M EMORANDUM
To: Emi Sugiyama, Associate Planner
City of Cupertino Community Development Department
From: Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS)
Subject: Fiscal Impact Peer Review for 20840 Stevens Creek; EPS #241073
Date: April 3, 2025
This memorandum provides a third-party peer review of a fiscal impact report for a proposed residential development at 20840 Stevens Creek Boulevard in Cupertino. The goal is to evaluate the assumptions, findings, and methodology of a report
(“Report”) prepared by BAE Urban Economics. (“BAE”) for SummerHill Homes.1 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) provided this peer review at the request of the City of Cupertino.
The BAE fiscal analysis is designed to estimate the impact of a proposed residential development on the City of Cupertino’s General Fund budget, accounting for both tax revenues and incremental public service costs. The analysis provides an estimate of ongoing net fiscal impacts at project stabilization, once the project is fully built and occupied. Fiscal impact estimates are presented on constant 2025 dollars.
The proposed project is a 59-unit townhome-style condominium community. Out of the 59 total townhomes, twelve units are designated as affordable for median and moderate-income households. The fiscal impact of the existing retail and commercial buildings at the site is treated as a baseline condition (i.e., fiscal outcome in the absence of redevelopment). For this peer review, EPS set up an independent fiscal impact model to evaluate BAE’s results given project specifications and the baseline condition. The results of the EPS model are described in comparison to BAE’s results described in the Report. Key affirmations of or differences in assumptions, methodology, and findings are described in the memorandum. The memorandum is followed by an appendix table set, which contains detail on EPS’s fiscal peer review findings.
1 The original report is titled “Cupertino SummerHill Homes Community Fiscal Impact Analysis” (“Report”), dated July 12, 2024.
Memorandum: Fiscal Impact Peer Review for the City of Cupertino Economic & Planning Systems
Page | 2
Project Description
The City of Cupertino (“City”) has received an application for a residential project on a
2.90-acre site located at 20840 Stevens Creek Boulevard (“Proposed Project”). The site includes a 0.82-acre portion of an existing parcel, requiring a lot line adjustment. The Proposed Project would consist of 59 townhomes, twelve of which are designated as Below Market Rate (BMR) units consistent with the City’s inclusionary requirements. Per the Report, the Project is expected to increase the City’s resident population by 190 persons. The site is currently the location of three commercial buildings, including 21,668 square feet of retail space occupied by an office supply store and 7,600 of vacant retail space.2 The combined 29,268 square feet of total existing retail space is the baseline condition for the purposes of the fiscal impact analysis.
BAE concludes that the fiscal impact of the Proposed Project is slightly positive, with net General Fund fiscal impacts over the baseline condition estimated at $2,900 annually.
Key Findings
1. BAE’s analysis concludes that the Proposed Project is likely to generate a slight positive fiscal impact on the City’s General Fund. EPS’ peer review and modeling indicates that the overall fiscal benefit is likely to be slightly negative to neutral, primarily depending on how the baseline condition is analyzed.
E
PS estimates that the fiscal impact of the Proposed Project at project buildout is $27,
200 (Tables 1 and 2). EPS found that the fiscal impact of the baseline co
ndition ranges from $30,000 to $37,400 depending on whether the 7,600 square feet of vacant retail remains vacant (or is re-leased to sales-tax- generating tenants).
T
he BAE Report assumes that the 7,600 square feet of vacant retail remains vacant. However, given Cupertino’s strong retail market with a vacancy rate that is under 5 percent, EPS conducted a sensitivity analysis that considers the vacant r
etail as occupied. As shown in the alternative fiscal impact summary, Table 2, if the vacant retail is leased, the negative net fiscal impact of redevelopment would be more significant.
2 Square footages and current vacancies reported by BAE.
Memorandum: Fiscal Impact Peer Review for the City of Cupertino Economic & Planning Systems
Page | 3
T
able 1 Annual Fiscal Impact Summary
T
able 2 Annual Fiscal Impact Summary (Alternative)
2. E
PS found BAE’s assumptions regarding market-rate and BMR townhome pricing to be reasonable given current market conditions.
F
or the market-rate townhomes, key assumptions EPS reviewed included townhome sales prices in the Cupertino region. EPS reviewed recent comparable townhome sales from 2022 to 2024 and can conclude that the Report’s assumed townhome sales price of $1,145 per square foot is on the higher end of townhome prices, but reasonable given strong demand in the local housing market. For the BMR townhomes, EPS reviewed 2024 household income limits for Santa Clara County provided by the State of California Housing and Community Developmen t
D
epartment as well as the City’s inclusionary housing policy. EPS also reviewed home pricing assumptions such as mortgage insurance and interest rates. Based on current economic conditions and comparable projects, EPS concludes that B
AE’s BMR home pricing assumptions are reasonable and appropriate for the fiscal an
alysis.
Revenue /
Expens e Category
Fiscal Impact
at Project
Bu
ildout
Fiscal Impact
Bas eline
(E
xcluding Vacant Retail)
Net
Fiscal Impact
General Fund Revenues $143,400 $44,900 $98, 500
General Fund Expenditures $116,300 $14,900 $101,400
Net Impact on General Fund $27,200 $30,000 -$2,800
Revenue /
Expens e Category
Fiscal Impact
at Project
Buildout
Fiscal Impact
Bas eline
(With All Existing Retail)
Net
Fiscal Impact
General Fund Revenues $143,400 $57,500 $85,900
General Fund Expenditures $116,300 $20,200 $96,100
Net Impact on General Fund $27,200 $37,400 -$10,200
Memorandum: Fiscal Impact Peer Review for the City of Cupertino Economic & Planning Systems
Page | 4
3. E
PS found BAE’s methodology for estimating fiscal impacts follows generally accepted industry-standard approaches. BAE cites sources where appropriate, and thoroughly explains calculations, enabling EPS’ peer review of the study methodology and results.
K
ey assumptions used in estimating fiscal costs and revenues are included, and th
e Report’s summary tables are accompanied by more detailed narratives and tables provided in later sections and appendices. Most estimates use an average cost method to estimate impacts (i.e., average General Fund cost per unit of development) on a per service population basis, while selected categories alternatively use the case study approach (i.e., estimated using assumptions sp
ecific to the theoretical prototype land uses). Both methods are appropriate and standard for fiscal impact analyses.
4. I
n some instances, EPS and BAE preferred methodology and assumptions differ, such as with the calculation of new sales tax revenue and new transfer tax revenue.
E
PS and BAE use different methods for the calculation of sales tax revenue attributed to the new residential development. EPS typically uses a case study approach to account for the spending power of new households. BAE uses a per resident method based on citywide taxable sales. The per resident method resul ts
in
a higher level of taxable sales and sales tax revenue. In the fiscal model EPS created to replicate BAE’s results, EPS uses the case study method, and a more conservative result is reflected in the summary tables above.
F
or the baseline sales tax revenue calculation, EPS and BAE both use the case study approach. However, BAE assumes a lower sales per square foot than EPS.
HdL California Retail Analytics provides a sales per square foot range for office supply stores. BAE has assumed the lowest end of the range whereas EPS has a
ssumed the mid-point.
F
or the calculation of transfer tax revenue associated with the Proposed Project, EPS’s fiscal impact model assumes a lower turnover rate than the BAE model. As a
result, the EPS transfer tax revenue estimate is more conservative and slightly lower than BAE’s estimate. The lower transfer tax revenue is reflected in the su
mmary tables above.
5. I
n addition, BAE’s per service population methodology for calculating R
ecreation & Community Services expenditures includes workers, which p
otentially understates the project’s costs to the City’s current General Fund.
Memorandum: Fiscal Impact Peer Review for the City of Cupertino Economic & Planning Systems
Page | 5
For the calculation of General Fund expenditures, as described above, both BAE and EPS use the per service population methodology. However, for Recreation & Community Services, EPS assumes that local parks in Cupertino are primarily resident serving. Instead of distributing the cost of Recreation & Community Services across the entire service population made up of residents and workers, EPS only takes into account residents as they are most likely to be served by the City’s Recreation & Community Services. The exclusion of workers results in a EPS’s higher cost estimate, which is reflected in the summary tables above.
6. BAE’s baseline retail square footage and resulting service population estimate is potentially understated, which disproportionately reduces the baseline contribution to the City’s current General Fund.
For the calculation of the baseline fiscal impact, BAE assumes an employment density of 1,500 square feet per employee whereas EPS uses 500 square feet per employee. EPS has found that the 500 square feet per employee is typical for retail uses. EPS’s higher employment density assumption for the baseline results in higher expenditures when calculating the baseline fiscal impact, which improves the overall net fiscal impact of the proposed project.
7. The City requested EPS to estimate one-time benefits of the Proposed Project. EPS estimates $122,000 in construction sales tax revenue and $2.6 million in development impact and in-lieu fees for a total of $2.7 million in one-time benefits. EPS estimates are provided for reference as one-time benefits are not included as part of BAE’s study.
The construction sales tax is calculated using an estimate of total construction costs. Construction costs are based on the Developer’s program and reported market values as provided in the BAE study and categorized as either a labor cost or materials cost. The 1 percent sales tax is only applied to a portion of the materials cost as only contracts of a certain size are eligible for point-of-sale capture.
The development impact fees and in-lieu fees estimate includes the parkland dedication in-lieu fee, transportation impact fee, and master storm drain area fee.3 The parkland dedication in-lieu fee assumes that the developer is not providing dedicated parkland through their development proposal. Per City confirmation, EPS assumes that the twelve BMR townhomes are not subject to the parkland dedication fee, but are subject to the master storm drain area and transportation impact fees.
3 The per unit fee amounts used in EPS’s calculations are from the City’s FY2024 – 2025 engineering fee schedule published on July 14, 2024.
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
The Economics of Land Use
1330 Broadway, Suite 450 Oakland, California 94612
(510) 841-9190 www.epsys.com
STEVENS CREEK
FISCAL PEER REVIEW
CITY OF CUPERTINO
EPS #241073 April 3, 2025
1330 Broadway, Suite 450 Oakland, California 94612
(510) 841-9190 www.epsys.com
6 Table 1
Net Annual Fiscal Impact Summary - Excluding Vacant Baseline Retail Fiscal Impact Analysis (EPS# 241073)
Revenue /
Expense Category
Fiscal Impact
at Project
Buildout
Fiscal Impact
Baseline
(Excluding Vacant Retail)
Net
Fiscal Impact
General Fund Revenues $143,400 $44,900 $98,500
General Fund Expenditures $116,300
$14,900 $101,400
Net Impact on General Fund $27,200 $30,000 -$2,800
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/3/2025
7 Table 1 (Alternative)
Net Annual Fiscal Impact Summary - All Baseline Retail
Fiscal Impact Analysis (EPS# 241073)
Revenue /
Expense Category
Fiscal Impact
at Project
Buildout
Fiscal Impact
Baseline
(With All Existing Retail)
Net
Fiscal Impact
General Fund Revenues $143,400 $57,500 $85,900
General Fund Expenditures $116,300
$20,200 $96,100
Net Impact on General Fund $27,200 $37,400 -$10,200
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/3/2025
8 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
The Economics of Land Use
1330 Broadway, Suite 450 Oakland, California 94612
(510) 841-9190 www.epsys.com
NEW PROPOSED
DEVELOPMENT
EPS #241073 April 3, 2025
1330 Broadway, Suite 450 Oakland, California 94612
(510) 841-9190 www.epsys.com
9 Table 2-a
Project Program and Service Population
Fiscal Impact Analysis (EPS# 241073)
Item Population Population
Residential For-Sale
Townhomes [1] 47 DU 2.85 Residents / HH 134 134
BMR For-Sale [2] 12 DU 4.67 Residents / HH 56 56
Total 190 190
[2] Based on BMR unit mix and estimated household size of number of bedrooms plus one.
Density Assumptions
Development
Program
[1] California Department of Finance 2024 City of Cupertino population estimate.
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/3/2025
10 Table 3-a
FY2024-2025 Revenue Budget Summary and Fiscal Impact Estimating Factors Fiscal Impact Analysis (EPS# 241073)
FY2024-2025
Total
Sales Tax $11,648,962 1.0% of estimated taxable sales
Property Tax
Property Tax in Lieu of VLF $10,894,681 0.3% of Citywide Assessed Value Other Property Tax $22,280,296 7.00% of base property tax rate (1%) Transient Occupancy Tax $7,731,947 - not applicable
Utility Tax $4,130,140 $49.02 per service population
Franchise Fees $3,509,346 $41.65 per service population Business License $744,690
Other Taxes $939,639
Property Transfer Tax $878,901 $0.55 per $1,000 in value Licenses & Permits $3,665,866 - not estimated
Use of Money & Property $4,697,122 - not estimated
Intergovernmental $2,471,990 - not estimated
Charges for Services $15,102,136 - not estimated
Fines & Forfeitures $395,000 - not estimated
Miscellaneous $1,210,653 - not estimated
Other Financing Sources $367,000 - not estimated
Transfer-In $15,000 - not estimated
Total R
evenues $89,804,468
Estimate Project RevenueItem Factors Applied to
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/3/2025
11 Table 4-a
Sales Tax Estimate
Fiscal Impact Analysis (EPS# 241073)
Item
Factor/
Estimate
Project Households Retail Purchases in Cupertino
Estimated Annual Household Income [1]
Townhomes 35% of income is Housing Costs $299,356
BMR For Sale $198,064
Household Taxable Retail Spending [2]
Single-Family Unit 14.3% percent of income $42,808
BMR Unit 22.1% percent of income $43,772
Weighted Average Household Spending $43,004
Household Retail Spending in Cupertino [3] 40% of retail expenditures $17,202 Project Households 59
Household Taxable Retail Sales Captured in Cupertino $1,014,894 Total Sales Tax Revenue 1.0% of taxable sales $10,149
[2] Based on Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Expenditure Survey for respective income groups.
Sources: State Board of Equalization, ICSC Research Survey, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Assumptions
[3] Assumes 40 percent of taxable retail spending by Cupertino residents is captured by the retailers within the City. [1] Income estimate relies on typical mortgage financing and the assumption that housing costs represent 35 percent of gross household income.
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/3/2025
12 Table 5-a
Property Tax and Property Tax In Lieu of VLF Estimate
Fiscal Impact Analysis (EPS# 241073)
Land Use
Total
at Buildout
Assessed Value Estimate
Market-Rate Townhomes $2,133,306 per Unit $100,265,360
BMR For Sale $615,929 per Unit $7,391,147
Total Assessed Value $107,656,507
Property Tax 1.0% Base Property Tax Rate $1,076,565
Cupertino General Fund Revenue [1] 7.00% Allocation to Cupertino General Fund $75,360
Property Tax In Lieu of VLF
Existing Citywide Property Tax in Lieu of VLF $10,894,681 Citywide Assessed Value [2] $33,715,982,769
Project Assessed Value Proportion [3] 0.32%
Property Tax In Lieu of VLF Revenue [4] $34,787
[1] Subject to City confirmation.
[1] FY2024-2025 value based on secured and unsecured assessed value from Santa Clara County's Annual Assessor's Report. [3] Calculated by multiplying existing property tax in lieu of VLF by project net assessed value increase.
Assumption / Factor
[2] Calculated by dividing the new assessed value by citywide assessed value.
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/3/2025
13 Table 6-a
Property Transfer Tax Estimate
Fiscal Impact Analysis (EPS# 241073)
Land Use
Annual Total
at Buildout
Property Value
Townhouse $2,133,306 per Unit $100,265,360
BMR Unit $615,929 per Unit $7,391,147
Total $107,656,507
Average Annual Turnover 10.0% $10,765,651
Property Transfer Tax Revenue $0.55 per $1,000 in value $5,921 Assumption / Factor
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/3/2025
14 Table 7-a
FY2024-2025 Other Revenue Budget Summary and Fiscal Impact Estimating Factors Fiscal Impact Analysis (EPS# 241073)
Item
Annual Total
at Buildout
Utility User Tax $49.02 per service population 190 service pop. $9,314 Franchise Fees $41.65 per service population 190 service pop. $7,914 Total $17,227
Allocation Factor Project Characteristic
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/3/2025
15 Table 8-a
FY2024-2025 Expenditure Budget Summary and Fiscal Impact Estimating Factors Fiscal Impact Analysis (EPS# 241073)
Item
City General
Fund Expenses
(FY2024-2025)
Percent
Variable [1]
Annual
Variable
Expenses
Per Capita
General
Fund
Expense
Project
Population/
Service
Population
Annual
Total at
Buildout
General
Government [2] $15,170,440 10% $1,517,044 84,252 Service Pop. $18.01 190 $3,421 Police [3] $18,648,806 90% $16,783,925 84,252 Service Pop. $199.21 190 $37,848 Innovation and Technology [4] $3,122,993 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Recreation &
Community
Services
$6,122,536 75% $4,591,902 59,471 Population $77.21 190 $14,670 Planning &
Community
Development
$11,460,954 50% $5,730,477 84,252 Service Pop. $68.02 190 $12,922 Public
Works [5] $28,040,398 75% $21,030,299 84,252 Service Pop. $249.61 190 $47,424 Non-Departmental $7,372,862
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Total Expenditures $89,938,989 $116,285
[1] Percentage of costs that are population-dependent, as opposed to fixed costs or costs recovered through fees or charges. [2] Includes Administration, Administrative Services, and Council and Commissions. [4] Formerly known as Public Affairs and includes services such as videography, applications, IT and GIS.
Sources: City of Cupertino FY2024-2025
Estimating Factors
[3] Reflects the contract portion of the police department's budget. Modeling assumes no change in the structure of the contract terms. [5] Includes administration, environmental programs, development services, service center, grounds, streets, trees and right of way, facilities and fleet, transportation, and other programs.
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/3/2025
16 Table 9-a
Annual Fiscal Impact Summary
Fiscal Impact Analysis (EPS# 241073)
Item Annual Fiscal Impact
General Fund Revenues
Sales Tax $10,100
Property Tax $75,400
Property Tax in Lieu of VLF $34,800
Property Transfer Tax $5,900
Utility Tax $9,300
Franchise Fees $7,900
Total Revenues $143,400
General Fund Expenditures
General Government $3,400
Police $37,800
Recreation & Community Services $14,700
Planning & Community Development $12,900
Public Works $47,400
Total Expenditures $116,300
Net Impact on General Fund $27,200
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/3/2025
17 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
The Economics of Land Use
1330 Broadway, Suite 450 Oakland, California 94612
(510) 841-9190 www.epsys.com
BASELINE
CONDITION
(ALTERNATIVE)
EPS #241073 April 3, 2025
1330 Broadway, Suite 450 Oakland, California 94612
(510) 841-9190 www.epsys.com
18 Table 2-b
Project Program and Service Population
Fiscal Impact Analysis (EPS# 241073)
Item Population
Service
Population
Retail (Existing) 29,268 Sq.Ft. 500 Sq.Ft./ Employee 59 29 Total 59 29
[2] Based on BMR unit mix and estimated household size of number of bedrooms plus one.
Density Assumptions
Development
Program
[1] California Department of Finance 2024 City of Cupertino population estimate.
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/3/2025
19 Table 3-b
FY2024-2025 Revenue Budget Summary and Fiscal Impact Estimating Factors Fiscal Impact Analysis (EPS# 241073)
FY2024-2025
Total
Sales Tax $11,648,962 1.0% of estimated taxable sales
Property Tax
Property Tax in Lieu of VLF $10,894,681 0.0% of Citywide Assessed Value Other Property Tax $22,280,296 7.00% of base property tax rate (1%) Transient Occupancy Tax $7,731,947 - not applicable
Utility Tax $4,130,140 $49.02 per service population
Franchise Fees $3,509,346 $41.65 per service population Business License $744,690
Other Taxes $939,639
Property Transfer Tax $878,901 $0.55 per $1,000 in value Licenses & Permits $3,665,866 - not estimated
Use of Money & Property $4,697,122 - not estimated
Intergovernmental $2,471,990 - not estimated
Charges for Services $15,102,136 - not estimated
Fines & Forfeitures $395,000 - not estimated
Miscellaneous $1,210,653 - not estimated
Other Financing Sources $367,000 - not estimated
Transfer-In $15,000 - not estimated
Tota
l Revenues $89,804,468
Estimate Project RevenueItem Factors Applied to
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/3/2025
20 Table 4-b
Sales Tax Estimate
Fiscal Impact Analysis (EPS# 241073)
Item
Factor/
Estimate
Retail (Existing)
Retail Square Feet 5% Vacancy 27,805
Sales per Square Foot (Annual) $165
Total Retail Sales (Annual) [1] $4,587,759
Total Sales Tax Revenue 1.0% of taxable sales $45,878
Sources: State Board of Equalization, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Assumptions
[1] Based on HdL California Retail Analytics 2024 midpoint sales per square foot estimat for office supply stores.
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/3/2025
21 Table 5-b
Property Tax and Property Tax In Lieu of VLF Estimate
Fiscal Impact Analysis (EPS# 241073)
Land Use
Total
at Buildout
Assessed Value Estimate
Retail (Existing AV from County) $293 per Sq.Ft. $8,572,942 Total Assessed Value $8,572,942
Property Tax 1.0% Base Property Tax Rate $85,729
Cupertino General Fund Revenue [1] 7.00% Allocation to Cupertino General Fund $6,001
Property Tax In Lieu of VLF
Existing Citywide Property Tax in Lieu of VLF $10,894,681 Citywide Assessed Value [2] $33,715,982,769
Project Assessed Value Proportion [3] 0.03%
Property Tax In Lieu of VLF Revenue [4] $2,770
[1] Subject to City confirmation.
[1] FY2024-2025 value based on secured and unsecured assessed value from Santa Clara County's Annual Assessor's Report. [3] Calculated by multiplying existing property tax in lieu of VLF by project net assessed value increase.
Assumption / Factor
[2] Calculated by dividing the new assessed value by citywide assessed value.
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/3/2025
22 Table 6-b
Property Transfer Tax Estimate
Fiscal Impact Analysis (EPS# 241073)
Land Use
Annual Total
at Buildout
Property Value
Retail (Existing) $293 per Sq.Ft. $8,572,942
Total $8,572,942
Average Annual Turnover 5.0% $428,647
Property Transfer Tax Revenue $0.55 per $1,000 in value $236 Assumption / Factor
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/3/2025
23 Table 7-b
FY2024-2025 Other Revenue Budget Summary and Fiscal Impact Estimating Factors Fiscal Impact Analysis (EPS# 241073)
Item
Annual Total
at Buildout
Utility User Tax $49.02 per service population 29 service pop. $1,435 Franchise Fees $41.65 per service population 29 service pop. $1,219 Total $2,654
Allocation Factor Project Characteristic
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/3/2025
24 Table 8-b
FY2024-2025 Expenditure Budget Summary and Fiscal Impact Estimating Factors Fiscal Impact Analysis (EPS# 241073)
Item
City General
Fund Expenses
(FY2024-2025)
Percent
Variable [1]
Annual
Variable
Expenses
Per Capita
General
Fund
Expense
Project
Population/
Service
Population
Annual
Total at
Buildout
General
Government [2] $15,170,440 10% $1,517,044 84,252 Service Pop. $18.01 29 $527 Police [3] $18,648,806 90% $16,783,925 84,252 Service Pop. $199.21 29 $5,831 Innovation and Technology [4] $3,122,993 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Recreation &
Community
Services
$6,122,536 75% $4,591,902 59,471 Population $77.21 59 $4,520 Planning &
Community
Development
$11,460,954 50% $5,730,477 84,252 Service Pop. $68.02 29 $1,991 Public
Works [5] $28,040,398 75% $21,030,299 84,252 Service Pop. $249.61 29 $7,306 Non-Departmental $7,372,862
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Total Expenditures $89,938,989 $20,174
[1] Percentage of costs that are population-dependent, as opposed to fixed costs or costs recovered through fees or charges. [2] Includes Administration, Administrative Services, and Council and Commissions. [4] Formerly known as Public Affairs and includes services such as videography, applications, IT and GIS.
Sources: City of Cupertino FY2024-2025
Estimating Factors
[3] Reflects the contract portion of the police department's budget. Modeling assumes no change in the structure of the contract terms. [5] Includes administration, environmental programs, development services, service center, grounds, streets, trees and right of way, facilities and fleet, transportation, and other programs.
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/3/2025
25 Table 9-b
Annual Fiscal Impact Summary
Fiscal Impact Analysis (EPS# 241073)
Item Annual Fiscal Impact
General Fund Revenues
Sales Tax $45,900
Property Tax $6,000
Property Tax in Lieu of VLF $2,800
Property Transfer Tax $200
Utility Tax $1,400
Franchise Fees $1,200
Total Revenues $57,500
General Fund Expenditures
General Government $500
Police $5,800
Recreation & Community Services $4,500
Planning & Community Development $2,000
Public Works $7,300
Total Expenditures $20,200
Net Impact on General Fund $37,400
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/3/2025
26 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
The Economics of Land Use
1330 Broadway, Suite 450 Oakland, California 94612
(510) 841-9190 www.epsys.com
ESTIMATE OF
ONE-TIME
FEES
EPS #241073 April 3, 2025
1330 Broadway, Suite 450 Oakland, California 94612
(510) 841-9190 www.epsys.com
27 Table 10
Estimate of One-Time Impact Fees
Fiscal Impact Analysis (EPS# 241073)
Fee Fee Project Required
Fee Category Amount Unit Units Fee
Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee $54,000 per Market Rate DU 47 $2,538,000 Master Storm Drain Area Fee
Per Unit Amount $347 per DU [1] 58 $20,126
Per Acre Amount $4,584 per Acre 2.90 $13,294
Total Master Storm Drain Area Fee $33,420
Transportation Impact Fee
Proposed
Multifamily $4,215 per DU 59 $248,685
Existing
Retail $10.94 per Sq. Ft. 21,668 $237,048
Net Transportation Impact Fee $11,637
Total One-Time Impact Fee Amount $2,583,057
[1] Maximum chargeable dwelling units of 20 units per acre.
Source: City of Cupertino Fees Effective July 14, 2024. 28 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/3/2025
Table 11
One-Time Construction Sales Tax Revenue Estimate
Fiscal Impact Analysis (EPS# 241073)
Item Total
Total Construction Hard Costs [1] $69,976,730
Labor [2] 64% of Hard Costs $44,785,107
Materials 35% of Hard Costs $24,491,855
Point-of-Sale Assumption 50% of Materials $12,245,928
Total Construction Sales Tax Revenue 1.0% Sales Tax $122,459 Assumptions
[1] Assumes 65% of the total $107.7 million assessed value of the new project from the BAE report represents hard costs.
[2] IMPLAN analysis of residential industry spending.
29 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/3/2025