Brisbane City Council
March 5, 2026

Final Report
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
December 19, 2022
nbsgov.com
Prepared by:

Corporate Headquarters
32605 Temecula Parkway, Suite 100
Temecula, CA 92592
59 Toll free: 800.676.7516

Executive Summary ............................................................................................................. S-1 Organization of the Report ....................................................................................................... S-1 Development Data ................................................................................................................... S-1 Impact Fee Analysis .................................................................................................................. S-2 Recovery of Administrative Costs ............................................................................................. S-4 Impact Fee Summary ................................................................................................................ S-4 Chapter 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................1-1 Purpose ..................................................................................................................................... 1-1 Legal Framework for Developer Fees ....................................................................................... 1-1 Recent Legislation .................................................................................................................... 1-6 Impact Fee Calculation Methodology ...................................................................................... 1-8 Facilities Addressed in this Study ........................................................................................... 1-10 Chapter 2. Development Data .............................................................................................2-1 Setting....................................................................................................................................... 2-1 Study Area and Time Frame ..................................................................................................... 2-1 Development Types .................................................................................................................. 2-1 Residential Development and Population ................................................................................ 2-2 Units of Development .............................................................................................................. 2-3 Demand Variables .................................................................................................................... 2-3 Impact Fees for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) ................................................................... 2-4 Population and Employees per Unit ......................................................................................... 2-5 Existing and Future Development ............................................................................................ 2-5 Growth Potential ...................................................................................................................... 2-7 Chapter 3. Park Land and Park Improvements ......................................................................3-1 Service Area .............................................................................................................................. 3-1 Methodology ............................................................................................................................ 3-1 Demand Variable ...................................................................................................................... 3-1 Existing Level of Service ............................................................................................................ 3-2 Cost Per Capita ......................................................................................................................... 3-3 Impact Fees per Unit ................................................................................................................ 3-3 Projected Revenue ................................................................................................................... 3-5 Updating the Fees .................................................................................................................... 3-6 Nexus Summary ........................................................................................................................ 3-6 60

Chapter 4. Recreation Facilities ...........................................................................................4-1 Service Area .............................................................................................................................. 4-1 Methodology ............................................................................................................................ 4-1 Demand Variable ...................................................................................................................... 4-1 Existing Level of Service ............................................................................................................ 4-2 Existing Level of Service - Cost Per Capita ................................................................................ 4-2 Impact Fees per Unit ................................................................................................................ 4-3 Projected Revenue ................................................................................................................... 4-3 Updating the Fees .................................................................................................................... 4-4 Nexus Summary ........................................................................................................................ 4-4 Chapter 5. Open Space and Trails ........................................................................................5-1 Service Area .............................................................................................................................. 5-1 Methodology ............................................................................................................................ 5-1 Demand Variable ...................................................................................................................... 5-1 Existing Level of Service ............................................................................................................ 5-2 Existing Level of Service - Cost Per Capita ................................................................................ 5-2 Impact Fees per Unit ................................................................................................................ 5-3 Projected Revenue ................................................................................................................... 5-4 Updating the Fees .................................................................................................................... 5-5 Nexus Summary ........................................................................................................................ 5-6 Chapter 6. Implementation .................................................................................................6-8 Adoption ................................................................................................................................... 6-8 Administration .......................................................................................................................... 6-9 Requirements Imposed by AB 602 ......................................................................................... 6-13 Training and Public Information ............................................................................................. 6-14 Recovery of Administrative Costs ........................................................................................... 6-14 Appendices
Fee Comparison Appendix A
61

City of Brisbane Page S-1
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
The City of Brisbane has retained NBS Government Finance Group to prepare this study to analyze the impacts of new development on the City’s parks, recreation facilities, open space and trails and to calculate impact fees based on that analysis. The methods used in this study are intended to satisfy all legal requirements of the U. S. Constitution, the California Constitution and the California Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Sections 66000 et seq.).

Organization of the Report
Chapter 1 of this report provides an overview of the legal requirements for establishing and imposing such fees, and methods that can be used to calculate impact fees.

Chapter 2 contains data on existing and future development that is used in this report.

Chapters 3 through 5 analyze the impacts of development on specific types of facilities and calculate impact fees for those facilities. The facilities addressed in this report are listed by chapter below:

Chapter 3. Park Land and Park Improvements
Chapter 4. Recreation Facilities
Chapter 5. Open Space and Trails

Chapter 6 contains recommendations for adopting and implementing impact fees, including suggested findings to satisfy the requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act.

Development Data
Chapter 2 of this report presents estimates of existing development in Brisbane and projections of future development in the City out to 2040. Brisbane is largely built-out except for an area known as the Baylands, a 700-acre former landfill and industrial site which is being planned for development as a mixed-use neighborhood with the potential to more than double the City’s population and employment.

Table 2.1 in Chapter 2 shows the population per unit for residential development and employees per unit for various types of non-residential development. Table 2.2 shows estimates of existing development in terms of units, population and employees. Table 2.3 shows a forecast of future development to buildout, and Table 2.4 shows a forecast of total development at buildout. The data in those tables is used to calculate impact fees and to project potential revenue for impact fees calculated in this report.

It should be noted that to comply with recent amendments to the Mitigation Fee Act, residential impact fees are calculated in this study for unit size ranges in square feet, rather than by unit type (e.g., single-family or multi-family) which was common practice in the past.
62

City of Brisbane Page S-2
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
Impact Fee Analysis
The impact fee analysis for each type of facility addressed in this report is presented in a separate chapter of this report. In each case, the relationship between development and the need for a particular type of facility is defined in a way that allows the impact of additional development on facility needs to be quantified. The impact fees are based on the cost of facilities and other capital assets needed to mitigate the impacts of additional development.

All of the fees calculated in this report are based on capital costs and may be spent only for land and capital improvements of the types identified in this report. The following paragraphs briefly discuss the approach used to calculate impact fees for each type of facility addressed in this study.

Chapter 3 - Impact Fees for Park Land and Park Improvements. Chapter 3 of this report calculates impact fees for both park land acquisition and park improvements. It is important to clarify when the park land impact fees calculated in this study would apply to residential development.

The City has an existing Quimby Act ordinance that requires dedication of park land or payment of fees in lieu of dedication by residential subdivisions. That means the park land acquisition impact fees calculated in Chapter 3 would not apply to residential subdivisions but would apply to new residential development that does not involve a subdivision or parcel map. The park land impact fees would also apply to all new non-residential (e.g., commercial and industrial) development in Brisbane. Unlike the impact fees for park land acquisition, the impact fees for park improvements calculated in Chapter 3 are intended to apply to all new residential and non-residential development in the City, including residential subdivisions.

Impact fees for park land and park improvements calculated in this report are based on the existing level of service as required by recent amendments to the Mitigation Fee Act.

For park land and park improvements, that level of service is defined in terms of acres of existing parks per capita of existing service population. For purposes of the impact fee calculations, that level of service is converted into per-capita costs for park land and park improvements using estimates of per-acre costs for park land acquisition and park improvements.

Service population is used in impact fee calculations in this study to represent the impact of development on the need for parks, recreation facilities, open space and trails. Service population is a weighted composite of resident population and employees working in Brisbane. Residents are included to represent the demand created by residential development and employees are included to represent the demand created by nonresidential development.

Residents are given a weight of 1.0 and employees are given different weights for different types of facilities in this study. For parks, employees are given a weight of 0.25, meaning that one employee represents 25% as much demand as one resident. 63

City of Brisbane Page S-3
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
See Chapter 3 for detailed analysis and calculation of impact fees for park land and park improvements. Table S.1, later in this Executive Summary shows the amounts of the impact fees calculated in this report.

Chapter 4 – Impact Fees for Recreation Facilities. Chapter 4 calculates impact fees for Brisbane’s recreation facilities. Impact fees for recreation facilities calculated in this report are based on the existing level of service as required by recent amendments to the Mitigation Fee Act. For recreation facilities, that level of service is defined in terms of the replacement cost of existing facilities per capita of existing service population.

As discussed in the previous section, service population is a weighted composite of resident population and employees working in Brisbane. Residents are included to represent the demand created by residential development and employees are included to represent the demand created by non-residential development.

Residents are given a weight of 1.0 and employees are given different weights for different types of facilities in this study. For recreation facilities, employees are given a weight of 0.1, meaning that one employee represents 10% as much demand as one resident.

See Chapter 4 for more detail on the calculation of impact fees for recreation facilities.

Table S.1, later in this Executive Summary shows the amounts of the impact fees calculated in this report.

Chapter 5 - Impact Fees for Open Space and Trails. Chapter 5 of this report calculates impact fees for both open space land acquisition and trail improvements. Impact fees for open space and trails calculated in this report are based on the existing level of service as required by recent amendments to the Mitigation Fee Act. For open space land acquisition and trail improvements, that level of service is defined in terms of the replacement cost of existing facilities per capita of existing service population.

As discussed in previous sections, service population is a weighted composite of resident population and employees working in Brisbane. Residents are included to represent the demand created by residential development and employees are included to represent the demand created by non-residential development.

Residents are given a weight of 1.0 and employees are given different weights for different types of facilities in this study. For open space and trails, employees are given a weight of 0.25, meaning that one employee represents 25% as much demand as one resident.

See Chapter 5 for detailed analysis and calculation of impact fees for open space and trails. Table S.1, later in this Executive Summary shows the amounts of the impact fees calculated in this report.
64

City of Brisbane Page S-4
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
Recovery of Administrative Costs
In the next section, following Table S.1, an administrative charge is calculated to recover the City’s costs for complying with administrative and reporting requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act and for periodic updates to this impact fee study. That administrative charge is added to the impact fees in Table S.2.

Impact Fee Summary
Impact fees per unit calculated in this report are summarized in Table S.1, below.

Table S.2 on the next page shows the proposed impact fees from Table S.1 with the addition of a 0.55% administrative fee to cover annual administrative costs and periodic impact fee update studies. That percentage is calculated as the estimated annual administrative cost ($3,500) plus the average annual cost of preparing an impact fee update study every five years ($5,600) divided by the projected annual revenue from impact fees calculated in this report ($1,665,491). The annual revenue estimate assumes that total revenue of $33,309,816 will be collected over 20 years. Potential revenue from impact fees calculated in this report is shown in Chapters 3, 4 and 5. No revenue is projected for the park land impact fees because it isn’t possible to know how much future residential development will pay Quimby Act fees in lieu of park land dedication instead of the park land impact fees calculated in this study. The administrative charge proposed in this section should not be applied to any in-lieu fees collected pursuant to the City’s park land dedication ordinance, since those fees are not addressed here.

Table S.1: Summary of Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Impact Fees Development
Type Units 1
Park
Land
Park
Imprvmts
Recreation
Facilities
Open Sp/
Trails Total
Residential <800 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $ 14,842 $ 2,438 $ 5,096 $ 1,499 $ 23,875 Residential 800-1,200 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $ 15,479 $ 2,543 $ 5,315 $ 1,563 $ 24,900 Residential 1,200-2,100 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $ 16,116 $ 2,648 $ 5,533 $ 1,627 $ 25,925 Residential >2,100 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $ 16,753 $ 2,752 $ 5,752 $ 1,692 $ 26,949 Commercial KSF $ 3,185 $ 523 $ 437 $ 322 $ 4,467
Lodging Room $ 557 $ 92 $ 77 $ 56 $ 782
Office KSF $ 4,778 $ 785 $ 656 $ 482 $ 6,701
Industrial KSF $ 1,752 $ 288 $ 241 $ 177 $ 2,457
Public Facilities KSF $ 4,778 $ 785 $ 656 $ 482 $ 6,701 1 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room or suite 65

City of Brisbane Page S-5
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
The impact fees calculated in this report are intended to represent the maximum amounts justified by the data and analysis presented in this report. The City Council may choose to adopt no fees, or any fees up to the amounts shown in the tables above, and may choose to adopt those fees with or without the administrative charge reflected in Table S.2.

Table S.2: Summary of Parks, Rec, Open Space and Trails Impact Fees Incl 0.55% Admin Charge Development
Type Units 1
Park
Land
Park
Imprvmts
Recreation
Facilities
Open Sp/
Trails Total
Residential <800 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $ 14,924 $ 2,452 $ 5,124 $ 1,507 $ 24,006 Residential 800-1,200 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $ 15,564 $ 2,557 $ 5,344 $ 1,572 $ 25,037 Residential 1,200-2,100 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $ 16,205 $ 2,662 $ 5,564 $ 1,636 $ 26,067 Residential >2,100 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $ 16,845 $ 2,767 $ 5,784 $ 1,701 $ 27,097 Commercial KSF $ 3,203 $ 526 $ 440 $ 323 $ 4,492
Lodging Room $ 560 $ 92 $ 77 $ 57 $ 786
Office KSF $ 4,804 $ 789 $ 660 $ 485 $ 6,738
Industrial KSF $ 1,761 $ 289 $ 242 $ 178 $ 2,471
Public Facilities KSF $ 4,804 $ 789 $ 660 $ 485 $ 6,738 1 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room or suite 66

City of Brisbane Page 1-1
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to analyze the impacts of development on the need for parks and recreation facilities provided by the City of Brisbane and to calculate impact fees based on that analysis. This report documents the approach, data and methodology used in this study to calculate impact fees.

The methods used to calculate impact fees and in-lieu fees in this report are intended to satisfy all legal requirements governing such fees, including provisions of the U. S.

Constitution, the California Constitution and the California Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Sections 66000-66025.

Legal Framework for Developer Fees
This brief summary of the legal framework for development fees is intended as a general overview. It was not prepared by an attorney and should not be treated as legal advice.

U. S. Constitution. Like all land use regulations, development exactions, including impact fees, are subject to the 5th Amendment prohibition on taking of private property for public use without just compensation. Both state and federal courts have recognized the imposition of impact fees on development as a legitimate form of land use regulation, provided the fees meet standards intended to protect against “regulatory takings.” A regulatory taking occurs when regulations unreasonably deprive landowners of property rights protected by the Constitution.

In two landmark cases dealing with exactions, the U. S. Supreme Court has held that when a government agency requires the dedication of land or an interest in land as a condition of development approval or imposes ad hoc exactions as a condition of approval on a single development project that do not apply to development generally, a higher standard of judicial scrutiny applies. To meet that standard, the agency must demonstrate an "essential nexus" between such exactions and the interest being protected (See Nollan v.

California Coastal Commission, 1987) and make an” individualized determination” that the exaction imposed is "roughly proportional" to the burden created by development (See Dolan v. City of Tigard, 1994).

Until recently, it was widely accepted that legislatively enacted impact fees that apply to all development in a jurisdiction are not subject to the higher standard of judicial scrutiny flowing from the Nollan and Dolan decisions. But after the U. S. Supreme Court decision in Koontz v. St. Johns Water Management District (2013), state courts have reached conflicting conclusions on that issue.

In light of that uncertainty, any agency enacting or imposing impact fees would be wise to demonstrate a nexus and ensure proportionality in the calculation of those fees. 67

City of Brisbane Page 1-2
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
Defining the “Nexus.” While courts have not been entirely consistent in defining the nexus required to justify exactions and impact fees, that term can be thought of as having the three elements discussed below. We think proportionality is logically included as one element of that nexus, even though it was discussed separately in Dolan v. Tigard. The elements of the nexus discussed below mirror the three “reasonable relationship” findings required by the Mitigation Fee Act for establishment and imposition of impact fees.

Need or Impact. Development must create a need for the facilities to be funded by impact fees. All new development in a community creates additional demands on some or all public facilities provided by local government. If the capacity of facilities is not increased to satisfy the additional demand, the quality or availability of public services for the entire community will deteriorate. Impact fees may be used to recover the cost of development-related facilities, but only to the extent that the need for facilities is related to the development project subject to the fees.

The Nollan decision reinforced the principle that development exactions may be used only to mitigate impacts created by the development projects upon which they are imposed. In this study, the impact of development on facility needs is analyzed in terms of quantifiable relationships between various types of development and the demand for public facilities based on applicable level-of-service standards. This report contains all of the information needed to demonstrate compliance with this element of the nexus.

Benefit. Development must benefit from facilities funded by impact fees. With respect to the benefit relationship, the most basic requirement is that facilities funded by impact fees be available to serve the development paying the fees. A sufficient benefit relationship also requires that impact fee revenues be segregated from other funds and expended in a timely manner on the facilities for which the fees were charged. Nothing in the U.S. Constitution or California law requires that facilities paid for with impact fee revenues be available exclusively to development projects paying the fees.

Procedures for earmarking and expenditure of fee revenues are mandated by the Mitigation Fee Act, as are procedures to ensure that the fees are either expended in a timely manner or refunded. Those requirements are intended to ensure that developments benefit from the impact fees they are required to pay. Thus, over time, procedural issues as well as substantive issues can come into play with respect to the benefit element of the nexus.

Proportionality. Impact fees must be proportional to the impact created by a particular development project. Proportionality in impact fees depends on properly identifying development-related facility costs and calculating the fees in such a way that those costs are allocated in proportion to the facility needs created by different types and amounts of development. The section on impact fee methodology, below, describes methods used to allocate facility costs and calculate impact fees that meet the proportionality standard.

California Constitution. The California Constitution grants broad police power to local governments, including the authority to regulate land use and development. That police 68

City of Brisbane Page 1-3
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
power is the source of authority for local governments in California to impose impact fees on development. Some impact fees have been challenged on grounds that they are special taxes imposed without voter approval in violation of Article XIIIA. However, that objection is valid only if the fees charged to a project exceed the cost of providing facilities needed to serve the project. In that case, the fees would also run afoul of the U. S.

Constitution and the Mitigation Fee Act.

Articles XIIIC and XIIID, added to the California Constitution by Proposition 218 in 1996, require voter approval for some “property-related fees,” but exempt “the imposition of fees or charges, as a condition of property development.” Thus, impact fees are exempt from those requirements.

The Mitigation Fee Act. California’s impact fee statute originated in Assembly Bill 1600 during the 1987 session of the Legislature and took effect in January 1989. AB 1600 added several sections to the Government Code, beginning with Section 66000. Since that time, the impact fee statute has been amended from time to time, and in 1997 was officially titled the “Mitigation Fee Act.” Unless otherwise noted, code sections referenced in this report are from the Government Code.

The Mitigation Fee Act does not limit the types of capital improvements for which impact fees may be charged. It defines public facilities very broadly to include "public improvements, public services and community amenities." Although the issue is not specifically addressed in the Mitigation Fee Act, it is clear both in case law and statute (see Government Code Section 65913.8) that impact fees may not be used to pay for maintenance or operating costs. Consequently, the fees calculated in this report are based on the cost of capital assets only.

The Mitigation Fee Act does not use the term “mitigation fee” except in its official title.

Nor does it use the more common term “impact fee.” The Act simply uses the word “fee,” which is defined as “a monetary exaction, other than a tax or special assessment…that is charged by a local agency to the applicant in connection with approval of a development project for the purpose of defraying all or a portion of the cost of public facilities related to the development project ….”
To avoid confusion with other types of fees, this report uses the widely accepted terms “impact fee” and “development impact fee” which both should be understood to mean “fee” as defined in the Mitigation Fee Act.

The Mitigation Fee Act contains requirements for establishing, increasing and imposing impact fees. They are summarized below. It also contains provisions that govern the collection and expenditure of fees and requires annual reports and periodic re-evaluation of impact fee programs. Those administrative requirements are discussed in the implementation chapter of this report.

Required Findings. Section 66001 (a) requires that an agency establishing, increasing or imposing impact fees, must make findings to:

1. Identify the purpose of the fee
69

City of Brisbane Page 1-4
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022

2. Identify the use of the fee; and

3. Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between the use of the fee and the development type on which it is imposed

4. Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between the need for the facility and the type of development on which the fee is imposed In addition, Section 66001 (b) requires that in any action imposing a fee as a condition of approval of a development project by a local agency, the local agency shall determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility or portion of the public facility attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed.

Some legal experts are of the opinion that the requirements of Section 66001 (a) apply when impact fees are based on a legislatively adopted fee schedule, while the requirements of Section 66001 (b) apply when impact fees are based on an administratively imposed (ad hoc) assessment. 1
The requirements outlined above are discussed in more detail below.

Identifying the Purpose of the Fees. The broad purpose of impact fees is to protect public health, safety and general welfare by providing for adequate public facilities. The specific purpose of the fees calculated in this study is to fund construction of certain capital improvements that will be needed to mitigate the impacts of planned new development on City facilities, and to maintain an acceptable level of public services as the City grows.

This report recommends that findings regarding the purpose of an impact fee should define the purpose broadly, as providing for the funding of adequate public facilities to serve additional development.

Identifying the Use of the Fees. According to Section 66001(a)(2), if a fee is used to finance public facilities, those facilities must be identified. A capital improvement plan may be used for that purpose but is not mandatory if the facilities are identified in a General Plan, a Specific Plan, or in other public documents. Section 66002 (b) requires that such capital improvement plans must be updated annually.

However, a new provision in Section 66016.5, which was added by AB 602 in 2021, requires that large jurisdictions adopt a capital improvement plan as part of an impact fee study. That requirement applies to impact fee studies adopted after January 1, 2022. “Large jurisdiction” means a county of 250,000 or more or any city within that county.

The statute does not provide any detail about what must be included in the capital improvement plan or how it should relate to the impact fee study. And, that new 1 See “The Mitigation Fee Act’s Five-Year Findings Requirement: Beware Costly Pitfalls” by Glen Hansen, Senior Council, Abbott and Kindermann and Rick Jarvis, Managing Partner, Jarvis, Fay and Gibson, presented at the 2022 League of California Cities City Attorneys Spring Conference 70

City of Brisbane Page 1-5
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
requirement is inconsistent with the original language of Section 66001(a)(2), so it is unclear whether the annual update requirement in Section 66002(b) applies.

Reasonable Relationship Requirement. As discussed above, Section 66001 requires that, for fees subject to its provisions, a "reasonable relationship" must be demonstrated between:

1. the use of the fee and the type of development on which it is imposed;

2. the need for a public facility and the type of development on which a fee is imposed; and,

3. the amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed.

Although some legal experts contend that the third of these only pertains to “ad hoc” fees that are not part of a legislatively adopted fee schedule, we believe that all three are part of a complete “nexus” or “reasonable relationship” framework as discussed earlier. These three reasonable relationship requirements address the nexus and proportionality requirements often cited in court decisions as the standard for defensible impact fees.

The term “dual rational nexus” is often used to characterize the standard used by courts in evaluating the legitimacy of impact fees. The “duality” of the nexus refers to (1) an impact or need created by a development project subject to impact fees, and (2) a benefit to the project from the expenditure of the fees.

However, although proportionality is reasonably implied in the dual rational nexus formulation, it was explicitly required by the Supreme Court in the Dolan case, and we prefer to list it as the third element of a complete nexus.

Development Agreements and Reimbursement Agreements. The requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act do not apply to fees collected under development agreements (see Govt. Code Section 66000) or reimbursement agreements (see Govt. Code Section 66003). The same is true of fees in lieu of park land dedication imposed under the Quimby Act (see Govt. Code Section 66477).

Existing Deficiencies. In 2006, Section 66001(g) was added to the Mitigation Fee Act (by AB 2751) to clarify that impact fees “shall not include costs attributable to existing deficiencies in public facilities,…” The legislature’s intent in adopting this amendment, as stated in the bill, was to codify the holdings of Bixel v. City of Los Angeles (1989), Rohn v.

City of Visalia (1989), and Shapell Industries Inc. v. Governing Board (1991).

That amendment does not appear to be a substantive change. It is widely understood that other provisions of law make it improper for impact fees to include costs for correcting existing deficiencies.

However, Section 66001(g) also states that impact fees “may include the costs attributable to the increased demand for public facilities reasonably related to the development project in order to (1) refurbish existing facilities to maintain the existing 71

City of Brisbane Page 1-6
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
level of service or (2) achieve an adopted level of service that is consistent with the general plan.” (Emphasis added.)
Impact Fees for Existing Facilities. Impact fees may be used to recover costs for existing facilities to the extent that those facilities are needed to serve additional development and have the capacity to do so. In other words, it must be possible to show that fees used to pay for existing facilities meet the need and benefit elements of the nexus.

Recent Legislation
Several new laws enacted by the State of California in 2019 to facilitate development of affordable housing will affect the implementation of in-lieu fees and impact fees calculated in this study. Below are brief overviews of some key bills passed in 2019.

SB 330 – The Housing Crisis Act of 2019. Amendments to existing law contained in SB 330 prohibit the imposition of new approval requirements on a housing development project once a preliminary application has been submitted. That provision applies to increases in impact fees and in-lieu fees, except when the resolution or ordinance establishing the fee authorizes automatic, inflationary adjustments to the fee or exaction.

AB 1483 – Housing Data: Collection and Reporting. AB 1483 requires that a city, county or special district must post on its website a current schedule of its fees and exactions, as well as associated nexus studies and annual reports. Updates must be posted within 30 days.

SB 13 – Accessory Dwelling Units. SB 13 prohibits the imposition of impact fees on accessory dwelling units (ADUs) smaller than 750 square feet and provides that impact fees for ADUs of 750 square feet or more must be proportional to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit. The proportionality requirement means that impact fees for ADUs of 750 square feet or more must be calculated on a case-by-case basis during the approval process.

Existing law requires a water or sewer connection fee or capacity charge for an accessory dwelling unit requiring a new or separate utility connection to be based on either the accessory dwelling unit’s size or the number of its plumbing fixtures. SB 13 revises the basis for calculating the connection fee or capacity charge to either the accessory dwelling unit’s square feet or the number of its drainage fixture units.

AB 602 – Amendments to the Planning and Land Use Law and the Mitigation Fee Act.

AB 602, which was passed and signed in 2021, adds section 65940.1 to the Planning and Land Use Law requiring cities, counties and special districts that have internet websites to post schedules of fees, exactions and affordability requirements, annual fee reports, and an archive of nexus studies on that website, and to update that information within 30 days after any changes.

AB 602 also adds Section 66016.5 to the Mitigation Fee Act imposing several new requirements for impact fees that go into effect on January 1, 2022, including:
72

City of Brisbane Page 1-7
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
 A nexus study must identify the existing level of service for each facility, identify the proposed new level of service (if any), and explain why the new level of service is appropriate.
 If a nexus study supports an increase in an existing fee the local agency shall review the assumptions of the nexus study supporting the original fee and evaluate the amount of the fees collected under the original fee.  Large jurisdictions (counties over 250,000 and cities within those counties) must adopt a capital improvement plan as part of the nexus study.  All impact fee nexus studies shall be adopted at a public hearing with at least 30 days’ notice, and the local agency shall notify any member of the public that requests notice of intent to begin and impact fee nexus study of the date of the hearing.
 Nexus studies shall be updated at least every eight years, from the period beginning on January 1, 2022.
 A nexus study adopted after July 1, 2022, shall calculate a fee imposed on a housing development project proportionately to the square footage of proposed units in the development. A nexus study is not required to comply with this requirement if the local agency makes certain findings specified in the law. A local agency that imposes a fee proportionately to the square footage of units in the development shall be deemed to have used a valid method to establish a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development.
 Authorizes any member of the public, including an applicant for a development project, to submit evidence that impact fees proposed by an agency fail to comply with the Mitigation Fee Act, and requires the legislative body of the agency to consider such evidence and adjust the proposed fee if deemed necessary.

SB 9, the California Housing Opportunity and More Efficiency (“HOME”) Act. SB 9 facilitates the subdivision of existing residential lots and allows for ministerial approval (without discretionary review or hearings) of no more than two dwelling units, including duplexes, on parcels zoned for single-family dwellings if the property satisfies certain requirements. To qualify under SB 9 the property must be located within either an urbanized area or urban cluster, as designated by the United States Census Bureau, or for unincorporated areas, within the boundaries of an urbanized area or urban cluster.

The law allows for qualifying lot splits to be approved ministerially upon meeting certain requirements. Each parcel may not be smaller than forty (40%) percent of the original parcel size and each parcel must be at least one thousand two hundred (1,200) square feet in size unless permitted by local ordinance. The parcel must be limited to residential use.

The law does not allow demolition or alteration of certain types of dwellings, including:
(a) housing that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to 73

City of Brisbane Page 1-8
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
affordable levels; (b) housing subject to rent control; (c) housing that has been tenant-occupied in the last three years; or (d) housing located in a historic district. In addition, the proposed development may not demolish more than 25% of the exterior structural walls of an existing unit, unless expressly permitted by a local ordinance.

A local agency may impose objective zoning standards, subdivision standards, and design standards unless they would preclude either of the two units from being at least 800 square feet in floor area.

No setback may be required for an existing structure, or a structure constructed in the same location and dimensions as an existing structure. Otherwise, a local agency may require a setback of up to four feet from the side and rear lot lines. Off-street parking of up to one space per unit may be required by the local agency, unless the project is located within a half-mile walking distance of a high-quality transit corridor or a major transit stop, or if there is a car share vehicle within one block of the parcel. If a local agency makes a written finding that a project would create a specific, adverse impact upon public health and safety or the environment without a feasible way to mitigate such impact, the agency still may deny the project.

It is impossible to predict how much SB 9 will affect the number of future residential units constructed in the City. Unlike recent laws dealing with accessory dwelling units, SB 9 does not address the imposition of impact fees on the new dwelling units it allows, and it appears at this point that such units would be subject to the same impact fees as other new residential development.

Impact Fee Calculation Methodology
Any one of several legitimate methods may be used to calculate impact fees. The choice of a particular method depends primarily on the service characteristics of, and planning requirements for, the facility type being addressed. To some extent they are interchangeable, because they all allocate facility costs in proportion to the needs created by development.

Allocating facility costs to various types and amounts of development is central to all methods of impact fee calculation. Costs are allocated by means of formulas that quantify the relationship between development and the need for facilities. In a cost allocation formula, the impact of development represented by some attribute of development such as added population or added vehicle trips that represent the impacts created by different types and amounts of development.

Plan-Based or Improvements-Driven Method. Plan-based impact fee calculations are based on the relationship between a specified set of improvements and a specified increment of development. The improvements are typically identified in a facility plan, while the development is identified in a land use plan that forecasts potential development by type and quantity.

Using this method, facility costs are allocated to various categories of development in proportion to the service demand created by each type of development. To calculate 74

City of Brisbane Page 1-9
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
plan-based impact fees, it is necessary to determine what facilities will be needed to serve a particular increment of new development.

With this method, the total cost of eligible facilities is divided by total units of additional demand to calculate a cost per unit of demand (e.g. a cost per capita for parks). Then, the cost per unit of demand is multiplied by factors representing the demand per unit of development (e.g. population per unit) to arrive at a cost per unit of development.

This method is somewhat inflexible in that it is based on the relationship between a specific facility plan and a specific land use plan. If either plan changes significantly the fees will have to be recalculated.

Capacity-Based or Consumption-Driven Method. This method calculates a cost per unit of capacity based on the relationship between total cost and total capacity of a system.

It can be applied to any type of development, provided the capacity required to serve each increment of development can be estimated and the facility has adequate capacity available to serve the development. Since the cost per unit of demand does not depend on the particular type or quantity of development to be served, this method is flexible with respect to changing development plans.

In this method, the cost of unused capacity is not allocated to development. Capacitybased fees are most commonly used for water and wastewater systems, where the cost of a system component is divided by the capacity of that component to derive a unit cost.

However, a similar analysis can be applied to other types of facilities. To produce a schedule of impact fees based on standardized units of development (e.g. dwelling units or square feet of non-residential building area), the cost per unit of capacity is multiplied by the amount of capacity required to serve a typical unit of development in each of several land use categories.

Standard-Based or Incremental Expansion Method. Standard-based fees are calculated using a specified relationship or standard that determines the number of service units to be provided for each unit of development. The standard can be established as a matter of policy or it can be based on the level of service being provided to existing development in the study area.

Using the standard-based method, costs are defined on a generic unit-cost basis and then applied to development according to a standard that sets the number of service units to be provided for each unit of development.

Park in-lieu and impact fees are commonly calculated this way. The level of service standard for parks is typically stated in terms of acres of parks per thousand residents. A cost-per-acre for park land or park improvements can usually be estimated without knowing the exact size or location of a particular park. The ratio of park acreage to population and the cost per acre for parks is used to calculate a cost per capita. The cost per capita can then be converted into a cost per unit of development based on the average population per dwelling unit for various types of residential development. 75

City of Brisbane Page 1-10
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
Facilities Addressed in this Study
Impact/in-lieu fees for the following types of facilities are addressed in this report:
 Park Land and Park Improvements
 Recreation Facilities
 Open Space and Trails
Each of those facilities is addressed in a separate chapter of this report, beginning with Chapter 3. Chapter 2 contains data on existing and future development used in the impact fee analysis.
76

City of Brisbane Page 2-1
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
This chapter presents data on existing and future development that will be used to calculate impact fees in subsequent chapters of this report.

The information in this chapter may be used to establish levels of service, analyze facility needs, and allocate the cost of capital facilities among various types of development.

Land use and development data in this chapter are based on information from the U.S.

Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS), the California Department of Finance (DOF) Demographic Research Unit, the City of Brisbane Community Development Department and other sources as noted in this chapter.

Setting
Brisbane is located in northern San Mateo County adjacent to San Francisco Bay about 2 miles south of San Francisco. Most of Brisbane lies west of the Bayshore Freeway (U. S.

Highway 101), which closely borders the Bay through much of the City. Brisbane is largely built-out except for an area known as the Baylands, a 700-acre former landfill and industrial site which is being planned for development as a mixed-use neighborhood with the potential to more than double the City’s population and employment.

Study Area and Time Frame
The study area for this study is the area within Brisbane’s city limits. The timeframe for this study extends from the present time to 2040. By which time Brisbane is expected to be fully built out. However, the time required for buildout will depend on the rate at which development occurs, and although buildout is expected to occur by 2040, the impact fee calculations do not depend on the rate or timing of development.

Development Types
Traditionally, impact fees for residential development are based on unit types such as single-family, multi-family and mobile home units. However, AB 602, enacted in 2021, added Section 66016.5 to the Government Code. That section requires that, “[a] nexus study adopted after July 1, 2022, shall calculate a fee imposed on a housing development project proportionately to the square footage of proposed units of the development.” It further states that “[a] local agency that imposes a fee proportionately to the square footage of the proposed units of the development shall be deemed to have used a valid method to establish a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development.”
Consequently, the residential development categories used in this study are based on unit size rather than the type of unit. The complete list of development categories used in this study is shown below.
 Residential: < 800 Sq. Ft.
77

City of Brisbane Page 2-2
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
 Residential: 800 – 1,200 Sq. Ft.
 Residential: >1,200 – 2,100 Sq. Ft.
 Residential: > 2,100 Sq. Ft.
 Commercial
 Lodging
 Office
 Industrial
 Public Facilities
Residential. As discussed above, the residential development categories used in this study are based on unit size and do not distinguish by unit type (e.g., single-family or multifamily). Residential development is any development made up primarily of dwelling units intended for long-term occupancy.

Commercial. As defined in this study, the Commercial category includes development intended primarily to accommodate retail commercial and service commercial uses and may include restaurants, service stations, banks, and similar or related uses.

Lodging. This category includes hotels, motels, bed and breakfast establishments and similar lodging uses.

Office. The Office category includes development intended for general office or medical office uses.

Industrial. This category includes development intended to accommodate research, manufacturing, warehouse and business park uses.

Public Facilities. This category includes government buildings and other public or quasipublic facilities including public schools. Parks are excluded because they do not create impacts on the types of facilities addressed in this report. In many cases, the City may lack authority to charge impact fees to development in this category, or in the case of City facilities, it would be impractical to do so.

Residential Development and Population
The chart on the next page shows the California Department of Finance (DOF) official January 1 population estimates for the City of Brisbane for the years from 2012 through 2022 except that the 2020 population is based on the 2020 Census count.

The population chart shows essentially no population growth from 2014 to 2019 and then bumps up in 2020 indicating that DOF estimates for the years prior to 2020 were low. The DOF numbers for 2021 and 2022 are slightly below the 2020 Census figure. 78

City of Brisbane Page 2-3
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
According to the official
2010 and 2020 Census
population counts, Brisbane
has grown a total of 13.3%
from 4,282 in 2010 to 4,851
in 2020.

This study uses data from
the U. S. Census Bureau’s
2020 American Community
Survey to calculate the
population per dwelling unit
factors for each category of
residential development
defined in this study. Those factors are shown in Table 2.1.

Units of Development
In this study, quantities of existing and planned development are measured in terms of certain units of development. Those units are discussed below.

Dwelling Units. Dwelling units (DUs) are the most commonly used measure of residential development. The dwelling unit is the standard unit for residential development in this study.

Building Area. For non-residential development other than lodging, gross building area in thousands of square feet (KSF) is used as the standard unit of development.

Lodging. For the Lodging category, the standard unit of development is a room, meaning a guest room or suite.

Demand Variables
In calculating impact fees, the relationship between facility needs and development must be quantified in cost allocation formulas. Some measurable attribute of development (e.g., population) is used in those formulas to reflect the impact of different types and amounts of development on the demand for specific public services and the facilities that support those services.

Those attributes are referred to in this study as “demand variables.” Demand variables are selected either because they directly measure service demand created by various types of development, or because they are reasonably correlated with that demand.

Service Population. In this study, service population is used to represent the demand created by development for parks, recreation facilities and trails. Service population is a weighted composite of population and employees working in the City. Resident population is included to represent the impacts of residential development and 0 1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Population
Year
Brisbane Population
2011-2021
79

City of Brisbane Page 2-4
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
employees of businesses in the City are included to represent the impacts of nonresidential uses, such as commercial, office and industrial development.

Because the impact of one new resident is not necessarily the same as the impact of one new employee, the employee component is weighted relative to the population component to reflect their relative impacts on the demand for certain types of facilities.

In this study, residents (population) are assigned a weight of 1.0. The weight assigned to employees varies depending on how much employees are expected to use a certain type of facility. Based on discussions with City staff regarding expected use of parks and recreation facilities by non-resident employees, employees are given a weight of 0.25 for parks, open space and trails. For other recreation facilities, employees are given a weight of 0.1.

Tables 2.2 through 2.4 later in this chapter show the existing and future population and employee numbers used in this study. Since service population weights differ by the type of facility being analyzed, those weights are applied in Chapters 3 through 5 where the impact fees are calculated.

Impact Fees for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)
Recent amendments to Section 65852.2 of the Government Code provide that impact fees may not be imposed on ADUs smaller than 750 square feet. It also establishes the following requirement for impact fees imposed on ADUs of 750 square feet or more:
“Any impact fees charged for an accessory dwelling unit of 750 square feet or more shall be charged proportionately in relation to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit.”
The effect of that requirement is that impact fees for ADUs must be calculated on a caseby-case basis, considering the size of both the primary unit and the ADU.

Although it is not spelled out in Section 65852.2, we think it is obvious that when calculating ADU impact fees in cases where the primary unit is a single-family detached unit, the starting point for the proportionality calculation is the fee that applies to the single-family unit. The law also allows for ADUs on lots or parcels where the primary unit is a multi-family unit. In that situation, it seems logical that the ADU impact fee should be proportional to the impact fee that applies to the multi-family unit, but we think ADUs within multi-family developments are likely to be rare and we don’t address them further.

The formula for calculating proportional ADU impact fees would be:

Primary unit impact fee X (ADU square feet / Primary unit square feet) One implication of that formula is that, for an ADU of a particular size, a larger primary unit results in lower impact fees for the ADU.
80

City of Brisbane Page 2-5
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
For example, if the ADU is 1,000 square feet and the primary unit is 2,000 square feet, the proportional impact fee for the ADU would be 50% of the impact fee that would apply to the primary unit. But if the primary unit is 1,200 square feet, the impact fee for the same-sized ADU would be 83.33% of the primary unit fee.

It seems likely that discrepancy is an unintended consequence of language in Section 65852.2 that was not thoroughly considered before adoption. As noted previously, for impact fee studies adopted after July 1, 2022, AB 602 requires impact fees for all types of residential units to be proportional to the square footage of a unit. Impact fees based on square footage for primary units will tend to reduce the inequity created by the proportionality language of Section 65852.2 because the fees that apply to a smaller primary unit would be less than the fees that apply to a larger primary unit. However, it may be a number of years before most cities in California adopt residential impact fees based on square footage. Based on surveys NBS has conducted, it appears that most California cities and counties are applying the proportionality requirement as written.

Population and Employees per Unit
Table 2.1 shows the population-and-employees-per-unit factors for various types of development as used in this study.

Existing and Future Development
Tables 2.2 through 2.4 present data on existing and future development in Brisbane. Data from those tables will be used throughout this report. Table 2.2 shows existing development as of January 2022.

Table 2.1: Population and Employees per Unit
Development Dev Pop per Employees
Type Units 1
Unit 2per Unit 3
Residential <800 Sq. Ft. Unit DU 2.33
Residential 800-1,200 Sq. Ft. Unit DU 2.43
Residential 1,200-2,100 Sq. Ft. Unit DU 2.53
Residential >2,100 Sq. Ft. Unit DU 2.63
Commercial KSF 2.00
Lodging Room 0.35
Office KSF 3.00
Industrial KSF 1.10
Public Facilities KSF 3.00
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room or suite
2 Population per unit for residential development estimated by NBS based on American Community Survey (ACS) 2020 5-year estimates for distribution of units by number of bedrooms (Table B25041) 3 Employees per unit estimated by NBS
81

City of Brisbane Page 2-6
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
It should be noted that existing and future residential development figures are not shown for each unit size category. Because no data are available on the mix of unit sizes for existing or future development, residential units and population for all unit size categories are grouped into the “all residential” category in these tables.

Table 2.3 on the next page presents a forecast of future development in the City.

Table 2.2: Existing Development as of January 2022
Development Dev Existing Existing Existing
Types Units 1
Units 2Pop 3Empl 4
All Residential DU 2,039 4,851
Commercial KSF 890.0 1,780
Lodging Room 387 135
Office KSF 356.3 1,069
Industrial KSF 3,209.1 3,530
Public Facilities KSF 85.3 256
Total 4,851 6,770
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room or suite;
2 Existing residential units from the California Department of Finance (DOF) 2022 E-5 report
3 Existing population based on the 2020 Census and assumes no growth from 2020 to 2022 as reported by the Brisbane Community Develop- ment Department
4 Total existing employees estimated by the Brisbane Community Development Department; the breakdown of jobs by development type based on the 2021 ESRI Business Summary for Brisbane 82

City of Brisbane Page 2-7
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
Table 2.4 shows forecasted buildout development in the City. The numbers in that table sum the existing development from Table 2.2 and forecasted future development from Table 2.3.

Growth Potential
The numbers in the foregoing tables indicate that between 2022 and buildout, the City’s population could increase by 133% while the number of employees working in the City could increase by 345%. The impact fees calculated in this report are intended to provide the City with the means to provide the parks, recreation facilities and trails needed to serve that growth.

Table 2.3: Forecasted Future Development to Buildout
Development Dev Future Future Future
Types Units 1
Units 2Pop 3Empl 4
All Residential DU 2,637.0 6,460
Commercial KSF 1,897.5 3,795
Lodging Room 600.0 210
Office KSF 4,262.7 12,788
Industrial KSF 5,601.8 6,162
Public Facilities KSF 150.0 450
Total 6,460 23,405
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room or suite;
2 Future units estimated by the Brisbane Community Development Dept.; estimates include buildout of the Baylands Specific Plan Area 3 Future population = residential units X pop. per unit from Table 2.1 4 Future employees = non-residential units X empl. per unit from Table 2.1 Table 2.4: Buildout Development
Development Dev Buildout Buildout Buildout
Types Units 1Units Population Employees
All Residential DU 4,676 11,311
Commercial KSF 2,788 5,575
Lodging Room 987 345
Office KSF 4,619 13,857
Industrial KSF 8,811 9,692
Public Facilities KSF 235 706
Total 11,311 30,175
Note: Buildout development in Table 2.4 = existing development from Table 2.2 plus forecasted future development from Table 2.3 1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room or suite;
83

City of Brisbane Page 3-1
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
This chapter calculates impact fees for both park land acquisition and park improvements.

Chapter 16.24 of the Brisbane Municipal Code requires that residential subdivisions dedicate land for parks or pay fees in lieu of dedication pursuant to the Quimby Act (Govt.

Code Section 66477) which is part of the Subdivision Map Act. Consequently, the park land impact fees calculated in this chapter would not apply to any residential subdivision that dedicates park land or pays in-lieu fees required by Chapter 16.24.

Since in-lieu fees and impact fees for park land acquisition are based only on the cost of land and do not cover the cost of park improvements, this chapter calculates a separate impact fee for park improvements. Impact fees for park land and park improvements, as well as for other facilities addressed in this report are governed by the Mitigation Fee Act.

To be clear, the park improvement impact fees calculated in this chapter are intended to be charged in addition to any dedication of park land or payment of park land in-lieu fees or impact fees by a development project. Park improvement impact fees, if enacted by the City, would apply to all new development in Brisbane, separately from contributions toward acquisition of park land.

Service Area
Impact fees calculated in this chapter are intended to apply to all new development in the City, except that impact fees for park land acquisition would not apply to any development project that dedicates park land or pays fees in lieu of dedication pursuant to the Quimby Act.

Methodology
This chapter calculates impact fees using the standard-based method discussed in Chapter 1. Standard-based fees are calculated using a specified relationship or standard that determines the number of service units to be provided for each unit of development.

In this case, the standard used to calculate impact fees for park land and park improvements is the existing level of service, which is defined as the City’s current ratio of park acres to service population. That level of service is shown in Table 3.2 later in this chapter. The makeup of the service population used in this report is discussed in Chapter 2 and in the next section.

Demand Variable
A “demand variable” is a quantifiable attribute of development that is used in impact fee calculation formulas to represent the impact of development. The demand variable used to calculate park impact fees in this chapter is service population.

As discussed in Chapter 2, service population is a weighted composite variable made up of resident population and employees working in Brisbane. Residents are included in the 84

City of Brisbane Page 3-2
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
service population to represent the demand created by residential development and employees are included to represent the demand created by non-residential development.

In all cases, residents are assigned a weight of 1.0, but the weighting of employees varies for different types of facilities in this report. For purposes of calculating park impact fees, employees are assigned a weight of 0.25, meaning that the demand created by an employee of a business in Brisbane equals one-quarter of the demand created by a resident of the City.

Existing Level of Service
In 2021, AB 602 added Section 66016.5 to the Mitigation Fee Act. That section requires, after January 1, 2022, that the level of service used in an impact fee study must be compared with the existing level of service. If the level used in the impact fee study exceeds the existing level of service, an explanation is required. The impact fees calculated in this chapter are based on the existing level of service as shown in Table 3.2 on the next page, so there is no level-of-service issue in the calculation of impact fees in this chapter with respect to Section 66016.5.

Table 3.1 lists the City’s existing parks and shows City-owned park acreage and acres of parks improved by the City.

Table 3.1: Existing Parks
Park City-Owned Improved
Name Location Park Acres 1Park Acres
Community Center Park 250 Visitacion Avenue 0.12 0.12
Community Park 5 Old County Road 2.82 2.82
Brisbane Dog Park 50 Park Place 0.54 0.54
Firth Park and Canyon 201 Glen Park Way 0.27 0.27
Fisherman's Park @ Brisbane Lagoon 0.25 0.25
Mission Blue Complex 475 Mission Blue Drive 4.95 3.85
Quarry Road Park 399 San Francisco Ave 0.20 0.20
Tot Lot Playground/Park 4 Solano Street 0.25 0.25
Marina Park Sierra Point Parkway 3.00 3.00
Skatepark Old County Rd & Park Ln 0.12 0.12
Basketball Courts (2) Old County Rd & Park Ln 0.16 0.16 Tennis Courts (2) 1 Solano St School Land 0.34
Total 12.67 11.91
Source: City of Brisbane Parks and Recreation Department; acreage shown for the Mission Blue Complex excludes the site of the Mission Blue Center 1 "School land" means that a facility was constructed by the City on land owned by a school district
85

City of Brisbane Page 3-3
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
Table 3.2 calculates the existing level of service in terms of acres per capita of service population for improved park land in the City. The level of service used in this chapter is based on improved park acres because a 2019 decision by the California Court of Appeal in Boatworks, LLC v. City of Alameda found that parks not yet open to the public could not be used as the basis for establishing the existing level of service used to calculate park impact fees.

Cost Per Capita
Table 3.3 calculates the cost per capita for park land acquisition and park improvements based on the existing acres per capita from Table 3.2 and the estimated cost per acre for park land and park improvements.

In the next section, the per-capita costs from Table 3.3 are used to calculate impact fees per unit of development.

Impact Fees per Unit
Park Land Acquisition. Table 3.4 on the next page shows the calculation of park land impact fees per unit of development, by development type. Those fees are calculated using per-capita costs for park land acquisition from Table 3.3 and service population per unit. Service population per unit for residential development = population per unit from Table 3.2: Existing Level of Service - Parks
Total Improved
Park Acres 1
Existing Service
Population 2
Existing Acres
per Capita 3

11.91 6,544 0.00182
1 See Table 3.1
2 Existing service population for parks = existing population + (existing employees X 0.25)
3 Existing acres per capita of service population = existing acres / existing service population
Table 3.3: Cost per Capita - Park Land and Park Improvements Fee Type
Acres per
Capita 1
Cost per
Acre2
Cost per
Capita3
Park Land Acquisition 0.00182 $ 3,500,000 $ 6,370.00
Park Improvements 0.00182 $ 575,000 $ 1,046.50
1 See Table 3.2
2 Park land acquisition cost per acre based on recent land purchase by the City; park improvement cost per acre estimated by the City 3 Cost per capita = acres per capita X cost per acre
86

City of Brisbane Page 3-4
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
Table 2.1. Service population per unit for non-residential development = 0.25 X employees per unit from Table 2.1.

Park Improvements. Table 3.5 on the next page shows the calculation of park improvement impact fees per unit of development, by development type. Those fees are calculated using per-capita costs for park improvements from Table 3.3 and service population per unit. Service population per unit for residential development = population per unit from Table 2.1. Service population per unit for non-residential development =

0.25 X employees per unit from Table 2.1.

Table 3.4: Impact Fees per Unit - Park Land Acquisition Development
Type Units 1
Cost per
Capita 2
Service Pop
per Unit 3
Impact Fee
per Unit 4
Residential <800 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $6,370.00 2.330 $ 14,842.10 Residential 800-1,200 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $6,370.00 2.430 $ 15,479.10 Residential 1,200-2,100 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $6,370.00 2.530 $ 16,116.10 Residential >2,100 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $6,370.00 2.630 $ 16,753.10 Commercial KSF $6,370.00 0.500 $ 3,185.00
Lodging Room $6,370.00 0.088 $ 557.38
Office KSF $6,370.00 0.750 $ 4,777.50
Industrial KSF $6,370.00 0.275 $ 1,751.75
Public Facilities KSF $6,370.00 0.750 $ 4,777.50
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 square gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room or suite
2 See Table 3.3
3 Service population per unit for residential development = population per unit from Table 2.1; service population per unit for non-residential development = 0.25 X em- ployees per unit from Table 2.1
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per capita X service population per unit 87

City of Brisbane Page 3-5
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
Projected Revenue
This report does not estimate potential revenue from park land acquisition impact fees because many new residential units may be in subdivisions which are subject to City’s Quimby Act park land dedication or in-lieu fee requirements rather than the park land impact fees which would apply to non-subdivision projects. We have no way of forecasting how many future residential units would be subject to the park land impact fees calculated in this chapter, so we do not project potential revenue from those fees.

However, since the park improvement impact fees would apply to all new residential development in the City, potential revenue from those impact fees is projected in Table

3.6. Because we are unable to forecast the number of new units that will be constructed in each residential unit size category, potential revenue is projected in Table 3.6 on the basis of added service population and the cost per capita of service population.

Table 3.5: Impact Fees per Unit - Park Improvements
Development
Type Units 1
Cost per
Capita 2
Service Pop
per Unit 3
Impact Fee
per Unit 4
Residential <800 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $1,046.50 2.330 $ 2,438.35 Residential 800-1,200 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $1,046.50 2.430 $ 2,543.00 Residential 1,200-2,100 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $1,046.50 2.530 $ 2,647.65 Residential >2,100 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $1,046.50 2.630 $ 2,752.30 Commercial KSF $1,046.50 0.500 $ 523.25
Lodging Room $1,046.50 0.088 $ 91.57
Office KSF $1,046.50 0.750 $ 784.88
Industrial KSF $1,046.50 0.275 $ 287.79
Public Facilities KSF $1,046.50 0.750 $ 784.88
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 square gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room or suite
2 See Table 3.3
3 Service population per unit for residential development = population per unit from Table 2.1; service population per unit for non-residential development = 0.25 X em- ployees per unit from Table 2.1
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per capita X service population per unit 88

City of Brisbane Page 3-6
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
Updating the Fees
The impact fees calculated in this chapter are based the current estimated cost of park land and improvements. We recommend that the fees be reviewed annually and adjusted as needed using local cost data or an index such as the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index (CCI). See the Implementation Chapter for more on indexing of fees.

Nexus Summary
As discussed in Chapter 1 of this report, Section 66001 of the Mitigation Fee Act requires that an agency establishing, increasing or imposing impact fees, must make findings to:

Identify the purpose of the fee;
Identify the use of the fee; and,
Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a. The use of the fee and the development type on which it is imposed; b. The need for the facility and the type of development on which the fee is imposed; and
c. The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development project.

Satisfying those requirements also ensures that the fees meet the “rational nexus” and “rough proportionality” standards enunciated in leading court decisions bearing on impact fees and other exactions. (For more detail, see “Legal Framework for Impact Fees” in Chapter 1.) The following paragraphs explain how the impact fees calculated in this chapter satisfy those requirements.

Table 3.6: Projected Revenue - Park Improvement Impact Fees Development Added Cost per Projected
Type Service Pop 1
Capita 2Revenue 3
All Residential 6,460 $1,046.50 $ 6,760,390
Commercial 949 $1,046.50 $ 993,129
Lodging 53 $1,046.50 $ 55,465
Office 3,197 $1,046.50 $ 3,345,661
Industrial 1,541 $1,046.50 $ 1,612,657
Total $ 12,767,300
1 See Table 2.3; added service population for residential development = added population; added service population for non-residential development = 0.25 X added employees
2 See Table 3.5
3 Projected revenue = added service population X cost per capita 89

City of Brisbane Page 3-7
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
Purpose of the Fee: The purpose of the impact fees calculated in this chapter is to mitigate the impact of new development on the need for parks in Brisbane.

Use of the Fee. Impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to provide additional parks to mitigate the impacts of new development in the City.

As provided by the Mitigation Fee Act, revenue from impact fees may also be used for temporary loans from one impact fee fund or account to another.

Reasonable Relationship between the Use of the Fee and the Development Type on Which It Is Imposed. The impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to provide additional parks to serve the needs of added service population associated with new development in Brisbane.

Reasonable Relationship between the Need for the Facilities and the Type of Development on Which the Fee Is Imposed. New development will increase the need for parks to maintain the existing level of service, as described earlier in this chapter. Without additional parks, the increase in service population associated with new development in the City would result in a reduction in the level of service provided to the entire City.

Reasonable Relationship between the Amount of the Fee and the Facility Cost Attributable to the Development Project. The amount of the park impact fees charged to a development project will depend on the increase in service population associated with that project. The fees per unit of development calculated in this chapter for each type of development are based on the estimated average service population per unit for that type of development in Brisbane. Thus, the fee charged to a development project reflects the impact of that project on the need for parks in the City. 90

City of Brisbane Page 4-1
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
This chapter calculates impact fees for recreation facilities needed to maintain the existing level of service in Brisbane as the City grows.

Service Area
Impact fees calculated in this chapter are intended to apply to all new development in the City.

Methodology
This chapter calculates impact fees using the standard-based method discussed in Chapter 1. Standard-based fees are calculated using a specified relationship or standard that determines the number of service units to be provided for each unit of development.

In this case, the standard used to calculate impact fees for recreation facilities is the existing level of service, which is defined as the current relationship between the replacement cost of existing recreation facilities and the existing service population. That level of service is shown in Table 4.2 later in this chapter. The makeup of the service population used in this report is discussed in Chapter 2 and in the next section.

Demand Variable
A “demand variable” is a quantifiable attribute of development that is used in impact fee calculation formulas to represent the impact of development. The demand variable used to calculate recreation facilities impact fees in this chapter is service population.

As discussed in Chapter 2, service population is a weighted composite variable made up of resident population and employees working in Brisbane. Residents are included in the service population to represent the demand created by residential development and employees are included to represent the demand created by non-residential development.

In all cases, residents are assigned a weight of 1.0 but the weighting of employees varies for different types of facilities in this report. For purposes of calculating impact fees for recreation facilities, employees are assigned a weight of 0.1, meaning that the demand created by one employee is one-tenth of the demand created by one resident of the City.

That weight is lower than the employee weight used in Chapter 3 for park land and park improvements and in Chapter 5 for Open Space and Trails because the experience of City staff indicates that employees of businesses in the City place substantially less demand on the types of recreation facilities addressed in this Chapter substantially than they do on parks, open space and trails.
91

City of Brisbane Page 4-2
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
Existing Level of Service
In 2021, AB 602 added Section 66016.5 to the Mitigation Fee Act. That section requires that, after January 1, 2022, the level of service used in an impact fee study must be compared with the existing level of service. If the level used in the impact fee study exceeds the existing level of service, an explanation is required. The impact fees calculated in this chapter are based on the existing level of service as shown in Table 4.2 below, so there is no level-of-service issue with respect to Section 66016.5.

Table 4.1 lists the City’s existing recreation facilities with their replacement cost, including land. Replacement cost is used here as an indicator of the cost of constructing additional facilities to serve new development.

Existing Level of Service - Cost Per Capita
Table 4.2 calculates the existing level of service in terms of a cost per capita of service population for the City’s existing recreation facilities.

Table 4.1: Existing Recreation Facilities
Park Site Land Building Facility Impact Fee
Name Location Acres 1
Value 2Sq Feet 3Repl Cost 4Cost Basis 5
Brisbane Community Pool 2 Solano St 0.62 2,169,421$ 3,066 2,085,698$ $ 4,255,119 Childcare Modular 500 San Bruno Av School Land 0$ 1,920 400,000$ $ 400,000 Community Center/Library 250 Visitacion Av 0.11 385,675$ 5,449 2,077,660$ $ 2,463,335 Mission Blue Center 475 Mission Blue Dr 0.65 2,275,000$ 7,200 1,981,290$ $ 4,256,290 Silverspot Cooperative 4 Solano St 0.06 216,942$ 2,700 498,582$ $ 715,524 Total 1.44 $ 5,047,039 17,269 $ 7,043,230 $ 12,090,269
1 Site acres provided by the City of Brisbane Parks and Recreation Department; "In Park" means the facility is located in a park on acreage already covered by the park land impact fees; "School Land" means the facility was constructed by the City on land owned by a school district
2 Site value = site acres X park land acquisition cost per acre from Table 3.3 in Chapter 3 3 Building square feet from the City's insured property schedule or the Parks and Recreation Department 4 Facility replacement cost includes both the fixed asset value and furniture, fixtures and equipment from the City's insured property schedule, where applicable
5 Impact fee cost basis is the sum of the land value and the facility replacement cost Table 4.2: Existing Level of Service - Recreation Facilities Impact Fee
Cost Basis 1
Existing Service
Population 2
Cost per
Capita 3
$12,090,269 5,528 $2,187.10
1 See Table 4.1
2 Existing service population for parks = existing population + (0.1 X existing employees)
3 Cost per capita = impact fee cost basis / existing service population
92

City of Brisbane Page 4-3
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
In the next section, the per-capita costs from Table 4.2 are used to calculate impact fees per unit of development.

Impact Fees per Unit
Table 4.3 shows the calculation of recreation facilities impact fees per unit of development, by development type. Those fees are calculated using per-capita costs from Table 4.2 and service population per unit. Service population per unit for residential development = population per unit from Table 2.1. Service population per unit for nonresidential development = 0.1 X employees per unit from Table 2.1.

Projected Revenue
Table 4.4. projects potential revenue from the recreation facilities impact fees based on the cost per capita of service population and service population per unit.

Table 4.3: Impact Fees per Unit - Recreation Facilities Development
Type Units 1
Cost per
Capita 2
Service Pop
per Unit 3
Impact Fee
per Unit 4
Residential <800 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $2,187.10 2.330 $ 5,095.93 Residential 800-1,200 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $2,187.10 2.430 $ 5,314.64 Residential 1,200-2,100 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $2,187.10 2.530 $ 5,533.35 Residential >2,100 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $2,187.10 2.630 $ 5,752.06 Commercial KSF $2,187.10 0.200 $ 437.42
Lodging Room $2,187.10 0.035 $ 76.55
Office KSF $2,187.10 0.300 $ 656.13
Industrial KSF $2,187.10 0.110 $ 240.58
Public Facilities KSF $2,187.10 0.300 $ 656.13
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room or suite
2 See Table 4.2
3 Service population per unit for residential development = population per unit from Table 2.1; service population per unit for non-residential development = 0.1 X empl- oyees per unit from Table 2.1
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per capita X service population per unit 93

City of Brisbane Page 4-4
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
Updating the Fees
The impact fees calculated in this chapter are based the current estimated cost of recreation facilities. We recommend that the fees be reviewed annually and adjusted as needed using local cost data or an index such as the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index (CCI). See the Implementation Chapter for more on indexing of fees.

Nexus Summary
As discussed in Chapter 1 of this report, Section 66001 of the Mitigation Fee Act requires that an agency establishing, increasing or imposing impact fees, must make findings to:

Identify the purpose of the fee;
Identify the use of the fee; and,
Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a. The use of the fee and the development type on which it is imposed; b. The need for the facility and the type of development on which the fee is imposed; and
c. The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development project.

Satisfying those requirements also ensures that the fees meet the “rational nexus” and “rough proportionality” standards enunciated in leading court decisions bearing on impact fees and other exactions. (For more detail, see “Legal Framework for Impact Fees” in Chapter 1.) The following paragraphs explain how the impact fees calculated in this chapter satisfy those requirements.

Table 4.4: Projected Revenue - Recreation Facilities Impact Fees Development Added Cost per Projected
Type Service Pop 1
Capita 2Revenue 3
All Residential 6,460 $2,187.10 $ 14,128,642
Commercial 380 $2,187.10 $ 831,097
Lodging 21 $2,187.10 $ 45,929
Office 1,279 $2,187.10 $ 2,797,296
Industrial 616 $2,187.10 $ 1,347,251
Total $ 19,150,216
1 See Table 2.3; added service population for residential development = added population; added service population for non-residential development = 0.1 X added employees
2 See Table 4.3
3 Projected revenue = added service population X cost per capita 94

City of Brisbane Page 4-5
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
Purpose of the Fee: The purpose of the impact fees calculated in this chapter is to mitigate the impact of new development on the need for recreation facilities in Brisbane.

Use of the Fee. Impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to provide additional recreation facilities to mitigate the impacts of new development in the City.

As provided by the Mitigation Fee Act, revenue from impact fees may also be used for temporary loans from one impact fee fund or account to another.

Reasonable Relationship between the Use of the Fee and the Development Type on Which It Is Imposed. The impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to provide additional recreation facilities to serve the needs of added service population associated with new development in Brisbane.

Reasonable Relationship between the Need for the Facilities and the Type of Development on Which the Fee Is Imposed. New development will increase the need for recreation facilities to maintain the existing level of service, as described earlier in this chapter. Without additional recreation facilities, the increase in service population associated with new development in the City would result in a reduction in the level of service provided to the entire City.

Reasonable Relationship between the Amount of the Fee and the Facility Cost Attributable to the Development Project. The amount of the recreation facilities impact fees charged to a development project will depend on the increase in service population associated with that project. The fees per unit of development calculated in this chapter for each type of development are based on the estimated average service population per unit for that type of development in Brisbane. Thus, the fee charged to a development project reflects the impact of that project on the need for recreation facilities in the City. 95

City of Brisbane Page 5-1
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
This chapter calculates impact fees for open space land acquisition and trail improvements needed to maintain the existing level of service in Brisbane as the City grows.

Service Area
Impact fees calculated in this chapter are intended to apply to all new development in the City.

Methodology
This chapter calculates impact fees using the standard-based method discussed in Chapter 1. Standard-based fees are calculated using a specified relationship or standard that determines the number of service units to be provided for each unit of development.

In this case, the standard used to calculate impact fees for open space and trails is the existing level of service. The existing level of service for open space land is defined as the current relationship between the value of the existing City-owned open space land and the existing service population. The existing level of service for trail improvements is defined as the current relationship between the replacement cost of the City’s existing trails and the existing service population. Those levels of service are shown in Table 5.2 later in this chapter. The makeup of the service population used in this report is discussed in Chapter 2 and in the next section.

Demand Variable
A “demand variable” is a quantifiable attribute of development that is used in impact fee calculation formulas to represent the impact of development. The demand variable used to calculate impact fees for open space and trails in this chapter is service population.

As discussed in Chapter 2, service population is a weighted composite variable made up of resident population and employees working in Brisbane. Residents are included in the service population to represent the demand created by residential development and employees are included to represent the demand created by non-residential development.

In all cases, residents are assigned a weight of 1.0 but the weighting of employees varies for different types of facilities in this report. For purposes of calculating impact fees for open space and trails, employees are assigned a weight of 0.25, meaning that the demand created by an employee is one-quarter of the demand created by a resident of the City.

That is the same employee weight used in Chapter 3 to calculate impact fees for park land and park improvements.
96

City of Brisbane Page 5-2
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
Existing Level of Service
In 2021, AB 602 added Section 66016.5 to the Mitigation Fee Act. That section requires, after January 1, 2022, that the level of service used in an impact fee study must be compared with the existing level of service. If the level used in the impact fee study exceeds the existing level of service, an explanation is required. The impact fees calculated in this chapter are based on the existing level of service as shown in Table 5.2 below, so there is no level-of-service issue with respect to Section 66016.5.

Table 5.1 lists the acreage and estimated value of the City’s existing open space parcels and the estimated replacement cost of trail improvements. Replacement cost is used here as an indicator of the cost of constructing additional facilities to serve new development.

Existing Level of Service - Cost Per Capita
Table 5.2 calculates the existing level of service in terms of a cost per capita of service population for the City’s existing open space land and improved trails.

Table 5.1: Existing Open Space and Trails
Park Open Space Open Space Trail Trail Trail Square Trail Name Acres 1
Land Value 2Length (LF) 3 Width (Ft) 4Feet 5Impr Cost 6 Costaños Canyon 1.01 80,800 $ 416 10.0 4,160 83,200$
Crocker Trail 5.45 $ 11,880 436,364 12.0 142,560 2,851,200$ Firth Canyon 1.68 134,400 $ 0$
Quarry Road Trail 1.19 95,200 $ 2,640 10.0 26,400 528,000$ Total 9.33 $ 746,764 $3,462,400
1 Open space acres provided by the City of Brisbane Parks and Recreation Department 2 Open space land based on $80,000 per acre
3 Trail length in linear feet
4 Trail width in feet
5 Trail improvements in square feet provided by the Brisbane Parks and Recreation Department 6 Trail improvement cost = square feet of trail improvements X $20.00 per square foot 97

City of Brisbane Page 5-3
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
In the next section, the per-capita costs from Table 5.2 are used to calculate impact fees per unit of development.

Impact Fees per Unit
Impact Fees per Unit – Open Space Land Acquisition. Table 5.3 shows the calculation of open space land acquisition impact fees per unit of development, by development type.

Those fees are calculated using per-capita costs from Table 5.2 and service population per unit. Service population per unit for residential development = population per unit from Table 2.1. Service population per unit for non-residential development = 0.25 X employees per unit from Table 2.1.

Table 5.2: Existing Level of Service - Open Space and Trails Cost Component
Impact Fee
Cost Basis 1
Existing Service
Population 2
Cost per
Capita 3
Open Space Land $ 746,764 6,544 $114.12
Trail Improvements $ 3,462,400 6,544 $529.14
1 See Table 5.1; impact fee cost basis = existing land value for open space land and trail improvement cost for trails
2 Existing service population for parks = existing population + (0.25 X existing employees)
3 Cost per capita = impact fee cost basis / existing service population Table 5.3: Impact Fees per Unit - Open Space Land Acquisition Development
Type Units 1
Cost per
Capita 2
Service Pop
per Unit 3
Impact Fee
per Unit 4
Residential <800 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $114.12 2.330 $ 265.91 Residential 800-1,200 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $114.12 2.430 $ 277.32 Residential 1,200-2,100 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $114.12 2.530 $ 288.73 Residential >2,100 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $114.12 2.630 $ 300.14 Commercial KSF $114.12 0.500 $ 57.06
Lodging Room $114.12 0.088 $ 9.99
Office KSF $114.12 0.750 $ 85.59
Industrial KSF $114.12 0.275 $ 31.38
Public Facilities KSF $114.12 0.750 $ 85.59
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 square gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room or suite
2 See Table 5.2
3 Service population per unit for residential development = population per unit from Table 2.1; service population per unit for non-residential development = 0.25 X em- ployees per unit from Table 2.1
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per capita X service population per unit 98

City of Brisbane Page 5-4
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
Impact Fees per Unit – Trail Improvements. Table 5.4 shows the calculation of trail improvement impact fees per unit of development, by development type. Those fees are calculated using per-capita costs from Table 5.2 and service population per unit. Service population per unit for trail improvement impact fees is identical to the service population per unit for open space land acquisition.

Projected Revenue
Projected Revenue – Open Space Land Acquisition Impact Fees. Table 5.5. projects potential revenue from the open space land acquisition impact fees based on the cost per capita of service population and service population per unit.

Table 5.4: Impact Fees per Unit - Trail Improvements
Development
Type Units 1
Cost per
Capita 2
Service Pop
per Unit 3
Impact Fee
per Unit 4
Residential <800 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $529.14 2.330 $ 1,232.89 Residential 800-1,200 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $529.14 2.430 $ 1,285.80 Residential 1,200-2,100 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $529.14 2.530 $ 1,338.71 Residential >2,100 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $529.14 2.630 $ 1,391.63 Commercial KSF $529.14 0.500 $ 264.57
Lodging Room $529.14 0.088 $ 46.30
Office KSF $529.14 0.750 $ 396.85
Industrial KSF $529.14 0.275 $ 145.51
Public Facilities KSF $529.14 0.750 $ 396.85
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 square gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room or suite
2 See Table 5.2
3 Service population per unit for residential development = population per unit from Table 2.1; service population per unit for non-residential development = 0.25 X em- ployees per unit from Table 2.1
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per capita X service population per unit 99

City of Brisbane Page 5-5
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
Projected Revenue – Trail Improvement Impact Fees. Table 5.6. projects potential revenue from the open space land acquisition impact fees based on the cost per capita of service population and service population per unit.

Updating the Fees
The impact fees calculated in this chapter are based on the current estimated cost of value of the City’s existing open space parcels and the current estimated replacement cost for trail improvements. We recommend that the fees be reviewed annually and adjusted as needed using local cost data or an index such as the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index (CCI). See the Implementation Chapter for more on indexing of fees.

Table 5.5: Projected Revenue - Open Space Land Impact Fees Development Added Cost per Projected
Type Service Pop 1
Capita 2Revenue 3
All Residential 6,460 $114.12 $ 737,234
Commercial 949 $114.12 $ 108,303
Lodging 53 $114.12 $ 6,049
Office 3,197 $114.12 $ 364,851
Industrial 1,541 $114.12 $ 175,863
Total $ 1,392,300
1 See Table 2.3; added service population for residential development = added population; added service population for non-residential development = 0.25 X added employees from Table 2.3
2 See Table 5.2
3 Projected revenue = added service population X cost per capita Table 5.6: Projected Revenue - Trail Improvement Impact Fees Development Added Cost per Projected
Type Service Pop 1
Capita 2Revenue 3
All Residential 6,460 $529.14 $ 3,418,217
Commercial 949 $529.14 $ 502,150
Lodging 53 $529.14 $ 28,044
Office 3,197 $529.14 $ 1,691,647
Industrial 1,541 $529.14 $ 815,398
Total $ 6,455,457
1 See Table 2.3; added service population for residential development = added population; added service population for non-residential development = 0.25 X added employees from Table 2.3
2 See Table 5.2
3 Projected revenue = added service population X cost per capita 100

City of Brisbane Page 5-6
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
Nexus Summary
As discussed in Chapter 1 of this report, Section 66001 of the Mitigation Fee Act requires that an agency establishing, increasing or imposing impact fees, must make findings to:

Identify the purpose of the fee;
Identify the use of the fee; and,
Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a. The use of the fee and the development type on which it is imposed; b. The need for the facility and the type of development on which the fee is imposed; and
c. The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development project.

Satisfying those requirements also ensures that the fees meet the “rational nexus” and “rough proportionality” standards enunciated in leading court decisions bearing on impact fees and other exactions. (For more detail, see “Legal Framework for Impact Fees” in Chapter 1.) The following paragraphs explain how the impact fees calculated in this chapter satisfy those requirements.

Purpose of the Fee: The purpose of the impact fees calculated in this chapter is to mitigate the impact of new development on the need for open space and trails in Brisbane.

Use of the Fee. Impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to provide additional open space and trails to mitigate the impacts of new development in the City.

As provided by the Mitigation Fee Act, revenue from impact fees may also be used for temporary loans from one impact fee fund or account to another.

Reasonable Relationship between the Use of the Fee and the Development Type on Which It Is Imposed. The impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to provide additional open space and trails to serve the needs of added service population associated with new development in Brisbane.

Reasonable Relationship between the Need for the Facilities and the Type of Development on Which the Fee Is Imposed. New development will increase the need for open space and trails to maintain the existing level of service, as described earlier in this chapter. Without additional open space and trails, the increase in service population associated with new development in the City would result in a reduction in the level of service provided to the entire City.

Reasonable Relationship between the Amount of the Fee and the Facility Cost Attributable to the Development Project. The amount of the open space and trails impact fees charged to a development project will depend on the increase in service population associated with that project. The fees per unit of development calculated in this chapter for each type of development are based on the estimated average service 101

City of Brisbane Page 5-7
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
population per unit for that type of development in Brisbane. Thus, the fee charged to a development project reflects the impact of that project on the need for open space and trails in the City.
102

City of Brisbane Page 6-8
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
This chapter of the report contains recommendations for adoption and administration of impact fees, and for the interpretation and application of the development impact fees and in-lieu fees calculated in this study. It was not prepared by an attorney and is not intended as legal advice.

Statutory requirements for the adoption and administration of fees imposed as a condition of development approval (impact fees) are found in the Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Sections 66000 et seq.).

Adoption
The form in which development impact fees are enacted should be determined by the City attorney. The specific requirements are different for impact fees under the Mitigation Fee Act, and for park land dedication and in-lieu fees under the Quimby Act. The latter requirements must be adopted by ordinance and are subject to the same noticing and public hearing procedures as any ordinance.

Procedures for adoption of fees subject to the Mitigation Fee Act, including notice and public-hearing requirements, are specified in Government Code Sections 66016 and 66018. It should be noted that Section 66018 refers to Government Code Section 6062a, which requires that the public hearing notice be published at least twice during the 10- day notice period. However, Section 66016.5 added by AB 602 in 2021 requires that impact fee nexus studies be adopted at a public hearing with at least 30-days’ notice.

Government Code Section 66017 provides that fees subject to the Mitigation Fee Act do not become effective until 60 days after final action by the governing body.

Actions establishing or increasing fees subject to the Mitigation Act require certain findings, as set forth in Government Code Section 66001 and discussed in Chapter 1 of this report.

Examples of findings that could be used for impact fees calculated in this study are shown below. The specific language of such findings should be provided by the City Attorney. A more complete discussion of the nexus for each fee can be found in individual chapters of this report.

Sample Finding: Purpose of the Fee. The City Council finds that the purpose of the impact fees hereby enacted is to protect the public health, safety and welfare by requiring new development to contribute to the cost of public facilities needed to mitigate the impacts of new development.

Sample Finding: Use of the Fee. The City Council finds that revenue from the impact fees hereby enacted will be used to provide public facilities needed to 103

City of Brisbane Page 6-9
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
mitigate the impacts of new development in the City and identified in the 2022 City of Brisbane Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study by NBS. 2 Sample Finding: Reasonable Relationship: Based on analysis presented in the 2022 City of Brisbane Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study by NBS, the City Council finds that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a. The use of the fees and the types of development projects on which they are imposed; and,
b. The need for facilities and the types of development projects on which the fees are imposed.

Administration
The California Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Sections 66000 et seq.) mandates procedures for administration of impact fee programs, including collection and accounting, reporting, and refunds. References to code sections in the following paragraphs pertain to the California Government Code.

Notices and Statute of Limitations. Section 66006 (f) provides that a local agency, at the time it imposes a fee for public improvements on a specific development project, "... shall identify the public improvement that the fee will be used to finance." The required notification could refer to the improvements identified in this study or to a capital improvement plan.

Section 66020 (d) (1) requires that the agency, at the time it imposes an impact fee, provide a written statement of the amount of the fee and written notice of a 90-day period during which the imposition of the fee can be protested. Failure to protest imposition of the fee during that period may deprive the fee payer of the right to subsequent legal challenge.

Section 66022 (a) provides a separate procedure for challenging the establishment of an impact fee. Such challenges must be filed within 120 days of enactment.

Collection of Fees. Section 66007(a) provides that a local agency shall not require payment of fees by developers of residential projects prior to the date of final inspection, or issuance of a certificate of occupancy, whichever occurs first. 2 According to Gov’t Code Section 66001 (a) (2), the use of the fee may be specified in a capital improvement plan, the General Plan, or other public documents that identify the public facilities for which the fee is charged. The findings recommended here identify this impact fee study as the source of that information. Also note that Section 66016.5 (a)(6) requires that large jurisdictions adopt a capital improvement plan as part of an impact fee nexus study. That requirement applies in counties of 250,000 or more and cities in those counties, so it does apply to Brisbane. 104

City of Brisbane Page 6-10
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
However, "utility service fees" (not defined, but likely referring to water and sewer connections) may be collected upon application for utility service. In a residential development project of more than one dwelling unit, Section 66007 (a) allows the agency to choose to collect fees either for individual units or for phases upon final inspection, or for the entire project upon final inspection of the first dwelling unit completed.

Section 66007 (b) provides two exceptions when the local agency may require the payment of fees from developers of residential projects at an earlier time: (1) when the local agency determines that the fees “will be collected for public improvements or facilities for which an account has been established and funds appropriated and for which the local agency has adopted a proposed construction schedule or plan prior to final inspection or issuance of the certificate of occupancy” or (2) the fees are “to reimburse the local agency for expenditures previously made.”
Statutory restrictions on the time at which fees may be collected do not apply to nonresidential development.

Notwithstanding the foregoing restrictions, some cities collect impact fees for all facilities at the time building or grading permits are issued, and builders may find it convenient to pay the fees at that time.

In cases where the fees are not collected upon issuance of building permits, Sections 66007 (c) (1) and (2) provide that the City may require the property owner to execute a contract to pay the fee, and to record that contract as a lien against the property until the fees are paid.

Earmarking and Expenditure of Fee Revenue. Section 66006 (a) mandates that fees be deposited “with other fees for the improvement in a separate capital facilities account or fund in a manner to avoid any commingling of the fees with other revenues and funds of the local agency, except for temporary investments, and expend those fees solely for the purpose for which the fee was collected.” Section 66006 (a) also requires that interest earned on the fee revenues be placed in the capital account and used for the same purpose.

The language of the law is not clear as to whether depositing fees "with other fees for the improvement" refers to a specific capital improvement or a class of improvements (e.g., street improvements).

We are not aware of any municipality that has interpreted that language to mean that funds must be segregated by individual projects. And, as a practical matter, that approach would be unworkable because it would mean that no pay-as-you-go project could be constructed until all benefiting development had paid the fees. Common practice is to maintain separate funds or accounts for impact fee revenues by facility category (i.e., streets, park improvements), but not for individual projects.

Impact Fee Exemptions, Reductions, and Waivers. In the event that a development project is found to have no impact on facilities for which impact fees are charged, such project must be exempted from the fees.
105

City of Brisbane Page 6-11
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
If a project has characteristics that will make its impacts on a particular public facility or infrastructure system significantly and permanently smaller than the average impact used to calculate impact fees in this study, the fees should be reduced accordingly to meet the requirement that there must be a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed. The fee reduction is required if the fee is not proportional to the impact of the development on relevant public facilities.

In some cases, an agency may desire to voluntarily waive or reduce impact fees that would otherwise apply to a project as a way of promoting goals such as affordable housing or economic development. Such a waiver or reduction is within the discretion of the governing body but may not result in increased costs to other development projects. So, the effect of such policies is that the lost revenue must be made up from sources other than impact fees.

Credit for Improvements Provided by Developers. If the City requires a developer, as a condition of project approval, to dedicate land or construct facilities or improvements for which impact fees are charged, the City should ensure that the impact fees are adjusted so that the overall contribution by the developer does not exceed the impact created by the development.

In the event that a developer voluntarily offers to dedicate land, or construct facilities or improvements in lieu of paying impact fees, the City may accept or reject such offers, and may negotiate the terms under which such an offer would be accepted. Excess contributions by a developer may be offset by reimbursement agreements.

Credit for Existing Development. If a project involves replacement, redevelopment or intensification of previously existing development, impact fees should be applied only to the portion of the project that represents a net increase in demand for relevant City facilities, applying the measure of demand used in this study to calculate that impact fee.

Annual Report. Section 66006 (b) (1) requires that once each year, within 180 days of the close of the fiscal year, the local agency must make available to the public the following information for each separate account established to receive impact fee revenues:

1. A brief description of the type of fee in the account or fund;

2. The amount of the fee;

3. The beginning and ending balance of the account or fund;

4. The amount of the fees collected and interest earned;

5. Identification of each public improvement on which fees were expended and the amount of the expenditures on each improvement, including the percentage of the cost of the public improvement that was funded with fees;

6. Identification of the approximate date by which the construction of a public improvement will commence, if the City determines sufficient funds have been collected to complete financing of an incomplete public improvement; 106

City of Brisbane Page 6-12
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022

7. A description of each inter-fund transfer or loan made from the account or fund, including interest rates, repayment dates, and a description of the improvement on which the transfer or loan will be expended;

8. The amount of any refunds or allocations made pursuant to Section 66001, paragraphs (e) and (f).

The annual report must be reviewed by the City Council at its next regularly scheduled public meeting, but not less than 15 days after the statements are made public, per Section 66006 (b) (2).

Five-Year Findings and Refunds under the Mitigation Fee Act. Prior to 1996, The Mitigation Fee Act required that a local agency collecting impact fees was required to expend or commit impact fee revenue within five years or make findings to justify a continued need for the money. Otherwise, those funds had to be refunded. SB 1693, adopted in 1996 as an amendment to the Mitigation Fee Act, changed that requirement in material ways.

Now, Section 66001 (d) requires that, for the fifth fiscal year following the first deposit of any impact fee revenue into an account or fund as required by Section 66006 (b), and every five years thereafter, the local agency shall make all of the following findings for any fee revenue that remains unexpended, whether committed or uncommitted:

1. Identify the purpose to which the fee will be put;

2. Demonstrate the reasonable relationship between the fee and the purpose for which it is charged;

3. Identify all sources and amounts of funding anticipated to complete financing of incomplete improvements for which impact fees are to be used;

4. Designate the approximate dates on which the funding necessary to complete financing of those improvements will be deposited into the appropriate account or fund.

Those findings are to be made in conjunction with the annual reports discussed above. If such findings are not made as required by Section 66001, the local agency could be required to refund the moneys in the account or fund, per Section 66001 (d).

Once the agency determines that sufficient funds have been collected to complete financing on incomplete improvements for which impact fee revenue is to be used, it must, within 180 days of that determination, identify an approximate date by which construction of the public improvement will be commenced (Section 66001 (e)). If the agency fails to comply with that requirement, it must refund impact fee revenue in the account according to procedures specified in Section 66001 (d).

For a useful discussion of the foregoing requirements, see “The Mitigation Fee Act’s FiveYear Findings Requirement: Beware Costly Pitfalls” by Glen Hansen, Senior Counsel, 107

City of Brisbane Page 6-13
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
Abbott and Kindermann, and Rick Jarvis, Managing Partner, Jarvis, Fay and Gibson, presented at the 2022 League of California Cities City Attorneys Spring Conference.

Indexing of In-Lieu/Impact Fees. In-lieu fees and impact fees calculated in this report are based on current costs and should be adjusted periodically to account for changes in the cost of facilities or other capital assets that will be funded by those fees. That adjustment is intended to account for escalation in costs for land, construction, vehicles and other relevant capital assets. The Engineering News Record Building Cost Index (BCI) and Construction Cost Index (CCI) are useful for indexing construction costs. Where land costs are covered by an impact fee or in-lieu fee, land costs should be adjusted based on changes in local land prices.

Requirements Imposed by AB 602
In 2021, the California Legislature passed AB 602 and the Governor signed it into law. AB 602 creates some new requirements for impact fees that will go into effect in 2022. The new law amends Government Code Section 65940.1 and adds Section 66016.5 to impose the following requirements:
1) A city, county or special district that has an internet website shall post on its website:
a) A current written schedule of fees, exactions and affordability requirements applicable to a proposed housing development project, and shall present that information in a manner that identifies the fees, exactions and affordability requirements that apply to each parcel and the fees that apply to each new water and sewer utility connection
b) All zoning ordinances and development standards and specifying the zoning, design and development standards that apply to each parcel c) A list of the information that will be required from any applicant for a development project, as specified in Government Code Section 69540 d) The current and five previous annual fee reports required by Government Code Section 66006 and Subsection 66013 (d).
e) An archive of impact fee nexus studies, cost of service studies or equivalent conducted on or after January 1, 2018.
2) The above information shall be updated within 30 days of any changes 3) A City or County shall request from a development proponent, upon issuance of a certificate of occupancy or final inspection, the total amount of fees and exactions associated with the project for which the certificate it issued. That information must be posted on the website and updated at least twice a year. 4) Before adoption of an impact fee, an impact fee nexus study shall be adopted. 108

City of Brisbane Page 6-14
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
5) When applicable, the nexus study shall identify the existing level of service for each public facility, identify the proposed new level of service and explain why the new level of service is appropriate
6) If a nexus study supports the increase of an existing fee, the local agency shall review the assumptions of the nexus study supporting the original fee and evaluate the amount of the fees collected under the original fee.
7) A nexus study adopted after July 1, 2022, shall calculate a fee imposed on a housing development project proportionately to the square footage of the proposed units of the development. A local agency that imposes a fee proportionately to the square footage if the proposed units of the development shall be deemed to have used a valid method to establish a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development. A nexus study is not required to comply with this requirement if the agency makes certain findings outlined in the statute. 8) Large jurisdictions as defined in Section 53559.1 (d) of the Health and Safety Code (counties of 250,000 or more and cities in those counties) shall adopt a capital improvement plan as part of a nexus study.
9) All studies shall be adopted at a public hearing with at least 30-days’ notice, and the local agency shall notify any member of the public that requests notice of intent to begin an impact fee nexus study of the date of the hearing. 10) Studies shall be updated at least every eight years, beginning on January 1, 2022.

Training and Public Information
Effective administration of an impact fee program requires considerable preparation and training. It is important that those responsible for collecting the fees, and for explaining them to the public, understand both the details of the fee program and its supporting rationale.

It is also useful to pay close attention to handouts that provide information to the public regarding impact fees. Impact fees should be clearly distinguished from other fees, such as user fees for application processing, and the purpose and use of particular impact fees should be made clear.

Finally, anyone responsible for accounting, capital budgeting, or project management for projects involving impact fees must be fully aware of the restrictions placed on the expenditure of impact fee revenues. Fees must be expended for the purposes identified in the impact fee nexus study in which they were calculated, and the City must be able to show that funds have been properly expended.

Recovery of Administrative Costs
To recover the cost of periodic impact fee update studies and ongoing staff costs for capital budgeting, annual reports, five-year updates and other requirements of the 109

City of Brisbane Page 6-15
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study
October 25, 2022
Mitigation Fee Act, an administrative charge may be added to the impact fees calculated in this report. See the Executive Summary for a discussion of an administrative charge to recover some costs for administration and updating of impact fees. 110

APPENDIX A
Fee Comparison
Prepared by NBS for the City of Brisbane
111

APPENDIX A
City of Brisbane - Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Comparison Type of Brisbane Foster Redwood San South San
Impact Fee Units Proposed 1
Belmont 2Burlingame 3City 4City 5Carlos 6Francisco 7
Residential - Single-Family (Brisbane >2,100 Square Feet) Park Land DU $ 16,753 $ 41,043 See Footnote $ 30,826 See Footnote $ 2,976 Park Improvements DU $ 2,752 $ 17,590 $ 590 $ 14,926 $ 15,950 $ 7,953 $ 26,148 Recreation Facilities DU $ 5,752 Included Included
Open Space/Trails DU $ 1,692 Included Included
Total $ 26,949 $ 58,633 $ 590 $ 14,926 $ 46,776 $ 7,953 $ 29,124 Residential - Multi-Family (Brisbane 800-1,200 Square Feet) Park Land DU $ 15,479 $ 27,362 See Footnote $ 26,468 See Footnote $ 1,759 Park Improvements DU $ 2,543 $ 11,660 $ 350 $ 11,639 $ 13,695 $ 3,977 $ 15,462 Recreation Facilities DU $ 5,315 Included Included
Open Space/Trails DU $ 1,563 Included Included
Total $ 24,900 $ 39,022 $ 350 $ 11,639 $ 40,163 $ 3,977 $ 17,221 Lodging
Park Land Room $ 557 $ 2,162 $ 3,795
Park Improvements Room $ 92 $ 427 $ 910 $ 1,119 $ 6,571 Recreation Facilities Room $ 77 Included Included
Open Space/Trails Room $ 56 Included Included
Total $ 782 $ 427 $ 0 $ 910 $ 3,281 $ 0 $ 10,366
Commercial
Park Land KSF $ 3,185 $ 3,510 $ 938
Park Improvements KSF $ 523 $ 710 $ 118 $ 2,350 $ 1,820 $ 3,158 Recreation Facilities KSF $ 437 Included Included
Open Space/Trails KSF $ 322 Included Included
Total $ 4,467 $ 710 $ 118 $ 2,350 $ 5,330 $ 0 $ 4,096
Office
Park Land KSF $ 4,778 $ 5,110 $ 833
Park Improvements KSF $ 785 $ 2,370 $ 172 $ 6,240 $ 2,640 $ 2,957 Recreation Facilities KSF $ 656 Included Included
Trails KSF $ 482 Included Included
Total $ 6,701 $ 2,370 $ 172 $ 6,240 $ 7,750 $ 0 $ 3,790 Industrial
Park Land KSF $ 1,752 $ 1,650 $ 394
Park Improvements KSF $ 288 $ 950 $ 56 $ 3,510 $ 860 $ 1,398 Recreation Facilities KSF $ 241 Included Included
Trails KSF $ 177 Included Included
Total $ 2,457 $ 950 $ 56 $ 3,510 $ 2,510 $ 0 $ 1,792
General Note: Cities other than Brisbane shown in this comparison table do not have specific impact fees for either recreation facilities or trails; where the cells for those fees show the notation "included," it means that documentation reviewed for this comparison indicated that it was the city's intent to include those uses within the meaning of "park improvements"; however, other cities may also include recreation facilities and/or trails within the meaning of park improvements
1 Brisbane park land fee is based on the park land impact fee for non-subdivision projects; Brisbane Quimby in-lieu fee is determined case-by-case
2 Belmont park land fee is based on the Quimby Act fee in-lieu of park land dedication 3 Burlingame has no impact fees or in-lieu fees for park land acquisition 4 Foster City has a Quimby Act ordinance that requires dedication of park land or payment of fees in lieu of dedication for residential development; in-lieu fees are determined case-by-case; the City has no park land impact fees for non-residential development; park impact fees for lodging are based on square footage; this comparison assumes an average overall building area of 425 square feet per hotel room 5 Redwood City has adopted park land in-lieu fees for residential subdivisions and park land impact fees for residential development not involving a subdivision in the same amount 6 San Carlos has a Quimby Act ordinance that requires dedication of park land or payment of fees in lieu of dedication for residential development; in-lieu fees are determined case-by-case; the City has no park land or park improvement impact fees for non-residential development; San Carlos adds a $700 administrative fee to the amounts shown in the table
7 South San Francisco charges multi-family residential impact fees for park land acquisition and park improvements based on the number of units in a building; multi-family impact fees shown in this table are for the 20-49 unit category
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free: 800.676.7516 12/19/2022 Page 1 of 1 112

Brisbane
Transportation
Impact Fee (TIF)
Nexus Study
Prepared for:

City of Brisbane
February 14, 2025
SF24-1354
113

This page was intentionally left blank.
114

Table of Contents
Introduction................................................................................................................................... 1 Background .................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Approach........................................................................................................................................ 2 District Structure ........................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Fee Categories ............................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Population and Employment Rates ...................................................................................................................................... 4 Land Use Inputs ............................................................................................................................................................................ 5 Trip Generation ............................................................................................................................................................................. 8 Infrastructure Inputs ................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Nexus Analysis and Fee Calculations......................................................................................... 12 Assumptions .................................................................................................................................................................................12 Cost Estimates .....................................................................................................................................................................12 Existing Deficiencies .........................................................................................................................................................12 Cost Attribution ..................................................................................................................................................................13 Fee Calculations and Application ........................................................................................................................................14 Summary of Required Program Elements ................................................................................ 16 Fundamental Nexus Requirements .....................................................................................................................................16 Additional Elements ..................................................................................................................................................................17 Attachments
Attachment A: Project Cut Sheets
Attachment B: Updating Fees with Future Candlestick Interchange Cost Estimate 115

List of Figures
Figure 1: Study Area ............................................................................................................................................................................ 3 List of Tables
Table 1: City of Brisbane Household and Employment Projections, excluding Baylands Specific Plan ............. 5 Table 2: Land Use Projects Approved Since 2015 .................................................................................................................. 6 Table 3: Brisbane Land Use Growth within TIF Districts ........................................................................................................ 7 Table 4: PM Peak Hour Trip Generation for TIF Land Use Categories ............................................................................. 8 Table 5: Project List ........................................................................................................................................................................... 10 Table 6: Cost Attribution by Project Type ................................................................................................................................ 13 Table 7: Total Project Costs Eligible for Inclusion in TIF..................................................................................................... 14 Table 8: Maximum Fees by TIF District and Land Use Category ..................................................................................... 15 116

Brisbane Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) Nexus Study
February 2025
1 Introduction
The City of Brisbane (City) expects significant population and employment growth that requires transportation capital improvements to meet the demands of new development. The City hired Fehr & Peers to create the Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) Nexus Study to study cost sharing of the needed transportation capital improvements. In collaboration with the City of Brisbane, transportation capital improvement projects necessary to accommodate anticipated growth were identified, along with their estimated costs. The study identifies fees for transportation improvements across the city for each land use type expected to be built.

Background
A fee program is required to operate pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act, also known as California Assembly Bill 1600 (AB 1600) or California Government Code Sections 66000 et seq., which governs impact fees in California. Fees charged pursuant to this legislation are used to build capital facilities needed to serve the demands generated by new development. Fees are not used to correct existing deficiencies but rather are intended to address future needs. There must be a demonstrated relationship, or “nexus,” between the amount of the fee, the cost of the facilities, and the types of development on which the fee is imposed.
117

Brisbane Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) Nexus Study
February 2025
2 Approach
District Structure
The nexus analysis in Brisbane is structured with a district approach that groups infrastructure projects according to the specific development areas most responsible for the need. This approach contrasts with a citywide approach which would be agnostic to the locations of infrastructure and land development projects within the City. City staff preferred a district approach because new development and corresponding infrastructure improvements are concentrated in discrete areas of the City.

The TIF is structured into the following three districts:
• Baylands
• Sierra Point
• West Brisbane
Figure 1 displays the general location of these districts. Any future expansion of the Recology site that occurs within Brisbane would be included within the Baylands area. Including Guadalupe Quarry in the West Brisbane TIF District may be infeasible under current circumstances because the site is not currently within the city limits of Brisbane. The Guadalupe Quarry project will be solely responsible for constructing site access improvements as a part of the project description or mitigation measures/conditions of approval, including on Quarry Road, secondary access drive, and multi-modal improvements on South Hill Drive. However, if Guadalupe Quarry is incorporated within the City and the TIF in the future, then it would be included within the West Brisbane TIF District.
118

Guadalupe Canyon Parkway
San Bruno
Mtn. State and
County Park
San Bruno
Mtn. ER
San Bruno
Mtn. SP
Bayshore Boulevard
Geneva Avenue
Lagoon Road
Sierra Point Parkway
Tunnel Avenue
San Bruno Avenue
Bea�y Road
Quarry Road
Valley Drive
Park Lane
Brisbane
Lagoon
Candlestick
Point State
Recreation Area
South Hill Drive
Old County
Road
North Hill Drive
Marina Boulevard
Shoreline Court
Brisbane TIF Infrastructure Projects
Figure 1
Brisbane City Limit 1 TIF Infrastructure Project (Location) Corridor Infrastructure Project
Baylands
West Brisbane
Sierra Point
Proposed Roadways 2 TIF Infrastructure Project (Corridor) Project Funding Source
1 General fund for bicycle and
pedestrian improvements as
identified in the BPMP.

Specific locations to be identified as
part of further study.
8 BPMP Improvements
6 5
4d
4b 4c
4a
3b
3a
2b
2a
1 7
119

Brisbane Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) Nexus Study
February 2025
4 Fee Categories
Based on the City’s input and the types of land uses anticipated per the City’s General Plan and available Specific Plan documents, the fee categories for this TIF study are:
• Office
• Life science / R&D
• Hotel
• Industrial
• Warehouse
• Residential
• Retail
Traffic generated by new residential uses is accounted for in the nexus analysis and proportional allocation of fees; however, based on direction from staff, impact fees will not be levied for residential uses outside of the Baylands TIF District. This will result in an impact fee program that is not fully funded (i.e., the total amount in collected fees will not fully pay for the improvements assumed in the impact fee program), because the proportion of costs attributable to new residential development outside of the Baylands TIF District will need to be covered through other funding sources. This study has calculated the number of trips anticipated to be generated by new residential land uses outside of the Baylands TIF District and found it to be less than 10 percent of the total future trips generated by new growth in the City.

Population and Employment Rates
We used population and employment rates from the Brisbane Baylands Transportation Impact Assessment (Fehr & Peers, 2024) and Fiscal Impact Analysis of The Baylands Specific Plan (Economic & Planning Systems, Inc., 2022) to estimate demand allocation among the various land use categories. Future growth projections are usually presented in units of population and employment, whereas fees are typically charged based on square footage of building area, so equivalency rates were needed to convert between different units of measurement. The rates for relevant fee categories are summarized below. • Office = 310 square feet per employee1
• Life Science/R&D = 350 square feet per employee2
• Hotel = 1 employee per room1
1 Per Fiscal Impact Analysis of The Baylands Specific Plan (Economic & Planning Systems, Inc., 2022) and employee densities used in Brisbane Baylands Transportation Impact Assessment, Table C-4 in Appendix C.1 2 This density aligns with employee densities used in the Brisbane Baylands Transportation Impact Assessment, Table C-4 in Appendix C.1.
120

Brisbane Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) Nexus Study
February 2025
5 • Industrial = 500 square feet per employee3
• Warehouse = 1,000 square feet per employee4
• Residential = 2.23 persons per dwelling unit5
• Retail = 580 square feet per employee
The Baylands TIA references the ITE Trip Generation Manual land use code 710 per employee rate for all employment uses, which has the largest dataset for employment-based uses. Therefore, ITE land use code 710 is appropriate to represent the trip generating characteristics of employees for the employment land uses presented above (note that it excludes residential and hotel land uses).

Land Use Inputs
This section summarizes the anticipated land use growth within the City of Brisbane that results in the need for the infrastructure improvements included in the TIF Nexus Study. Table 1 presents Brisbane’s General Plan household and employment projections between 2015 and 2050 used in the cumulative impact analyses for the Baylands Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (Baylands EIR). The growth projections in Table 1 exclude the Baylands Specific Plan. The Baylands Specific Plan was incorporated into the General Plan via an amendment through Measure JJ in 2018.

Table 1: City of Brisbane Household and Employment Projections, excluding Baylands Specific Plan
Households Employment
2015 2050 2015–2050 2015 2050 2015–2050
1,910 2,713 +803 10,465 14,865 +4,400
Notes:

1. Does not include development of the Baylands Specific Plan.

Source: Baylands Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report, Table 7-1. City of Brisbane, 2022.

Since 2015, some development projects included within the General Plan projections were approved and therefore would not be subject to paying the TIF and are not included within the TIF calculations. These approved development projects, in addition to the remaining General Plan Buildout that could be included in the TIF, are presented in Table 2.
3 Industrial land uses are not presented in the Baylands studies so the employment density is cited from the Commercial Linkage Fee Nexus Analysis prepared for the City of San Jose (July 2020). 4 Warehouse land uses are not presented in the Baylands studies. The employment density is 2,000 square feet per employee from the Commercial Linkage Fee Nexus Analysis prepared for the City of San Jose (July 2020). Based on the Guadalupe Quarry EIR, 2,000 square feet per employee is on the lower range of anticipated employees for warehouse projects, with 1,200 to 1,500 employees at the 1.3 msf facility as the upper range of employment.

Therefore, 1,000 sf per employee is used to represent this upper range. 5 Fiscal Impact Analysis of The Baylands Specific Plan (Economic & Planning Systems, Inc., 2022). 121

Brisbane Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) Nexus Study
February 2025
6 Table 2: Land Use Projects Approved Since 2015
Development TIF District Residential
Uses (Units)
Commercial Uses
Quantity
(1,000 sf)
S.F. per
Employee Employees
The Shore at Sierra Point (Biotech) Sierra Point 0 540 350 1,543 The Shore at Sierra Point (Retail) Sierra Point 0 15 580 26 Genesis Marina Sierra Point 0 422 350 1,206
3750-3780 Bayshore Boulevard West
Brisbane 30 0 -- 0
25 Visitacion Ave. Mixed-Use Project West
Brisbane 2 0.734 580 1
213 Visitacion Ave. Mixed-Use Project West
Brisbane 4 0.283 580 1
18 Visitacion Ave. Mixed-use Project West
Brisbane 2 0.400 580 1
Subtotal – Approved Projects -- 38 978 -- 2,778
Brisbane General Plan Buildout
(from Table 1) -- 803 -- -- 4,400
Total – Remaining General Plan
Buildout not yet Approved -- 765 -- -- 1,622
Notes: sf = square feet; rate per residential unit is assumed to be 2.23 persons per household Source: Metis, Fehr & Peers. From Brisbane Baylands Transportation Impact Assessment (June 2024), Appendix B.4 Baylands EIR Master Cumulative Project List.

Brisbane’s Housing Element anticipates that all housing growth outside of the Baylands Specific Plan would occur in West Brisbane, including 246 households in the Parkside Specific Plan, 134 other units in West Brisbane, and 40 auxiliary dwelling units (ADU’s). While the location of the remaining housing units to fulfill the General Plan Buildout is unknown, Fehr & Peers assumed that it would occur within the West Brisbane district as additional housing units are not allowed in the Baylands and Sierra Point TIF districts.

Fehr & Peers assumed that the remaining General Plan Buildout employment shown in Table 2 would be incorporated within planned development in Sierra Point and Guadalupe Quarry.

Table 3 presents the anticipated remaining land use growth in the City of Brisbane for each TIF district.

Note that this land use growth does not include minor construction projects or tenant improvements nor projects that are already entitled.
122

Brisbane Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) Nexus Study
February 2025
7 Table 3: Brisbane Land Use Growth within TIF Districts Development TIF District Residential
Uses (Units)
Commercial Uses
Quantity
(1,000 sf or
rooms)6
S.F. per
Employee or
Employees per
Room
Employees
Baylands Specific Plan1 Baylands 2,200 7,000 -- 19,480
Residential Baylands 2,200 -- -- --
Office Baylands -- 6,397.8 -- 18,503
Retail Baylands 0 102.2 580 177
Hotel6 Baylands 0 800 1 800
Other Pipeline Projects
Sierra Point Towers2 Sierra Point 0 853.22 -- 2,373
Sierra Point Hotel and Life
Sciences3 Sierra Point 0 1,165.62 -- 2,526
Life Science / R&D Sierra Point 0 328.81 400 822
Office Sierra Point 0 328.81 300 1,096
Hotel Sierra Point 0 608 1 608
Guadalupe Quarry4 West Brisbane -- 1,322 1,000 1,322
Total Pipeline Projects -- 0 3,340.84 -- 6,221
Remaining General Plan
Buildout after Other
Pipeline Projects5
West Brisbane 765 -- -- 0
Total (City of Brisbane w/
Quarry) -- 2,965 10,341 -- 25,701
Total (City of Brisbane
w/o Quarry) -- 2,965 9,019 -- 24,379
Notes: s.f. = square feet

1. Baylands Specific Plan size and employees matches the EIR project description. The Baylands Specific Plan was not included in the Table 2 General Plan Buildout totals and therefore is shown separately from the other Pipeline Projects.

2. Sierra Point Towers employees based on 2022 project description from the project applicant.

3. Sierra Point Hotel and Life Science employees split based on discussion with City staff in 2022.

4. Guadalupe Quarry square feet per employee represents the upper range of potential employees at the project site based on information provided by the project applicant.

5. The remaining General Plan Buildout includes the total residential units and employees from Table 2 minus the pipeline projects presented in the above table. The remaining General Plan Buildout employees would be zero as the number of employees proposed as a part of the pipeline projects exceeds the number of employees anticipated in the Brisbane General Plan.

6. For Hotel uses, the values shown represent the number of rooms and the number of employees (based on the assumption of 1 employee per room). All other uses reported in 1,000 sf.

Source: Metis, Fehr & Peers. From Brisbane Baylands Transportation Impact Assessment (June 2024), Appendix B.4 Baylands EIR Master Cumulative Project List.
123

Brisbane Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) Nexus Study
February 2025
8 Trip Generation
Once the land use assumptions were established, the trip generation associated with those land uses was calculated. The PM peak hour trip rates for each land use category were used since this period typically represents the highest trip generation of the day. Vehicle trip rates for the Brisbane Baylands EIR, Sierra Point project EIRs, and Guadalupe Quarry EIR will be used for those projects to reflect trip making behavior within the City of Brisbane, accounting for the TDM measures required by Brisbane Municipal Code 10.52. When updating the TIF Nexus Study, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) trip rates should be used for other land use categories if no locally appropriate trip rates are available.

Table 4 presents the PM Peak Hour trip generation for TIF land use categories.

Table 4: PM Peak Hour Trip Generation for TIF Land Use Categories Land Use
Baylands Sierra Point West Brisbane
Quantity Trip Rate Trips Quantity Trip Rate Trips Quantity Trip Rate Trips Residential 2,200 du 0.30 661 - - - 765 0.36 275
Office 6,397.8 ksf 0.55 3,519 1,182 ksf 0.85 1,008 - - - Retail 102.2 ksf 5.39 551 - - - - - -
Hotel 800 rooms 0.43 344 608 rooms 0.59 359 - - -
Life science /
R&D - - - 328.81 ksf 0.85 - - - -
Warehouse - - - - - - 1,322 ksf 0.16 205
Total - - 5,075 - - 1,367 - - 480
Notes: du = dwelling unit; ksf = 1,000 square feet
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2025. Vehicle trip rates derived from the Brisbane Baylands EIR, Sierra Point project EIRs, and Guadalupe Quarry EIR.

Infrastructure Inputs
A list of major transportation improvement projects in the City of Brisbane evaluated as part of the TIF is included in Table 5. These projects were identified based on review of past studies and coordination with the City of Brisbane. Attachment A includes cut sheets that summarize key attributes for each transportation improvement project that would be included in the TIF, including:
• Project ID
• Project name
• Project description
• Concept plans if available
• TIF district
• Total project cost estimate
124

Brisbane Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) Nexus Study
February 2025
9 • Assumed TIF contribution
The transportation improvement projects are generally organized by complexity and how they relate together. The most complex is the Candlestick Interchange (also known as Harney Interchange) due to the shared regional funding agreements outlined in the 2013 Bi-County Study.6 This project is significant in scope and will require funding sources from multiple agencies. Further, the design and cost estimate for the Candlestick Interchange is over a decade old and subject to change. Therefore, the Candlestick Interchange has been separated from the baseline fee calculations in this nexus study. This approach accounts for the Candlestick Interchange based on the current cost estimate per the 2013 Bi-County Study while providing flexibility for future updates to the Bi-County study to update the scope and cost estimate for the Candlestick Interchange. The Geneva Avenue Extension and other transportation changes were included in the 2013 Bi-County study but are not included in this TIF as they are either part of project descriptions (e.g., the Geneva Avenue Extension is a part of the Baylands) or may no longer be required. Information supporting the assumed fee requirements of the nexus study is contained in Table

7.2 Cumulative Projects List of the Baylands Specific Plan EIR. 6 https://www.sfcta.org/projects/bi-county-transportation-study 125

Brisbane Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) Nexus Study
February 2025
10 Table 5: Project List
ID Name Description Total Project
Cost
Assumed TIF
Contribution TIF District(s)
1 Candlestick
Interchange
Reconfiguration
The Candlestick Interchange
Reconfiguration would address deficient
conditions that would arise with land use
growth in both San Mateo and San
Francisco counties, and thus will require
significant coordination among several
jurisdictions, including the cities of Brisbane,
Daly City, San Francisco, and Caltrans.
$195,000,0001 $42,344,516
Baylands,
West Brisbane,
Sierra Point
2a
Bayshore
Corridor Mobility
Plan
The Bayshore Mobility Plan sets forth the
design plan for Bayshore Boulevard
required by Program C.1.b of the City of
Brisbane General Plan.
$10,000,0002 $8,532,096
Baylands,
West Brisbane,
Sierra Point
2b
Bayshore
Boulevard / San
Bruno Avenue
Signalization
The Bayshore Boulevard and San Bruno
Avenue Intersection Improvement is part of
the greater Bayshore Boulevard Mobility
Plan (see Project 2a), to accommodate
traffic and land use growth in West
Brisbane.
$850,0003 $850,000 West Brisbane
3a
Sierra Pt Pkwy /
Lagoon Road /
US 101
Southbound
Ramp
Roundabout
As documented in the Brisbane Baylands
Transportation Impact Assessment, a
roundabout is the preferred configuration
for the rebuilt intersection of Sierra Point
Parkway, Lagoon Road, and the U.S. 101
Southbound Ramp Terminal to reduce offramp queues from extending back onto the mainline with the addition of traffic
generated by the Baylands Specific Plan and
land use growth in Sierra Point.
$1,025,0002 $1,025,0003 Baylands,
Sierra Point
3b Sierra Point Bay
Trail Gap Closure
As documented in the Brisbane Baylands
Transportation Impact Assessment, with the
addition of the Bay Trail segment north of
Lagoon Road and the change in land uses
proposed by the Baylands Specific Plan and
in Sierra Point would create demand for
walking and bicycling travel along this
segment of Sierra Point Parkway.
$1,715,000 $1,715,000 Baylands,
Sierra Point
4a
Sierra Pt Parkway
/ Marina Blvd
(West) /
Shoreline Court
Roundabout
Operational and safety improvements to
the intersection Sierra Point Parkway /
Marina Boulevard (West) / Shoreline Court
to support the increase in multi-modal
travel associated with the increased density
of Sierra Point.
$3,280,000 $3,280,000 Sierra Point
126

Brisbane Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) Nexus Study
February 2025
11 ID Name Description Total Project
Cost
Assumed TIF
Contribution TIF District(s)
4b
Sierra Pt Parkway
/ Marina Blvd
(East) / Shoreline
Court
Roundabout
Operational and safety improvements to
the intersection Sierra Point Parkway /
Marina Boulevard (East) to support the
increase in multi-modal travel associated
with the increased density of Sierra Point.
$2,000,000 $2,000,000 Sierra Point
4c
Sierra Point
Parkway
Terminus
Roundabout
Operational and safety improvements to
the terminus of the Sierra Point Parkway at
the Brisbane Marina driveways to support
the increase in multi-modal travel
associated with the increased density of
Sierra Point and facilitate vehicle access to
9000 Marina Boulevard.
$2,000,000 $2,000,000 Sierra Point
4d
Sierra Point
Internal MultiUse Pathway
Safety improvements to connect other
proposed Class 1 pathways to provide a
complete internal network for multi-modal
travel in support of the increased density of
Sierra Point.
$4,000,000 $4,000,000 Sierra Point
5 Parkside Precise
Plan: Park Lane
Implement Park Lane street section of the
Parkside Precise Plan to accommodate land
use changes.
$1,200,000 $1,200,000 West Brisbane
6 Parkside Precise
Plan: Old County
Road
Implement Old County Road street section
of the Parkside Precise Plan to
accommodate land use changes.
$100,000 $100,000 West Brisbane
7 Valley Drive
Improvements
Implement Valley Drive bicycle and
pedestrian improvements per the 2017
Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan and the
findings from the Crocker Park Technical
Assistance Panel.
$3,000,0003 $3,000,000 West Brisbane
8 BPMP
Improvements
General fund for bicycle and pedestrian
improvements as identified in the BPMP.

Specific locations to be identified as part of
further study.
$1,132,0004 $1,132,000
Baylands,
West Brisbane,
Sierra Point

1. The Candlestick Interchange Project cost will change once a new Bi-County study is released. This value represents the full cost of the project. The cost of the project is shared with jurisdictions outside of the City of Brisbane per Table ES-3 of BiCounty Study. Access the 2013 Bi-County Study: https://ccag.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/BiCounty-FinalReport_.pdf

2. Project contributions to Projects 2a and 3a were calculated using a “select link” analysis as described in Fee Calculations and Application section. These projects will not be fully funded by the TIF program.

3. A signal or roundabout were identified as mitigation for land use growth in Sierra Point and Baylands to reduce vehicle queues from extending onto U.S. 101. Therefore, the full cost of this improvement is included in the TIF and assigned to development in these two TIF districts.

4. Cost estimate per email direction from Randy Breault in September and October 2024. 127

Brisbane Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) Nexus Study
February 2025
12 Nexus Analysis and Fee Calculations
Assumptions
Cost Estimates
Individual project costs in Table 5 are presented in current year (2025) dollars. Once the fee program is adopted, inflation will be accounted for by escalating the individual fee rates annually per the Engineering News-Record’s Construction Cost Index. This is an industry standard approach for determining fee escalation and is used for other similar impact fee programs. Given that some of the projects have prior mitigations identified for the sites, the City of Brisbane will need to provide information about how much money was gathered for these mitigations to provide a credit for the new project cost estimate.

Existing Deficiencies
One of the key functions of a fee program is to charge fees to new development to fund new development’s proportional share of transportation improvements that are needed to serve the demand generated by new development. The purpose of an impact fee is not to correct existing deficiencies.

Therefore, it is necessary to determine whether there are existing deficiencies in the roadway network that may be related to or affected by those proposed projects, so that the deficiencies can be accounted for in the fee calculations.

To determine whether there exist any deficiencies within the facilities contained within the list of transportation improvement projects, available traffic operations analysis for each facility presented in Table 5 was compared against the local performance threshold. The traffic operations analyses are contained within recent EIR documents, including the Bayshore Baylands EIR and the Sierra Point Towers EIR. Based on our review of these documents, all facilities within the list of transportation improvement projects currently operate acceptably and there are no existing deficiencies that need to be accounted for in this nexus analysis.

Beyond the question of existing deficiencies, the available planning documents indicate that autooriented infrastructure within the Sierra Point TIF District is anticipated to become deficient in the future as the planned land use changes will increase multi-modal travel beyond what can be supported by the existing infrastructure. Automobile travel to and from Sierra Point will be constrained by the existing ramp terminal and the two-lane segment of Sierra Point Parkway under US 101; the multi-modal improvements included within this study will provide a complete network of low-stress bicycle and walking facilities, in addition to shuttle stops, to allow for travel by multiple modes into and out of Sierra Point. For this reason, intersections along Sierra Point Parkway that were originally planned to be signalized are now being designed to have roundabouts, and the cost difference between these planned improvements is assumed in this TIF study.
128

Brisbane Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) Nexus Study
February 2025
13 Cost Attribution
To identify the proportion of project cost attributable to new development and thus eligible for inclusion in the TIF, two separate methodologies will be employed depending on project type. Table 6 summarizes these two approaches. For roadway projects, cost attribution will be based on projected vehicle trip usage of the new facilities. For multi-modal enhancement projects, cost attribution will be based on population and employment proportions.

Table 6: Cost Attribution by Project Type
Project Type Basis for cost attribution
Roadway projects (including interchanges, ramps,
roundabouts, intersections, and those roadways that
would be deficient with the land use change)
Proportion of vehicle trips assigned to each facility
(using select link function in the City of Brisbane subarea VISUM model) Multi-modal enhancements (including Bicycle and
Pedestrian Master Plan, Local Road Safety Plan, and Bay Trail projects)1
Proportion of future population and employment
contributed by new development
Notes:

1. Project 3b, the Sierra Point Bay Trail Gap Closure, has its fee split 50% / 50% between the Baylands and Sierra Point TIF districts. This reflects a shared benefit of the proposed Class I bike facility for Baylands residents and Sierra Point employees.

Source: Fehr & Peers.
129

Brisbane Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) Nexus Study
February 2025
14 Fee Calculations and Application
The project cost estimates attributable to the TIF in Table 5 are distributed to individual TIF districts. The following projects have costs shared across multiple TIF districts:
• Project 1, the Candlestick Interchange Reconfiguration Project, has costs allocated to all three TIF districts per the proportional cost allocation in Table ES-3 of the 2013 Bi-County Study. • Project 2a, the Bayshore Corridor Mobility Plan, has costs allocated to all three TIF districts based on the number of trips generated by each TIF district in the 2040 Baylands Cumulative Plus Project PM submodel of the CCAG travel demand model. This information was obtained from the model using a “select link” procedure to track the usage of each facility by travelers crossing TIF district boundaries. This project is not fully funded through the TIF because other regional passthrough trips account for a share of the new trips that benefit from this project. • Project 3a, Sierra Point Parkway / Lagoon Road / US-101 Southbound Ramp Roundabout, has the full costs allocated between the Baylands and Sierra Point TIF districts as this project is called out as a mitigation measure in the EIR’s for development in these two districts to address LOS and queuing impacts. Similar to Project 2a, the costs are distributed between the two districts based on the 2040 Baylands Cumulative Plus Project PM submodel of the CCAG travel demand model. (Note to reviewer: Split is approximately 50/50 based on the model. We are confirming that this split includes both the planned and approved Sierra Point projects that originally created impacts and contributed money to improvements at this location.)
• Project 3b, the Sierra Point Bay Trail Gap Closure, has its fee split 50% / 50% between the Baylands and Sierra Point TIF districts. This reflects a shared benefit of the proposed Class I bike facility for Baylands residents and Sierra Point employees. The Baylands project will roughly double the number of residents living in Brisbane, meaning the employers in Sierra Point will draw a substantial number of their local employees from the Baylands area, and the residents, employees, and visitors of both districts will benefit from closing the gap in this regional trail.

Table 7 presents the summation of project costs eligible for inclusion in the TIF program by district.

Table 7: Total Project Costs Eligible for Inclusion in TIF Baylands Sierra Point West Brisbane
$40,524,004 $20,109,863 $10,544,745
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2025.

The total project costs in each TIF district shown in Table 7 were divided by the number of trips generated in that district to establish a cost per trip. The cost per trip was multiplied by the trip rate for each land use type within a TIF district to calculate the maximum TIF contribution for each land use (e.g., per square foot or per 1,000 square feet, or per dwelling unit, or per hotel room).

Table 8 presents the maximum fee rates for each land use category and TIF district. 130

Brisbane Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) Nexus Study
February 2025
15 Table 8: Maximum Fees by TIF District and Land Use Category Land Use Category Baylands Sierra Point West Brisbane
Residential (Dwelling Unit) $2,399.14 - $7,897.93
Office (SF) $4.39 $10.41 -
Retail (SF) $43.05 - -
Hotel (Room) $3,433.56 $7,204.58 -
Warehouse/Quarry (SF) - - $3.41
Life Science (SF) - $10.41 -
Source: Fehr & Peers.

When comparing the fees across TIF districts, the fees in the Baylands TIF District are lower than those in the other districts because the Baylands TIF district contains significantly more development across which to distribute costs. It should be noted that the Brisbane Baylands project is also responsible for directly funding additional infrastructure improvements beyond those included in this TIF Nexus Study, such as the Geneva Avenue Roadway Extension and the Sierra Point Roadway Improvements.

The fees described in this report reflect maximum fees the City could adopt as part of the TIF. The City may choose to adopt fee amounts that are less than the maximum fees shown in this report; this may require additional funding sources to cover the costs for the projects in this nexus study. 131

Brisbane Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) Nexus Study
February 2025
16 Summary of Required
Program Elements
This report provides a detailed discussion of the elements of the City of Brisbane Transportation Impact Fee program and explains the analytical techniques used to develop this nexus study. The report addresses the following fee program elements required by the Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Section 66000 et seq), as summarized below.

Fundamental Nexus Requirements
Section 66001 contains several fundamental requirements that an agency must document when establishing or imposing an impact fee.

1. Identifying the purpose of the fee
The TIF program is established for the purpose of supporting local public infrastructure improvements and facilities needed to mitigate the traffic-related impacts of new development in the City of Brisbane.

2. Identifying how the fee will be used and the facilities to be funded through the fee The fee is used to help fund capital improvement projects that will accommodate future transportation needs throughout the City of Brisbane. Table 5 identifies the projects eligible to be funded through the fee.

3. Determining a reasonable relationship between the fee’s use and the type of development on which the fee is imposed
As described in this report, different types of development generate traffic with different characteristics. The maximum fee calculations presented in Table 8 account for these characteristics by calculating the travel-related characteristics of different land use types. These considerations account for the differential impacts on the transportation system generated by different development types.

4. Determining a reasonable relationship between the need for the public facility and the type of development on which the fee is imposed
The need for the facilities listed in Table 5 has been established through local and regional planning processes prepared by the City of Brisbane and member agencies of the Bi-County Study.
132

Brisbane Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) Nexus Study
February 2025
17 5. Determining a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility (or portion of facility) attributable to new development This report describes the calculations applied to determine the cost of the public facility that is attributable to new development in the City of Brisbane, accounting for the effects of existing deficiencies. Thus, a reasonable effort has been made to quantitatively establish the relationship between the fees charged in the TIF program and the costs of public improvements attributable to new development within the City of Brisbane.

Additional Elements
Due to recent changes in state legislation, Section 66016.5 now defines several additional elements beyond the fundamental nexus requirements that have historically been part of the Mitigation Fee Act.

These additional elements include the following:
• If a nexus study supports the increase of an existing fee, review the assumptions of the nexus study supporting the original fee and evaluate the amount of fees collected under the original fee.

This Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) Nexus Study is the first in the City of Brisbane. Future updates should review its assumptions and evaluate the fees collected under the original fee. • Calculate a fee imposed on a housing development project proportionately to the square footage of proposed units of the development, or explain why that would not be an appropriate metric for calculating fees.

The nexus study fees on housing developments use one fee level for all unit types. Trip rates used to estimate trips generated from residential developments are based on the Baylands Environmental Impact Reports and its analysis which was conducted by Fehr & Peers. The average trip rate from the Baylands EIR assumes an average of 2.23 residents per unit, as allowed by the City of Brisbane’s Measure JJ (2018), which allows a maximum average population density of 2.23 residents per unit for the Baylands project.

The Mitigation Fee Act requires that there be a demonstrated relationship between the fee being charged to a new development and the level of demand that development places on public facilities and services. As described previously, the calculations presented in Table 8 account for these characteristics by calculating the travel-related characteristics of different land use types.

These considerations account for the differential impacts on the transportation system generated by different development types in different TIF districts. There is no available reference document that directly links trip generation rates to the square footage of a housing unit. Given the lack of readily available reference data about how the size of a housing unit might be related to the demand that unit would place on the transportation system, some agencies in California have undertaken statistical analyses to attempt to better understand that relationship. 133

Brisbane Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) Nexus Study
February 2025
18 Several of these recent statistical analyses have found limited information available from which to derive conclusions. The analyses cite some sources of information that link trip generation rates to the number of people living in a housing unit, although those sources often present values that are averaged over large geographic areas and the results can differ substantially; for example, some analyses cite the 2017 National Household Travel Survey which indicates that a 4-person household in California generates 12.6 daily trips, while others cite a 2012 national report on Travel Demand Forecasting: Parameters and Techniques that indicates a 4-person household generates 16.1 daily trips. These analyses then estimate the relationship between the number of people living in a house and the square footage of the house using US Census data, and then combine those factors to estimate trip generation rates by house size.

An alternative approach has been taken in Western Riverside County, where an analysis was done based on actual trip generation rates and house size data collected from residential neighborhoods throughout that region. This locally-specific analysis found that single-family house size explained approximately one-half of the variation in trip generation rates, while the other half of the variation was related to other economic and demographic factors such as household income, number of residents with jobs, number of school-age children in the household, number of vehicles owned by the residents, and other factors. In addition, the relationship between single-family house size and trip generation rates was found to hold only for houses up to 2,500 square feet; for larger houses, the statistical relationship was much less strong.

No statistically significant relationship was found for multi-family developments.

In light of the lack of consistent and available sources of data to support conclusions about how housing units of varying sizes affect the transportation system, the Brisbane Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) Nexus Study has determined that square footage is not currently an appropriate metric to use in calculating fees on residential developments, nor is there substantial evidence that the current method of calculating fees is disproportionate to a residential development’s effects on the transportation system.
• In large jurisdictions, adopt a capital improvement plan as a part of the nexus study.

For this purpose, a large jurisdiction is defined as a county with a population of at least 250,000 and all the cities within that county, so the City of Brisbane would meet the definition of a large jurisdiction. The City of Brisbane regularly prepares a capital improvement program (CIP) to guide the expenditure of funds on capital improvements in the City. Before a particular project receives any funds from this TIF program, that project should be included in the City’s CIP and the amount of TIF funds allocated to the project should be identified. • Nexus studies must be updated at least every eight (8) years.

This nexus study and associated fee calculations will need to be updated by 2032-33. 134

Attachment A:

Project Cut Sheets
135

Candlestick Interchange Reconfiguration

BAYLANDS
1 TIF District
Shared - Baylands (primary), West
Brisbane, Sierra Point
Location
US-101 Candlestick Park Interchange
Total Project Cost Estimate
$ 195,000,000 (from 2013 Bi-County
Study)
Assumed TIF Contribution (from 2013
Bi-County Study)*
$ 42,344,516
$ 35,880,000 - Baylands
$ 1.284,467 - West Brisbane
$ 5,180,049 - Sierra Point
* Allocation of assumed TIF
contribution is based on proportional
cost responsibility per Table ES-3
“Cost-Participation Percentages
and Amounts, by Automobile Trip
Generation Method” in the Bi-County
Transportation Study.

The Candlestick Interchange Reconfiguration would address deficient conditions that would arise with land use growth in both San Mateo and San Francisco counties, and thus will require significant coordination among several jurisdictions, including the cities of Brisbane, Daly City, and San Francisco and Caltrans. The project includes a reconfiguration of the existing US-101 interchange at Candlestick Park/Harney Way to accommodate the extension of Geneva Avenue by the Baylands Specific Plan from its current terminus at Bayshore Boulevard, over Caltrain, and to a new access point from US-101 to Harney Way.

A 2013 Project Study Report (2013 PSR) by Caltrans and a 2015 Genera Avenue Interchange/Extension Baylands Direct Connector Study by Biggs Cardosa include the following components:
• Southbound ramps converge on existing intersection, off-ramp is new structure and on-ramp footprint remains the same
• Northbound ramps converge on new intersection, off-ramp uses existing footprint and on-ramp has a new structure
• BRT enters around southbound ramps
• Bridge over US-101 towards Beatty Ave (configuration not described) The project was evaluated in the Bi-County Transportation Study (2013) lead by the SFCTA and in partnership with several agencies from both sides of the San FranciscoSan Mateo county line, as a potential transportation improvement needed to address significant current and anticipated land use growth. The project has also been considered during the planning of the Candlestick Point-Hunters Point Shipyard and Schlage Lock (now Baylands North) master plans in San Francisco and Baylands in Brisbane. Conceptual designs of the project have been preapred as part of these studies and projects; however, given the time elapsed since prior studies, the interchange design would need to be updated to reflect the current land uses and design standards.

As further described Bi-County Transportation Study (2011), the funding strategy determined “fair-share” contributions from public and private entities involved in the study area. The project’s total estimated cost is $195,000,000, with Baylands responsible for $35,880,000, other proposed Brisbane TIF districts responsible for $21,840,000, and the remaining $137,280,000 shared across other jurisdictions, development projects, and stakeholders. Given the time elapsed since these estimates were prepared, updated cost estimates are recommended for the revised interchange design noted above.

Source: Geneva Ave Interchange/Extension Baylands Direct Connector Study (2015), Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc.

WEST BRISBANE SIERRA PT

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

KEY INFORMATION
136

Bayshore Corridor Mobility Plan 2a
TIF District
Shared - Baylands, West Brisbane,
Sierra Point
Location
Bayshore Boulevard (Brisbane)
Total Project Cost Estimate
$ 10,000,000
Assumed TIF Contribution*
$ 8,532,096
$ 2,476,433 - Baylands
$ 4,034,865 - West Brisbane
$ 2,020,799 - Sierra Point
* Allocation of assumed TIF
contribution is based on growth in
traffic volumes.

The Bayshore Mobility Plan sets forth
the design plan for Bayshore Boulevard
required by Program C.1.b of the City
of Brisbane General Plan. General Plan
Policy C.1 calls for the City’s roadway
system to be designed “to emphasize
mobility for Brisbane residents and
businesses, accommodate bicycle
and pedestrian in addition to
vehicular movement, and provide for
comfortable and safe travel within the
community to shopping, employment,
and recreation, as well as to transit
and the Highway 101 freeway.” The
Bayshore Mobility Plan consists of a
road diet, improved local access, and
Source: Bayshore Mobility Plan: Concept Design Recommendations (2024), Fehr & Peers

BAYLANDS WEST BRISBANE SIERRA PT

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

KEY INFORMATION
road safety improvements consistent
with the conceptual plans presented
in the Bayshore Mobility Plan:

Concept Design Recommendations
memorandum included as an
appendix to the Brisbane Baylands
Transportation Impact Assessment
Report. The Bayshore Mobility Plan
would address deficient conditions
that would occur due to the growth
in demand for multi-modal travel
resulting from the land use changes.

Given the citywide role of Bayshore
Boulevard for travel within Brisbane,
the funding for the Bayshore Mobility
Plan would be shared among the
three districts based on the percent of
vehicle traffic generated by the land
use growth on Bayshore Boulevard
from each district. This project would
be implemented in tandem with the
Baylands Specific Plan, which includes
access changes along Bayshore
Boulevard between Geneva Avenue in
the north and the future Campus Drive
intersection in the south.
137

TIF District
West Brisbane
Location
Bayshore Boulevard / San Bruno
Avenue
Total Project Cost Estimate
$ 850,000
Assumed TIF Contribution*
$ 850,000 - West Brisbane
* Allocation of assumed TIF
contribution is based on growth in
traffic volumes.

The Bayshore Boulevard and San Bruno Avenue Intersection Improvement is part of the greater Bayshore Boulevard Mobility Plan (see Project 2a), to accommodate traffic and land use growth in West Brisbane. The project could be funded as part of Project 2a or could be funded separately as an interim improvement prior to implementation of the entire plan (with a credit applied to the rest of Project 2a). The mast arm at Bayshore/San Bruno was already completed as indicated in the TIF Contribution.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

KEY INFORMATION
Bayshore Boulevard / San Bruno Avenue Signalization 2b

WEST BRISBANE
Source: Bayshore Mobility Plan: Concept Design Recommendations (2024), Fehr & Peers Note: Figure shows the signal with Bayshore Mobility Plan in place. 138

Sierra Pt Pkwy / Lagoon Road /
US 101 Southbound Ramp Roundabout 3a
TIF District
Baylands and Sierra Point
Location
US-101 Southbound Ramps, Sierra
Point Parkway, and Lagoon Road
Total Project Cost Estimate
$ 1,025,000
Assumed TIF Contribution*
$ 1,025,000
$ 512,500 - Baylands
$ 512,500 - Sierra Point
* Allocation of assumed TIF
contribution is based on growth in
traffic volumes. As documented in the Brisbane Baylands Transportation Impact Assessment, a roundabout is the preferred configuration for the rebuilt intersection of Sierra Point Parkway, Lagoon Road, and the U.S. 101 Southbound Ramp Terminal to reduce off-ramp queues from extending back onto the mainline with the addition of traffic generated by the Baylands Specific Plan and land use growth in Sierra Point. A roundabout would replace the traffic signal required as a part of TRAF-1 P3RE MMRP, with a credit for the $1,025,000 for design and construction costs already paid by the Sierra Pt LLC applicant .

A roundabout at this location will be completed in tandem with the realignment of Lagoon Road as proposed in the Baylands Specific Plan. The roundabout will require Caltrans approval and is expected to include the following features based on the Brisbane Baylands Transportation Impact Assessment:
• Two left turn lanes from westbound U.S. 101 Southbound Off-Ramp to southbound Sierra Point Parkway
• Two right turn lanes from northbound Sierra Point Parkway onto the U.S. 101 Southbound On-Ramp
• Taper down to one-lane in each direction on Sierra Point Parkway south of the roundabout
• One lane in each direction on Lagoon Road (west leg) and Sierra Point Parkway (north leg)
• Class 1 trail crossings for the Bay Trail across the north and west legs would include features that meet the design standards outlined in the Brisbane Baylands Transportation Impact Study: Supplemental Design Guidelines, which are based on Caltrans and Bay Trail standards.

Source: The Baylands Specific Plan (2023), Universal Paragon Corporation

BAYLANDS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

KEY INFORMATION

SIERRA PT
139

TIF District
Baylands and Sierra Point
Location
Sierra Point Parkway between Lagoon
Road and Marina Boulevard
Total Project Cost Estimate
$ 1,715,000
Assumed TIF Contribution*
$ 1,715,000
$ 857,500 - Baylands
$ 857,500 - Sierra Point
* The Sierra Point Bay Trail Gap
Closure, has its fee split 50% / 50%
between the Baylands and Sierra Point
TIF districts. This reflects a shared
benefit of the proposed Class I bike
facility for Baylands residents and
Sierra Point employees.

As documented in the Brisbane Baylands Transportation Impact Assessment, with the addition of the Bay Trail segment north of Lagoon Road and the change in land uses proposed by the Baylands Specific Plan and in Sierra Point would create demand for walking and bicycling travel along this segment of Sierra Point Parkway. With these land uses changes, this segment would represent a 1.2 mile deficient gap in the “all ages and abilities” network for people walking and bicycling, as identified by MTC’s Active Transportation Network and Bay Trail Plans, between the proposed pathways in Baylands and Sierra Point. A Bay Trail compliant Class I multi-use pathway on this segment would close this network gap and would allow commuter and recreational travelers to walk or bike safely between Bay Trail pathways at Sierra Point and the rest of the City of Brisbane and other nearby communities.

This Bay Trail segment would connect in the north to the proposed Class 1 multi-use pathways included in the Baylands Specific Plan south of Lagoon Road and east of the Sierra Point Parkway extension north of Lagoon Road. This connection is identified in the San Mateo County Comprehensive Bicycle Plan’s Backbone Network. In the north, the Bay Trail would cross Sierra Point Parkway and Lagoon Road on the north and west legs of the intersection, as described for Project 3a. In the south, the Bay Trail would travel under the U.S. 101 underpass on the west / south side of Sierra Point Parkway and connect to the Bay Trail and other multi-use pathways on the south and east legs of the U.S. 101 Northbound Ramp Terminal. Class 1 trail crossings would include features that meet the design standards outlined in the Brisbane Baylands Transportation Impact Study:

Supplemental Design Guidelines, which are based on Caltrans and Bay Trail standards.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

KEY INFORMATION
Sierra Point Bay Trail Gap Closure 3b BAYLANDS SIERRA PT Source: The Baylands Specific Plan (2023), Universal Paragon Corporation The Bay Trail Gap Closure would occur on
the west side of Sierra Point Parkway and
connect to other Bay Trail Segments and Class I
pathways.
140

Sierra Pt Parkway / Marina Blvd (West) /
4a Shoreline Court Roundabout
TIF District
Sierra Point
Location
Sierra Point Parkway and Marina
Boulevard (West)
Total Project Cost Estimate
$ 3,280,000
Assumed TIF Contribution*
$ 3,280,000 - Sierra Point
* Allocation of assumed TIF
contribution is based on growth in
traffic volumes.

The Sierra Point Sub-Area includes operational and safety improvements to the intersection Sierra Point Parkway / Marina Boulevard (West) / Shoreline Court to support the increase in multimodal travel associated with the increased density of Sierra Point.

The project includes the installation of a dual-lane roundabout to address deficient future traffic operations with the build out of land uses in Sierra Point. This project replaces a previous proposal to signalize the intersection from the prior Sierra Point EIR (TRAF3 P3RE MMRP), with a credit for the $1,540,000 for design and construction costs already paid by the Sierra Pt LLC applicant .

The roundabout would improve traffic flow and multi-modal safety compared to the previously proposed signalized intersection by reducing vehicle speeds and crossing distances for people walking and bicycling. New Bay Trail connections would be provided through the roundabout to connect the existing Bay Trail segments in Sierra Point to the northwest and southeast of the intersection, Project 3b (Sierra Point Parkway Bay Trail Gap Closure), and Project 5 (Sierra Point Internal Multi-Use Pathway). Class 1 trail crossings would include features that meet the design standards outlined in the Brisbane Baylands Transportation Impact Study: Supplemental Design Guidelines, which are based on Caltrans and Bay Trail standards.

Source: City of Brisbane

SIERRA PT

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

KEY INFORMATION
141

Sierra Pt Parkway / Marina Blvd (East) /
4b Shoreline Court Roundabout
TIF District
Sierra Point
Location
Sierra Point Parkway and Marina
Boulevard (East)
Total Project Cost Estimate
$ 2,000,000
Assumed TIF Contribution*
$ 2,000,000 - Sierra Point
* Allocation of assumed TIF
contribution is based on growth in
traffic volumes.

The Sierra Point Sub-Area includes operational and safety improvements to the intersection Sierra Point Parkway / Marina Boulevard (East) to support the increase in multi-modal travel associated with the increased density of Sierra Point. The project includes the installation of a single-lane roundabout to replace the existing all-way stop sign with four lane approaches on Sierra Point Parkway and Marina Boulevard. The roundabout and associated reduction from four to two lanes on Sierra Point Parkway and Marina Boulevard approaching the intersection would reduce vehicle speeds and crossing distances for people walking and bicycling. These would enhance the comfort and safety for people walking and bicycling within Sierra Point and thus encourage the replacement of vehicle trips with walking and bicycling trips. New Bay Trail connections would be provided through the roundabout on the north leg to connect Project 5 (Sierra Point Internal Multi-Use Pathway) with the pathway through the 9000 Marina Boulevard property to Project 4C (Sierra Point Parkway Terminus Roundabout). Class 1 trail crossings would include features that meet the design standards outlined in the Brisbane Baylands Transportation Impact Study: Supplemental Design Guidelines, which are based on Caltrans and Bay Trail standards.

Source: Fehr & Peers, 2024

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

KEY INFORMATION

SIERRA PT
See Project 4c
142

TIF District
Sierra Point
Location
Sierra Point Parkway at Brisbane
Marina
Total Project Cost Estimate
$ 2,000,000
Assumed TIF Contribution*
$ 2,000,000 - Sierra Point
* Allocation of assumed TIF
contribution is based on growth in
traffic volumes.

The Sierra Point Sub-Area includes operational and safety improvements to the terminus of the Sierra Point Parkway at the Brisbane Marina driveways to support the increase in multi-modal travel associated with the increased density of Sierra Point and facilitate vehicle access to 9000 Marina Boulevard. The project includes the installation of a single-lane roundabout to replace the existing all-way stop sign with right-turn channelized slip lanes. The roundabout, reduction from four to two lanes on Sierra Point Parkway, and reconfiguration of driveway access into the Brisbane Marina would simplify vehicle access while allowing vehicles to use the roundabout to access the proposed driveway and loading zones for 9000 Marina Boulevard. Reduced crossing distances for people walking and bicycling and a designated Class 1 connection would provide continuous access all the way from the Sierra Point Gateway to the Brisbane Marina and Bay Trail segment. These would enhance the comfort and safety for people walking and bicycling throughout Sierra Point and thus encourage the replacement of vehicle trips with walking and bicycling trips.

Class 1 trail crossings would include features that meet the design standards outlined in the Brisbane Baylands Transportation Impact Study: Supplemental Design Guidelines, which are based on Caltrans and Bay Trail standards.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

KEY INFORMATION
Sierra Point Parkway Terminus Roundabout 4c SIERRA PT
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2024
See Project 4b
143

Sierra Point Internal Multi-Use Pathway
Sierra Point Parkway
Bayshore Freeway
Shoreline Court
Bayshore Boulevard
Marina Boulevard
Sierra Point Improvements
Figure 2
Existing Class I Trail
Existing Class II Bike Lane
Proposed Class I Trail
Proposed Class II Bike Lane
Proposed or Enhanced Pedestrian Crossing
Proposed On-Street Shuttle Stop
Proposed Roundabout
4d
TIF District
Sierra Point
Location
Sierra Point District
Total Project Cost Estimate
$ 4,000,000
Assumed TIF Contribution*
$ 4,000,000 - Sierra Point
* Allocation of assumed TIF
contribution is based on growth in
traffic volumes.

The Sierra Point Sub-Area includes safety improvements to connect other proposed Class 1 pathways to provide a complete internal network for multi-modal travel in support of the increased density of Sierra Point. This project includes the installation of a class 1 pathway around the central parcel of Sierra Point Parkway in coordination with the Sierra Point Towers project and high-visibility crosswalks with crossing enhancements consistent with those outlined in the Brisbane Baylands Transportation Impact Study:

Supplemental Design Guidelines. This would enhance the comfort and safety for people walking and bicycling throughout Sierra Point and thus encourage the replacement of vehicle trips with walking and bicycling trips.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

KEY INFORMATION

SIERRA PT
144

TIF District
West Brisbane
Location
Park Lane between 145 Park Lane and
Old County Road
Total Project Cost Estimate
$ 1,200,000
Assumed TIF Contribution*
$ 1,200,000 - West Brisbane
* Allocation of assumed TIF
contribution is based on growth in
traffic volumes.

Implement Park Lane street section of the Parkside Precise Plan to accommodate land use changes:
• Maintain established street alignments.
• Within existing public rights-of-way, narrow the travel lanes and medians to allow excess width to be converted into bike lanes and/or sidewalks according to figure above
• Maintain existing curb edges and stormwater flowlines unless otherwise authorized by the City Engineer.
• Add bulb-outs along parking lanes. Landscaping bulbs in the parking lane may be considered at key locations if the adjacent parkway does not provide sufficient width for appropriate landscaping.
• Plant trees in the Brisbane Approved Street Tree List along all roadways to help articulate the street edge and open areas, provide pedestrians with a buffer from motorized traffic, and offer shade and wind protection along sidewalks and pathways • Require a clear, unobstructed contiguous, minimum eight-footwide ADA accessible boarding and unboarding area at all transit shelters
Source: Parkside Precise Plan (2017), City of Brisbane

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

KEY INFORMATION
Parkside Precise Plan: Park Lane
5 WEST BRISBANE
145

TIF District
West Brisbane
Location
Old County Rd between San Francisco
Ave and Bayshore Blvd
Total Project Cost Estimate
$ 100,000
Assumed TIF Contribution*
$ 100,000 - West Brisbane
* Allocation of assumed TIF
contribution is based on growth in
traffic volumes.

KEY INFORMATION
Parkside Precise Plan: Old County Road 6 WEST BRISBANE
Implement Old County Road street section of the Parkside Precise Plan to accommodate land use changes:
• Maintain established street alignments.
• Within existing public rights-of-way, narrow the travel lanes and medians to allow excess width to be converted into bike lanes and/or sidewalks according to figure above
• Maintain existing curb edges and stormwater flowlines unless otherwise authorized by the City Engineer.
• Add bulb-outs along parking lanes. Landscaping bulbs in the parking lane may be considered at key locations if the adjacent parkway does not provide sufficient width for appropriate landscaping.
• Plant trees in the Brisbane Approved Street Tree List along all roadways to help articulate the street edge and open areas, provide pedestrians with a buffer from motorized traffic, and offer shade and wind protection along sidewalks and pathways • Require a clear, unobstructed contiguous, minimum eight-footwide ADA accessible boarding and unboarding area at all transit shelters
The Class II Bicycle Lanes are planned to be included in an upcoming repaving project, and therefore will be removed from the total cost (~$80,000).

Source: Parkside Precise Plan (2017), City of Brisbane

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
146

TIF District
West Brisbane
Location
Valley Drive from Bayshore Blvd to
Silverspot Dr
Total Project Cost Estimate
$ 3,000,000
Assumed TIF Contribution*
$ 3,000,000 - West Brisbane
* Allocation of assumed TIF
contribution is based on growth in
traffic volumes.

Implement Valley Drive bicycle and pedestrian improvements per the 2017 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan and the findings from the Crocker Park Technical Assistance Panel. Improvements include the following:
• Install Class II bike lanes from Bayshore Blvd to Silverspot Dr • Extend existing median islands and pedestrian cages at Crocker Trail and City Hall
• Add median islands, pedestrian cages, and yield teeth at two existing locations
Source: Crocker Park Technical Assistance Panel (2014), City of Brisbane

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

KEY INFORMATION
Valley Drive Improvements 7

WEST BRISBANE
147

Attachment B:

Updating Fees with Future Candlestick
Interchange Cost Estimate
148

The Candlestick Interchange represents the largest project cost of the projects included in this TIF. Since the cost estimate for the Candlestick Interchange project will likely be updated in the future, this report also provides the fee calculations for each land use category and TIF district exclusive of the Candlestick Interchange project. This information can serve as the basis from which to calculate a revised maximum fee rate with an updated cost estimate for the Candlestick Interchange.

Table 9 presents the maximum fee rates for each land use category and TIF district, exclusive of the Candlestick Interchange Project. These fee rates are significantly lower than those presented in Table 8 because they exclude the Candlestick Interchange project, which represents the largest cost of the projects included in this TIF.

Table 9: Maximum Fee Calculations Without the Candlestick Interchange Project Land Use Category Baylands Sierra Point West Brisbane
Residential (Dwelling
Unit) $274.94 - $6,935.87
Office (SF) $0.50 $7.73 -
Retail (SF) $4.93 - -
Hotel (Room) $393.48 $5,348.77 -
Warehouse/Quarry (SF) - - $2.99
Life Science (SF) - $7.73 -
Source: Fehr & Peers
Should the City of Brisbane include an updated cost estimate for the Candlestick Interchange project in the TIF, the fees for all TIF districts will need to be revised since the costs for the Candlestick Interchange are distributed across all TIF districts.

To update the maximum fee values, use the values in Table 9 to perform the following calculations:

1. Determine each TIF District’s share of Candlestick Interchange costs: allocate the total cost (i.e., dollar value) of the Candlestick Interchange project to each Brisbane TIF district (Baylands, Sierra Point, West Brisbane).

2. Calculate the percentage of growth: Calculate the percentage of growth (e.g., ratio) for each TIF district that results from adding the fees for the Candlestick Interchange in Step 1 to the baseline total costs for each TIF district below. These values would replace the values presented in Table 7, and sum to the total cost for all projects excluding the Candlestick Interchange. ▪ Baylands: $4,644,004
▪ Sierra Point: $9,260,278
▪ West Brisbane: $14,929,824
149

Calculate the percentage growth as:

𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝐶𝐶 𝐶𝐶 − 𝐵𝐵 𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝐶𝐶 𝐶𝐶
𝐵𝐵 𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝐶𝐶 𝐶𝐶
× 100

3. Adjust all fee categories in each TIF district: Apply the percentage of growth for each TIF district in Step 2 to all fee categories in the TIF district. For each fee category in the table (e.g., Residential, Office), apply the percentage growth calculated in Step 2. Multiply each fee by:
(1 + 𝑃𝑃 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 𝑃𝑃 𝐺𝐺 ℎ)
Example: If the percentage growth is 10%, a $100 fee would increase to $110.

As previously stated, the fees described in this report reflect maximum fees the City could adopt as part of the TIF. The City may choose to adopt fee amounts that are less than the maximum fees shown in this report; this may require additional funding sources to cover the costs for the projects in this nexus study. 150

Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
Final Report
October 10, 2025

151

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................ S-1 Organization of the Report...............................................................................................S-1 Development Data ...........................................................................................................S-1 Impact Fee Analysis........................................................................................................... S1 Impact Fee Summary........................................................................................................S-3 Findings ............................................................................................................................S-4 Chapter 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................1-1 Purpose.............................................................................................................................1-1 Legal Framework for Impact Fees....................................................................................1-1 Recent Legislation ............................................................................................................1-5 Impact Fee Calculation Methodology ..............................................................................1-7 Impact Fees for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) ...........................................................1-8 Facilities Addressed in this Study .....................................................................................1-8 Chapter 2. Development Data.............................................................................................2-1 Study Area ........................................................................................................................2-1 Time Frame.......................................................................................................................2-1 Development Types..........................................................................................................2-1 Demand Variables............................................................................................................2-4 Demand Factors ...............................................................................................................2-8 Existing and Future Development....................................................................................2-8 Chapter 3. Library ...............................................................................................................3-1 Methodology ....................................................................................................................3-1 Service Area......................................................................................................................3-1 152

Demand Variable..............................................................................................................3-1 Level-of-Service Standard ................................................................................................3-1 Existing Library Facility .....................................................................................................3-2 Impact Fees per Unit........................................................................................................3-3 Projected Revenue ...........................................................................................................3-3 Planned Improvements....................................................................................................3-3 Updating the Fees ............................................................................................................3-4 Nexus Summary................................................................................................................3-4 Chapter 4. General Government Facilities...........................................................................4-1 Methodology ....................................................................................................................4-1 Service Area......................................................................................................................4-1 Demand Variable..............................................................................................................4-1 Level-of-Service Standard ................................................................................................4-1 Existing General Government Facilities ...........................................................................4-2 Impact Fees per Unit........................................................................................................4-3 Projected Revenue ...........................................................................................................4-3 Planned Improvements....................................................................................................4-4 Updating the Fees ............................................................................................................4-4 Nexus Summary................................................................................................................4-4 Chapter 5. Police Department Facilities...............................................................................5-1 Methodology ....................................................................................................................5-1 Service Area......................................................................................................................5-1 Demand Variable..............................................................................................................5-1 Level-of-Service Standard ................................................................................................5-1 Existing Police Department Facilities...............................................................................5-2 153

Impact Fees per Unit........................................................................................................5-3 Projected Revenue ...........................................................................................................5-4 Updating the Fees ............................................................................................................5-4 Planned Improvements....................................................................................................5-4 Nexus Summary................................................................................................................5-4 Chapter 6. Fire Department Facilities..................................................................................6-1 Methodology ....................................................................................................................6-1 Service Area......................................................................................................................6-1 Demand Variable..............................................................................................................6-1 Level-of-Service Standard ................................................................................................6-1 Planned Fire Department Facilities..................................................................................6-2 Impact Fees per Unit........................................................................................................6-3 Projected Revenue ...........................................................................................................6-4 Updating the Fees ............................................................................................................6-4 Planned Improvements....................................................................................................6-4 Nexus Summary................................................................................................................6-4 Chapter 7. Implementation.................................................................................................7-1 Adoption...........................................................................................................................7-1 Administration..................................................................................................................7-1 Requirements Imposed by AB 602...................................................................................7-5 Training and Public Information.......................................................................................7-6 154

City of Brisbane Page S-1
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
Executive Summary
The City of Brisbane retained NBS Government Finance Group to prepare this study to analyze the impacts of new development on several types of City capital facilities and to calculate impact fees based on that analysis. The methods used in this study satisfy all legal requirements of the U. S. Constitution, the California Constitution and the California Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Sections 66000 et seq.).

Organization of the Report
Chapter 1 of this report provides an overview of the legal requirements for establishing and imposing such fees, and methods that can be used to calculate impact fees.

Chapter 2 contains data on existing and future development used in this report.

Chapters 3 through 6 analyze the impacts of development on specific types of facilities and calculate impact fees for those facilities. The facilities addressed in this report are listed by chapter below:

Chapter 3. Library
Chapter 4. General Government Facilities
Chapter 5. Police Department Facilities and Vehicles
Chapter 6. Fire Department Facilities, Apparatus and Vehicles Chapter 7 contains recommendations for adopting and implementing impact fees.

Development Data
Chapter 2 of this report presents estimates of existing development in Brisbane and a forecast of future development through buildout. Chapter 2 also establishes values for factors such as population per unit, service population per unit, and police and fire calls per unit that are used in the impact fee calculations.

It is important to note that because of some provisions of AB 602 that were incorporated into the Mitigation Fee Act, effective in 2022, impact fee categories for residential development in this study are defined in terms of unit-size categories, broken down by square footage ranges.

Prior to the adoption of AB 602 it was common practice to base residential impact fees on unit type categories (e.g., single-family or multi-family units).

Impact Fee Analysis
The impact fee analysis for each type of facility addressed in this report is presented in a separate chapter. In each case, the relationship, or nexus, between development and the need for a particular type of facility is defined in a way that allows the impact of additional development on facility needs to be quantified.
155

City of Brisbane Page S-2
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
The impact fees are based on capital costs for facilities and other capital assets needed to mitigate the impacts of additional development. Impact fees may not be used for maintenance or operating costs. Impact fees calculated in this study are intended to recover only new development’s proportionate share of the cost of facilities. Costs for correcting existing deficiencies in City facilities must be funded by non-impact fee funds.

The following paragraphs briefly discuss the methods used to calculate impact fees for each of the facility types addressed in this study.

Library. Impact fees for library facilities in Chapter 3 are calculated using the existing inventory method discussed in Chapter 1, which means that the library impact fees are based on the existing level of service for those facilities in Brisbane. The existing level of service is defined as the replacement value of existing library facilities per capita of existing population.

To calculate that cost per capita, the estimated replacement cost for the existing library is divided by the existing population. That cost per capita is then multiplied by the estimated population per unit for each type of residential development defined in this study to get an impact fee per unit for each type of residential development. Because added population is associated with new residential development, the library impact fees apply only to residential development.

General Government. Impact fees general government facilities in Chapter 4 are calculated using the existing inventory method discussed in Chapter 1, which means that impact fees for general government facilities are based on the existing level of service for those facilities in Brisbane. The impact of development on the need for those facilities is represented by the added service population associated with new development in the City. The existing level of service is defined as the replacement cost of existing facilities per capita of existing service population.

To calculate that cost per capita, the estimated replacement cost for existing general government facilities is divided by the existing service population. That cost per capita is then multiplied by the estimated service population per unit for each type of development defined in this study to get an impact fee per unit for each type of development.

Police Facilities and Vehicles. The police impact fees in Chapter 5 are calculated using the existing inventory method discussed in Chapter 1, which means that impact fees for police facilities and vehicles are based on the existing level of service for those assets in Brisbane. The existing level of service is based on the replacement cost of the Police Department’s existing capital assets.

The impact of development on the need for those assets is represented by the added calls for service per year associated with various types of new development in the City. The replacement cost of existing Police Department capital assets is divided by the existing calls for service per year to get a cost per call for service per year.

As part of this study, NBS analyzed the distribution of Police Department calls for service for a full year to determine the average number of calls per unit per year generated by different types of development. The impact fees are calculated as the cost per call for service multiplied by the calls per unit per year associated with each type of development defined in this study. The police impact fees apply to all types of new development in the City. 156

City of Brisbane Page S-3
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
Fire Station. Unlike the other impact fees calculated in this study, which use the existing inventory method, the fire impact fees in Chapter 6 are calculated using the planned facilities method. That method bases the impact fees on a forecast of future development to buildout along with the estimated cost of additional facilities, apparatus and vehicles needed to serve that future development.

The impact of new development on Fire Department facilities, apparatus and vehicles is represented in this study by the number of Fire Department calls for service per year generated by development in the City. As part of this study, NBS analyzed the distribution of fire calls for service for a full year to determine the average number of calls per unit per year generated by different types of development.

A cost per call for service per year is calculated by dividing the estimated cost of planned new Fire Department facilities, apparatus and vehicles by the projected number of calls for service per year generated by new development in the City to buildout. Then, an impact fee per unit is calculated by multiplying that cost per call by the number of calls for service per unit per year generated by each category of development defined in this study.

The reason that the fire impact fees are calculated using the system plan method is that the projected revenue from those fees is exactly equal to the cost of the new assets. In this case, impact fees calculated by either the existing inventory method or the system plan method would result in projected impact fee revenue that would exceed the cost of the new assets needed to serve future development.

Impact Fee Summary
Table S.1 shows the impact fees calculated in this report. Blank areas in the table indicate that some impact fees are not calculated for non-residential development.

Because Brisbane has no existing impact fees, there is no need to compare the proposed impact fees with any existing impact fees.

Table S.1: Summary of Proposed Impact Fees
Development
Type Units 1Library
General
Gov't Police Fire Total
Residential <800 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $ 1,944 $ 3,708 $ 395 $ 2,611 $ 8,658 Residential 800-1,200 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $ 3,791 $ 7,230 $ 621 $ 3,046 $ 14,688 Residential 1,200-2,100 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $ 5,734 $ 10,938 $ 847 $ 3,482 $ 21,001 Residential >2,100 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $ 7,678 $ 14,646 $ 1,073 $ 3,917 $ 27,314 Commercial KSF $ 3,795 $ 9,657 $ 5,566 $ 19,018
Hotel/Motel Room $ 2,201 $ 2,452 $ 2,305 $ 6,959
Office KSF $ 3,804 $ 186 $ 479 $ 4,469
Life Science/R&D KSF $ 3,369 $ 327 $ 1,523 $ 5,220
Industrial KSF $ 2,358 $ 2,811 $ 392 $ 5,561
Warehouse KSF $ 1,179 $ 570 $ 740 $ 2,489
1 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room or suite 157

City of Brisbane Page S-4
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
The impact fees calculated in this report are the maximum amounts justified based on the data used to support the calculations. The City Council may choose to adopt impact any of the proposed impact fees at any level up to the amounts shown in Table S.1.

Findings
As discussed in Chapter 1 of this report, the Mitigation Fee Act (Govt. Code Section 66001) requires that in any action establishing, increasing, or imposing a fee as a condition of development approval, the local agency must do all of the following:

1. Identify the purpose of the fee.

2. Identify the use to which the fee is to be put (a capital improvement plan is now required for that purpose).

3. Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the fee’s use and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed.

4. Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the need for the public facility and the type of development on which the fee is imposed.

5. When the fee is imposed as a condition of approval on a development project, determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility or portion of the public facility attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed.

In addition, as discussed in Chapter 2, we recommend that the City Council adopt the following findings pursuant to Government Code Section 66016.5(a)(5)(B) to justify the use of tiered square footage ranges for residential development in this study rather than a fixed fee-per-square-foot approach:

1. A fixed fee-per-square-foot approach would not reflect the actual impact of differentsized residential units on the facilities addressed in this study and would not meet the rough proportionality standard set forth in Dolan v. Tigard.

2. The use of tiered square footage ranges rather than a fixed fee per square foot approach better reflects the relationship between the fees charged and the actual burden imposed by various types of development.

3. Calculating impact fees for tiered square footage ranges rather than a fixed fee per square foot still ensures that smaller developments are not charged disproportionate fees because that approach allows the impact fees to be tailored to the actual impacts created by smaller developments, while protecting larger units from excessive fees. 158

City of Brisbane Page 1-1
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
Chapter 1. Introduction
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to analyze the impacts of development on the need for certain capital facilities and other capital assets provided by the City of Brisbane and to calculate impact fees based on that analysis. This report documents the approach, data and methodology used in this study to calculate impact fees.

The impact fees calculated in this report are intended to satisfy all legal requirements governing such fees, including provisions of the U. S. Constitution, the California Constitution and the California Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Sections 66000-66025).

Legal Framework for Impact Fees
This brief summary of the legal framework for development fees is intended as a general overview. It was not prepared by an attorney and should not be treated as legal advice.

U. S. Constitution. Like all land use regulations, development exactions, including impact fees, are subject to the 5th Amendment prohibition on taking of private property for public use without just compensation. Both state and federal courts have recognized the imposition of impact fees on development as a legitimate form of land use regulation, provided the fees meet standards intended to protect against “regulatory takings.” A regulatory taking occurs when regulations unreasonably deprive landowners of property rights protected by the Constitution.

In two cases dealing with exactions, the U. S. Supreme Court has held that when a government agency requires the dedication of land or an interest in land as a condition of development approval or imposes exactions as a condition of approval on a development project, the agency must demonstrate an "essential nexus" between such exactions and the interest being protected (See Nollan v. California Coastal Commission, 1987) and make an “individualized determination” that the exaction imposed is "roughly proportional" to the burden created by development (See Dolan v. City of Tigard, 1994). In April 2024, the U. S. Supreme Court ruled that Impact fees, even legislatively adopted impact fees, are subject to Nollan and Dolan.

Defining “Nexus.” The nexus required to justify exactions and impact fees can be thought of as having the three elements discussed below. We think proportionality is logically included as one element of that nexus, even though it was discussed separately in Dolan v. Tigard. The elements of the nexus discussed below mirror the three “reasonable relationship” findings required by the Mitigation Fee Act for establishment and imposition of impact fees.

1. Need or Impact. An agency imposing impact fees must demonstrate that a development project subject to those fees will create a need for the facilities to be funded by the impact fees.

All new development in a community creates additional demands on some or all public facilities provided by local government. If the capacity of facilities is not increased to satisfy the additional demand, the quality or availability of public services for the entire community will deteriorate. 159

City of Brisbane Page 1-2
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
Impact fees may be used to recover the cost of development-related facilities, but only to the extent that the need for facilities is related to the development project subject to the fees.

The Nollan decision reinforced the principle that development exactions may be used only to mitigate impacts created by the development projects upon which they are imposed. In this study, the impact of development on facility needs is analyzed in terms of quantifiable relationships between various types of development and the demand for public facilities based on applicable level-of-service standards. This report contains all of the information needed to demonstrate compliance with this element of the nexus.

2. Benefit. An agency imposing impact fees must demonstrate that a development project subject to those fees will benefit from the facilities funded by the impact fees. With respect to the benefit relationship, the most basic requirement is that facilities funded by impact fees be available to serve the development paying the fees. A sufficient benefit relationship also requires that impact fee revenues be segregated from other funds and expended in a timely manner on the facilities for which the fees were charged. Nothing in the U.S. Constitution or California law requires that facilities paid for with impact fee revenues be available exclusively to development projects paying the fees.

Procedures for earmarking and expenditure of fee revenues are mandated by the Mitigation Fee Act, as are procedures to ensure that the fees are either expended in a timely manner or refunded. Those requirements are intended to ensure that developments benefit from the impact fees they are required to pay. Thus, over time, procedural issues as well as substantive issues can come into play with respect to the benefit element of the nexus.

3. Proportionality. An agency imposing impact fees must demonstrate that the amount of those fees is proportional to the impact created by development projects subject to the fees.

Proportionality in impact fees depends on properly identifying development-related facility costs and calculating the fees in such a way that those costs are allocated in proportion to the facility needs created by different types and amounts of development. The section on impact fee methodology, below, describes methods used to allocate facility costs and calculate impact fees that meet the proportionality standard.

California Constitution. The California Constitution grants broad police power to local governments, including the authority to regulate land use and development. That police power is the source of authority for local governments in California to impose impact fees on development. Some impact fees have been challenged on grounds that they are special taxes imposed without voter approval in violation of Article XIIIA. Impact fees calculated in this report do not exceed the cost of providing facilities needed to serve new development and, thus, are not special taxes requiring voter approval pursuant to Article XIIIA.

Articles XIIIC and XIIID, added to the California Constitution by Proposition 218 in 1996, require voter approval for some “property-related fees,” but exempt “the imposition of fees or charges, as a condition of property development.” Thus, impact fees are exempt from those requirements.

The Mitigation Fee Act. California’s impact fee statute originated in Assembly Bill 1600 during the 1987 session of the Legislature and took effect in January 1989. AB 1600 added several 160

City of Brisbane Page 1-3
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
sections to the Government Code, beginning with Section 66000. Since that time, the impact fee statute has been amended from time to time, and in 1997 was officially titled the “Mitigation Fee Act.” Unless otherwise noted, code sections referenced in this report are from the Government Code.

The Mitigation Fee Act does not limit the types of capital improvements for which impact fees may be charged. It defines public facilities very broadly to include "public improvements, public services and community amenities." Although the issue is not specifically addressed in the Mitigation Fee Act, both case law and statute (see Government Code Section 65913.8) clarify that impact fees may not be used to pay for ongoing maintenance or operating costs. Consequently, the fees calculated in this report are based on the cost of capital assets only.

The Mitigation Fee Act does not use the term “mitigation fee” except in its official title. Nor does it use the common term “impact fee.” The Act simply uses the word “fee,” which is defined as “a monetary exaction, other than a tax or special assessment…that is charged by a local agency to the applicant in connection with approval of a development project for the purpose of defraying all or a portion of the cost of public facilities related to the development project ….” To avoid confusion with other types of fees, this report uses the widely accepted term “impact fee” which should be understood to mean “fee” as defined in the Mitigation Fee Act.

The Mitigation Fee Act contains requirements for establishing, increasing and imposing impact fees. They are summarized below. It also contains provisions that govern the collection and expenditure of fees and requires annual reports and periodic re-evaluation of impact fee programs. Those administrative requirements are discussed in the implementation chapter of this report.

Required Findings. Section 66001 (a) requires that an agency establishing, increasing or imposing impact fees, must make findings to:

1. Identify the purpose of the fee

2. Identify the use of the fee; and

3. Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between the use of the fee and the development type on which it is imposed

4. Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between the need for the facility and the type of development on which the fee is imposed In addition, Section 66001 (b) requires that in any action imposing a fee as a condition of approval of a development project by a local agency, the local agency shall determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility or portion of the public facility attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed.

The requirements outlined above are discussed in more detail below.

Identifying the Purpose of the Fees. The broad purpose of impact fees is to protect public health, safety and general welfare by providing for adequate public facilities. The specific purpose of the 161

City of Brisbane Page 1-4
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
fees calculated in this study is to fund acquisition or construction of certain capital assets that will be needed to mitigate the impacts of planned new development on District facilities, and to maintain an acceptable level of public services as the District grows.

This report recommends that findings regarding the purpose of an impact fee should define the purpose broadly, as providing for the funding of adequate public facilities to serve additional development.

Identifying the Use of the Fees. According to Section 66001(a)(2), if a fee is used to finance public facilities, those facilities must be identified. A capital improvement plan may be used for that purpose but is not mandatory if the facilities are identified in a General Plan, a Specific Plan, or in other public documents. Section 66002 (b) requires that if a capital improvement plan is used to identify the facilities, it must be updated annually.

However, a new provision in Section 66016.5(a)(6), which was added by AB 602 in 2021, requires that large jurisdictions adopt a capital improvement plan as part of an impact fee study. That requirement applies to impact fee nexus studies adopted after January 1, 2022. “Large jurisdiction” means a county of 250,000 or more or any city within that county. Section 66002 (a) states that the capital improvement plan shall indicate the approximate location, size, time of availability and estimates of cost for all facilities or improvements to be financed with the fees.

That amendments contained in AB 602 appears to override the original language of Section 66001(a)(2), so that a capital improvement plan (CIP) is no longer optional. A CIP is now required for all new impact fee nexus studies adopted by large jurisdictions. The annual update requirement for the CIP appears to remain in effect.

Reasonable Relationship Requirement. As discussed above, Section 66001 requires that, for fees subject to its provisions, a "reasonable relationship" must be demonstrated between:

5. the use of the fee and the type of development on which it is imposed;

6. the need for a public facility and the type of development on which a fee is imposed; and,

7. the amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed.

Development Agreements and Reimbursement Agreements. The requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act do not apply to fees collected under development agreements (see Govt. Code Section 66000) or reimbursement agreements (see Govt. Code Section 66003). The same is true of fees in lieu of park land dedication imposed under the Quimby Act (see Govt. Code Section 66477).

Existing Deficiencies. In 2006, Section 66001(g) was added to the Mitigation Fee Act (by AB 2751) to clarify that impact fees “shall not include costs attributable to existing deficiencies in public facilities…” The legislature’s intent in adopting this amendment, as stated in the bill, was to codify the holdings of Bixel v. City of Los Angeles (1989), Rohn v. City of Visalia (1989), and Shapell Industries Inc. v. Governing Board (1991).

Section 66001(g) also states that impact fees “may include the costs attributable to the increased demand for public facilities reasonably related to the development project in order to (1) 162

City of Brisbane Page 1-5
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
refurbish existing facilities to maintain the existing level of service or (2) achieve an adopted level of service that is consistent with the general plan.” (Emphasis added.) Impact Fees for Existing Facilities. Impact fees may be used to recover costs for existing facilities to the extent that those facilities are needed to serve additional development and have the capacity to do so. In other words, it must be possible to show that fees used to pay for existing facilities meet the need and benefit elements of the nexus. As a practical matter, such fees are difficult to implement unless the fees are needed to repay outstanding debt related to the facilities in question.

Recent Legislation
Several new laws enacted by the State of California since 2019 to facilitate development of affordable housing bear on the implementation of impact fees calculated in this study. Below are brief overviews of some key bills passed since 2019.

SB 330 – The Housing Crisis Act of 2019. SB 330 (amended and clarified in 2021 by SB 8) contained a variety of amendments designed to promote affordable housing. Among them was a provision in Government Code Section 65589.5 that prohibits the imposition of new approval requirements on a housing development project once a preliminary application has been submitted. That provision applies to increases in impact fees except when the resolution or ordinance establishing the fee authorizes automatic, inflationary adjustments to the fee or exaction. These provisions will remain in effect until January 1, 2030.

AB 1483 – Housing Data: Collection and Reporting (2019). AB 1483 added Section 65490.1 to the Government Code, and requires that a city, county or special district must post on its website a current schedule of its fees and exactions, as well as associated nexus studies and annual reports. Updates must be posted within 30 days.

SB 13 – Accessory Dwelling Units (2019). SB 13 amended Government Code Section 65852.2 to prohibit the imposition of impact fees on accessory dwelling units (ADUs) smaller than 750 square feet and to require that impact fees for ADUs of 750 square feet or more must be proportional to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit. The proportionality requirement means that impact fees for ADUs of 750 square feet or more must be calculated on a case-by-case basis during the approval process.

Existing law requires a water or sewer connection fee or capacity charge for an accessory dwelling unit requiring a new or separate utility connection to be based on either the accessory dwelling unit’s size or the number of its plumbing fixtures. SB 13 revises the basis for calculating the connection fee or capacity charge to either the accessory dwelling unit’s square feet or the number of its drainage fixture units.

AB 602 – Amendments to the Planning and Land Use Law and the Mitigation Fee Act (2021). AB 602 adds Section 65940.1 to the Planning and Land Use Law requiring cities, counties and special districts that have internet websites to post schedules of fees, exactions and affordability requirements, annual fee reports, and an archive of nexus studies on that website, and to update that information within 30 days after any changes.
163

City of Brisbane Page 1-6
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
AB 602 also adds Section 66016.5 to the Mitigation Fee Act imposing several new requirements for impact fees that went into effect in 2022, including:
▪ A nexus study must identify the existing level of service for each facility, identify the proposed new level of service (if any), and explain why the new level of service is appropriate.
▪ If a nexus study supports an increase in an existing fee the local agency shall review the assumptions of the nexus study supporting the original fee and evaluate the amount of the fees collected under the original fee.
▪ Large jurisdictions (counties over 250,000 and cities within those counties) must adopt a capital improvement plan as part of the nexus study.
▪ All impact fee nexus studies shall be adopted at a public hearing with at least 30 days’ notice, and the local agency shall notify any member of the public that requests notice of intent to begin and impact fee nexus study of the date of the hearing. ▪ Nexus studies shall be updated at least every eight years, from the period beginning on January 1, 2022.
▪ A nexus study adopted after July 1, 2022, shall calculate a fee imposed on a housing development project proportionately to the square footage of proposed units in the development. A nexus study is not required to comply with this requirement if the local agency makes certain findings specified in the law. A local agency that imposes a fee proportionately to the square footage of units in the development shall be deemed to have used a valid method to establish a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development.
▪ Authorizes any member of the public, including an applicant for a development project, to submit evidence that impact fees proposed by an agency fail to comply with the Mitigation Fee Act, and requires the legislative body of the agency to consider such evidence and adjust the proposed fee if deemed necessary.

AB 516 – Amendments to the Mitigation Fee Act (2023). AB 516, which took effect on January 1, 2024, amends Government Code Section 66006 to add certain requirements to the annual reports mandated by that section. Specifically, Section 66006 now requires that:
▪ Annual reports indicate whether construction on public improvements identified in previous annual reports began on the approximate date shown in the previous annual report; and,
▪ If a project failed to start construction on schedule, the annual report must explain the reason for the delay and provide a revised approximate date when construction will begin.

AB 516 also amends Section 66023 to provide that when a person requests an audit of a fee or charge levied by a local agency, that audit may address when revenue generated by that fee or charge is scheduled to be expended, and when the public improvement to be funded by that fee 164

City of Brisbane Page 1-7
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
or charge is scheduled to be completed. Prior to this amendment, the only stated purpose of such an audit was to determine whether such a fee or charge exceeds the amount reasonably necessary to cover the cost of any product, public facility or service provided by the local agency.

Impact Fee Calculation Methodology
The methods used to calculate impact fees in this study are designed to comply with all of the legal requirements discussed earlier in this chapter. Any one of several legitimate methods may be used to calculate impact fees. The choice of a particular method depends primarily on the service characteristics of, and planning requirements for, the type of facility being addressed. To some extent those methods are interchangeable, because they all allocate facility costs in proportion to the needs created by development.

Allocating facility costs to various types and amounts of development is central to all methods of impact fee calculation. Costs are allocated by means of formulas that quantify the relationship between development and the need for facilities. In a cost allocation formula, the impact of development is represented by some attribute of development such as added population or added vehicle trips that represent the impacts created by different types and amounts of development.

Although it is not mandatory, this study adopts the nomenclature used in the Impact Fee Nexus Study Templates prepared by the Terner Center for Housing Innovation at UC Berkeley to describe impact fee calculation methods. Those templates were prepared for The California Department of Housing and Community Development pursuant to Section 50466.5 of the Health and Safety Code and are cited in AB 602.

Planned Facility Method. With this method, impact fees are calculated so that new development will pay for the planned expansion of facilities at the future standard attributable to new development. To calculate the cost per unit of demand, the cost of planned facilities is divided by the amount of demand that will be created by new development. The impact fees depend on the cost of planned future facilities and a plan for future development, so the fees should be recalculated if facility plans or development plans change.

Existing Inventory Method. With this method, impact fees are calculated so that new development will fund expansion of facilities at the same standard currently used to serve existing development. To calculate the cost per unit of demand, the value of existing facilities is divided by the amount of demand associated with existing development. This method allows impact fees to be calculated without a list of planned facilities, but such a list is required by AB 602 as part of a Capital Improvement Plan that must be adopted with any new impact fee nexus study. This approach can be used to calculate impact fees for many types of public facilities but is usually not appropriate for facilities such as transportation improvements or water, wastewater or drainage systems where improvement needs must be determined by engineering analysis.

System Plan Method. With this method, impact fees are calculated so that new development pays for its share of the cost of an integrated system of facilities at the future standard attributable to new development. To calculate the cost per unit of demand, the value of existing 165

City of Brisbane Page 1-8
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
facilities plus the cost of planned facilities is divided by the combined demand associated with both existing development and planned development. This approach is especially appropriate for impact fees for fire protection and EMS facilities because new facilities must be planned to integrate geographically with existing facilities.

Impact Fees for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)
SB 477, enacted in 2024, relocated and consolidated California’s ADU laws into a new Government Code Chapter (Chapter 13, Division 1, Title 7). Recent amendments to ADU law provide that impact fees may not be imposed on ADUs smaller than 750 square feet and establish the following requirement for impact fees imposed on ADUs of 750 square feet or more:
“Any impact fees charged for an accessory dwelling unit of 750 square feet or more shall be charged proportionately in relation to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit.”
The proportionality requirement depends on the square footage of both the primary unit and the ADU, which necessitates that impact fees for ADUs be calculated on a case-by-case basis.

Consequently, this report does not calculate a schedule of impact fees for ADUs. The formula for calculating proportional ADU impact fees is:

Primary unit impact fee X (ADU square feet / Primary unit square feet) Facilities Addressed in this Study
Impact/in-lieu fees for the following types of facilities are addressed in this report:
▪ Libraries
▪ General Government Facilities
▪ Police Facilities and Vehicles
▪ Fire Department Facilities, Apparatus and Vehicles
Each of those facilities is addressed in a separate chapter of this report, beginning with Chapter

3. Chapter 2 contains data on existing and future development used in the impact fee analysis. 166

City of Brisbane Page 2-1
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
Chapter 2. Development Data
This chapter presents data on existing and future development that will be used to calculate impact fees in subsequent chapters of this report. The information in this chapter may be used to establish levels of service, analyze facility needs, and/or allocate the cost of capital facilities between existing and future development and among various types of new development.

Study Area
The study area for the City of Brisbane (City) in this study is the planning area defined in the City’s current General Plan which was adopted in 1994. That area encompasses both the existing City and the small Sphere of Influence consisting primarily of open space.

Time Frame
Planned future development in this study is forecasted to buildout of the remaining developable land in the City. The methods used to calculate impact fees in this study do not depend on the timing of future development.

Development Types
The development types for which impact fees are calculated in this report are discussed below.

Impact fees calculated in this report are intended to be applied based on actual land uses rather than zoning or general plan land use designations. For mixed use development projects, impact fees should be applied to each type of development within the project, consistent with the number of units of development of each type within the project.

Residential Development. Traditionally, impact fees for residential development are based on the type of unit, e.g., single-family, multi-family or mobile home. However, Government Code Section 66016.5(a)(5)(A) which was added to the Mitigation Fee Act by AB 602 in 2021 contains the following requirement:
“A nexus study adopted after July 1, 2022, shall calculate a fee imposed on a housing development project proportionately to the square footage of proposed units of the development. A local agency that imposes a fee proportionately to the square footage of the proposed units of the development shall be deemed to have used a valid method to establish a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development”
But that requirement is not absolute. Section 66016.5(a)(5)(B) provides that a nexus study is not required to comply with Section 66016.5(a)(5)(A) if the local agency makes a finding that includes all of the following:

1. An explanation as to why square footage is not the appropriate metric to calculate fees imposed on a housing development project.

2. An explanation that an alternative basis of calculating the fee bears a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden imposed by the development.

3. That other policies in the fee structure support smaller developments or otherwise ensure that smaller developments are not charged disproportionate fees. 167

City of Brisbane Page 2-2
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
The proportionality requirement in Section 66016.5(a)(5)(A) is often interpreted to mean that impact fees must have a linear relationship to unit square footage. That means the fees must increase by the same amount for every added square foot of unit size. Such a fee structure results in impact fees that are necessarily five times as high for a 3,000 square-foot single-family unit as for a 600 square apartment. That type of fee structure is justified only if the actual impact of a 3,000 square-foot unit is five times greater than the impact of a 600 square-foot unit.

Otherwise, the impact fees could violate the “rough proportionality” requirement set forth in the U. S. Supreme Court in Dolan v. Tigard [512 U. S. 374 (1994)]. The recent U. S. Supreme Court decision in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado [601 U. S. __ (2024)] made clear that Dolan applies to all impact fees, whether they are applied ad hoc or legislatively adopted.

This study uses several attributes of development, including added population, added police calls for service per year and added fire calls for service per year, to represent the impact of new development on different types of City facilities. We use those attributes to represent the demand created by various types of development for public services and the capital facilities and other capital assets needed to support those services.

What we see in analyzing patterns of service demand is that the relationship between unit size and service demand doesn’t conform to a linear model. While the potential for added population may be five times as great for the largest residential units compared with the smallest units, that increase is not linear. In the real world, population per unit does not increase in a tiny increment for each added square foot. It increases in a stairstep fashion, jumping from one person to two persons to three persons per unit and so on.

It is not feasible to get specific data on police and fire calls by unit size, but in our experience, the difference in the average number of police and fire calls-per-unit-per-year generated by singlefamily as opposed to multi-family residential units does not justify a flat impact fee per square foot. So, a fee structure that results in large units paying five times as much as small units would appear disproportionate to the actual demand created by units of different sizes for some types of facilities.

This study breaks down residential development into tiered square-feet-per-unit ranges and calculates an impact fee for each range or category. That approach allows impact fees to be graduated by unit size while avoiding the distortions that result from a rigid, fixed fee per square foot approach, and while respecting the need for rough proportionality between the fees and the impact of development as set forth in Dolan v. Tigard.

Based on the foregoing discussion, we propose that the City of Brisbane City Council adopt the following findings pursuant to Government Code Section 66016.5(a)(5)(B) to justify the use of tiered square footage ranges for residential development in this study rather than a fixed feeper-square-foot approach:

1. A fixed fee-per-square-foot approach would not reflect the actual impact of differentsized residential units on the facilities addressed in this study and would not meet the rough proportionality standard set forth in Dolan v. Tigard. 168

City of Brisbane Page 2-3
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025

2. The use of tiered square footage ranges rather than a fixed fee per square foot approach better reflects the relationship between the fees charged and the actual burden imposed by various types of development.

3. Calculating impact fees for tiered square footage ranges rather than a fixed fee per square foot still ensures that smaller developments are not charged disproportionate fees because that approach allows the impact fees to be tailored to the actual impacts created by smaller developments, while protecting larger units from excessive fees.

As discussed above, residential development categories are defined in this study by ranges of unit sizes rather than by unit types (e.g., single-family or multi-family) as is the case for the City’s existing impact fees. Unit-size ranges used to define residential development in this study are listed below.
▪ Residential <800 Square Feet per Unit
▪ Residential >800-1,200 Square Feet per Unit
▪ Residential <1,200-2,100 Square Feet per Unit
▪ Residential >2,100 Square Feet per Unit
Each of these unit-size ranges is typical of units with a certain number of bedrooms, ranging from studio and one-bedroom apartments up to single-family units with four or more bedrooms.

Non-Residential Development. Non-residential development types used in this study are:
▪ Commercial
▪ Hotel/Motel
▪ Office
▪ Life Science/R&D
▪ Industrial
▪ Warehouse
The impact fees calculated in this report are intended to be applied to development projects, or portions of projects, based on the actual type of development being constructed. Except for the Hotel/Motel category, which is measured in terms of guest rooms, the non-residential development types listed above are measured in terms of gross leasable floor area in thousands of square feet (KSF).

Public Facilities, Public Schools and Parks. In addition to the development types listed above, the development tables presented later in this chapter include public (government) facilities, public schools and parks. The City does not impose impact fees on those uses, either because of legal constraints or because it would be imposing the fees on itself, which serves no purpose.

However, those uses do create measurable impacts on some services, including law enforcement and fire protection/emergency medical services, and they are included in the impact fee analysis so that the impacts associated with those exempt uses can be distinguished from demand associated with fee-paying development types.
169

City of Brisbane Page 2-4
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
Other types of Development. The development types for which impact fees are calculated in this study will encompass most new development in the City, but there may be some development projects that don’t fit very well within any of the established fee categories. In such cases, it is possible for City staff to calculate a project-specific impact fee at the time a project is approved.

For example, to calculate a customized police impact fee, it would be necessary to estimate the number of police calls for service per year that will be generated by the project, based on the number of calls generated by similar existing uses in the City. Then, that number would be multiplied by the cost per call calculated in this study to arrive at the police impact fee for the project. Customized impact fees for other facility types could be calculated in a similar manner.

Demand Variables
To calculate impact fees, the relationship between facility needs and development must be quantified in cost allocation formulas. Certain measurable attributes of development (for example, added population) are used as “demand variables” in those formulas to represent the impact of different types of development on various types of facilities.

Demand variables are selected either because they directly measure the service demand created by various types of development, or because they are reasonably correlated with that demand.

For example, the need for parks in a community is typically defined in terms of the relationship between population and acres of parks. As population grows, more parks are needed to maintain that relationship. Logically, then, the increase in population related to new residential development is an appropriate yardstick, or demand variable, for use in measuring the impact of development on the need for additional parks.

Demand variables have specific values for each type of development defined in this study. Those values may be referred to as “demand factors.” So, if the demand variable used to calculate impact fees for a particular type of facility is added population, the demand factor for a specific category of residential development would be the population per dwelling unit for that category.

Demand variables used in this study are discussed below. Specific demand factors can be found in Table 2.3.

Population. Population is used in this study as the demand variable for libraries. The need for those facilities is driven largely by the added population associated with residential development.

They are not impacted substantially by non-residential development. The specific population per unit factors used in this study are shown in Table 2.1, below and in Table 2.3 Table 2.1 shows the estimated average population per unit for each residential unit-size category.

The unit-size categories shown in Table 2.1 are based on the number of bedrooms per unit, as shown in American Community Survey (ACS) Table B25041, which also shows the number of units in each category. Average population per unit is assumed to increase with unit size. The estimated population per unit factors are adjusted using the overall average population per unit and total population as controls. The results are cross-checked against ACS Table B25001 which shows the mix of household sizes in the City.
170

City of Brisbane Page 2-5
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
Service Population. Some types of City facilities are impacted by both residential and nonresidential development so population alone does not represent all of the impacts of development on those facilities. For facilities like City Hall, where the impact of development cannot be measured by a specific demand variable such as vehicles trips or police or fire calls for service, a variable called service population is commonly used to represent the impact of development.

Service population is a composite variable that includes both residents of the City and employees of businesses in the City. Resident population is included to represent the impacts of residential development. Employees are included to represent the impacts of non-residential uses, such as commercial, office and industrial development.

Because the impact of one new resident is not necessarily the same as the impact of one new employee, various components of the service population are weighted to reflect their relative impacts on demand for certain types of facilities.

Service population is intended to approximate the number of people creating the demand for service on an average day. It is difficult to estimate that number precisely for several reasons.

Some residents work in the City, some residents commute to work outside the City, and some residents don’t work at paid jobs. In addition, non-residents may be pre-sent in the City for work, shopping, recreation, or any number of other reasons.

In this study, residents are assigned a weight of 1.0. Our estimate of the average number of hours per week that residents spend in the City is based in part on an analysis of Census Bureau data on how many residents work in the city and how many commute to work outside the City. In addition, we assume the average resident spends eight hours a week outside the City for activities like shopping and recreation. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) data for 2022 show that about 60% of Brisbane residents aged 16 and over are employed, and that about 78% of employed residents work outside the City.

Table 2.1. Population per Unit by Unit Size
Unit Size No. of No. of % of Pop at 2.25 Est Pop Adjusted in Sq Ft 1
Bedrms Units 2Units per Unit 3
per Unit 4Pop 5
<800 0 or 1 557 26.3% 1,253 1.00 557
800-1,200 2 646 30.5% 1,454 1.95 1,260
>1,200-2,100 3 634 30.0% 1,427 2.95 1,870
>2,100 4+ 279 13.2% 628 3.95 1,102
Total/Average 2,116 100.0% 4,761 2.26 4,789
1 Estimated square-feet-per-unit ranges based on number of bedrooms 2 Distribution of units by number of bedrooms from American Community Survey (ACS) Table B25041, 2022 1-Year estimates
3 Population for all units in each square-footage range if all units were occupied by the overall average of 2.25 persons per unit
4 Estimated population per unit by NBS
5 Adjusted population = number of units X estimated population per unit 171

City of Brisbane Page 2-6
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
Assuming that out-commuters spend 47.5 hours a week (9.5 hours per day) outside the City for work and commuting, and that all residents spend an average of eight hours a week outside the City for shopping and recreation leads us to the conclusion that out- commuters spend an average of 112.5 (168 - 47.5 - 8 = 112.5) hours per week in the City. Assuming other residents spend 160 (168 - 8 = 160) hours per week in the City, the weighted average for all residents is 141.5 hours per week in the City. Dividing that number by 168 hours per week gives us a weight of 0.842 for all residents (population) of the City.

Service population weights for employees associated with different types of development are based on estimates of the number of hours per week businesses of a certain type are in operation. This study assumes that retail and service commercial businesses operate 12 hours a day, 7 days a week (84 hours). For professional offices, industrial uses and public facilities, that number is estimated to be 45 hours (9 hours a day, 5 days a week). The weights assigned to employees of businesses associated with various types of non- residential development are based on the hours per week of operation divided by 168 total hours per week. The hours per week for each development as well as the weighting factor for each type of development are shown in Table 2.2, below. It should be noted that since all students in the K-12 Schools category are assumed to be residents of the City, the non-residential service population weight for that category is zero.

The service population weights shown in Table 2.2 are intended to allow a balanced allocation of costs among non-residential development types.

Finally, for simplicity, all of the service population base weights are normalized by dividing them by residential base weight of 0.842 so that the normalized weight for population equals 1.0 and weight for each of the non-residential components is increased proportionately. The resulting service population weights are shown in Table 2.2. Service-population-per-unit factors based on the normalized service population weights are shown in Table 2.3.

Table 2.2: Service Population Weights
Development Avg Hrs Total Hrs Base Svc Pop Normalized
Type per Wk 1per Week Weight 2Svc Pop Wt 3
Residential 141.5 168.0 0.842 1.000
Commercial/Retail 84.0 168.0 0.500 0.594
Hotel/Motel 84.0 168.0 0.500 0.594
Office 45.0 168.0 0.268 0.318
Life Science/R&D 45.0 168.0 0.268 0.318
Industrial 45.0 168.0 0.268 0.318
Warehouse 45.0 168.0 0.268 0.318
Public Facilities 45.0 168.0 0.268 0.318
1 Expected average hours per week of business operation 2 Base service population weight = average hours per week / total hrs per week 3 Service population weight normalized to residential service population weight = base population weight / residential base service population weight 172

City of Brisbane Page 2-7
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
Police Calls for Service. Demand for police services is impacted by both residential and nonresidential development in the City. In this study, the number of police calls for service per unit per year is used to represent the demand for police services by various types of development. The calls-for-service factors used in this study are based on analysis by NBS of a random sample of all calls for service received by the City of Brisbane Police Department for a one-year period from April 1 2023 to March 31 2024.

During that period, the City of Brisbane Police Department logged about 15,500 calls. A random sample of 600 calls was classified by development type based on address or location. Calls that could not be associated with a particular type of development were excluded from the analysis.

The percentage of sampled calls associated with each type of development defined in this study was applied to the one-year count of calls to get the number of calls generated by each type of development for the year. The number of calls for each type of development was divided by the number of existing units for that type of development to arrive at the average number of calls per unit per year for that category.

Because it is not possible to determine individual call rates for residential units by square footage in the analysis of police calls for service, the overall average calls per unit per year for all residential units is used as the midpoint in estimating calls-for-service factors for the residential unit size categories used in this study and the factors are scaled up and down from that midpoint relative to unit size. The overall range of call rates from the smallest to the largest units is adjusted for consistency with the extent of differences in call rates for single-family and multi-family units.

Police calls per unit per year for each type of development defined in this study is shown in Table

2.3. Fire Authority Calls for Service per Year. Fire protection, emergency medical response and other services are provided in the City by the North County Fire Authority (NCFA), which also serves Daly City and Pacifica. Demand for the services provided by NCFA is impacted by both residential and non-residential development. In this study, the number of calls for service per unit per year from Brisbane to NCFA is used to represent the demand for fire protection and emergency response services by various types of development in the City. The calls-for-service factors used in this study are based on analysis by NBS of a random sample of all 2023 calls for service from the City of Brisbane to NCFA.

In 2023, NCFA logged about 600 calls for service in Brisbane. As part of this study, NBS analyzed a random sample of 400 of those calls and classified them by development type based on address.

Calls that could not be associated with a particular type of development were excluded from the analysis.

The percentage of sampled calls associated with each type of development defined in this study was applied to the total number of 2023 calls to get the full number of calls generated by that type of development for the year. Then, the number of calls per year was divided by the number of existing units for each type of development to arrive at the average number of calls per unit per year.
173

City of Brisbane Page 2-8
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
Because it is not possible to determine individual call rates for residential units by square footage in the analysis of fire calls for service, the overall average calls per unit per year for all residential units is used as the midpoint in estimating calls for service factors for the unit size categories used in this study. The factors are scaled up and down from that midpoint relative to unit size. The overall range of call rates from the smallest to the largest units is adjusted for consistency with the extent of differences in call rates for single-family and multi-family units. Fire calls-per-unitper-year for each type of development defined in this study are shown in Table 2.3.

Demand Factors
Table 2.2 shows the values of demand factors used in this study for each type of development.

Existing and Future Development
Tables 2.4 through 2.6, beginning on the next page, present summaries of existing and future development by development type in Brisbane. Table 2.4 shows estimated existing development as of January 1, 2024.

Table 2.3: Demand Factors
Development Dev Pop per Employees Svc Pop PD Calls Fire Calls Type Units 1 Unit 2per Unit 3per Unit 4per Unit 5per Unit 6 Residential <800 Sq. Ft. Unit DU 1.00 1.00 0.70 0.120
Residential 800-1,200 Sq. Ft. Unit DU 1.95 1.95 1.10 0.140 Residential 1,200-2,100 Sq. Ft. Unit DU 2.95 2.95 1.50 0.160 Residential >2,100 Sq. Ft. Unit DU 3.95 3.95 1.90 0.180 Commercial KSF 1.72 1.02 17.11 0.256
Hotel/Motel Room 1.00 0.59 4.34 0.106
Office KSF 3.23 1.03 0.33 0.022
Life Science/R&D KSF 2.86 0.91 0.58 0.070
Industrial KSF 2.00 0.64 4.98 0.018
Warehouse KSF 1.00 0.32 1.01 0.034
Public Facilities KSF 3.00 0.95 4.78 0.105
Public Schools Students 1.36 0.006
Parks Acres 72.17 0.333
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room or suite
2 See Table 2.1
3 Employees per unit provided by the City of Brisbane Community Development Department 4 Service population per unit estimated based on residents and employees weighted by factors in Table 1.2 5 Police Department calls for service per unit per year based on analysis of a random sample of all 2023 calls; calls for service rates for residential unit size categories based on the range of actual rates for single-family, multi-family and mobile home units
6 Fire Department calls for service per unit per year based on analysis of a random sample of all 2023 calls; calls for service rates for residential unit size categories based on the range of actual rates for single-family, multi-family and mobile home units
174

City of Brisbane Page 2-9
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
Table 2.5, on the next page, shows projected future development in Brisbane to buildout.

Table 2.4: Existing Development as of January 2024
Development Dev Existing Existing Existing Existing Existing Existing Types Units 1Units 2Pop 2
Empl 3Svc Pop 4PD Calls 5Fire Calls 6
All Residential DU 2,076 4,645 4,645 3,414 323
Commercial KSF 125.1 216 128 2,140 32
Hotel/Motel Room 387 387 230 1,681 41
Office KSF 695.4 2,243 713 253 15
Life Science/R&D KSF 561.0 1,603 510 358 39
Industrial KSF 756.6 1,513 481 2,776 14
Warehouse KSF 4,356.4 4,356 1,385 3,237 148
Public Facilities KSF 85.3 256 81 408 9
Public Schools Students 337 459 2
Parks Acres 12.0 866 4
Total 4,645 10,574 8,174 15,592 627
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room or suite;
2 Existing residential units and population from the California Department of Finance (DOF) 2024 E-5 report; existing hotel/motel rooms provided by the City of Brisbane; existing non- residential units provided by the Brisbane Community Development Department 3 Existing employees = existing units X employees per unit from Table 2.3 4 Existing service population = existing units X service population per unit from Table 2.3 5 Existing police department calls for service per year by development type based on analysis by NBS of a random sample of 2023 Brisbane Police Department calls for service 6 Existing fire department calls for service per year by development type based on analysis by NBS of a random sample of 2023 Brisbane Police Department calls for service 175

City of Brisbane Page 2-10
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
Table 2.6 on the next page shows projected total development in Brisbane at buildout.

Table 2.5: Forecasted Future Development to Buildout
Development Dev Added Added Added Added Added Added
Types Units 1Units 2Pop 3Empl 4Svc Pop 5PD Calls 6Fire Calls 7 All Residential DU 3,003 6,607 6,607 4,474 480
Commercial KSF 140.0 241 143 2,395 36
Hotel/Motel Room 1,408.0 1,408 836 6,116 149
Office KSF 2,770.6 8,937 2,842 914 61
Life Science/R&D KSF 5,366.5 15,333 4,876 3,113 376
Industrial KSF (69.4) (139) (44) (346) (1)
Warehouse KSF 1,156.0 1,156 368 1,168 39
Public Facilities KSF 121.2 364 116 579 13
Public Schools Students 478.5 652 3
Parks Acres 17.0 1,230 6
Total 6,607 27,300 15,743 20,295 1,161
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room or suite;
2 Added units estimated by the Brisbane Community Development Department; estimates include buildout of the Baylands Specific Plan Area; future units for Public Facilities, Public Schools and Parks assumed to increase at the same rate as population 3 Added population assumes an average of 2.2 occupants per added residential unit 4 Added employees = added non-residential units X employees per unit from Table 2.3 5 Added residential service population = added population; added non-residential service population = added non-residential units X service pop per unit from Table 2.3 6 Added Police Dept calls for service per year = added units X PD calls per unit from Table 2.3; added residential calls per year based on an average of 1.49 calls per unit 7 Added Fire Department calls for service per year = added units X Fire calls per unit from Table 2.3; added residential calls per year based on an average of 0.16 calls per unit 176

City of Brisbane Page 2-11
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
The numbers presented in Tables 2.4 through 2.6 indicate that projected growth in the City between 2024 and buildout will represent large percentage increases of 142% in population and 258% in employment, mostly as a result of development in the Baylands Specific Plan Area. The impact fees calculated in this report are intended to pay for capital facilities and other capital assets needed by the City to serve that additional development.

Table 2.6: Buildout Development
Development Dev Buildout Buildout Buildout Buildout Buildout Buildout Types Units 1
Units 2Pop 2Empl 2Svc Pop 2PD Calls 2Fire Calls 2
All Residential DU 5,079 11,252 11,252 7,888 803
Commercial KSF 265.1 457 271 4,535 68
Hotel/Motel Room 1,795.0 1,795 1,066 7,797 190
Office KSF 3,466.0 11,181 3,556 1,167 76
Life Science/R&D KSF 5,927.5 16,936 5,386 3,471 415
Industrial KSF 687.2 1,374 437 2,430 12
Warehouse KSF 5,512.4 5,512 1,753 4,405 187
Public Facilities KSF 206.5 620 197 987 22
Public Schools Students 815.5 1,111 5
Parks Acres 29.0 2,096 10
Total 11,252 37,875 23,917 35,887 1,789
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Room = guest room or suite;
2 Figures in this table = the sum of the corresponding figures from the Tables 2.4 and 2.5 177

City of Brisbane Page 3-1
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
Chapter 3. Library
This chapter calculates library impact fees for the City of Brisbane. The existing Brisbane Library is part of the San Mateo County library system. The City’s existing library is located at 163 Visitacion Avenue. It was funded by a number of sources including the City’s general fund, donations from library supporters, and a loan from the County.

Methodology
This chapter calculates impact fees using the existing inventory method discussed in Chapter 1.

With that method, impact fees are based on the existing level of service so that the impact fees will provide the funding needed to maintain the existing level of service as the City grows.

Service Area
Brisbane’s existing and future libraries will serve all residents of the City. The impact fees calculated in this chapter are intended to apply to all residential development in the City unless the fees for a project are limited by statute or established by a development agreement.

Demand Variable
A “demand variable” is a quantifiable attribute of development that is used in impact fee calculation formulas to represent the impact of development. The demand variable used to calculate impact fees for the library in this chapter is population.

Population is used for that purpose because the need for libraries is almost universally defined in terms of the population to be served. Because added population is associated with new residential development, the impact fees calculated in this chapter are intended to apply only to residential development.

Population per dwelling unit varies by development type, so the average population per unit is estimated for each residential unit size category defined in this study. Those individual population-per-unit factors are shown in Table 2.1 in Chapter 2 and are used in the library impact fee calculations in Table 3.3, later in this chapter.

Level-of-Service Standard
The level-of-service standard used in this study to calculate impact fees for libraries is the existing level of service. That level is defined as the replacement cost of the City’s existing library divided by the existing population, which results in a cost per capita. To calculate an impact fee per unit, that cost per capita is multiplied by the population per unit for each residential unit size category defined in this study.

In 2021, Section 66016.5 was added to the Mitigation Fee by Act AB 602. That section requires, after January 1, 2022, that the level of service used in an impact fee study must be compared 178

City of Brisbane Page 3-2
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
with the existing level of service. If the level used in the impact fee study exceeds the existing level of service, an explanation is required.

Because the library impact fees calculated in this chapter are based on the existing level of service, those fees present no issue with respect to the statute.

Existing Library Facility
Table 3.1 shows key data about Brisbane’s existing library, including its current replacement cost which is combined with the land value of the library site to arrive at the impact fee cost basis.

The current principal balance of the loan from San Mateo County is deducted from the impact fee cost basis to reflect the City’s current equity in the library.

Table 3.2 divides the City’s net impact fee cost basis for the library by the City’s existing population to calculate the existing level of service in terms of a cost per capita.

In the next section, the cost per capita from Table 3.2 is used to calculate library impact fees per unit for each residential unit size range defined in this study.

Table 3.1: Existing Library Facilities
Building Site Facility Land Impact Fee
Facility Sq Feet 1Acres 2Repl Cost 3Value 4
Cost Basis 5
Brisbane Library 7,629 0.29 $ 8,977,520 $ 1,015,000 $ 9,992,520 Outstanding Balance on Loan from San Mateo County as of April 2025 $ (963,333) Total $ 9,029,187
1 Building square feet provided by the City of Brisbane 2 Site acres provided by the City of Brisbane
3 2020 construction cost provided by the City of Brisbane escalated 38% to 2024 cost using the California Construction Cost Index
4 Land value based on $3,500,000 per acre
5 Impact fee cost basis = facility replacement cost + land value Table 3.2: Library Existing Level of Service
Impact Fee Existing Cost per
Cost Basis 1 Population 2 Capita 3
$9,029,187 4,645 $1,943.85
1 See Table 3.1
2 See Table 2.4
3 Cost per capita = impact fee cost basis / existing
population
179

City of Brisbane Page 3-3
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
Impact Fees per Unit
Table 3.3 shows the calculation of library impact fees per unit of residential development by unit size category. Those fees are calculated using the per-capita cost from Table 3.2 and population per unit factors from Table 2.1.

Projected Revenue
Table 3.4 projects potential revenue from the library impact fees. That projection is based on the cost per capita from Table 3.2 and the added population from Table 2.5.

The projected revenue shown in Table 3.4 assumes that future development in the City will occur as forecasted in Chapter 2. It does not account for limits on impact fees set by development agreements for some future projects.

Planned Improvements
Details regarding planned expenditure of the library impact fees can be found in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan.

Table 3.3: Impact Fees per Unit - Library
Development Cost per Population Impact Fee
Type Units 1
Capita 2 per Unit 3 per Unit 4
Residential <800 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $1,943.85 1.00 $ 1,943.85 Residential 800-1,200 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $1,943.85 1.95 $ 3,790.51 Residential 1,200-2,100 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $1,943.85 2.95 $ 5,734.36 Residential >2,100 Sq. Ft. Unit DU $1,943.85 3.95 $ 7,678.21 1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit
2 See Table 3.2
3 See Table 2.3
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per capita X population per unit Table 3.4: Projected Revenue - Library Impact Fees
Development Added Cost per Projected
Type Population 1
Capita 2Revenue 3
All Residential 6,607 $1,943.85 $ 12,842,245
Total $ 12,842,245
1 See Table 2.5
2 See Table 3.2
3 Projected revenue = added population X cost per capita 180

City of Brisbane Page 3-4
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
Updating the Fees
The impact fees calculated in this chapter are based on estimated current replacement costs for the for the existing library. We recommend that the fees be reviewed annually and adjusted as needed using the most current cost estimates. The City will be required to update the nexus study at least every eight years, per Government Code Section 66016.5(a)(8).

Nexus Summary
As discussed in Chapter 1 of this report, Section 66001 of the Mitigation Fee Act requires that an agency establishing, increasing or imposing impact fees, must make findings to:

Identify the purpose of the fee;
Identify the use of the fee; and,
Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a. The use of the fee and the development type on which it is imposed; b. The need for the facility and the type of development on which the fee is imposed; and
c. The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development project.

Satisfying those requirements also ensures that the fees meet the “rational nexus” and “rough proportionality” standards enunciated in leading court decisions bearing on impact fees and other exactions. (For more detail, see “Legal Framework for Impact Fees” in Chapter 1.) The following paragraphs explain how the impact fees calculated in this chapter satisfy those requirements.

Purpose of the Fee: The purpose of the impact fees calculated in this chapter is to provide additional library facilities to maintain the existing level of service for libraries in Brisbane.

Use of the Fee. Impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to pay for additional library facilities to serve new residential development in the City.

Reasonable Relationship between the Use of the Fee and the Development Type on Which It Is Imposed. The impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to pay for additional library facilities needed to serve additional residential development in Brisbane at the currently existing level of service in terms of the relationship between facility cost and population.

Reasonable Relationship between the Need for the Facilities and the Type of Development on Which the Fee Is Imposed. Added population associated with new residential development will increase the need for library facilities in Brisbane. The library impact fees will provide funding for additional library facilities needed to maintain the existing level of service for libraries in Brisbane.
181

City of Brisbane Page 3-5
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
Reasonable Relationship between the Amount of the Fee and the Facility Cost Attributable to the Development Project. The amount of the library impact fees charged to a development project will depend on the increase in population associated with that project. The fees per unit of development calculated in this chapter for each type of residential development are based on the estimated average population per unit for that type of development in Brisbane. Thus, the fee charged to a development project reflects the impact of that project on the need for libraries in the City.
182

City of Brisbane Page 4-1
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
Chapter 4. General Government Facilities
This chapter calculates impact fees for general government facilities in Brisbane, including City Hall, the City Hall Annex and the corporation yard.

Methodology
This chapter calculates impact fees using the existing inventory method discussed in Chapter 1.

With that method, impact fees are based on the existing level of service so that the impact fees will provide the funding needed to maintain the existing level of service as the City grows.

Service Area
Brisbane’s general government facilities serve all development in the City. The impact fees calculated in this chapter are intended to apply to all new development except new public facilities, unless the fees for a project are limited by statute or established by a development agreement.

Demand Variable
A “demand variable” is a quantifiable attribute of development that is used in impact fee calculation formulas to represent the impact of development. The demand variable used to calculate impact fees for the general government in this chapter is service population.

As discussed in Chapter 2, service population is used in cases where facilities serve both residential and non-residential development and there is no other single demand variable that better represents the demand created by development for a certain type of facility.

The residential component of service population is the same population used to calculate impact fees for facilities such as libraries, that only serve residential development. The non-residential component of service population is based on the number of employees associated with various types of non-residential development, but those employee numbers are weighted as discussed in Chapter 2. The service population per unit factors are shown in Table 2.3 and are used in Table

4.3 to calculate impact fees per unit for general government facilities.

Level-of-Service Standard
The level-of-service standard used in this study to calculate impact fees for general government facilities is the existing level of service. That level is defined as the replacement cost of the City’s existing general government facilities divided by the existing service population, which results in a cost per capita. To calculate an impact fee per unit, that cost per capita is multiplied by the service population per unit for each development type defined in this study.

In 2021, Section 66016.5 was added to the Mitigation Fee by Act AB 602. That section requires, after January 1, 2022, that the level of service used in an impact fee study must be compared with the existing level of service. If the level used in the impact fee study exceeds the existing level of service, an explanation is required.
183

City of Brisbane Page 4-2
Public Facilities Impact Fee Study
October 10, 2025
Because the general government facilities impact fees calculated in this chapter are based on the existing level of service, those fees present no issue with respect to the statute.

Existing General Government Facilities
Table 4.1 shows key data about Brisbane’s existing general government facilities, including its current replacement cost which is combined with the land value of the general government facilities sites to arrive at the impact fee cost basis. Outstanding debt related to existing facilities is deducted from the impact fee cost basis so that it reflects only the City’s equity in those facilities.

Table 4.2, on the next page, divides the City’s net impact fee cost basis for the general government facilities by the City’s existing service population to calculate the existing level of service in terms of a cost per capita of service population.

Table 4.1: Existing General Government Facilities
Building Site Facility Land Impact Fee
Facility Sq Feet 1
Acres 2Repl Cost 3Value 4Cost Basis 5
City Hall 18,025 1.04 $ 18,025,000 $ 3,634,750 $ 21,659,750 City Hall Annex 5,260 1.55 $ 5,500,000 $ 5,425,000 $ 10,925,000 Corp Yard Office/Shops/Storage 10,800 2.00 $ 5,158,000 $ 5,158,000 Outstanding Debt on City Hall/Police Building (City-Hall Share = 72%) $ (2,264,400) Outstanding Debt on City Admin Office Annex $ (5,170,000) Total 34,085 4.59 $ 28,683,000 $ 9,059,750 $ 30,308,350 1 Building square feet provided by the City of Brisbane is the share of the combined City Hall/Police building occupied by City Hall
2 Site acres provided by the City of Brisbane; City Hall share of site for combined City Hall/Police building estimated by NBS at 67% of the total 1.55 acre site 3 Facility replacement cost provided by the City of Brisbane 4 Land value based on $3,500,000 per acre
5 Impact fee cost basis = facility replacement cost + land value; outstanding debt from City Hall/ Police Station remodeling/expansion = City Hall portion (72%) of principal balance on 2014 bonds; City Hall share of debt based on share of building square feet; outstanding debt on City Hall Annex renovation = principal balance on 2023 bonds; outstanding debt provided by the City of Brisbane Finance Department
Table 4.2: Existing Level of Service - General Government Impact Fee Existing Service Cost per
Cost Basis 1 Population 2Capita 3
$30,308,350 8,174 $3,707.90
1 See Table 4.1
2 See Table 2.4
3 Cost per capita = impact fee cost basis / existing service population
184