure 73.


93



The Land Use Assumptions projects an additional 4,509 housing units and 3,974,400 square feet of nonresidential buildings over the next ten years. These projected service units are multiplied by the levels-of-service for each of the IIP components.



1 2013 472 350,000 1,112 979 529 1,311 $2742 2014 347 951,000 925 3,134 689 1,553 $2493 2015 400 951,000 1,073 3,134 745 1,701 $2854 2016 430 232,400 1,212 768 544 1,369 $2965 2017 430 232,400 1,212 768 544 1,369 $2966 2018 430 232,400 1,212 768 544 1,369 $2967 2019 430 232,400 1,212 768 544 1,369 $2968 2020 430 232,400 1,212 768 544 1,369 $2969 2021 570 280,200 1,632 969 726 1,830 $398

10 2022 570 280,200 1,632 969 726 1,830 $398

10 YEAR TOTAL 4,509 3,974,400 10 YEAR TOTAL 12,434 13,026 6,137 15,070 $3,084


1 2013 472 350,000 1,112 4,090 2272 2014 347 951,000 925 10,647 3863 2015 400 951,000 1,073 10,647 4014 2016 430 232,400 1,212 2,010 1815 2017 430 232,400 1,212 2,010 1816 2018 430 232,400 1,212 2,010 1817 2019 430 232,400 1,212 2,010 1818 2020 430 232,400 1,212 2,010 1819 2021 570 280,200 1,632 2,442 237

10 2022 570 280,200 1,632 2,442 237

10 YEAR TOTAL 4,509 3,974,400 10 YEAR TOTAL 12,434 40,319 2,395

1. Land Use Assumptions Document2. From Figure 71.3. From Figure 72.4. From Figure 77.5. From Figure 73.

10 YEAR TOTAL

trips


Expansion @ Buy-in LOS 5


Courthouse

Unit of Measurement

square feetService Units

1 housing unit


Demand Units persons




Type of Developme


Residential Nornes.


NOC








Type of Developme


Residential


Expansion 4

square feet


Service Units

1 housing unit





City Hall

Unit of Measuremen

cost

10 YEAR TOTAL




94

IIP Element #7





95




Property Tax




All development



rev/capita2




rev/capita2




rev/capita2




Sales Tax


All development

2.00%

4.00%


96











household) 4






Foot of Building 1



(10% assessment

ratio)


(20% assessment

ratio)




Annual Retail Sales


Tax Calculations 3

Annual Retail Sales




Year TOTAL2012 $728,911 $15,836,163 $6,508,043 $165,871 $137,103 $23,376,0912013 $945,341 $17,791,163 $2,494,570 $287,636 $237,749 $21,756,4592014 $1,450,873 $21,488,663 $4,797,208 $239,242 $197,748 $28,173,7342015 $1,964,332 $25,186,163 $4,931,966 $277,402 $229,290 $32,589,1532016 $2,144,963 $25,589,063 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $30,478,0972017 $2,325,595 $25,991,963 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $31,061,6282018 $2,506,227 $26,394,863 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $31,645,1602019 $2,686,858 $26,797,763 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $32,228,6922020 $2,867,490 $27,200,663 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $32,812,2232021 $3,104,879 $27,591,663 $2,896,353 $422,105 $348,897 $34,363,8972022 $3,342,267 $27,982,663 $2,896,353 $422,105 $348,897 $34,992,285

TOTAL $24,067,735 $267,850,793 $35,382,145 $3,381,622 $2,795,124 $333,477,420



Revenues 3





97


The debt service associated with City Hall, the NOC, and Courthouse will be repaid with future revenues. Thus, these contributions from new development are used in determining the extent of the burden imposed by new development. The figure below calculates a credit for future revenue contributions, which will be applied against the cost of serving new development in the development fee calculations. A net present value calculation is used to account for the value of future revenues in current dollars.

Figure 83: Revenue Credit for General Government Facilities



Fiscal

Prop. Share-City Hall,

NOCProp. Share-

Court Projected Credit per

Prop. Share-City Hall,

NOC Projected Credit perProp. Share-

Court. Projected Credit perYear 91% 63% Subtotal Population Person 9% Jobs Job 37% Trips Trip2013 $426,180 $0 $426,180 49,824 $8.55 $42,150 18,444 $2.29 $0 115,561 $0.002014 $428,710 $0 $428,710 50,936 $8.42 $42,400 19,423 $2.18 $0 119,652 $0.002015 $425,980 $0 $425,980 51,861 $8.21 $42,130 22,557 $1.87 $0 130,299 $0.002016 $427,327 $0 $427,327 52,934 $8.07 $42,263 25,692 $1.65 $0 140,946 $0.002017 $427,964 $0 $427,964 54,146 $7.90 $42,326 26,460 $1.60 $0 142,956 $0.002018 $150,341 $0 $150,341 55,358 $2.72 $14,869 27,228 $0.55 $0 144,966 $0.002019 $150,341 $0 $150,341 56,570 $2.66 $14,869 27,996 $0.53 $0 146,976 $0.002020 $150,342 $0 $150,342 57,782 $2.60 $14,869 28,765 $0.52 $0 148,986 $0.002021 $0 $0 $0 58,994 $0.00 $0 29,533 $0.00 $0 150,997 $0.002022 $0 $0 $0 60,626 $0.00 $0 30,502 $0.00 $0 153,438 $0.002023 $0 $0 $0 62,258 $0.00 $0 31,471 $0.00 $0 155,880 $0.002024 $0 $187,371 $187,371 63,890 $2.93 $0 32,440 $0.00 $112,096 158,321 $0.712025 $0 $475,938 $475,938 65,522 $7.26 $0 33,409 $0.00 $284,732 160,763 $1.772026 $0 $479,229 $479,229 67,154 $7.14 $0 34,377 $0.00 $286,701 163,204 $1.762027 $0 $483,988 $483,988 69,160 $7.00 $0 35,080 $0.00 $289,548 165,057 $1.752028 $0 $482,920 $482,920 71,166 $6.79 $0 35,783 $0.00 $288,909 166,909 $1.732029 $0 $483,336 $483,336 73,172 $6.61 $0 36,485 $0.00 $289,158 168,762 $1.71

TOTAL $5,179,968 $86.86 $255,875 $11.17 $1,551,144 $9.43

Interest Rate 5.20% Interest Rate 5.20% Interest Rate 5.20%

Net Present Value $62.01 Net Present Value $9.45 Net Present Value $7.82



98




2013FY 2013-

2014FY 2014-

2015FY 2015-

2016

FY 2016-2017 & beyond

TOTAL









TOTAL $3,245,000 $4,050,000 $6,500,000 $3,000,000 $5,000,000 $21,795,000



99

STREET FACILITIES OVERVIEW

ARS 9-463.05 (T)(7)(f) defines the facilities and assets which can be included in the Street Facilities IIP:

“Street facilities located in the service area, including arterial or collector streets or roads that have been designated on an officially adopted plan of the municipality, traffic signals and rights-of-way and improvements thereon.”

The Street Facilities IIP includes components for arterial street improvements, interchanges, and the cost of preparing the Street Facilities IIP and development fees. The plan-based methodology utilizing capital projects from the City’s FY 2013 – FY 2017 Capital Improvement Plan and Small Area Transportation Study is used to calculate the Street Facilities IIP.

SERVICE AREA

The Streets Facilities IIP and Development Fees include arterial street and interchange improvements. The City’s arterial street network is designed to efficiently move traffic throughout the City. Thus the service area for the Street Facilities IIP and Development Fees is citywide.


Trip generation rates and trip adjustment factors from Trip Generation published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers is used to determine the proportionate impact of residential, commercial, office, and industrial land uses on the City’s network of streets.

IIP FOR STREET FACILITIES

For each necessary public service that is the subject of a development fee, ARS 9-463.05(E) requires the IIP to include seven elements. This section details each of these seven elements for the Street Facilities IIP.


100

IIP Element #1



The City has identified $169,626,000 of capital needs for Streets. Of this total, $67,408,041 is the result of new development and is included in the IIP and development fee calculations. The balance of these projects reflect the costs to upgrade, improve, expand, correct or replace street facilities to meet existing needs and usage and stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards.


IIP Element #2



A total of 17.8 lane miles of improvements to arterial streets attributable to new development has been identified for inclusion in the Streets IIP and Development Fees. These projects are shown in the figure below.

Total Streets Capital Needs 1 $169,626,000


Balance 2 $102,217,959

1. City of Casa Grande, Capital Improvement Plan FY 2013- FY 2017 plus projects from Small Area TransportationStudy over next 10 years.

2. Reflects costs to upgrade, update, improve, expand, correct or replace those necessary public services to meet existing needs and usage and stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards.


101

Figure 86: IIP Element #2 – Planned Arterial Street Improvements

One interchange project has been identified for inclusion in the Streets IIP and Development Fees. The details of this planned project are shown in the figure below.

Figure 87: IIP Element #2 – Planned Interchange Improvements

The City’s current arterial streets network operates at a LOS D or better on an average weekday basis. Using the projection of residential and nonresidential development from the Land Use Assumptions document and vehicle trip generation rates and adjustment factors from Trip Generation, it is possible to calculate the planned average miles per trip (usage) from new development on the planned arterial improvements attributable to new development. As shown in the following figure, the average trip length on the planned arterial improvements from new development over the next fifteen years is 1.68 miles.

Project 1 Lane Miles

FY 2012-2013

FY 2013-2014

FY 2014-2015

FY 2015-2016

FY 2016-2017

FY 2017-2018

FY 2018-2019 TOTAL Lane Miles TOTAL

Cottonwood Ln: Peart to Hacienda 6.0 $0 $0 $16,300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $16,300,000 50% 3.0 $8,150,000Overfield (Florence to City Limits) 5.0 $0 $0 $0 $13,500,000 $0 $0 $0 $13,500,000 50% 2.5 $6,750,000Selma Hwy (Jimmer Kerr to Sunland Gin) 5.0 $0 $0 $0 $13,300,000 $0 $0 $0 $13,300,000 50% 2.5 $6,650,000Kortsen Rd. (I-10 to Overfield) 4.0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,800,000 $0 $0 $10,800,000 50% 2.0 $5,400,000Henness Rd: I-8 to Selma 1.3 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,500,000 $0 $0 $3,500,000 100% 1.3 $3,500,000Cottonwood Ln: Hacienda to Overfield 2.0 $0 $0 $5,400,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,400,000 50% 1.0 $2,700,000Henness Rd: Florence to Cottonwood Ln 2.0 $0 $0 $0 $5,400,000 $0 $0 $0 $5,400,000 50% 1.0 $2,700,000Kortsen Rd. (Henness to I-10) 2.0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,400,000 $0 $0 $5,400,000 50% 1.0 $2,700,000Doan Street 2.0 $300,000 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,300,000 100% 2.0 $5,300,000Thornton Road (I-8 to Selma Hwy.) 3.0 $475,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $475,000 50% 1.5 $237,500Kortsen Rd. (Pinal to Trekell) 0.0 $0 $0 $4,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,000,000 66% 0.0 $2,640,000Rodeo Road (Casa Grande Ave. to Trekell Road) 0.0 $0 $3,000,000 $3,500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,500,000 50% 0.0 $3,250,000Selma Hwy (Henness to Peart) 0.0 $850,000 $0 $3,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,850,000 50% 0.0 $1,925,000Engineering: On-call 0.0 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $0 $0 $1,250,000 50% 0.0 $625,000Traffic Signal Interconnect 0.0 $0 $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 $0 $0 $500,000 50% 0.0 $250,000EW Corridor 0.0 $0 $217,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $217,000 50% 0.0 $108,500Peart SQ 0.0 $0 $750,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $750,000 50% 0.0 $375,000Val Vista 0.0 $0 $217,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $217,000 100% 0.0 $217,000Traffic Signals 0.0 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $0 $0 $4,000,000 100% 0.0 $4,000,000TOTAL 32.3 $2,675,000 $7,359,000 $36,375,000 $33,375,000 $20,875,000 $0 $0 $100,659,000 17.8 $57,478,000

1. City of Casa Grande, taken from City of Casa Grande Small Area Transportation Study , Wilson and Company, 2007.2. Page 65, City of Casa Grande Small Area Transportation Study , Wilson & Company, 2007.

New Dev.

Share 2

Project 1 FY 2012-2013

FY 2013-2014

FY 2014-2015

FY 2015-2016 FY 2016-2017

FY 2017-2018

FY 2018-2019 TOTAL TOTAL

Kortsen & I-10 DCR Interchange $638,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $638,000 32% $206,781Kortsen / I-10 Interchange $0 $0 $0 $0 $30,000,000 $0 $0 $30,000,000 32% $9,723,260TOTAL $638,000 $0 $0 $0 $30,000,000 $0 $0 $30,638,000 $9,930,041

1. City of Casa Grande, taken from City of Casa Grande Small Area Transportation Study , Wilson and Company, 2007.2. TischlerBise and City of Casa Grande.

New Dev.

Share 2


102

Figure 88: IIP Element #2 – VMT’s on Planned Street Improvements

IIP Element #3



TischlerBise projects an increase of 154,821 vehicle miles of travel (VMTs) between FY 2013 and FY 2027 from new development on the planned 17.8 lane miles of arterial improvements attributable to new development. This cost for the planned arterial street improvement attributable to new development is $371.25 per VMT. This is calculated as follows: $57,478,000/154,821 VMTs from new development FY 2013 through FY 2027 = $371.25 per VMT.

INPUT VARIABLES ARTERIAL STREETS CAPACITY ANALYSISYear-> Base 1 2 3 4 5 10 15

Vehicle Trip Rates (Ave. Weekday) 1 Casa Grande, Arizona 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2022 2027 Single Family Detached (per unit) 9.57 DEMAND DATA2

Multi-Family (per unit) 6.65 Single Family Detached Units 16,560 16,602 16,702 16,874 17,074 17,349 18,849 20,949 All Other Types of Housing (per unit) 4.99 Multi-family Units 3,812 3,920 4,217 4,317 4,417 4,472 4,762 5,142 Retail/Commercial (per 1,000 sf) 67.91 All Other Types of Housing Units 2,448 2,566 2,641 2,716 2,816 2,916 3,416 3,916 Office/Institutional (per 1,000 sf) 18.35 Retail/Commercial SF (1,000's) 4,461 6,324 6,554 6,989 7,424 7,472 7,707 7,937 Industrial/Flex (per 1,000 sf) 3.82 Office/Institutional SF (1,000's) 2,043 2,047 2,127 2,603 3,079 3,214 3,938 4,795Trip Rate Adjustment Factors Industrial/Flex SF (1,000's) 3,448 3,451 3,491 3,531 3,571 3,621 3,871 4,121 Residential Development3 54% Single Family Detached Trips 86,084 86,302 86,822 87,716 88,756 90,185 97,983 108,899 Commercial Development 21% Multi-family Trips 13,770 14,160 15,233 15,594 15,955 16,154 17,201 18,574 All Other Nonresidential Development 50% All Other Types of Housing Trips 6,635 6,955 7,158 7,362 7,633 7,904 9,259 10,614Trip Length Adjustment Factors 4 Retail/Commercial Trips 63,623 90,193 93,473 99,676 105,880 106,556 109,916 113,196 Residential Development 122% Office/Institutional Trips 18,748 18,777 19,511 23,879 28,246 29,485 36,129 43,990 Commercial Development 68% Industrail/Flex Trips 6,586 6,591 6,668 6,744 6,820 6,916 7,393 7,871 All Other Nonresidential Development 75% TOTAL TRIPS 195,445 222,978 228,864 240,970 253,289 257,199 277,881 303,144Street Information ARTERIAL VMT 322,862 355,162 363,611 379,287 395,399 401,745 435,464 477,683Arterial Capacity @ LOS D (Vehicles Per Lane Mile)5 8,700 ANNUAL ARTERIAL LANE MILES 3.71 0.97 1.80 1.85 0.73 0.96 1.02

CUMULATIVE ARTERIAL LANE MILES 3.71 4.68 6.49 8.34 9.07 12.94 17.80Avg Miles/Trip on Arterials 1.68

1. Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation , 2008.2. Land Use Assumptions document.3. U.S.Census Bureau, Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics, 4. Federal Highway Administration, National Household Travel Survey , 2001.5. Table 3-1, City of Casa Grande Small Area Transportation Study , Wilson & Company, 2007.

5 Year Intervals


103

Figure 89: IIP Element #3 – Planned Arterial Street Improvement Costs

The planned interchange improvements are the result of both existing and new development over the next fifteen years. TischlerBise projects an increase of 154,821 vehicle miles of travel (VMTs) between FY 2013 and FY 2027 from new development. These VMT’s represent 32% of the total VMT’s in FY 2027 (154,821 VMT’s from new development/477,683 total VMT’s = 0.32 or 32%). The cost for the planned interchange improvement attributable to new development is $20.79 per VMT. This is calculated as follows: $9,930,041/154,821 VMTs from new development = $20.79.

Project 1 Lane Miles TOTAL Lane Miles TOTAL

Cottonwood Ln: Peart to Hacienda 6.0 $16,300,000 50% 3.0 $8,150,000Overfield (Florence to City Limits) 5.0 $13,500,000 50% 2.5 $6,750,000Selma Hwy (Jimmer Kerr to Sunland Gin) 5.0 $13,300,000 50% 2.5 $6,650,000Kortsen Rd. (I-10 to Overfield) 4.0 $10,800,000 50% 2.0 $5,400,000Henness Rd: I-8 to Selma 1.3 $3,500,000 100% 1.3 $3,500,000Cottonwood Ln: Hacienda to Overfield 2.0 $5,400,000 50% 1.0 $2,700,000Henness Rd: Florence to Cottonwood Ln 2.0 $5,400,000 50% 1.0 $2,700,000Kortsen Rd. (Henness to I-10) 2.0 $5,400,000 50% 1.0 $2,700,000Doan Street 2.0 $5,300,000 100% 2.0 $5,300,000Thornton Road (I-8 to Selma Hwy.) 3.0 $475,000 50% 1.5 $237,500Kortsen Rd. (Pinal to Trekell) 0.0 $4,000,000 66% 0.0 $2,640,000Rodeo Road (Casa Grande Ave. to Trekell Road) 0.0 $6,500,000 50% 0.0 $3,250,000Selma Hwy (Henness to Peart) 0.0 $3,850,000 50% 0.0 $1,925,000Engineering: On-call 0.0 $1,250,000 50% 0.0 $625,000Traffic Signal Interconnect 0.0 $500,000 50% 0.0 $250,000EW Corridor 0.0 $217,000 50% 0.0 $108,500Peart SQ 0.0 $750,000 50% 0.0 $375,000Val Vista 0.0 $217,000 100% 0.0 $217,000Traffic Signals 0.0 $4,000,000 100% 0.0 $4,000,000TOTAL 32.3 $100,659,000 17.8 $57,478,000

VMT's From New Development FY 2013 - FY 2027 154,821

Cost per VMT $371.25

1. City of Casa Grande, taken from City of Casa Grande Small Area Transportation Study , Wilson and Company, 2007.2. Page 65, City of Casa Grande Small Area Transportation Study , Wilson & Company, 2007.

New Dev.

Share 2


104

Figure 90: IIP Element #3 – Planned Interchange Improvement Costs

The cost to prepare the Streets Facilities IIP and development fees totals $14,100. The City plans to update its report every five years. Based on this cost, proportionate share, and five year projections of new residential and nonresidential development from the Land Use Assumptions, the cost per trip is $0.23.


IIP Element #4



Project 1 TOTAL TOTAL

Kortsen & I-10 DCR Interchange $638,000 32% $206,781Kortsen / I-10 Interchange $30,000,000 32% $9,723,260TOTAL $30,638,000 $9,930,041

VMT's From New Development FY 2013 - FY 2027 154,821

Cost per VMT $20.79

1. City of Casa Grande, taken from City of Casa Grande Small Area Transportation Study , Wilson and Company, 2007.2. TischlerBise and City of Casa Grande.

New Dev.

Share 2








TOTAL $52,200


$1,300


Unit




105

The number of adjusted vehicle trips ends per housing unit and per square foot of nonresidential building space from the Land Use Assumptions document is multiplied by the current average trip length and trip length adjustment factor to determine the number of VMT’s. This number of VMT’s is then divided by the average lane capacity which results in the number of lane miles of arterial improvements needed per residential and nonresidential service unit. To determine the ratio of a service unit to various types of land uses, the number of units of infrastructure needed to serve one service unit by type of housing unit or one square foot of nonresidential building by type is then divided by the number of units of infrastructure needed to serve a single family house. This results in an equivalent demand unit (EDU) which serves as a basis for comparing the infrastructure needs of various land uses to a single family house. However, it should be noted, this does not assume that the impacts of commercial, industrial, and residential land uses are the same. This is simply an analytical technique used to provide a common unit of measure.

Using the arterial street facility needs of a multi-family unit as an example, the adjusted number of trip ends (3.61) is multiplied by the planned average trip length (1.68 miles) and then multiplied by the residential trip length adjustment factor of 122% (1.22) resulting in 7 VMT’s per multi-family unit. The 7 VMT’s per multi-family unit is divided by the average lane capacity figure of 8,700 resulting in 0.0009 lane miles per multi-family unit. This figure is then divided by the number of lane miles needed to serve a single family housing unit (0.0012 lane miles) which results in a ratio of 0.69 per EDU. This can be read as a multi-family unit having 69% of the needs of a single family unit. This calculation is repeated for all types of development and each component of the IIP.



Type Service Unit# of Trips

(a) 1

Trip Adjustment Factor (b) 1

Adjusted Trip Ends

(c ) = a x b

Average Arterial Trip Length on

Planned Projects (d) 1

Trip Length Adjustment Factor ( e) 1

VMT (f) = c x d x e

Arterial Capacity @ LOS

D (g) 1

Arterial Lane Miles (h) =

f/g

Ratio to 1 Single

Family Unit


per Trip 2


Ratio to 1 Single

Family Unit

Single Family 1 Unit 9.57 54% 5.20 1.68 122% 11 8,700 0.0012 1.00 $0.23 $1.19 1.00Multi-family 1 Unit 6.65 54% 3.61 1.68 122% 7 8,700 0.0009 0.69 $0.23 $0.82 0.69Mobile Home/Park Model 1 Unit 4.99 54% 2.71 1.68 122% 6 8,700 0.0006 0.52 $0.23 $0.62 0.52All Other Types of Housing 1 Unit 2.37 54% 1.29 1.68 122% 3 8,700 0.0003 0.25 $0.23 $0.29 0.25


Type Service Unit# of Trips

(a) 1

Trip Adjustment Factor (b) 1

Adjusted Trip Ends

(c ) = a x b

Average Arterial Trip Length on

Planned Projects (d) 1

Trip Length Adjustment Factor ( e) 1

VMT (f) = c x d x e

Arterial Capacity @ LOS

D (g) 1

Arterial Lane Miles (h) =

f/g

Ratio to 1 Single

Family Unit


per Trip 2


Ratio to 1 Single

Family Unit

Commercial/Retail Development 0 - 100,000 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.06791 21% 0.0143 1.68 68% 0.0163 8,700 0.00000187 0.001529 $0.23 $0.00326 0.002743 100,001 - 200,000 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.05328 24% 0.0128 1.68 68% 0.0146 8,700 0.00000168 0.001371 $0.23 $0.00292 0.002460 Over 200,001 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.04180 17% 0.2700 1.68 68% 0.3084 8,700 0.00003545 0.028950 $0.23 $0.06165 0.051940Office/Institutional 0 - 100,000 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.01334 50% 0.0067 1.68 75% 0.0084 8,700 0.00000097 0.000789 $0.23 $0.00152 0.001283 100,001 - 200,000 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.01137 50% 0.0057 1.68 75% 0.0072 8,700 0.00000082 0.000672 $0.23 $0.00130 0.001094 Over 200,001 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.00970 50% 0.0049 1.68 75% 0.0061 8,700 0.00000070 0.000574 $0.23 $0.00111 0.000933Business Park 1 sq ft of building 0.01276 50% 0.0064 1.68 75% 0.0080 8,700 0.00000092 0.000755 $0.23 $0.00146 0.001227Light Industrial 1 sq ft of building 0.00697 50% 0.0035 1.68 75% 0.0044 8,700 0.00000050 0.000412 $0.23 $0.00080 0.000670Warehousing 1 sq ft of building 0.00356 50% 0.0018 1.68 75% 0.0022 8,700 0.00000026 0.000211 $0.23 $0.00041 0.000342Manufacturing 1 sq ft of building 0.00382 50% 0.0019 1.68 75% 0.0024 8,700 0.00000028 0.000226 $0.23 $0.00044 0.000367Hotel (per room) 1 room 5.63 50% 2.82 1.68 75% 3.55 8,700 0.00040769 0.33 $0.23 $0.64 0.54

1. Taken from Figure 88.2. Taken from Figure 91.


106






The Land Use Assumptions projects an additional 4,509 housing units and 3,974,400 square feet of nonresidential buildings over the next ten years. These projected service units are multiplied by the levels-of-service standards for each of the IIP components. The projected needs of new development over the next ten years are shown in the figure below.


IIP Element #7


“A forecast of revenues generated by new service units other than development fees, which shall include estimated state-shared revenue, highway users revenue, federal revenue, ad valorem property taxes, construction contracting or similar excise taxes and the capital recovery portion of utility fees attributable to development based on the approved land use assumptions, and a


1 2013 472 350,000 1,796 4,090 1.2 $1,3442 2014 347 951,000 1,459 4,090 1.2 $1,2673 2015 400 951,000 1,672 4,090 1.2 $1,3164 2016 430 232,400 1,899 4,090 1.2 $1,3685 2017 430 232,400 1,899 4,090 1.2 $1,3686 2018 430 232,400 1,899 4,090 1.2 $1,3687 2019 430 232,400 1,899 4,090 1.2 $1,3688 2020 430 232,400 1,899 4,090 1.2 $1,3689 2021 570 280,200 2,603 4,090 1.2 $1,528

10 2022 570 280,200 2,603 4,090 1.2 $1,528

10 YEAR TOTAL 4,509 3,974,400 10 YEAR TOTAL 19,629 40,905 11.9 $13,821

1. Land Use Assumptions Document2. From Figure 88.3. From Figure 91.

Projected Service Units Necessitated by New Development in Service Area 1


Projected Demand for Necessary Public Services or Facility Expansion 2

Projected Demand for Necessary Public Services or Facility Expansion 3

Type of Development

Residential Nonresidential Type of Development

Residential Nonresidential Necessary Public Service

Arterial Streets Necessary Public Service

IIP and Development Fee

Service Units 1 housing unit


Demand Units vehicle trips vehicle trips Unit of Measurement

Lane Miles Unit of Measurement

cost



107

plan to include these contributions in determining the extent of the burden imposed by the development as required in subsection B, paragraph 12 of this section.”





Property Tax




All development



rev/capita2




rev/capita2




rev/capita2




Sales Tax


All development

2.00%

4.00%


108











household) 4






Foot of Building 1



(10% assessment

ratio)


(20% assessment

ratio)




Annual Retail Sales


Tax Calculations 3

Annual Retail Sales




Year TOTAL2012 $728,911 $15,836,163 $6,508,043 $165,871 $137,103 $23,376,0912013 $945,341 $17,791,163 $2,494,570 $287,636 $237,749 $21,756,4592014 $1,450,873 $21,488,663 $4,797,208 $239,242 $197,748 $28,173,7342015 $1,964,332 $25,186,163 $4,931,966 $277,402 $229,290 $32,589,1532016 $2,144,963 $25,589,063 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $30,478,0972017 $2,325,595 $25,991,963 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $31,061,6282018 $2,506,227 $26,394,863 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $31,645,1602019 $2,686,858 $26,797,763 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $32,228,6922020 $2,867,490 $27,200,663 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $32,812,2232021 $3,104,879 $27,591,663 $2,896,353 $422,105 $348,897 $34,363,8972022 $3,342,267 $27,982,663 $2,896,353 $422,105 $348,897 $34,992,285

TOTAL $24,067,735 $267,850,793 $35,382,145 $3,381,622 $2,795,124 $333,477,420



Revenues 3





109

Note: the above figure should not be interpreted as the total fiscal impact of new development as there is no forecast of on-going and one-time costs resulting from new development.






2013FY 2013-

2014FY 2014-

2015FY 2015-

2016

FY 2016-2017 & beyond

TOTAL









TOTAL $3,245,000 $4,050,000 $6,500,000 $3,000,000 $5,000,000 $21,795,000



110

WASTEWATER FACILITIES OVERVIEW

ARS 9-463.05 (T)(7)(f) defines the facilities and assets which can be included in the Wastewater Facilities IIP:

“Wastewater facilities, including collection, interception, transportation, treatment and disposal of wastewater, and any appurtenances for those facilities”

The Wastewater Facilities IIP includes components for treatment, Rodeo Road sewer interceptor, Kortsen and East Side sewer line, Burris Road sewer line, Highway 84 interceptor, collection lines per 1 square mile, managed recharge system, and the cost of preparing the Wastewater Facilities IIP and development fees. The buy-in methodology is used to calculate the Burris Road Sewer Line component. The plan-based methodology utilizing capital projects from the City’s FY 2013 – FY 2017 Capital Improvement Plan and Wastewater Feasibility Plan is used to calculate the Wastewater Facilities IIP.

The Wastewater Facilities IIP also includes a credit for future revenues to be used to retire debt service associated with wastewater infrastructure.

SERVICE AREA

The treatment and managed recharge components of the City’s wastewater system are operated as a single, citywide system. The wastewater collection system does not serve the City as a whole. The Burris Road sewer line and Highway 84 interceptor serve the west side of the City (hereafter referred to as Zone A). The eastern portion of the City (hereafter referred to as Zone B) is served by the Rodeo Road Sewer Interceptor and Kortsen and East Side Sewer Line. Thus, there are two service areas for the Wastewater Facilities IIP and Development Fees.


111

Figure 98: Wastewater Facilities Service Areas

PROPORTIONATE SHARE ARS 9-463.05 (B)(3) states that the development fee shall not exceed a proportionate share of the cost of necessary public services needed to provide necessary public services to the development. The Wastewater Facilities IIP and development fees are assessed on both residential and nonresidential development. Demand factors from the City’s Wastewater Feasibility Study are used to differentiate the demand between different types of residential and nonresidential development.

IIP FOR WASTEWATER FACILITIES

For each necessary public service that is the subject of a development fee, ARS 9-463.05(E) requires the IIP to include seven elements. This section details each of these seven elements for the Wastewater Facilities IIP.

IIP Element #1


“A description of the existing necessary public services in the service area and the costs to upgrade, update, improve, expand, correct or replace those necessary public services to meet

ZONE B

ZONE A


112

existing needs and usage and stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards, which shall be prepared by qualified professionals licensed in this state, as applicable.”

The City has identified a total of $140,734,837 of Wastewater Facility improvements over the next 10 years. Of this total, $109,560,835 is the result of new development and is included in the IIP and development fee calculations. The balance of these projects reflect the costs to upgrade, improve, expand, correct or replace wastewater facilities to meet existing needs and usage and stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards.


IIP Element #2



The following factors are used to differentiate the demand for wastewater infrastructure between residential and nonresidential development.

Total Wastewater Capital Needs 1 $140,734,837


Balance 2 $31,174,002

1. City of Casa Grande, Capital Improvement Plan FY 2013- FY 2017 , Wastewater Feasibility Study , plus projected

debt service payments for wastewater treament plant expansion over next 10 years.2. Reflects costs to upgrade, update, improve, expand, correct or replace those necessary public services to meet existing needs and usage and stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards.


113

Figure 100: IIP Element #2 – Wastewater Demand Factors

Using the projection of residential and nonresidential development from the Land Use Assumptions document and the above demand factors, it is possible to calculate the planned gallons (usage) as shown in the following figure.

Figure 101: IIP Element #2 – Projected Wastewater Demand

RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTGallons per Person per Gallons per

Person 1 Household 2 UnitSingle Family 70 3.11 218Multi-family 70 2.09 146Mobile Home/Park Model 70 2.42 169All Other Types of Housing 70 1.76 124

NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Gallons per SF 3

Per Square Foot of Building 0.09

1. Carollo Engineers, City of Casa Grande Wastewater FeasibilityStudy , January 2007.2. TischlerBise analysis of 2010 Census for City of Casa Grande.3. Based on 1,000 gallons per acre of nonresidential development and0.25 floor-to-area (FAR) ratio.

Start of Fiscal Year

Customers 1

Average Daily

Demand (Gallons)

Annual New Customers 2

Annual New Population 3

Average Daily

Demand per Person (Gallons) 1

Annual New Ave.

Daily Gallons

Customers 1

Average Daily

Demand (Gallons)

Annual New

Customers 4

Annual New SF

(1,000's) 3

Ave. Daily Demand

per Square Foot

(Gallons) 1

Annual New Ave.

Daily Gallons

Customers

Total Ave. Day

Demand (1,000's of

Gallons)

2012 14,210 3,157,971 44 641 70 44,895 1,358 1,846,027 37 1,869 0.09 171,644 15,568 5,003,9982013 14,254 3,202,866 102 1,112 70 77,852 3,227 2,017,670 7 350 0.09 32,140 17,481 5,220,5362014 14,356 3,280,718 174 925 70 64,753 3,577 2,049,810 19 951 0.09 87,328 17,933 5,330,5282015 14,530 3,345,471 202 1,073 70 75,082 4,528 2,137,138 19 951 0.09 87,328 19,058 5,482,6092016 14,732 3,420,553 277 1,212 70 84,839 5,479 2,224,466 5 232 0.09 21,341 20,211 5,645,0192017 15,009 3,505,392 277 1,212 70 84,839 5,712 2,245,806 5 232 0.09 21,341 20,721 5,751,1982018 15,286 3,590,231 277 1,212 70 84,839 5,944 2,267,147 5 232 0.09 21,341 21,230 5,857,3782019 15,563 3,675,070 277 1,212 70 84,839 6,176 2,288,488 5 232 0.09 21,341 21,739 5,963,5582020 15,840 3,759,909 277 1,212 70 84,839 6,409 2,309,828 5 232 0.09 21,341 22,249 6,069,7382021 16,117 3,844,748 402 1,632 70 114,247 6,641 2,331,169 6 280 0.09 25,730 22,758 6,175,9172022 16,519 3,958,996 402 1,632 70 114,247 6,921 2,356,899 6 280 0.09 25,730 23,440 6,315,8952023 16,921 4,073,243 402 1,632 70 114,247 7,202 2,382,629 6 280 0.09 25,730 24,123 6,455,8722024 17,323 4,187,490 402 1,632 70 114,247 7,482 2,408,359 6 280 0.09 25,730 24,805 6,595,8492025 17,725 4,301,737 402 1,632 70 114,247 7,762 2,434,089 6 280 0.09 25,730 25,487 6,735,8272026 18,127 4,415,985 502 2,006 70 140,403 8,042 2,459,819 4 216 0.09 19,835 26,169 6,875,8042027 18,629 4,556,388 502 2,006 70 140,403 8,258 2,479,654 4 216 0.09 19,835 26,887 7,036,0422028 19,131 4,696,791 502 2,006 70 140,403 8,474 2,499,489 4 216 0.09 19,835 27,605 7,196,2792029 19,633 4,837,194 502 2,006 70 140,403 8,690 2,519,323 4 216 0.09 19,835 28,323 7,356,5172030 20,135 4,977,597 502 2,006 70 140,403 8,906 2,539,158 4 216 0.09 19,835 29,041 7,516,7552031 20,637 5,118,000 502 2,006 70 140,403 9,122 2,558,993 3 160 0.09 14,692 29,759 7,676,993

Net New 6,427 1,960,029 7,764 712,966 14,191 2,672,995

1. Taken from Figure 100.2. Taken from Land Use Assumptions document. Assumes each Single Family unit will equal one customer and one Multi-family customer and one All Other Types of Housing customer.3. Taken from Land Use Assumptions document.4. Assumes 50,000 square feet per new nonresidential customer.

Residential Nonresidential TOTAL


114

IIP Element #3



The City is in the process of expanding its wastewater treatment plant by 6,000,000 gallons at a cost of $79,950,190; an average of $13.33 per gallon ($79,950,190/6,000,000 gallons = $13.33 per gallon). This plant serves both Zone A and Zone B.

Figure 102: IIP Element #3 – Wastewater Treatment Buy-in Costs - Citywide

The City plans to construct the Rodeo Road Sewer Interceptor to serve the Zone B Service Area. The project is planned to cost $69,500,000 and provide 44,400,000 gallons of capacity; an average of $1.57 per gallon ($69,500,000/44,400,000 gallons = $1.57 per gallon).

Figure 103: IIP Element #3 – Planned Rodeo Road Sewer Interceptor Costs – Zone B Service Area

The City plans to construct the Kortsen Road and Eastside Sewer Line to serve the Zone B Service Area. The project is planned to cost $17,061,877 and provide 15,000,000 gallons of capacity; an average of $1.14 per gallon ($17,061,877/15,000,000 gallons = $1.14 per gallon).

Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion 1 $79,950,190 Gallons of Capacity 6,000,000

Cost per Gallon $13.33


Rodeo Road Sewer Interceptor 1 $69,500,000 Gallons of Capacity at Ave. Daily Flows 2 44,400,000


1. City of Casa Grande Capital Improvement Plan FY 2013 to FY 2017 . 2. City of Casa Grande Public Works Department.


115

Figure 104: IIP Element #3 – Planned Kortsen Road and Eastside Sewer Line Costs – Zone B Service Area

The City constructed the Burris Road Sewer Line to serve the Zone A Service Area. The project cost $3,760,000 and will provide 6,560,000 gallons of capacity; an average of $0.57 per gallon ($3,760,000/6,560,000 gallons = $0.57 per gallon).

Figure 105: IIP Element #3 – Burris Road Sewer Line Buy-in Costs – Zone A Service Area

The City plans to construct the Highway 84 Interceptor to serve the Zone A Service Area. The project will cost $2,200,000 and will provide 1,827,500 gallons of capacity; an average of $1.20 per gallon ($2,200,000 /1,827,500 gallons = $1.20 per gallon).

Figure 106: IIP Element #3 – Planned Highway 84 Interceptor – Zone A Service Area

The average 1 square mile of development generates 400,000 of wastewater demand. The City’s planned cost to construct the wastewater collection system lines per 1 square mile is $4,960,421. This is the equivalent of $12.40 per gallon ($4,960,421/400,000 gallons = $12.40 per gallon).

Kortsen Road and East Side Sewer Line 1 $17,061,877 Gallons of Capacity at Ave. Daily Flows 1 15,000,000


1. City of Casa Grande Public Works Department.

Burris Road Sewer Line 1 $3,760,000 Gallons of Capacity at Ave. Daily Flows 2 6,560,000


1. Original construction cost. City of Casa Grande Finance Department.2. City of Casa Grande Public Works Department.

Highway 84 Interceptor Sewer $2,200,000 Gallons of Capacity at Ave. Daily Flows 1 1,827,500


1. City of Casa Grande Public Works Department.


116

Figure 107: IIP Element #3 – Collection Lines per 1 Square Mile Planned Costs – Citywide

The City plans to construct the first phase of its managed recharge facility for $4,600,000. The project is expected to provide 9,900,000 gallons of capacity; an average of $0.46 per gallon ($4,600,000/9,900,000 gallons = $0.46 per gallon).

Figure 108: IIP Element #3 – Managed Recharge System Planned Costs – Citywide

The cost to prepare the Wastewater Facilities IIP and development fees totals $6,700. The City plans to update its report every five years. Based on this cost, proportionate share, and five year projections of new residential and nonresidential development from the Land Use Assumptions, the cost per gallon is $0.01.

10 inch pipe $656,10012 inch pipe $871,20024 inch pipe $844,800Subtotal $2,372,100

Contingency 30% $711,630Subtotal $3,083,730

General Conditions 15% $462,560Subtotal $3,546,290

Contractors OH&P 10% $354,629Subtotal $3,900,918

Sales Tax $165,000Subtotal $4,065,918

Engineering 15% $609,888Legal and Administrative Fees 5% $203,296Owners Change Order Reserve 2% $81,318TOTAL $4,960,421

Average Daily Flow per Square Mile 400,000


Source: Carollo Engineers and City staff estimates in support of Casa GrandeSewer System Master Plan - Phase I Conceptual Plan and Wastewater FeasibilityStudy .

Managed Recharged System 1 $4,600,000 Gallons of Capacity 9,900,000


1. City of Casa Grande Capital Improvement Plan FY 2013 to FY 2017 .


117


IIP Element #4



The number of gallons per housing unit and per square foot of nonresidential building space is multiplied by number of persons per household and one square foot of nonresidential development to determine the number of gallons of wastewater. To determine the ratio of a service unit to various types of land uses, the number of units of infrastructure needed to serve one service unit by type of housing unit or one square foot of nonresidential building by type is then divided by the number of units of infrastructure needed to serve a single family house. This results in an equivalent demand unit (EDU) which serves as a basis for comparing the infrastructure needs of various land uses to a single family house. However, it should be noted, this does not assume that the impacts of commercial, industrial, and residential land uses are the same. This is simply an analytical technique used to provide a common unit of measure.

Using the wastewater demands of a multi-family unit as an example, the number of gallons per unit (146 gallons) is divided by the number of gallons per unit generated by a single family housing unit (218 gallons) which results in a ratio of 0.67 per EDU. This can be read as a multi-family unit having 67% of the needs of a single family unit. This calculation is repeated for all types of development and each component of the IIP.








TOTAL $52,200


$1,300


Unit




118







The Land Use Assumptions projects an additional 4,509 housing units and 3,974,400 square feet of nonresidential buildings over the next ten years. These projected service units are multiplied by the levels-of-service standards for each of the IIP components. The projected needs of new development over the next ten years are shown in the figure below.


Type Service UnitGallons per

Service Unit 1

Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

IIP and Dev Fee Study Cost per Gallon 2

Cost per Service

Unit

Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Single Family 1 Unit 218 1.00 $0.01 $1.95 1.00Multi-family 1 Unit 146 0.67 $0.01 $1.31 0.67Mobile Home/Park Model 1 Unit 169 0.78 $0.01 $1.52 0.78All Other Types of Housing 1 Unit 124 0.57 $0.01 $1.11 0.57


Type Service UnitGallons per

Service Unit 1

Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

IIP and Dev Fee Study Cost per Gallon 2

Cost per Service

Unit

Equivalent Demand

Unit (EDU)

Commercial/Retail Development 0 - 100,000 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.09 0.0004 $0.01 $0.0008 0.0004 100,001 - 200,000 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.09 0.0004 $0.01 $0.0008 0.0004 Over 200,001 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.09 0.0004 $0.01 $0.0008 0.0004Office/Institutional 0 - 100,000 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.09 0.0004 $0.01 $0.0008 0.0004 100,001 - 200,000 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.09 0.0004 $0.01 $0.0008 0.0004 Over 200,001 square feet 1 sq ft of building 0.09 0.0004 $0.01 $0.0008 0.0004Business Park 1 sq ft of building 0.09 0.0004 $0.01 $0.0008 0.0004Light Industrial 1 sq ft of building 0.09 0.0004 $0.01 $0.0008 0.0004Warehousing 1 sq ft of building 0.09 0.0004 $0.01 $0.0008 0.0004Manufacturing 1 sq ft of building 0.09 0.0004 $0.01 $0.0008 0.0004Hotel (per room) 1 room 20 0.09 $0.01 $0.18 0.09

1. From Figure 100.2. From Figure 108.


119


IIP Element #7





1 2013 472 350,000 1,112 979 109,991 $9862 2014 347 951,000 925 3,134 152,081 $1,3643 2015 400 951,000 1,073 3,134 162,410 $1,4564 2016 430 232,400 1,212 768 106,180 $9525 2017 430 232,400 1,212 768 106,180 $9526 2018 430 232,400 1,212 768 106,180 $9527 2019 430 232,400 1,212 768 106,180 $9528 2020 430 232,400 1,212 768 106,180 $9529 2021 570 280,200 1,632 969 139,977 $1,255

10 2022 570 280,200 1,632 969 139,977 $1,255

10 YEAR TOTAL 4,509 3,974,400 10 YEAR TOTAL 12,434 13,026 1,235,335 $11,077

1. Taken from Land Use Assumptions.2. Taken from Figure 100.3. Taken from Figure 108.

10 YEAR TOTAL


Expansion @ Planned LOS 3



Unit of Measurement

cost

10 YEAR TOTAL

Service Units 1 housing unit


Demand Units

persons jobs Unit of Measurement

gallons


Wastewater Facilities

Projected Service Units Necessitated by New Development in Service Area 1



Expansion @ Planned LOS 2

Type of Development Residential Nornes. Type of Development

Residential


120




Property Tax




All development



rev/capita2




rev/capita2




rev/capita2




Sales Tax


All development

2.00%

4.00%


121


TischlerBise’s forecast of revenues for the next ten years is shown in the figure below based on the development projections from the Land Use Assumptions document, revenue assumptions and rates, and revenue characteristics of new development.








Unit (revenues per







Foot of Building 1



assessment ratio)


(20% assessment

ratio)



Calculations 2




Annual Retail Sales


Tax Calculations 3

Annual Retail Sales


Foot for Sales Tax

Calculations 3


Year TOTAL2012 $728,911 $15,836,163 $6,508,043 $165,871 $137,103 $23,376,0912013 $945,341 $17,791,163 $2,494,570 $287,636 $237,749 $21,756,4592014 $1,450,873 $21,488,663 $4,797,208 $239,242 $197,748 $28,173,7342015 $1,964,332 $25,186,163 $4,931,966 $277,402 $229,290 $32,589,1532016 $2,144,963 $25,589,063 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $30,478,0972017 $2,325,595 $25,991,963 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $31,061,6282018 $2,506,227 $26,394,863 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $31,645,1602019 $2,686,858 $26,797,763 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $32,228,6922020 $2,867,490 $27,200,663 $2,171,530 $313,452 $259,088 $32,812,2232021 $3,104,879 $27,591,663 $2,896,353 $422,105 $348,897 $34,363,8972022 $3,342,267 $27,982,663 $2,896,353 $422,105 $348,897 $34,992,285

TOTAL $24,067,735 $267,850,793 $35,382,145 $3,381,622 $2,795,124 $333,477,420



Revenues 3





122


The debt service associated with the expansion of the wastewater treatment facility will be repaid with future revenues. Thus, these contributions from new development are used in determining the extent of the burden imposed by new development. The figure below calculates a credit for future revenue contributions, which will be applied against the cost of serving new development in the development fee calculations. A net present value calculation is used to account for the value of future revenues in current dollars.

Figure 115: Future Revenue Credit for Wastewater Facilities



Fiscal Projected Credit perYear Principal Interest TOTAL Gallons Gallon2013 $2,297,957 $1,991,339 $4,289,296 5,220,536 $0.822014 $2,390,542 $1,898,731 $4,289,273 5,330,528 $0.802015 $2,486,857 $1,802,393 $4,289,250 5,482,609 $0.782016 $2,587,052 $1,702,172 $4,289,224 5,645,019 $0.762017 $2,917,063 $1,372,079 $4,289,142 5,751,198 $0.752018 $2,917,063 $1,372,079 $4,289,142 5,857,378 $0.732019 $2,917,063 $1,372,079 $4,289,142 5,963,558 $0.722020 $2,917,063 $1,372,079 $4,289,142 6,069,738 $0.712021 $2,917,063 $1,372,079 $4,289,142 6,175,917 $0.692022 $3,546,804 $734,980 $4,281,784 6,315,895 $0.682023 $3,546,804 $734,980 $4,281,784 6,455,872 $0.662024 $3,546,804 $734,980 $4,281,784 6,595,849 $0.652025 $3,546,804 $734,980 $4,281,784 6,735,827 $0.642026 $3,546,804 $734,980 $4,281,784 6,875,804 $0.622027 $3,665,569 $214,949 $3,880,518 7,036,042 $0.552028 $3,665,569 $214,949 $3,880,518 7,196,279 $0.54

TOTAL $49,412,878 $18,359,830 $67,772,708 $11.11

Interest Rate 4.029%



123




2013FY 2013-

2014FY 2014-

2015FY 2015-

2016

FY 2016-2017 & beyond

TOTAL









TOTAL $3,245,000 $4,050,000 $6,500,000 $3,000,000 $5,000,000 $21,795,000



124

APPENDIX A – ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES 9-463.05

Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS) 9-463.05. Development fees; imposition by cities and towns; infrastructure improvements plan; annual report; advisory committee; limitation on actions; definitions

(Effective January 1, 2012)

A. A municipality may assess development fees to offset costs to the municipality associated with providing necessary public services to a development, including the costs of infrastructure, improvements, real property, engineering and architectural services, financing and professional services required for the preparation or revision of a development fee pursuant to this section, including the relevant portion of the infrastructure improvements plan.

B. Development fees assessed by a municipality under this section are subject to the following requirements:

1. Development fees shall result in a beneficial use to the development.

2. The municipality shall calculate the development fee based on the infrastructure improvements plan adopted pursuant to this section.

3. The development fee shall not exceed a proportionate share of the cost of necessary public services, based on service units, needed to provide necessary public services to the development.

4. Costs for necessary public services made necessary by new development shall be based on the same level of service provided to existing development in the service area.

5. Development fees may not be used for any of the following:

(a) Construction, acquisition or expansion of public facilities or assets other than necessary public services or facility expansions identified in the infrastructure improvements plan.

(b) Repair, operation or maintenance of existing or new necessary public services or facility expansions.

(c) Upgrading, updating, expanding, correcting or replacing existing necessary public services to serve existing development in order to meet stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards.

(d) Upgrading, updating, expanding, correcting or replacing existing necessary public services to provide a higher level of service to existing development.

(e) Administrative, maintenance or operating costs of the municipality.


125

6. Any development for which a development fee has been paid is entitled to the use and benefit of the services for which the fee was imposed and is entitled to receive immediate service from any existing facility with available capacity to serve the new service units if the available capacity has not been reserved or pledged in connection with the construction or financing of the facility.

7. Development fees may be collected if any of the following occurs:

(a) The collection is made to pay for a necessary public service or facility expansion that is identified in the infrastructure improvements plan and the municipality plans to complete construction and to have the service available within the time period established in the infrastructure improvement plan, but in no event longer than the time period provided in subsection H, paragraph 3 of this section.

(b) The municipality reserves in the infrastructure improvements plan adopted pursuant to this section or otherwise agrees to reserve capacity to serve future development.

(c) The municipality requires or agrees to allow the owner of a development to construct or finance the necessary public service or facility expansion and any of the following apply:

(i) The costs incurred or money advanced are credited against or reimbursed from the development fees otherwise due from a development.

(ii) The municipality reimburses the owner for those costs from the development fees paid from all developments that will use those necessary public services or facility expansions.

(iii) For those costs incurred the municipality allows the owner to assign the credits or reimbursement rights from the development fees otherwise due from a development to other developments for the same category of necessary public services in the same service area.

8. Projected interest charges and other finance costs may be included in determining the amount of development fees only if the monies are used for the payment of principal and interest on the portion of the bonds, notes or other obligations issued to finance construction of necessary public services or facility expansions identified in the infrastructure improvements plan.

9. Monies received from development fees assessed pursuant to this section shall be placed in a separate fund and accounted for separately and may only be used for the purposes authorized by this section. Monies received from a development fee identified in an infrastructure improvements plan adopted or updated pursuant to subsection D of this section shall be used to provide the same category of necessary public services or facility expansions for which the development fee was assessed and for the benefit of the same service area, as defined in the infrastructure improvements plan, in which the development fee was assessed. Interest earned on monies in the separate fund shall be credited to the fund.


126

10. The schedule for payment of fees shall be provided by the municipality. Based on the cost identified in the infrastructure improvements plan, the municipality shall provide a credit toward the payment of a development fee for the required or agreed to dedication of public sites, improvements and other necessary public services or facility expansions included in the infrastructure improvements plan and for which a development fee is assessed, to the extent the public sites, improvements and necessary public services or facility expansions are provided by the developer. The developer of residential dwelling units shall be required to pay development fees when construction permits for the dwelling units are issued, or at a later time if specified in a development agreement pursuant to section 9-500.05. If a development agreement provides for fees to be paid at a time later than the issuance of construction permits, the deferred fees shall be paid no later than fifteen days after the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The development agreement shall provide for the value of any deferred fees to be supported by appropriate security, including a surety bond, letter of credit or cash bond.

11. If a municipality requires as a condition of development approval the construction or improvement of, contributions to or dedication of any facilities that were not included in a previously adopted infrastructure improvements plan, the municipality shall cause the infrastructure improvements plan to be amended to include the facilities and shall provide a credit toward the payment of a development fee for the construction, improvement, contribution or dedication of the facilities to the extent that the facilities will substitute for or otherwise reduce the need for other similar facilities in the infrastructure improvements plan for which development fees were assessed.

12. The municipality shall forecast the contribution to be made in the future in cash or by taxes, fees, assessments or other sources of revenue derived from the property owner towards the capital costs of the necessary public service covered by the development fee and shall include these contributions in determining the extent of the burden imposed by the development. Beginning August 1, 2014, for purposes of calculating the required offset to development fees pursuant to this subsection, if a municipality imposes a construction contracting or similar excise tax rate in excess of the percentage amount of the transaction privilege tax rate imposed on the majority of other transaction privilege tax classifications, the entire excess portion of the construction contracting or similar excise tax shall be treated as a contribution to the capital costs of necessary public services provided to development for which development fees are assessed, unless the excess portion was already taken into account for such purpose pursuant to this subsection.

13. If development fees are assessed by a municipality, the fees shall be assessed against commercial, residential and industrial development, except that the municipality may distinguish between different categories of residential, commercial and industrial development in assessing the costs to the municipality of providing necessary public services to new development and in determining the amount of the development fee applicable to the category of development. If a municipality agrees to waive any of the development fees assessed on a development, the municipality shall reimburse the appropriate development fee accounts for the amount that was waived. The municipality shall provide notice of any such waiver to the advisory committee established pursuant to subsection G of this section within thirty days.

14. In determining and assessing a development fee applying to land in a community facilities district established under title 48, chapter 4, article 6, the municipality shall take into account all


127

public infrastructure provided by the district and capital costs paid by the district for necessary public services and shall not assess a portion of the development fee based on the infrastructure or costs.

C. A municipality shall give at least thirty days' advance notice of intention to assess a development fee and shall release to the public and post on its website or the website of an association of cities and towns if a municipality does not have a website a written report of the land use assumptions and infrastructure improvements plan adopted pursuant to subsection D of this section. The municipality shall conduct a public hearing on the proposed development fee at any time after the expiration of the thirty day notice of intention to assess a development fee and at least thirty days before the scheduled date of adoption of the fee by the governing body. Within sixty days after the date of the public hearing on the proposed development fee, a municipality shall approve or disapprove the imposition of the development fee. A municipality shall not adopt an ordinance, order or resolution approving a development fee as an emergency measure. A development fee assessed pursuant to this section shall not be effective until seventy-five days after its formal adoption by the governing body of the municipality. Nothing in this subsection shall affect any development fee adopted before July 24, 1982.

D. Before the adoption or amendment of a development fee, the governing body of the municipality shall adopt or update the land use assumptions and infrastructure improvements plan for the designated service area. The municipality shall conduct a public hearing on the land use assumptions and infrastructure improvements plan at least thirty days before the adoption or update of the plan. The municipality shall release the plan to the public, post the plan on its website or the website of an association of cities and towns if the municipality does not have a website, including in the posting its land use assumptions, the time period of the projections, a description of the necessary public services included in the infrastructure improvements plan and a map of the service area to which the land use assumptions apply, make available to the public the documents used to prepare the assumptions and plan and provide public notice at least sixty days before the public hearing, subject to the following:

1. The land use assumptions and infrastructure improvements plan shall be approved or disapproved within sixty days after the public hearing on the land use assumptions and infrastructure improvements plan and at least thirty days before the public hearing on the report required by subsection C of this section. A municipality shall not adopt an ordinance, order or resolution approving the land use assumptions or infrastructure improvements plan as an emergency measure.

2. An infrastructure improvements plan shall be developed by qualified professionals using generally accepted engineering and planning practices pursuant to subsection E of this section.

3. A municipality shall update the land use assumptions and infrastructure improvements plan at least every five years. The initial five year period begins on the day the infrastructure improvements plan is adopted. The municipality shall review and evaluate its current land use assumptions and shall cause an update of the infrastructure improvements plan to be prepared pursuant to this section.

4. Within sixty days after completion of the updated land use assumptions and infrastructure improvements plan, the municipality shall schedule and provide notice of a public hearing to discuss and review the update and shall determine whether to amend the assumptions and plan.


128

5. A municipality shall hold a public hearing to discuss the proposed amendments to the land use assumptions, the infrastructure improvements plan or the development fee. The land use assumptions and the infrastructure improvements plan, including the amount of any proposed changes to the development fee per service unit, shall be made available to the public on or before the date of the first publication of the notice of the hearing on the amendments.

6. The notice and hearing procedures prescribed in paragraph 1 of this subsection apply to a hearing on the amendment of land use assumptions, an infrastructure improvements plan or a development fee. Within sixty days after the date of the public hearing on the amendments, a municipality shall approve or disapprove the amendments to the land use assumptions, infrastructure improvements plan or development fee. A municipality shall not adopt an ordinance, order or resolution approving the amended land use assumptions, infrastructure improvements plan or development fee as an emergency measure.

7. The advisory committee established under subsection G of this section shall file its written comments on any proposed or updated land use assumptions, infrastructure improvements plan and development fees before the fifth business day before the date of the public hearing on the proposed or updated assumptions, plan and fees.

8. If, at the time an update as prescribed in paragraph 3 of this subsection is required, the municipality determines that no changes to the land use assumptions, infrastructure improvements plan or development fees are needed, the municipality may as an alternative to the updating requirements of this subsection publish notice of its determination on its website and include the following:

(a) A statement that the municipality has determined that no change to the land use assumptions, infrastructure improvements plan or development fee is necessary.

(b) A description and map of the service area in which an update has been determined to be unnecessary.

(c) A statement that by a specified date, which shall be at least sixty days after the date of publication of the first notice, a person may make a written request to the municipality requesting that the land use assumptions, infrastructure improvements plan or development fee be updated.

(d) A statement identifying the person or entity to whom the written request for an update should be sent.

9. If, by the date specified pursuant to paragraph 8 of this subsection, a person requests in writing that the land use assumptions, infrastructure improvements plan or development fee be updated, the municipality shall cause, accept or reject an update of the assumptions and plan to be prepared pursuant to this subsection.

10. Notwithstanding the notice and hearing requirements for adoption of an infrastructure improvements plan, a municipality may amend an infrastructure improvements plan adopted pursuant to this section without a public hearing if the amendment addresses only elements of


129

necessary public services in the existing infrastructure improvements plan and the changes to the plan will not, individually or cumulatively with other amendments adopted pursuant to this subsection, increase the level of service in the service area or cause a development fee increase of greater than five per cent when a new or modified development fee is assessed pursuant to this section. The municipality shall provide notice of any such amendment at least thirty days before adoption, shall post the amendment on its website or on the website of an association of cities and towns if the municipality does not have a website and shall provide notice to the advisory committee established pursuant to subsection G of this section that the amendment complies with this subsection.

E. For each necessary public service that is the subject of a development fee, the infrastructure improvements plan shall include:

1. A description of the existing necessary public services in the service area and the costs to upgrade, update, improve, expand, correct or replace those necessary public services to meet existing needs and usage and stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards, which shall be prepared by qualified professionals licensed in this state, as applicable.

2. An analysis of the total capacity, the level of current usage and commitments for usage of capacity of the existing necessary public services, which shall be prepared by qualified professionals licensed in this state, as applicable.

3. A description of all or the parts of the necessary public services or facility expansions and their costs necessitated by and attributable to development in the service area based on the approved land use assumptions, including a forecast of the costs of infrastructure, improvements, real property, financing, engineering and architectural services, which shall be prepared by qualified professionals licensed in this state, as applicable.

4. A table establishing the specific level or quantity of use, consumption, generation or discharge of a service unit for each category of necessary public services or facility expansions and an equivalency or conversion table establishing the ratio of a service unit to various types of land uses, including residential, commercial and industrial.

5. The total number of projected service units necessitated by and attributable to new development in the service area based on the approved land use assumptions and calculated pursuant to generally accepted engineering and planning criteria.

6. The projected demand for necessary public services or facility expansions required by new service units for a period not to exceed ten years.

7. A forecast of revenues generated by new service units other than development fees, which shall include estimated state-shared revenue, highway users revenue, federal revenue, ad valorem property taxes, construction contracting or similar excise taxes and the capital recovery portion of utility fees attributable to development based on the approved land use assumptions, and a plan to include these contributions in determining the extent of the burden imposed by the development as required in subsection B, paragraph 12 of this section.


130

F. A municipality's development fee ordinance shall provide that a new development fee or an increased portion of a modified development fee shall not be assessed against a development for twenty-four months after the date that the municipality issues the final approval for a commercial, industrial or multifamily development or the date that the first building permit is issued for a residential development pursuant to an approved site plan or subdivision plat, provided that no subsequent changes are made to the approved site plan or subdivision plat that would increase the number of service units. If the number of service units increases, the new or increased portion of a modified development fee shall be limited to the amount attributable to the additional service units. The twenty-four month period shall not be extended by a renewal or amendment of the site plan or the final subdivision plat that was the subject of the final approval. The municipality shall issue, on request, a written statement of the development fee schedule applicable to the development. If, after the date of the municipality's final approval of a development, the municipality reduces the development fee assessed on development, the reduced fee shall apply to the development.

G. A municipality shall do one of the following:

1. Before the adoption of proposed or updated land use assumptions, infrastructure improvements plan and development fees as prescribed in subsection D of this section, the municipality shall appoint an infrastructure improvements advisory committee, subject to the following requirements:

(a) The advisory committee shall be composed of at least five members who are appointed by the governing body of the municipality. At least fifty per cent of the members of the advisory committee must be representatives of the real estate, development or building industries, of which at least one member of the committee must be from the home building industry. Members shall not be employees or officials of the municipality.

(b) The advisory committee shall serve in an advisory capacity and shall:

(i) Advise the municipality in adopting land use assumptions and in determining whether the assumptions are in conformance with the general plan of the municipality.

(ii) Review the infrastructure improvements plan and file written comments.

(iii) Monitor and evaluate implementation of the infrastructure improvements plan.

(iv) Every year file reports with respect to the progress of the infrastructure improvements plan and the collection and expenditures of development fees and report to the municipality any perceived inequities in implementing the plan or imposing the development fee.

(v) Advise the municipality of the need to update or revise the land use assumptions, infrastructure improvements plan and development fee.


131

(c) The municipality shall make available to the advisory committee any professional reports with respect to developing and implementing the infrastructure improvements plan.

(d) The municipality shall adopt procedural rules for the advisory committee to follow in carrying out the committee's duties.

2. In lieu of creating an advisory committee pursuant to paragraph 1 of this subsection, provide for a biennial certified audit of the municipality's land use assumptions, infrastructure improvements plan and development fees. An audit pursuant to this paragraph shall be conducted by one or more qualified professionals who are not employees or officials of the municipality and who did not prepare the infrastructure improvements plan. The audit shall review the progress of the infrastructure improvements plan, including the collection and expenditures of development fees for each project in the plan, and evaluate any inequities in implementing the plan or imposing the development fee. The municipality shall post the findings of the audit on the municipality's website or the website of an association of cities and towns if the municipality does not have a website and shall conduct a public hearing on the audit within sixty days of the release of the audit to the public.

H. On written request, an owner of real property for which a development fee has been paid after July 31, 2014 is entitled to a refund of a development fee or any part of a development fee if:

1. Pursuant to subsection B, paragraph 6 of this section, existing facilities are available and service is not provided.

2. The municipality has, after collecting the fee to construct a facility when service is not available, failed to complete construction within the time period identified in the infrastructure improvements plan, but in no event later than the time period specified in paragraph 3 of this subsection.

3. For a development fee other than a development fee for water or wastewater facilities, any part of the development fee is not spent as authorized by this section within ten years after the fee has been paid or, for a development fee for water or wastewater facilities, any part of the development fee is not spent as authorized by this section within fifteen years after the fee has been paid.

I. If the development fee was collected for the construction of all or a portion of a specific item of infrastructure, and on completion of the infrastructure the municipality determines that the actual cost of construction was less than the forecasted cost of construction on which the development fee was based and the difference between the actual and estimated cost is greater than ten per cent, the current owner may receive a refund of the portion of the development fee equal to the difference between the development fee paid and the development fee that would have been due if the development fee had been calculated at the actual construction cost.

J. A refund shall include any interest earned by the municipality from the date of collection to the date of refund on the amount of the refunded fee. All refunds shall be made to the record owner of the


132

property at the time the refund is paid. If the development fee is paid by a governmental entity, the refund shall be paid to the governmental entity.

K. A development fee that was adopted before January 1, 2012 may continue to be assessed only to the extent that it will be used to provide a necessary public service for which development fees can be assessed pursuant to this section and shall be replaced by a development fee imposed under this section on or before August 1, 2014. Any municipality having a development fee that has not been replaced under this section on or before August 1, 2014 shall not collect development fees until the development fee has been replaced with a fee that complies with this section. Any development fee monies collected before January 1, 2012 remaining in a development fee account:

1. Shall be used towards the same category of necessary public services as authorized by this section.

2. If development fees were collected for a purpose not authorized by this section, shall be used for the purpose for which they were collected on or before January 1, 2020, and after which, if not spent, shall be distributed equally among the categories of necessary public services authorized by this section.

L. A moratorium shall not be placed on development for the sole purpose of awaiting completion of all or any part of the process necessary to develop, adopt or update development fees.

M. In any judicial action interpreting this section, all powers conferred on municipal governments in this section shall be narrowly construed to ensure that development fees are not used to impose on new residents a burden all taxpayers of a municipality should bear equally.

N. Each municipality that assesses development fees shall submit an annual report accounting for the collection and use of the fees for each service area. The annual report shall include the following:

1. The amount assessed by the municipality for each type of development fee.

2. The balance of each fund maintained for each type of development fee assessed as of the beginning and end of the fiscal year.

3. The amount of interest or other earnings on the monies in each fund as of the end of the fiscal year.

4. The amount of development fee monies used to repay:

(a) Bonds issued by the municipality to pay the cost of a capital improvement project that is the subject of a development fee assessment, including the amount needed to repay the debt service obligations on each facility for which development fees have been identified as the source of funding and the time frames in which the debt service will be repaid.

(b) Monies advanced by the municipality from funds other than the funds established for development fees in order to pay the cost of a capital improvement project that is


133

the subject of a development fee assessment, the total amount advanced by the municipality for each facility, the source of the monies advanced and the terms under which the monies will be repaid to the municipality.

5. The amount of development fee monies spent on each capital improvement project that is the subject of a development fee assessment and the physical location of each capital improvement project.

6. The amount of development fee monies spent for each purpose other than a capital improvement project that is the subject of a development fee assessment.

O. Within ninety days following the end of each fiscal year, each municipality shall submit a copy of the annual report to the city clerk and post the report on the municipality's website or the website of an association of cities and towns if the municipality does not have a website. Copies shall be made available to the public on request. The annual report may contain financial information that has not been audited.

P. A municipality that fails to file the report and post the report on the municipality's website or the website of an association of cities and towns if the municipality does not have a website as required by this section shall not collect development fees until the report is filed and posted.

Q. Any action to collect a development fee shall be commenced within two years after the obligation to pay the fee accrues.

R. A municipality may continue to assess a development fee adopted before January 1, 2012 for any facility that was financed before June 1, 2011 if:


2. After August 1, 2014, any development fees collected under this subsection are used solely for the payment of principal and interest on the portion of the bonds, notes or other debt service obligations issued before June 1, 2011 to finance construction of the facility.

S. Through August 1, 2014, a development fee adopted before January 1, 2012 may be used to finance construction of a facility and may be pledged to repay debt service obligations if:

1. The facility that is being financed is a facility that is described under subsection T, paragraph 7, subdivisions (a) through (g) of this section.

2. The facility was included in an infrastructure improvements plan adopted before June 1, 2011.

3. The development fees are used for the payment of principal and interest on the portion of the bonds, notes or other debt service obligations issued to finance construction of the necessary public services or facility expansions identified in the infrastructure improvement plan.


134

T. For the purposes of this section:

1. "Dedication" means the actual conveyance date or the date an improvement, facility or real or personal property is placed into service, whichever occurs first.

2. "Development" means:

(a) The subdivision of land.

(b) The construction, reconstruction, conversion, structural alteration, relocation or enlargement of any structure that adds or increases the number of service units.

(c) Any use or extension of the use of land that increases the number of service units.

3. "Facility expansion" means the expansion of the capacity of an existing facility that serves the same function as an otherwise new necessary public service in order that the existing facility may serve new development. Facility expansion does not include the repair, maintenance, modernization or expansion of an existing facility to better serve existing development.

4. "Final approval" means:

(a) For a nonresidential or multifamily development, the approval of a site plan or, if no site plan is submitted for the development, the approval of a final subdivision plat.

(b) For a single family residential development, the approval of a final subdivision plat.

5. "Infrastructure improvements plan" means a written plan that identifies each necessary public service or facility expansion that is proposed to be the subject of a development fee and otherwise complies with the requirements of this section, and may be the municipality's capital improvements plan.

6. "Land use assumptions" means projections of changes in land uses, densities, intensities and population for a specified service area over a period of at least ten years and pursuant to the general plan of the municipality.

7. "Necessary public service" means any of the following facilities that have a life expectancy of three or more years and that are owned and operated by or on behalf of the municipality:

(a) Water facilities, including the supply, transportation, treatment, purification and distribution of water, and any appurtenances for those facilities.

(b) Wastewater facilities, including collection, interception, transportation, treatment and disposal of wastewater, and any appurtenances for those facilities.

(c) Storm water, drainage and flood control facilities, including any appurtenances for those facilities.


135

(d) Library facilities of up to ten thousand square feet that provide a direct benefit to development, not including equipment, vehicles or appurtenances.

(e) Street facilities located in the service area, including arterial or collector streets or roads that have been designated on an officially adopted plan of the municipality, traffic signals and rights-of-way and improvements thereon.

(f) Fire and police facilities, including all appurtenances, equipment and vehicles. Fire and police facilities do not include a facility or portion of a facility that is used to replace services that were once provided elsewhere in the municipality, vehicles and equipment used to provide administrative services, helicopters or airplanes or a facility that is used for training firefighters or officers from more than one station or substation.

(g) Neighborhood parks and recreational facilities on real property up to thirty acres in area, or parks and recreational facilities larger than thirty acres if the facilities provide a direct benefit to the development. Park and recreational facilities do not include vehicles, equipment or that portion of any facility that is used for amusement parks, aquariums, aquatic centers, auditoriums, arenas, arts and cultural facilities, bandstand and orchestra facilities, bathhouses, boathouses, clubhouses, community centers greater than three thousand square feet in floor area, environmental education centers, equestrian facilities, golf course facilities, greenhouses, lakes, museums, theme parks, water reclamation or riparian areas, wetlands, zoo facilities or similar recreational facilities, but may include swimming pools.

(h) Any facility that was financed and that meets all of the requirements prescribed in subsection R of this section.

8. "Qualified professional" means a professional engineer, surveyor, financial analyst or planner providing services within the scope of the person's license, education or experience.

9. "Service area" means any specified area within the boundaries of a municipality in which development will be served by necessary public services or facility expansions and within which a substantial nexus exists between the necessary public services or facility expansions and the development being served as prescribed in the infrastructure improvements plan.

10. "Service unit" means a standardized measure of consumption, use, generation or discharge attributable to an individual unit of development calculated pursuant to generally accepted engineering or planning standards for a particular category of necessary public services or facility expansions.


136

APPENDIX B – TISCHLERBISE EXPERIENCE, PROJECT MANAGER RESUME

TischlerBise is a fiscal, economic, and planning consulting firm. Our qualified professionals specialize in impact fees, fiscal impact analysis, capital improvement planning, cost allocation plans, user fees, utility rate studies, and financial planning. Our firm has been providing consulting services to public agencies for over thirty years. In this time, we have prepared over 800 impact fee evaluations – more than any other firm. Through our detailed approach, proven methodology, and comprehensive product, TischlerBise has established itself as a national expert on impact fees, revenue enhancement and cost of growth strategies. The map below illustrates the broad geographic diversity of our client base.

Below is a summary of our development fee experience in the state of Arizona. Note: TischlerBise has had multiple engagements with many of these communities.

CLIENT

Feas

ibili

ty A

naly

sis

Road

s/Tr

ansp

orta

tion

Sew

er

Wat

er

Stor

mw

ater

Solid

Was

te

Law

Enf

orce

men

t

Fire

/EM

S

Park

s and

Rec

reat

ion

Trai

ls/O

pen

Spac

e

Libr

arie

s

Gen

eral

Gov

ernm

ent

Scho

ols

Apache Co.

Apache Junction

Avondale

Buckeye

Bullhead City

Casa Grande

Camp Verde

Carefree

Casa Grande

Cave Creek

Cochise Co.

Coolidge


137

CLIENT

Feas

ibili

ty A

naly

sis

Road

s/Tr

ansp

orta

tion

Sew

er

Wat

er

Stor

mw

ater

Solid

Was

te

Law

Enf

orce

men

t

Fire

/EM

S

Park

s and

Rec

reat

ion

Trai

ls/O

pen

Spac

e

Libr

arie

s

Gen

eral

Gov

ernm

ent

Scho

ols

El Mirage

Eloy

Flagstaff Fort Mojave Mesa Fire Dept.

Glendale

Lake Havasu City

Maricopa (City)

Maricopa County

Navajo Co.

Northwest Fire District

Peoria

Pinal Co.

Pinetop-Lakeside

Prescott

Queen Creek

Scottsdale

Sedona

Show Low

Sierra Vista

Springerville

Surprise

Taylor

Tolleson

Yuma

CHRISTOPHER CULLINAN

EXPERIENCE

Christopher Cullinan is a Principal with TischlerBise and has fifteen years of public finance experience in both the public and private sectors. He holds a B.A. in Political Science and a Masters of Public Administration in public finance from Indiana University. Prior to joining TischlerBise, Mr. Cullinan worked as the Budget Director for the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, where he was involved with budgeting, cost analysis, revenue analysis and forecasting, long-term financial planning, and capital improvement planning. He has prepared over 150 impact fees and other one-time fees for cities,


138

counties, and towns across the country. In addition, he has conducted numerous fiscal impact analyses user fee studies, cost allocation plans, utility rate analyses, and capital improvement funding analyses. Mr. Cullinan frequently presents on cost of growth issues at national conferences including the American Planning Association (APA), Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA), and International City/County Management Association (ICMA). He is currently on the Board of Directors for the Growth and Infrastructure Consortium.

SELECTED DEVELOPMENT/IMPACT FEE EXPERIENCE

Town of Apache Junction, Arizona – Development Fee Study Town of Buckeye, Arizona – Development Fee Study Bullhead City, Arizona – Development Fee Study City of Maricopa, Arizona – Development Fee Study City of Casa Grande, Arizona – Development Fee Study Town of Carefree, Arizona – Development Fee Study Town of Cave Creek, Arizona – Development Fee Study City of Coolidge, Arizona – Development Fee Study City of El Mirage, Arizona – Development Fee Study City of Eloy, Arizona – Development Fee Study City of Flagstaff, Arizona – Development Fee Study City of Glendale, Arizona – Development Fee Study Lake Havasu City, Arizona – Development Fee/Infrastructure Financing Study City of Maricopa, Arizona – Development Fee Study Maricopa County, Arizona – Capital Improvement Plan and Development Fee Study Navajo County, Arizona – Capital Improvement Plan and Development Fee Study City of Peoria, Arizona – Development Fee Study Pinal County, Arizona – Capital Improvement Plan and Development Fee Study Town of Pinetop-Lakeside, Arizona – Development Fee Study Town of Queen Creek, Arizona – Development Fee Study City of Sedona, Arizona – Development Fee Study City of Show Low, Arizona – Development Fee Study City of Sierra Vista, Arizona – Development Fee Study Town of Springerville, Arizona – Capacity Fee Study City of Surprise, Arizona – Development Fee Study City of Tolleson, Arizona – Development Fee Study City of Yuma, Arizona – Development Fee Study City of Lake Wales, Florida- Impact Fee Study City of North Miami, Florida- Impact Fee Study City of Parkland, Florida – Impact Fee Study Pasco County School , Florida- School Impact Fee Study City of Frederick, Maryland – Road Impact Fee Study Carroll County, Maryland – Impact Fee Study Harford County, Maryland – School Impact Fee Study


139

Corvallis School District #1, Montana – School Impact Fees City of Delaware, Ohio – Impact Fees City of Pickerington, Ohio – Impact Fees Town of East Greenwich, Rhode Island – Impact Fee Study City of Summerville, South Carolina – Impact Fee Study Jefferson County, West Virginia –School Impact Fee Study

EDUCATION

M.P.A., Public Finance, Indiana University-Bloomington B.A., Political Science, Earlham College

SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS

Planning for the Bottom Line, American Planning Association Annual Conference, 2010. Surviving an Impact Fee Challenge, National Impact Fee Roundtable, 2009. Alternative Impact Fee Calculations, National Impact Fee Roundtable, 2008. Including Interest Costs in Impact Fees, National Impact Fee Roundtable, 2008. Development Fee Calculations, Arizona Chapter of American Planning Association Annual

Conference, 2008. Cost of Growth: From Assessment to Implementation, International City/County Management

Association Annual Conference, 2008. Cost of Growth vs. Fiscal Impact Analysis, Arizona City/County Management Association

Summer Conference, 2006. The Cost of Growth: It’s Not Just the Capital Costs, American Planning Association Annual

Conference, 2006. Mr. Cullinan developed the curriculum and conducted workshops for appointed and elected

officials in Wyoming and McDowell counties in West Virginia on improving local government financial management.

AFFILIATIONS

Mr. Cullinan currently serves on the Board of Directors for the Growth and Infrastructure Consortium (formerly the National Impact Fee Roundtable).

repository.asu.edu...final draft-infrastructure improvements plan city of casa grande, arizona 2...

Documents